 |
|
|
(760) 240-5881 * email: info@safe2use.com
Environmentally Safe Products for your Home, School and Business
Web Site: www.safe2use.com
June 22, 1999
Paul E. Helliker, Director
California Department of Pesticide Regulation
830 K Street
Sacramento, CA 95814-3510
Re: Activity of DPR under California Food
and Agricultural Code Section 12931
Title 3, California Code of Regulations
Section 6140
“Or”
WHEN THE DPR WALKS IN COMMON SENSE
AND ONE’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEAVE!
Dear Mr. Helliker:
On June 15, 1999, Manuel B. Gutierrez of the Pesticide Enforcement Branch of your California State Department of Pesticide Regulation paid me a visit. He identified himself as a Senior Pesticide Use Specialist and presented me with his card.
He stated that his purpose was to review our “suspected violations” as follows:
Sale Distribution of unregistered pesticide(s). –Not Nice to Lice and Kleen Kill
I told him that we have never sold, distributed or advocated the use of unregistered or “registered” pesticide poisons.
Mr. Gutierrez had a file, which apparently
contained printouts of our web site including pages on Kleen Kill®
Enzyme Cleaner, and the MSDS for that cleaning product and our brochure
on Not Nice to Lice® cosmetic shampoo.
- I asked him how this “inspection” came about and he said that it may have come from product competitors who feel that our products have an unfair advantage because they are not registered as a pesticide poison. He said he was not at liberty to disclose who would have made the complaint.
It is our understanding that we have
a constitutional right to know our accusers and if this is still true in
this country; Mr. Gutierrez is illegally depriving us of our constitutional
rights. What are you going to do about “his” violation of our rights?
- I told him that we do not sell pesticides of any type. Our products are shampoos and cleaners that do not need to be registered.
- I provided Mr. Gutierrez with copies of our marketing literature (the contents of which was developed by Stephen Tvedten and which I am also enclosing for your review) because we feel that these items are public records and readily available to anyone who asks. I would not provide Mr. Gutierrez with copies of all our sales receipts.
- I told Mr. Gutierrez that Kleen Kill is an enzyme cleaner and is sold as a cleaner. Nowhere in our, or the Manufacturer’s, literature were there any indications made that this is being sold as a pesticide. In fact, we clearly state that it is not being sold as a pesticide poison, and that it contains no pesticides.
- I explained to him that Not Nice to Lice is an enzymatic shampoo and is only sold as a cosmetic shampoo and we clearly note it is not sold as a pediculicide. In fact, on our web site and on our literature we have printed warnings about the potential effect on insects so that the consumer will be aware to use them, while cleaning, and use caution e.g., in areas where they are trying to preserve insect cultures. For the record, all of the enzymatic contact lens cleaners will also “illegally” kill insects.
For the record, Not Nice to Lice®
and Kleen Kill® Enzyme Cleaner have been deemed as complying with the
Feindgold® program which provides diets, advice, and product review
for chemically sensitive adults and children.
- Mr. Gutierrez read from Stephen L. Tvedten’s literature (which we hand out) and came upon the words control and remove. He stated that the words like control, remove, manage, eliminate, etc. in relationship to pests/insects automatically made any product a pesticide and thus was under the jurisdiction of the DPR.
For the record, Mr. Tvedten has written
several alternative pest control books, and he recommends over 1,700 non-toxic
products to be used to control pest problems. Mr. Tvedten has consistently
proven his pesticide alternatives are far safer, better, cheaper
and far more effective in actually controlling pests - than any of your
“registered”, volatile, synthetic pesticide poisons. If you have
any objections to Mr. Tvedten’s alternatives, you should take this matter
up with Mr. Tvedten, who has told me would be happy to fly to California
and debate the matter with you on television. Mr. Tvedten has written
many letters to Mr. Lyndon Hawkins about his ideas for true Integrated
Pest Management (IPM). Mr. Tvedten has safely removed all pests inside
and outside in over 350 schools without ever using any “registered” volatile
pesticide poisons.
- I pointed out to Mr. Gutierrez the unregistered flytrap that we also sell hanging from our patio. It had “trapped flies” in it that were going to be dead soon. I said that the trap was controlling, removing, managing and/or eliminating flies and under his definition it is also an “unregistered” pesticide and should be cited. He said that I was correct, fumbled for a few seconds and then said, “however in this circumstance, since it is a “device” like a mousetrap the DPR did not choose to enforce its own regulation.” I then asked him if that meant that the DPR is “selectively” enforcing their pesticide policy regulations towards us regarding Kleen Kill? He sort of grinned and then said yes.
