Big questions about Medfly spraying

When the state doused most of West Central Florida with malathion during a Medfly outbreak in 1997, authorities stressed the chemical [malathion] was absolutely safe.

More company documents show that malathion manufacture, Cheminova, was aware of danger and supplied bad batches and inaccurate information.

[ Dr. Robert Simon - about Malathion ]

Click Here to Add Comment

            

Subject:    Big questions about Medfly spraying
 Date:       Wed, 11 Apr 2001 10:28:50 -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 

cc:    Carol Browner browner.carol@epa.gov

Dear Mr. Helliker,  I thought you might like  to read an Apr 6, 2001, article located at: http://www.tampatrib.com/News/MGAFORI17LC.html  entitled: Big questions about Medfly spraying.

When the state doused most of West Central Florida with malathion during a Medfly outbreak in 1997, authorities stressed the chemical was absolutely safe.

But since then, evidence has mounted that the state was so obsessed with eliminating the produce-destroying fruit fly that public safety was a secondary concern.

The latest revelations are found in documents released in a lawsuit filed by residents against Cheminova A/S and Cheminova Inc., the companies that manufactured and supplied Florida with the malathion

These letters and memorandums say batches of ``pungent'' malathion that had been recalled from a Michigan mosquito-control agency ended up in Florida. The data also cite the dangers of storing the pesticide in heated conditions. One document says that barrels of the pesticide stored in a hot Texas warehouse ended up gassing and leaking.

Another document shows a company toxicologist, in response to a Louisiana mosquito- control district inquiry, stressed the health threat of storing the pesticide above 90 degrees. Malathion's label instructs users not to place it in heated conditions.

As the Tribune's Jan Hollingsworth reports: ``Heat, sunlight and oxygen can create compounds far more toxic than the malathion itself. Of particular concern: isomalathion, a potentially lethal contaminant that can form when malathion becomes too hot.''

Yet the malathion used here was stored on an airport tarmac in the summer heat. Officials never tested whether isomalathion had formed during the 1997 spraying.

Company lawyers say the chemical is safe, even when heated. For years the pesticide has been stored in warehouses in the Southeast without incident. They say the malathion sent to Florida was tested for isomalathion before it was shipped.  Lawyers for the plaintiffs say Cheminova has failed to produce documents backing up that claim.

But this is only the latest in a series of disturbing findings about the malathion spraying in Florida.

As Hollingsworth reported, a state epidemiologist who conducted a health study of the effects of malathion spraying in 1998 found cases of respiratory problems, rashes, allergic reactions and other ill effects that were attributable to the spraying. He found that at least nine out of every 10,000 residents in a spray zone suffered adverse reactions, and he recommended aerial spraying be discontinued.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviewed Omar Shafey's work and found it to be ``excellent.'' Nevertheless, his conclusions were excised from the state Health Department's final report, which said no association had been found between the spraying and health problems. Moreover, Shafey, a well-regarded scientist with an impressive record, was later fired for peculiar reasons.

The appearance of all this is less than reassuring. Did the state, in a panic over the crop- destroying pest, jettison all regard for public health in its quest to eradicate the Medfly? Was the chemical that was used tainted? Have state officials been trying to whitewash the affair ever since?

The 1997 aerial onslaught was launched without notifying the public. The poison was dumped on lakes, rivers and swimming pools. Cars were stained. More than a million people were affected by the spraying. State officials gave conflicting answers about the chemical's dangers.

BUT THIS ALSO should be said: With the $6 billion-a-year agriculture industry in peril, the Medfly infestation represented a genuine crisis. If the state overreacted, that's not difficult to understand.

After the 1997 public outcry, the state Agriculture Department has tried to be more cautious and to include the public in spraying decisions. Agriculture Secretary Bob Crawford recently departed to become executive director of Florida Citrus Mutual. But straight answers about malathion use are still hard to come by.

Perhaps this court case will finally provide the people of Florida with some hard facts about whether officials gambled with the public's health during the 1997 chemical assault.

TBO.com IS Tampa Bay Online © 2001, Media General Inc.

Well Mr. Helliker, do you think we will ever get the "hard facts" or just more "assurances" that all is "well"?

Respectfully,  Stephen L. Tvedten

---

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.