1
   

EPA WILL USE POOR KIDS AS GUINEA PIGS

 
 
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 05:52 am
11/16/2004: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), led by Bush appointees, is seeking input on a new proposed study in which infants in participating low income families will be monitored for health impacts as they undergo exposure to known toxic chemicals over the course of two years. The study entitled Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study (CHEERS) will look at how chemicals can be ingested, inhaled or absorbed by children ranging from babies to 3 years old.

For taking part in these studies, each family will receive $970, a free video camera, a T-shirt, and a framed certificate of appreciation.

In October, the EPA received $2.1 million to do the study from the American Chemistry Council, a chemical industry front group that includes members such as Dow, Exxon, and Monsanto (see full list of members on sidebar of this page). Critics of the research, including some EPA scientists, claim the study's funders guarantee the results will be biased in favor of the chemical industry, at the expense of the health of the impoverished children serving as test subjects.

For 30 years the ACC has known the high level of toxicity of the specific chemicals being "studied" in this project. These are some of the most dangerous known chemicals in household products. The ACC knows full well the intensely negative impacts that these chemicals have on humans, as does the EPA. This is fully documented in study after study and memo after memo and meeting after meeting over three decades (see side bar and footnotes for reference and further research).

The trick here is that these products are known to have negative long term health effects. This is a short two year study. The results are already known...there will be little to no obvious negative effects on these children at the end of the two year period. The seemingly positive results of the study will allow the ACC to advertise positive "EPA study results" to the public, which will allow the ACC to more effectively lobby congress to weaken regulations on these products even more (thereby increasing profits dramatically). This technique has been exercised by the ACC for decades.

The real negative effects of these types of chemicals come further down the road, when these children could exhibit learning disorders, a propensity for various types of cancer, early puberty, and birth defects in their children.

Participants for the study were chosen from 6 health clinics and three hospitals in Jacksonville, FL. These medical facilities report that 51% of their births are to non-white mothers and 62% of mothers have only received an elementary or secondary education.

Important Note on Participants of Study: The study layout does not require that participants increase their chemical use, but does mandate that chosen applicants will need to demonstrate that they do regularly use toxic chemicals in and around the home. The concern here is that low income applicants may increase their toxic chemical use for the sake of applying and being eligible for the funding.

Important Note on Suspension of the Study: On November 11th, the EPA announced suspension of the study's launch until early 2005 for the sake of "final review." The Organic Consumers Association is taking this opportunity to call on the nation's citizens to demand the EPA permanently terminate this abuse of low income children by the chemical industry.


You can help stop this from happening. Sign the petition, write to your representatives: http://www.organicconsumers.org/epa-alert.htmhttp://www.organicconsumers.org/epa-alert.htm
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 550 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 06:00 am
For taking part in these studies, each family will receive $970, a free video camera, a T-shirt, and a framed certificate of appreciation.

A good incentive to get folks to sign up for this very worthwhile, IMO, study to better understand infant tolerance to their environment.

The results should yield valid data to better set rational threshold standards I would think.

Why would anyone want to stop the study?
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 06:28 am
Why don't you go ahead and sign up your children / grandchildren then, Larry? Would be so appreciated by the rest of us.
0 Replies
 
willow tl
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 06:39 am
Jesus...anyone remember Tuskegee ...
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 06:46 am
squinney wrote:
Why don't you go ahead and sign up your children / grandchildren then, Larry? Would be so appreciated by the rest of us.


Because they don't qualify. But the knowledge that will be gained from this study will certainly be of benefit to future generations.

And it ain't like they are subjecting the volunteers to additional toxins, merely observing the effect of those in their current environment.

Knowledge is a good thing, obtained without causing harm to anyone or anything, is a good thing don't you think?
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 06:56 am
I've participated in a LOT of product studies ranging from diaper comparison to the new Burger King sandwich. The largest payout was the four weeks of free diapers worth about $90 at that time. Others averaged $25 - $50.

Even medical studies at Duke and UNC don't payout at the rate spoken of here. My egg donation which would give someone a real live baby doesn't pay that well. (not that I have or would do it)


If there is no harm, why would there be a $970 payment, a video camera, a T-shirt and a framed certificate?
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 07:00 am
squinney wrote:
I've participated in a LOT of product studies ranging from diaper comparison to the new Burger King sandwich. The largest payout was the four weeks of free diapers worth about $90 at that time. Others averaged $25 - $50.

Even medical studies at Duke and UNC don't payout at the rate spoken of here. My egg donation which would give someone a real live baby doesn't pay that well. (not that I have or would do it)


If there is no harm, why would there be a $970 payment, a video camera, a T-shirt and a framed certificate?


Incentive to participate.

And what harm do you imagine can come from this study?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 07:21 am
Goodie! A video camera. I can record little Willie's seizures and puking after being exposed to toxic chemicals.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Nov, 2004 07:25 am
Quote:
Important Note on Participants of Study: The study layout does not require that participants increase their chemical use, but does mandate that chosen applicants will need to demonstrate that they do regularly use toxic chemicals in and around the home.


These kids are not being exposed to anything that to which they would not be exposed if the study were not being conducted. So what's the problem?

Quote:
The concern here is that low income applicants may increase their toxic chemical use for the sake of applying and being eligible for the funding.


Obviously, the perks being given have some value to the parents.

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/jul/tuskegee/

Quote:
For 40 years, the U.S. Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human guinea pigs, not given proper treatment, have died of syphilis and its side effects," Associated Press reporter Jean Heller wrote on July 25, 1972. "The study was conducted to determine from autopsies what the disease does to the human body."


I don't know how one could compare the Tuskeegee study from this one. Apparently the children in are exposed to the chemicals in the home. Being in the study would make no difference in their exposure, unless some parents decide to expose their kids more than is naturally occurring in their normal environment.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » EPA WILL USE POOR KIDS AS GUINEA PIGS
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/16/2024 at 09:46:37