Mr. Gutierrez’s comments clearly indicate
and prove that you are blatantly prejudicial in your “enforcement” policies.
What are you going to do about this obvious loss of our constitutional
rights?
- I related to Mr. Gutierrez that my grandfather would use the water from washing dishes and clothes and toss it into his garden and that my Grandfather never had any pest problems in his garden. I also explained that I had a information from a licensed California PCO that the State of California knew soap and water is the best thing to use against pests and killer bees. Mr. Gutierrez stated that it is true that soap and water is the best thing to use for pests and as long as you only use it in your own home it is okay. However, if you sell soap and water for eliminating pests, then it automatically becomes a pesticide and needs to be registered.
- Mr. Gutierrez asked about the ingredients in Not Nice to Lice and Kleen Kill. I told him we were proud of Ginesis Natural Product’s ingredients and displayed them on our web site, and most of our printed literature. I told him that the literature also showed that the ingredients were rated GRAS by the EPA and that the manufacturer, Ginesis Natural Products took every care to ensure that everything in their shampoos and cleaners were harmless to the public.
- Mr. Gutierrez stated that it appeared that the shampoo, Not Nice to Lice may be okay for sale, in California, but because Kleen Kill may be used to spray or clean equipment, etc. that it is suspect of being an unregistered pesticide.
Mr. Tvedten’s book, THE
BEST CONTROL which I also sell on my web site all over the world, clearly
has many hundreds of alternative (unregistered) household products including,
Comet and Talcum Powder, that he and many others have consistently proven
that these products control, remove, mitigate, harm, repel, manage, eliminate
and/or kill (even resistant) pest problems better, safer and more effectively
than any “registered” pesticide poison.
- I explained, to Mr. Gutierrez, that Not Nice to Lice and Kleen Kill Preformed Enzyme Cleaner were changing the lives of thousands of people and dozens of schools and Healthy Start Programs in California, and in every other state in the US, and several other countries. We are getting reports that some schools are actually “lice free” for the first time in years and desperately chronic cases of lice infestations that have previously kept children out of school for weeks and months are ending with the use of this safe shampoo and cleaner. That though all of this there had been no adverse side effects to people, pets, wildlife, sewer systems or the environment using any of these products.
This visit by your representative makes
no Common Sense and stuns the Sensible Mind. Why are you using
our precious State resources to protect the interests of pesticide producers
by making common sense and safe pest control illegal in California?
According to your own representative, the use of safe “soap and water” to control pests (except in private residences) is “illegal” in California. However, I have witnessed State employees on public property, being paid with public dollars, water hose in hand with a little soap or bleach, rinsing out trash cans (thereby “illegally” killing thousands of fly larvae). Yet I have not heard of anyone stopping the State’s obviously “illegal” use of this “unregistered” (soap and water) “pesticide”. I have even heard Mr. Lyndon Hawkins, of your department, speak on the subject of using caulking, screening, and other methods of “controlling, removing, eliminating, managing pests” yet caulking, screening, etc. have also not been registered in California as “pesticides”. Why are you selectively enforcing your “policies” on us and not on yourselves?
If I may quote from your own web site that
states on the Home Page:
Welcome to the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Department of Pesticide Regulation. DPR has primary responsibility for regulating all aspects of pesticide sales and use to protect public health and the environment. The Department’s mission is to evaluate and mitigate impacts of pesticide use, maintain the safety of the pesticide work place, ensure product effectiveness, and encourage the development and use of reduced-risk pest control practices while recognizing the need for pest management in a healthy economy.
During my “interview” with Mr. Guiterrez,
I explained to him that Lindane and the pyrethrums/pyrethrins/ pyrethroids
currently being utilized in lice products are “registered pesticides”
that clearly do not work due to “registered” pesticide resistance, and
have also been linked to many health problems including seizures, leukemia
and breast cancer but the DPR does nothing to protect the California public
or the California environment from exposure to these dangerous poisons
or to control the clearly resistant (to “registered” poisons) lice..
