Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM011485 . . . . . District No. 1 Commissioner: District No. 2 Commissioner: District No. 3 Commissioner: Larry W. Dennison, Member B.G. Brown, Member John L. Pitts, Chairman Clerk of the Board Public Works Director Jerdine C. Bragg Brian L. Shelton " M I'iIlJ NUll ;E','~E,Jj',,' l ----------------------------~--- , Week df Ja uary 14, 1985 The meeting was called to order at 10:00 by Acting Chairman, B.G. Brown, due to the absence 0 Chairman John L. Pitts. Commissioner Larry W. Dennison was present. Mr. Gastman is also acre lake on his pr and accomodations f Hunting Zone at Crocker Lake roc er a e: r. astman ony arm at Crocker Lake and res next to the old barn near the ecause the lake is open to fishing, ences, people sneak in and hunt an is gathering signatures on a petition y owners to ask that a "No Hunting" of Crocker Lake. ent 0 e.own has an option to' bu Public Boat Ramp 0 and there are not a ducks in this area. circulated among th Zone be established proposing th perty as! wel r handicrppe a bird sanctuary to include a 10 as a building for bird watching and Senior Citizens fishing, be developed. since the lake is surrounded by pri- risdiction regarding a No Hunting ed by the State he should submit te Fish and Game Department. The Board advised M vate property the C Zone and that since his petition to the , . Gastmap. th unty has! no . the lake! is Washingtbn S Earl Committee re: a so ~nutes 0 the Grange Transpor has installed "No P 20 mph (From 8a.m. that includes the W I I ation Commit rking" s!igns oS p. m.!) si st Valle:y Ro a sketch of sportation C r side o~ th road and! the I There is a 60 foot Shelton, Public Wor in 'the center of th of road from the en on each side of the , ight-of-way s Directior n t right-pf-w of the pres road. he area with some suggestions noted mittee which would include eliminating road and installing a left hand turn emoval of a light pole in the area. ong that stretch of Rhody Drive, Brian ed, and the present road is almost which would allow another 10 feet t pavement to the right-of-way line, Earl from the Grange Tra the ditches on eith lane on the widened After further discussion of the tersection and poss.ble solution that the Public Wor s Department Grange Transportati n Committee rious traffic problems at this in- to those problems, the Board asked ook into the suggestions made by the see if they are feasible. VOL , rACE 1:- 164 Minutes, Week of Ja uary 14, 1985 Page 2: BUSINESS FROM COUNT DEPARTMENTS: S DEPARTMENT ommissioner Dennison moved to Road Project No. CR0579 for a section lution No. 7-85 County Road Project. ction. Commissioner Brown seconded Addition 0 the Officia 8-85 adding awn treet to t e ana-signed bymotior' of Commissio Brown. Nip Lee R ad R.I.D. Pet tion: Commissioner De to accept t e ~p t' e oa ... et~tion and direct the Department to proce s the petitio and report back on the of the petition. C IDmissioner Br wn seconded the motion. Blue Hero Road Right-o -way: Brian Shelton, P blic Works Director advised th t a request has been received from Mr. Heinzinger who owns property a ong Blue Heron Road, for the County to cut some of the trees in the right-of-way in exchange for the legal conveyance of this right~of-wa to the County. A Court Order defined that this right-of-way is the Countys, but the legal conveyance fro Mr. Heinzinger has never been made. This work would be beneficial to t e County and the adjacent proper y owners. ution No. s approved Commissioner nison moved Public Works sufficiency The Board dire~ted _he Public Works Department to contact Mr. Heinzinger and have him f1ag t e trees that.. he wants cut down so the County will know the scope 10f t e work being requested. Rhod~ Dri~e and West Valley Road Intersection: The Chimacum School Distr~c as requeste t at t e ounty part~c pate in some way to have automa ed f ashing yellow lights put on the "School Zone Ahead" signs that are on R ody Drive in front of the school, Brian Shelton advised. A se~f co tained, fully automated system on each of the two signs woul.d co tap. roximatly $2,400.00, which Lloyd Olson, Superinten- dent of the Chomacu Schools, has indicated they would be willing to pay, but they lould like the County's help. After diScussi~n of the various aspects of this project, the Board dir- ected Brian Sh lton to find out what the monthly mainten nce costs would be as well as ow m ch it will cost to have the power ru to these two signs. I PLANNING DEPARTMENT Buildin Mr. Barbe is pro- posing to ui an ~t~on to s ca ~n on McM nn oad. In order to accomodate theJbluf setback requirements, Mr. Barbe mov d the location of the structu~e to an area of his property that could i fringe on a future septic ank ~rainfield area. When the H~alth Dep rtment reviewed the applicatio