Orange Agent

Bộ Nông Nghiệp Hoa Kỳ (USDA) sắp chấp thuận cho xử dụng Chất độc Da cam 2,4-D để diệt cỏ dại trên bắp và đậu nành.

Chất độc Da cam 2,4-D là gì mà VU Heritage Foundation phải hành động?

2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) là thành phần chính trong chất độc da cam.  Chất diệt cỏ trong chiến tranh Việt Nam đã giết chết hoặc bị thương 400.000 người và 500.000 trẻ em bị dị tật bẩm sinh.

Các nhóm chống đối chất độc da cam, chẳng hạn như Hội đồng Bảo vệ Tài nguyên Thiên nhiên (Natural Resources Defense Council), cũng đã trích dẫn nhiều nghiên cứu liên kết 2,4-D với những bệnh nghiêm trọng và ung thư, bao gồm ung thư hạch không Hodgkin. Đặc biệt là trẻ em rất dễ bị tổn thương khi tiếp xúc với 2,4-D.

Nếu USDA cho phép, hóa chất độc hại này sẽ được sử dụng trên cả nước Mỹ. Người ta ước tính đến 2019, các nông trại sẽ tiêu thụ khoảng 100 triệu cân Anh mỗi năm.

Nếu có người cho rằng hóa chất đang được phun ở các trang trại không gây thiệt hại cho người dân thì xin đọc thống kê sau đây:

- Nước uống được coi là rất độc hại ở California.  Người dân cần phải uống nước lọc.
- Nước uống ở vùng Trung Tây (Midwest) đã trở thành mối nguy cơ nghiêm trọng cho sức khỏe. 
- Tìm thấy 59 loại thuốc trừ sâu khác nhau trong nguồn nước uống.
- Atrazine đã được tìm thấy trong 94% nguồn nước tại Hoa Kỳ.

Liệu Tổng thống Obama có làm theo đề nghị của Ủy ban Ung Thư (The President Cancer Panel) không?

Ủy ban đã tường trình lên Tổng thống là chất 2,4-D gây ung thư đang gia tăng nhanh chóng và yêu cầu ông dùng quyền lực của mình để cấm đoán việc xử dụng chất độc da cam gây ô nhiễm đất đai, nguồn nước và không khí.Nhưng Tổng thống Obama có làm không? Không! Bởi sẽ sút giảm lợi nhuận các đại công ty hóa chất.

Vì vậy VU Heritage Foundation Ad Hoc Committee đã viết kháng thư gởi Bộ trưởng Canh nông dưới đây:

Electronically submitted on April 24, 2014


Mr. Thomas Vilsack
Secretary
Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave. SW, Room 501A
  Washington DC 20250


Dear Secretary Vilsack:

On behalf of Friends Of The VU Heritage Foundation, we respectfully request that USDA deny the petition from Dow AgroSciences to deregulate its 2,4-D and genetically engineered (GE), 2,4-D-resistant corn (DAS-40278-9). Widespread planting of 2,4-D GE corn is projected to substantially increase the use of 2,4-D; experts estimate that overall agricultural use of this herbicide may rise from 27 to over 100 million pounds over the next decade. 2,4-D soybeans and vegetables would boost usage still more.

Yet USDA has provided no analysis of the harm to human health that could result.  2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is an herbicide that was the active ingredient in Agent Orange, the Vietnam War defoliant that killed or maimed approx. 400,000 human beings and left 500,000 children with birth defects throughout four and a half decades and still going on. Although the main health effects of Agent Orange were blamed on the other component of the mixture (2,4,5-T) and dioxin contamination, the data indicates that 2,4-D has significant health risks of its own. It remains unclear whether continuing low-level contamination of 2,4-D with dioxins or dioxin-like compounds plays a role.

  Dozens of studies in humans have reported associations between exposure to 2,4-D and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer of the lymphocytes (white blood cells). This finding is consistent with other studies finding that 2,4-D increases lymphocyte replication in exposed farmworkers, and that 2,4-D formulations are cytotoxic and mutagenic. For example, in human lymphocytes, 2,4-D causes chromosome breakage and aberrant cells. In 2010, according to the National Cancer Institute, approximately 65,540 people in the United States were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The incidence of this disease in the United States has increased to about double the rate seen in the 1970s, even when adjusted for population growth and aging. 2,4-D is likely to be responsible for a fraction of cases of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma each year, although it is difficult to quantify the exact numbers.

Dozens of animal studies show that 2,4-D exhibits hormone-disrupting activity. 2,4-D also affects the function of the neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin. Interference with hormones and neurotransmitters can cause serious and lasting effects during fetal and infant development, including birth defects, neurological damage, and interference with reproductive function. Human studies support the results of the animal studies. Male farm sprayers exposed to 2,4-D have lower sperm counts and more spermatic abnormalities compared to men who are not exposed to this chemical. In California, higher rates of birth defects have been observed in wheat-growing areas of the state with the highest use of 2,4-D and other herbicides of the same class. This increase was most pronounced among infants who were conceived in the Spring, the time of greatest herbicide use. A larger study in agricultural counties in California, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota found significant increases in malformations of the circulatory and respiratory systems, especially among infants conceived in April-June in wheat-growing counties.
 
In other study, infant deaths from birth defects among males were significantly elevated. 2,4-D is classified by the EPA as a hazardous air pollutant and by the State of California as a toxic air contaminant. Human exposure to 2,4-D is widespread, including among children. Studies in California, Iowa, North Carolina, and Ohio, for example, found 2,4-D in the carpet dust of 83-98 percent of homes sampled, despite the fact that most homeowners reported that they had not used the pesticide recently. These studies imply that 2,4-D is blowing in or being tracked in to homes, and many studies have shown that chemicals – including 2,4-D – in house dust end up on children’s hands and absorb in their bodies.

  For all of the above reasons, we urge USDA to deny Dow’s petition to deregulate 2,4-D and 2,4-D-resistant corn and soy. At the very least, USDA must conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that addresses the serious issues discussed above, meaningfully considers restrictions on this crop system to prevent its foreseeable harms, and then use that EIS to inform its eventual decision, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act.

VU Heritage Foundation Ad Hoc Committee electronically signed by:

  Hoa Vu, LCSW, MSW
San Jose, California

Dr. Keith Howe, MD
Campbell, California

Prof. Cheriel Jensen, PhD
Saratoga, California

Kathryn Mathewson, MS
San Jose, California

Nancy Pamello, BS
Saratoga, California

Ruth Cole, BA
San Jose, California

CC:
Ms. Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20460

   


© Copyright 2016-2017 Friends Of The VU Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved
4457 Park Paxton Place - San Jose - California 95136 - USA
A Public Benefit Non-Profit Organization No. 3429996
Calif. Charity Registration No. 0139 619 7376
Federal Tax ID No. EIN 45-4160199
Tel: 408-644-6983

Website created by Hoa Vu and is solely responsible for its content.
Last update: 04/05/17


Mission      Value      Services      Support Us      Board of Directors