¨ I also asked Mr. Gutierrez whether he was aware that the nurseries in Riverside, Orange and other counties were required to literally soak their plants with Dow’s “registered” Dursban before they could sell them because of the Fire Ants. He said he was. I asked him whether he was aware of the fact that the “guidelines” state that after soaking nursery personnel had to wait 12 hours before re-entering the soaked/sprayed area supposedly because the Dursban would “dissipate.” He said yes. I asked him if he realized that because the Dursban is poured into the plant soil that without sun and air it could not and will not dissipate so that when the nursery personnel re-entered and moved the plants they were coming into contact with the full killing strength of Dursban for many months or years. He said he did know that the Dursban was not dissipating in 12 hours. I further pointed out that these same plants are then being sold to the unknowing public in the same condition (soaked [contaminated] with Dursban). I asked if he knew where organophosphate poisons like Dursban came from, he indicated that he did not. I explained that they were developed in World War II for use in wars and in the Nazi gas chambers of Germany and now we are exposing the citizens of California to the same neuro-toxins that had already killed millions.
“Insert Pesticides Monthly” seems to have become the definition of IPM in California, why must the children and communities of California continue to be poisoned? Isn’t it time to work towards Non-Toxic IPM’s in California?
In a recent communication I received from a coalition of California groups concerned about the use of pesticides, it makes me wonder about the “protection” of our communities. When concerned citizens in La Selva Beach challenged the use permit of Methyl Bromide (MB) to be used near their homes, their fears went unnoticed by you. You approved a permit for Coastal Nursery to use MB with only a 100-foot buffer zone next to the residences. MB is a highly toxic pesticide and has been documented to drift up to 1,300 feet.
It appears that you and your Department are only interested in the “healthy economy” of the pesticide poison “industry”. We, the citizens of California (according to your website statement), have been approved, evaluated and mitigated “to death” by the DPR. You seem to soundly stand on the position that “registered” pesticide poisons won’t hurt anyone.
Your rush to “register” any product suspected of being used as a pesticide may make some people believe you are trying to do something good. However, you clearly know that “registration” of any poison’s active ingredient indicates nothing about the total poison compound’s product toxicity and/or the total poison compound’s adverse effects on people or plants. You cannot legally say any active poison ingredient that is “registered” is safe. There is no possible way you can correctly or scientifically evaluate or determine how dangerous even one active ingredient in even one “registered” pesticide poison compound is, much less how dangerous the synergistic effect will be when you combine exposures to all of the other “registered” active poison ingredients, all of the “inerts”, all of the contaminants, all of the metabolites, all of the possible medications and all of the transformation products. No one honestly knows how any of these “registered” active poison ingredients will chronically effect children, babies, fetuses, women, old people, sick people, etc. as they are not included or considered in the “risk formula.”
This “registered protective” pesticidal soup/smog you have created and are requiring the citizens of California to daily eat, drink, breathe and to live in is lethal and extremely dangerous and is not even controlling our pest problems. Obviously, Los Angeles Unified School District disagrees with your idea of “protection” because they have decided not to use any of your “registered” poisons. “Registered” pesticide poisons do not protect, they kill!
The obvious question is who/what is more important to your Department to “protect,” the rest of the California people and the environment or the profits of the poison producers? To my Husband and me and many other people in California it is obvious that you are not protecting the people and/or the environment, as evidenced by the ever increasing use of “registered” poisons, the ever increasing amounts of “registered” pesticide resistance and the every increasing pest damages/costs, and the corresponding increased in miscarriages, death, injured/deformed babies, flu-like sicknesses, increased rage, truancy, chronic fatigue, mental aberrations, cancer, chemical sensitivity, contaminated environments, sick and dying pets, livestock and wildlife and all the other environmental, physical and mental health problems that your “registered” poisons cause. So what if some unfortunate people and the environment are destroyed…the bottom (profit) line is important. Babies, sick and dying victims, obviously, cannot afford to pay “someone” what the poison “industry” can. Did you know it is now considered “normal” to have 500 – 1000 different toxins in your blood and fat that your grandparents never had to contend with? Why do you feel it necessary to add more “registered” poisons to the toxic mix?
