Corn’s Part in an Upward Trend Yielding Downward Results

According to analysis performed by local physicians, a dangerous trend has become quite noticeable in Waimea, on the island of Kauai, Hawai‘i: the number of severe heart malformations has risen to more than ten times the national rate.

Local doctors now find themselves at the center of a growing controversy about whether the substantial increase in severe illness and birth defects in Waimea stem from the main cash crop on four of the six islands, genetically modified (GMO) corn, which has been altered to resist pesticides.

Throughout the years, Hawai‘i has been utilized as a testing ground for almost all GMO corn grown in the United States.  The island of Kauai is the largest area used with chemical companies Dow, BASF, Syngenta, and DuPont spraying 17 times more pesticide per acre than on ordinary cornfields in the US mainland.

How are Residents Exposed to Pesticides?

Waimea is a small town that lies directly downhill from the 12,000 acres of GMO test fields leased mainly from the state. Spraying takes place often, sometimes every couple of days. Residents have complained that when the wind blows downhill from the fields, the chemicals have caused headaches, vomiting, and stinging eyes.

When crops are sprayed with pesticides, the toxic mist can become airborne and blown by the wind away from the intended field crop. This is called pesticide drift. The pesticide drift can be blown downwind into nearby communities contaminating homes and exposing residents to toxic chemicals.

While Hawai‘ians have attempted to use a ballot initiative to force a moratorium on the planting of GMO crops, the chemical companies that grow the GMO corn have refused to disclose the chemicals that they are spraying as well as the specific amounts of the chemicals being used.

How are Birth Defects Linked to Pesticides?

Fighting against this, a report by the American Academy of Pediatrics has found “an association between pesticides and adverse birth outcomes, including physical birth defects.” Pesticides can cause birth defects in children whose parents were exposed through airborne pesticide drift, groundwater contamination or farm work. The toxins in pesticides can be inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through the mother’s (or father’s) skin. The toxins may then damage the parents’ chromosomes. If a child is conceived before or soon after a mother’s pesticide exposure, the unborn child may inherit abnormal DNA and suffer from a serious heart condition or other birth defects.

Local doctors report seeing more than 10 times the national rate of birth defects, such as heart malformations, in the state of Hawai‘i and say that more study is needed. However, many of the pesticides being heavily used on Kauai, Maui, and throughout the neighbor islands have been linked to a number of birth defects including:

  • Cardiac conditions
  • Limb abnormalities
  • Spina bifida
  • Gastroschisis

It has been revealed that chemical companies, unlike farmers, are allowed to operate under a decades-old Environmental Protection Agency permit which allowed toxic chemicals to be discharged into water. The state of Hawai‘i has asked for a federal exemption to allow these companies to continue to not comply with modern standards. As such, there continues to be discord between corporations grouped with some politicians and the people of Hawai‘i.

Pittsburgh Board of Ed. Can’t Escape Asbestos Liability

Pennsylvania Appeals Court Affirms Ruling that the Pittsburgh Board of Public Education Cannot Hide Behind Governmental Immunity to Avoid Asbestos Liability

In January 2017, a Pennsylvania Appeals Court affirmed the ruling of the trial court that Pittsburgh’s Board of Public Education (“PBPE”) will not be able to use governmental immunity to escape liability for the death of a teacher from mesothelioma. The teacher, who worked at a Pittsburgh high school, was exposed to asbestos dust in the school. She died over 50 years later from mesothelioma. Her estate has brought a claim against PBPE, as well as a number of corporate entities.

What is the Claim?

The plaintiff’s claim alleges that PBPE, as well as the corporate entities at issue, are liable for the death of a school teacher. The teacher was occupationally exposed to asbestos while she taught in the Pittsburgh school district resulting in her developing mesothelioma. She died from the disease in 2013. The claim alleges that her exposure to asbestos dust came from pipe coverings on the steam and water pipes located throughout the school.

The School Board’s Attempt at Claiming Governmental Immunity

PBPE appealed the decision of the trial court which stated that it could not rely on governmental immunity to escape liability for the teacher’s asbestos exposure. PBPE’s contention was that as a governmental entity it could not be held liable for the teacher’s death. The school board argued that failing to provide a safe place to work does not fall within the scope of exceptions to governmental immunity, and therefore, PBPE should be granted summary judgment.

