|
A state agency’s new report that it couldn’t substantiate
illness claims after last year’s aerial spraying for the light brown
apple moth has been called into question by Assemblyman John Laird,
D-Santa Cruz.
A little-known state agency’s new report that it couldn’t substantiate illness claims after last year’s aerial spraying for the light brown apple moth has been called into question by Assemblyman John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, following the agency’s abrupt termination of a conference call with reporters.
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, consulting with the state Department of Food and Agriculture about its plans to spray again starting in June, conducted an assessment of more than 600 health complaints after last summer’s spraying of a synthetic pheromone over parts of Santa Cruz and Monterey counties.
OEHHA worked with the state Department of Public Health and the Department of Pesticide Regulation on the study.
“We examined all the complaints, and it was not possible to link the reported symptoms to the aerial spraying,” OEHHA director Joan Denton was quoted as saying in a news release issued by her office Friday, April 11.
The office had scheduled a conference call for media representatives later in the day, but CDFA Secretary A.G. Kawamura quickly hailed the report, commending the group’s “thorough look at every report of health symptoms.”
“It’s my hope today’s report will help ease the minds of those concerned about the light brown apple moth eradication program,” he said.
During the conference call, however, Denton conceded that the scientists had dismissed most of the health reports because of a lack of detail and did not interview any complainant or any of the doctors who filed 45 official Pesticide Illness Reports.
She clarified that, although it was downplayed in the news release, there wasn’t enough detail to determine whether there was any link between the spraying and the illness reports.
“Are you saying there is no link?” a reporter asked. “No,” she replied. “Are you saying the details are not as accurate as you need them to be to draw a link?” she was then asked. “Correct,” she said. “We can’t say either way.”
She pointed out that the report said respiratory, skin-rash and other reported symptoms are “quite typical of the general population” and could have other causes.
Then, health officials, apparently annoyed because representatives of several citizen groups opposed to the spraying were on the call and started asking questions, stopped answering all questions and announced, “The call is ended!”
Several reporters were heard to say, “Wait, I have another question,” and “I have a couple more questions.” Someone on the line gave them a telephone number to call.
Many media outlets reported that there was no link and did not clarify the reports later.
A spokesman for Kawamura, Steve Lyle, said the secretary’s statement would stand and that the state planned to go ahead with this year’s spraying plans.
The usually circumspect Laird, who has urged CDFA to be more forthcoming about the spray and to listen to objections, took off his gloves.
“I’m disappointed that what should have been a very serious scientific effort started long ago became an exercise where just 10 percent of the reported cases were analyzed, and the findings have been used effectively as spin for the CDFA,” Laird said.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Who is this Kawmanura guy and Steve Liar? Who are they - Hitler and Goerbal (sp?). Just because they like to turn poison onto people doesn't mean that they should be in charge!