Outrageous! Unbelievable! Sounds like some crackpot conspiracy story cooked up by the tinfoil hat crowd. If only it were.
A new rule from Bush's EPA includes exceptions that make it acceptable to test "abused and neglected" children if a "direct benefit" can be demonstrated. Direct benefit? How could there be a direct benefit to the public from exposing a child to pesticides?
In an article by national staff writer Andrew Schneider, The Baltimore Sun reports:
WASHINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 14, 2005 The Environmental Protection Agency's new rules on human testing, which the agency said last week would "categorically" protect children and pregnant women from pesticide testing, include numerous exemptions - including one that specifically allows testing of children who have been "abused and neglected."
The rules were revised under intense criticism from environmental groups, scientists and members of Congress, after the disclosure that subjects in some earlier pesticide studies were unaware of what they were being exposed to and, in many cases, did not know why the testing was being done.
In unveiling the new rules last week, the EPA promised full protection for those most at risk of unethical testing.
Knowing the Bush administration as I do - the rampant crony capitalism, the disdain for science and the environment - why am I not reassured?
... within the 30 pages of rules are clear-cut exceptions that permit:
>> Testing of "abused or neglected" children without permission from parents or guardians.
>> "Ethically deficient" human research if it is considered crucial to "protect public health."
>> More than minimal health risk to a subject if there is a "direct benefit" to the child being tested, and the parents or guardians agree.
>> EPA acceptance of overseas industry studies, which are often performed in countries that have minimal or no ethical standards for testing, as long as the tests are not done directly for the EPA ...
"For the first time in our nation's history, the EPA has proposed a program to allow for the systematic and everyday experimentation of pesticides on humans," Rep. Henry A. Waxman, a California Democrat and leading critic of the testing policies, said in a statement yesterday. "Moreover, the proposed program is riddled with ethical loopholes."
The exemptions are "obviously driven by the pesticide industry's goal of relaxing pesticide safety standards," said Aaron Colangelo, a senior staff lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Fund, which has been involved in 18 lawsuits against the pesticide industry and government agencies ...
A study that could mean higher crop yields could be justification enough for the EPA to cite a "public health benefit" under the exemptions, said Dr. Alan Lockwood, an expert in human-testing ethics and past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
"This would be a public health benefit, even though the exposed children may experience an adverse effect."
This is beyond politics. This is about basic humanity and the moral rot at the heart of this government. Please. Copy and email a link to the Baltimore Sun article to friends, relatives, co-workers and acquaintances who voted for Bush and his gang of incompetents. Call your senator and congressman. Write your local newspaper. Phone your local radio and tv station. Demand they cover the story.
And, ask your Republican friends, relatives, etc. how they can continue to support an administration so incompetent, so evil it would allow this travesty.
National Debunker