However, the panel for the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The panel explained that public employers, even if they are governmental entities, have a common law duty to ensure that the work environment is safe. This includes maintaining safe structures free from asbestos dust. The attorney for the plaintiff applauded the decision, suggesting that this will allow people who have been truly injured to seek justice and compensation from the parties responsible for the injury.

Vietnam Veterans Pass on a Tragic Legacy from Agent Orange

Birth Defects in Descendants of Vietnam Veterans Exposed to Agent Orange Raise Concerns about Enlist Duo because of its Similar Chemical Makeup

Vietnam veterans are leaving behind a tragic legacy with their children and grandchildren – birth defects related to toxic exposure to Agent Orange during the war. Agent Orange was a herbicide used during the Vietnam War that has now been banned because it is a proven carcinogen. In addition, studies have shown that Agent Orange can be a cause of birth defects in the children of Vietnam veterans. Grandchildren of these veterans have also shown a higher than normal rate of birth defects.

Studies showing that Agent Orange is a cause of birth defects are especially troubling because, while Agent Orange is banned, Enlist Duo is not. Enlist Duo is a popular weed killer that the Environmental Protection Agency has recently approved for expanded use. The concern with Enlist duo is that it contains 2-4D, a major ingredient in Agent Orange.

Who is at Risk for Birth Defects Resulting from Toxic Exposure to Enlist Duo?

Farm workers will be put at risk for having children with birth defects resulting from toxic exposure to Enlist Duo. As fields are sprayed with the popular Enlist Duo, farm workers will come in contact with the potentially harmful chemical if they are not adequately protected. All too often, farm workers do not even know about the dangers of the chemicals used on the farms where they are working, nor are they properly protected from coming in contact with substances known to cause birth defects.

Who is Responsible for Protecting Farm Workers from Birth Defects Resulting from Toxic Exposure?

Consumers and individuals depend on companies catering to the commercial farming industry to make safe products and to provide warnings when necessary.  However, it is the responsibility of labor contractors and farm owners to provide a safe working environment for their laborers and farm workers. The labor contractors and farm owners are frequently aware that chemicals used on their fields can be a cause of birth defects, but fail to adequately warn or protect the workers from these dangers. No one should have to be subjected to toxic exposure because of an unsafe work environment.

Cancer Warning Will Make Consumers Think Twice About Roundup

Glyphosate, the Main Ingredient in Roundup, Will be Added to California’s List of Carcinogens – A Cancer Warning Must be Placed on the Herbicide’s Product Label

The main ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, will be added to California’s list of substances known to cause birth defects, reproductive harm, or cancer in accordance with Proposition 65. Glyphosate has been the center-point of a battle between chemical giant Monsanto and the California Environmental Protection Agency over the classification of the chemical as a carcinogen. For years, various reputable agencies have suggested that glyphosate can cause cancer – Monsanto denied such claims. Widespread use of Roundup and glyphosate in industrial agriculture and on commercial farms is common. Now, thanks to California’s Proposition 65, glyphosate will officially be recognized by the state as a dangerous chemical.

What is Proposition 65?

Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, was passed in California in 1986. This act requires products that contain chemicals deemed to be dangerous, such as substances known to cause birth defects, reproductive harm, or cancer to have warning labels displayed on their packaging. Proposition 65 not only allows consumers, including those in the commercial farming industry, to be aware of any harmful chemicals that might be in products, but it also encourages manufacturers to substitute out the harmful ingredients and make safer products that don’t need warning labels. The act has resulted in the addition of over 900 substances to the dangerous chemical list – glyphosate will be the newest addition.

What is Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is the main ingredient in the popular herbicide Roundup. This product, common in commercial produce farming, is used all over the world despite glyphosate’s known health risks. In 2015, the World Health Organization said that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic.” Studies conducted in the U.S. have also indicated that it is linked to birth defects and reproductive problems. This is especially concerning because exposure to toxic chemicals during pregnancy, such as glyphosate, is all too common for female farm workers. Farm owners and labor contractors frequently neglect their responsibility to adequately warn and protect farm workers from the dangers of the chemicals that are being sprayed on the fields