WARNING: May contain opinions
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has denied a bid by an environmental group to revoke approval of the weed killer 2,4-D, one of the most widely used weed killers in the world. The Natural Resources Defense Council has said the weed killer may cause cancer, hormone disruption and other problems and that the EPA has underestimated how much people might be exposed to the chemical.
That short headline had me lookin' into this and I found this doc, I am researching further, but this is adequately concerning...
I also found this, it is out of date(1996) but of good use to show just how long this information has been "known"...find the section labeled: Toxicological Effects:
Then I found that the EPA says this(http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/24d_fs.htm)...
Acute aggregate risk. The acute DWLOCs are 432 ppb or greater with the most sensitive population being females 13-49 years old. The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of 118 ppb for surface water and 15 ppb for groundwater are substantially less than the DWLOCs which means that the risks are not of concern. Using the forward calculation method, the highest risks (58 percent of the aPAD) are for females 13-49 years old. These risks are based upon the lower no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 25 mg/kg/day from a developmental study in rats. Acute aggregate risk is not of concern to the Agency.
Short-term aggregate risk. The short term DWLOCs were calculated only for females 13-49 and children 1-6 because these population subgroups have the highest exposure and are protective of the other subgroups. The DWLOCs range from 24 to 54 ug/liter. These DWLOCs are all greater than the EDWCs, which range from 15 to 23 ug/liter, and indicate that short term risks are not of concern. Using the forward calculation method, the short term aggregate MOEs indicate that the short term risks are not of concern because the MOEs equal or exceed the target MOE of 1000. The highest exposed subgroups were females 13-49 and children 1-6 years old.
Chronic (non-cancer) aggregate risk. The chronic DWLOCs are 47 ppb or greater with the most sensitive populations being infants and children. The EDWCs, which range from 1.5 to 23 ppb, are less than the DWLOCs which means that the risks are not of concern. With the forward calculation method, chronic aggregate risks are not of concern because they are less than 100 percent of the cPAD. The highest risks (38 percent of the cPAD) are for children 1-2 years old.
I don't know about you guys but I don't wear this stuff at the park or the lake...MOE=Margin of Exposure...how would I know when this is applied and if it was applied to safest regulatory standard possible???
With the exception of mixing/loading wettable powder, all of the short-term and intermediate-term MOEs exceed the target of 100 with baseline personal protective equipment (PPE) (i.e., long-sleeved shirt, long pants, shoes plus socks, no respirator) or single layer PPE (i.e., long-sleeved shirt, long pants, shoes plus socks, gloves, no respirator) and are not of concern. The MOEs for handling wettable powder are above 100 with engineering controls (i.e. water soluble bags).
I would be really interested to know if there is a public register of what tax-payer supported community resources use this product, this would give power back to the people to express their disagreement with this decision made by the US-EPA.
Thanks for taking the time to read and/or discuss...