Florida Pest Control Operator - "We were deceived"

I think what is needed here is a class action suit by applicators against the government, citing their failure to recognize the potential threat of significantly high levels of exposure to pesticides to the applicators and to take measures to properly notify us of this potential threat.

Click Here to Add Comment

 

Subject:   What are we? Chopped Liver!!
Date:       Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:48:17 -0400
From:        Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization:     Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)

To:     Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
          Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide Regulation 

Dear Mr. Helliker, I thought you might like to read a letter From "Uncle Walter", that was published in the August, 2000 issue of "The CPCO Advantage" - The Largest State Pest Control Association In The Nation. This of course means the Certified Pest Control Association of Florida.

What are we? Chopped Liver!!

"A recent decision by the EPA has significantly restricted the use of products containing Dursban. Among those restrictions are a ban on the use of indoor product and a ban on the use of Termite Control materials.

This is based on a number of spurious and questionable created theories dreamed up by the EPA and special interest groups. The primary battle cry is to protect the children and elderly who may be susceptible to low level exposures to the products due to their life styles and alleged high susceptibility levels

The Dose Makes the Poison

Nowhere in their reports is there mention of the exposure levels of the applicators, who are exposed to hundreds if not thousands of levels of higher exposure than children, the elderly or any other member of society.

If they really wanted to know about the dangers of exposure, wouldn't it be logical to check the effect the use of the product has had on the applicators?

We Were Deceived

When the FIFRA was brought into existence, we were sold on the concept that the primary function of FIFRA was to protect the applicators who are exposed to higher levels of pesticide exposure on a regular bases.

We have been faced with bans on DDT in the 60's, Chlordane in the 80's and now Chlorpyrifos in the 00's. All of these actions were based on theories of exposure, none of which contained a review of the health records of actual applicators of the products. In fact, a large study by the University of Florida on the general health of pesticide applicators revealed that overall, they had a higher life expectancy and a lower incidence of diseases attributed to the use of pesticide.

All of that being what it is, what protection is afforded by the pesticide regulations and laws to the applicator of the products.

The government cites many tales of the negative effects of pesticide products in their numerous anti-pesticide reports, but I am not aware of any warnings or special precautions directed at the commercial users of the products.

FIFRA and state law mandates that a product will not be registered unless it is found that it will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on man and the environment.

If only a small part of what they are saying is true, about exposure levels and their effects, they are permitting products to be registered which, due to our exposure levels, pose an unreasonable adverse effect on our health.

We pay them for certification, we pay them for business permits. One would think that they have some sort of obligation to protect us, as applicators from adverse effect of the products which they register.

I think what is needed here is a class action suit by applicators against the government, citing their failure to recognize the potential threat of significantly high levels of exposure to pesticides to the applicators and to take measures to properly notify us of this potential threat.

This would put them in a difficult position. If their defense is that these products do not cause unreasonable adverse effects, their spurious theories are shot to heck. On the other side, if it turns out that we are exposed to unreasonable adverse effects, safeguards must be initiated to protect us as the original pesticide applicator laws and regulations intended to do. From my point of view, this is a not lose situation.

We are not chopped liver, we are not some sort of alien species immune to the effects of pesticides. We are individuals who are charged by the government to apply pesticides which while they do not assure us are safe, they are not supposed to register these products if it is found they will cause unreasonable adverse effect on man and the environment.

"IF THEY WANT TO BE THE AUTHORITY, THEY MUST TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY."

I would like to add that I believe that not only should the applicators and/or their families sue you for being directly responsible when they get sick and/or die - but, I believe you are also directly responsible for any contamination litigation they find themselves in - directly because of your demand that they can ONLY apply your "registered" POISONS to "legally control" any pest problems. So I suggest that when any applicator finds themselves in court - the applicator should also sue you individually and corporately for all of the resulting contamination, chemical trespass, wrongful deaths, sickness, disease, etc. - that resulted from your "registered" POISONS that you demanded MUST be applied! I was once indicted by you "regulators" for not applying the MAXIMUM amount of chlordane the label permitted. I now wear that attack by you as a badge of honor! You "regulators" almost killed me and you did kill my Son, Uncle and many friends with your damn demands that the MAXIMUM amount of your "registered" POISONS be used. Almost every time I read that another Pest Control Operator has died, I note that their death was due to leukemia, cancer or some other pesticide-related "trigger". Thanks to you - many PCO's will be sued, destroyed financially become ill and/or die because of your "registered" POISONS and your demand that ONLY these "registered" POISONS can be "legally" used! And STILL you remain SILENT!

Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten

TOP
 If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.