Why would you want to try to label any safe products as being the same as your “registered” poisons? Ginesis products are no more poisonous than any dish soap, and they are safer to use around children, pregnant women, sick people, the chemically sensitive, asthmatics, the elderly, pets and other wildlife than any of your “registered” poisons. If you do not believe this is true, with which of your “registered” poisons do you recommend we wash our dishes, clothes, children, pets, etc.? The answer is extremely obvious…you will not and can not recommend any of your “registered” poisons for these daily household chores; yet 1 tablespoon of any dish soap and 1 teaspoon of any vegetable oil in a quart of water will kill most pests faster, cheaper and a lot safer than most of your “registered” poisons. When are you going to make all of the (other) soap manufacturers “register” all of their safe soaps as POISONS, like you are trying to do with us?
The Manufacturers of Ivory Soap and Not Nice to Lice® and Kleen Kill® Enzyme Cleaner have not registered their safe cleaning products as pesticide poisons for one simple reason; they are not poisons. The pathogenic information provided on the Kleen Kill label is for the benefit of those people who may use these cleaning products in areas where protecting fungus, mold, mildew and some insects may be desirable. We feel the other manufacturers who produce (unregistered) dish soap, laundry detergents, shampoos, bleaches, cleaning products that are known to kill insects, bacteria, fungus, mold and mildew are remiss in not informing the general public about the potential pathogenic effects of their products on non-target species of mold, mildew, fungus, insects and/or bacteria.
A quick tour of most store shelves in California will find dozens of products (e.g., soaps, detergents, bleaches, cleaners, etc.) that directly say that they “KILL”, remove, destroy and eliminate bacteria, germs, mold and mildew. I have yet to see a DPR “registration” number on any of them. Why are the manufacturers of these products allowed to make statements showing an obvious intent to harm these living things without being harassed as we are? Is Dow’s Clorox Bleach registered as a pesticide/disinfectant in California?
Given all of the above, a more representative wording of your web site statement would be:
Welcome to the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Department of Pesticide Regulation. DPR has primary responsibility forregulatingall aspects of pesticide salesand use to protect public health and the environment. The Department’s mission is toevaluate and mitigate impacts of pesticide use,maintainthe safety of thepesticides,work place,and ensure theirproduct effectiveness, and encourage the development and use of reduced-risk pest control practices while recognizing the need for pest management in ahealthy economy.
You may, or may not, be aware that
we are involved in educating the California public on the health and the
environmental dangers of your “registered” pesticide poisons that are chronically
contaminating the environment and killing and crippling people, pets, wildlife
and livestock all over the State of California. We are advising them
to use many of Steve Tvedten’s hundreds of safer alternatives that actually
control, kill, eradicate, harm, repel, mitigate even those pests that are
resistant to all of your “registered” poisons.
Obviously, because of your selective “enforcement” of your policies, we view this “interview/inspection” as an act of harassment by your department because of our environmental efforts to educate the citizens of California. The last time I checked, we still live in the U. S., are citizens of California, and we are guaranteed the rights of freedom of press and speech by the Constitution, which you and your representatives apparently believe you can selectively violate at will. As Mr. Gutierrez stated that he, “was only following orders”, this sounds eerily familiar. Again what are you personally going to do about these violations of all of our constitutional rights?
What we would like is a cessation of the harassment against us and the safe products we represent. We have worked tirelessly on the promotion of safe alternatives to pesticides and being accused of marketing a pesticide is abhorrent. We would like to know who our accusers are and I believe that we also deserve an apology from your department.
If there is any question regarding any aspect or use of these products or the information contained in the literature we provide to the public, please feel free to call us or Stephen Tvedten at (616) 677-1261. Again, Mr. Tvedten is more than willing to discuss these issues, in a open forum, with you and the press.
Sincerely,
/S/
Linda
L. Jensen-Pascarella
Jen-Par
Enterprises
Encls. (Product Brochure and "Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning")
Copy to:
Governor Gray Davis
Sen. Barbara Boxer
Sen. Dianne Feinstein
Lieutenant Governor Cruz Bustamante
Secretary of State Bill Jones
Attorney General Bill Lockyer
Doug Okumura
Lyndon Hawkins
Charles A. Andrews
Kathleen Boyle
Manuel B. Guiterrez
All Members of California Senate
All Members of California Assembly
Marion Moses M.D.
Doris Rapp, M.D.
Lynda Uvari, CCAAPP
Tom Alsup, Ginesis Natural Products
Stephen L Tvedten, Get Set, Inc.
Jay Feldman
Oprah Winfrey
TV Stations
Radio Stations
Newspapers
and others.
Pests,
Bugs and Other creepsy stuff Site Map