Herbicide okay to eat, but not to drink
The ciy of Drexel, MO last week had to, once again, issue an order for residents not to use their water in any way, shape or form – even if boiled. It seems that every year after any heavy rains routine testing of their water turns up high levels of the weed killer, atrazine. The most recent test in mid-June showed the atrazine level to be 10 times the EPA “safe” level.
Atrazine, made by Syngenta, is the most widely used herbicide in the country. Run off from its use has long been a problem in ground water supplies and can be carried up to 600 miles on the wind. Here’s the kicker; it has been found (even in low concentrations) to lower sperm counts for men and increase the risk of breast cancer and fertility problems in women. When tested on frogs, it was even powerful enough to turn males into functional females. And it’s okay to spray this stuff on our food supply?
Which begs the question, if it’s okay to spray it on our food why is it not okay to drink it, bathe in it or wash dishes with it? Seems like quite a contradiction to me. But now, cities are fighting back. Sixteen cities in Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, and Iowa have filed a lawsuit demanding that Syngenta pay for removal of atrazine from public water systems. It’s estimated the cities involved have spent more than $350 million trying to filter the herbicide from their water.
Apparantly it’s not even a particularly effective herbicide. Even the USDA concedes that banning atrazine would reduce agricultural productivity by just 1.2 percent. So why haven’t they just banned it?
Syngenta, obviously, says they haven’t done anything wrong since the EPA approved the use of atrazine in 2006. Of course, this was two solid years after the European Union banned its use completely. Somebody please remind me of what the job of the EPA is. Doesn’t seem to me like they are doing a good job of protecting the environment or us.