the~ could not approve it for ajrecreati nroom (detached) because the wa~er s stem serving the property is from an unapproved source. Mr. B rbe : as changed the designation bf the bu lding from recreation roo, to storage building which does bot requi e Health De- partment appro~al. I . ~ The Board adviJed t, at they would discuss this ~atter fu Health Board trieeti'n~on Wednesday. ! ordeJ of ~acation: Portion of Beck an~ Kirkpat Commissioner Pitts move to approve an sign e$o ut~on o. ordering the v catibn of a portion of BEck and 1F-irkpatrick Com- missioner Denn1son seconded the motion. I I I , I !.VOL 11 fACE foe 16$ , , Minutes, Page 3: Operation: SEP emporary c ippe hel Nathanson, set up a perma rd and trucking Review: Mr. & Mrs. Udd are operation in Hadlock at the old ssistant Planner reported, and ent operation to include a chipper, to take the chips out of the County. Udd Chippe presently running a Shold gravel pit, l they are proposing t barker, scale, log The permanent operat one chipper, barker feet by 480 feet; . P yard (approximately caretaker, a truck I located on 20 acres port site which is from the Airport Ro~ posed along the AirI- other boundaries. This area, Rachel a the . Comprehens i ve pll it is adjacent to ot recommends that the review and a determi on would be in wo phases; phase one would include nd a log and chop storage area approximately 400 ase two would i clude one chipper, another log he same size as the firsd, a mobile home for a rking area and shop. This operation would be f property that is adjacent to the present air- xt to Mac's Wre king~ Access to the property is near the Fire tation. A 75 foot buffer is pro- rt Cutoff Road ith a 50 foot buffer along all hanson advised, is designated as "Suburban" by n, but was chos n by the project proponent because er industrial a tivity. The Planning Department roposal be sent to the Planning Commission for ation on the la d use question. Commissioner Dennis moved to have he proposed Udd Chipper project sent to the Plannin~ Commission for heir review and determination on the land use questio Commissioner Brown, seconded the motion. \ Buildin iissua:lJto a party in Jments of the Sh6reli. of this permit has new regulations woul The permitee has du~ with weather nothin~ applied for a buildt the Uniform Building ponent required to r After discussion wib the Board would con fee and advise him County regulations. has advised engs to move a portable ector reported ~. buil bluf went into effe 8 feet ff\@m the foot setback. ing permit was setback require- t. The site plan bluff, which the for th foundation, bu done d ring 1984, and g permit extens'on. Under the Code this permi could be cance apply under the new setback req due to problems the permitee has equirements of led and the pro- irements. the :Soard, the Planning Direct r was advised that r if he decided to accept this ermittee's renewal submit a new p ot plan consist nt with the current Rental of the VFW Ha as req of Commissioner Denp Budget Tr~ No. 9-85 was approv Commissioner Brown IL various county depa~ EstablisJu Trading Company: Ti Company was establis of the Jefferson Co Resolution No. 5-85 Commissioner Brown. * * e rental agreem nt for space at Shomer, was app oved by motion e Commissioner rown. s: Resolution son, seconded by as requested by ictorian Seaport aport Tra ing g, Coordinator the approval of n, seconded by ~ VOL 1 rACE r:O 166 Minutes, Week of J n Page 3: 14, 1985 The meeting of the ard of County ornmissioners was recessed Monday evening after the c equled appoint ents and reconve ed Tuesday. All Board members were esent. B.lls: The bills pproved for paym the balance by each of the er re: Mora orium on. Aerial ng 1S aVer at1m transcript1 Chairman Pitts: T e of Tom Jay and Ken here before, that present their info question the speak sented and if ther of pro or con, tho e or by Tom Jay. Th.s the sense that it is hearing, but it's portion over to TOi eetings hav an and the followed in n and the B regards to questions f stions ~ill sion is not a public h ic meeting, to introduc been set up by s with the help ormat for anyone who has not been the past, is tha the speaker will ard will have.an opportunity to ny information t at they have pre- om either side 0 the question be asked by eith r Ken Hillman open to public q estioning, in aring, and this .s not a public and with that I ill turn this the speaker. Tom Jay: Ah, did want me to do it? nt to menti n what the topic was or do you Chairman Pitts: T aspects of aerial the final eeting and it hasta do with health ng. Tom Jay: Well, th Dr. Ruth Shearer a consults, the way subject and withou~ Dr. Shearer: Than~ ker that' th Coalition has i 's a geneti consultant and rstand it, orldwide on matt her ado,. Dr. Shearer. vited today is oxicologist who rs of, on this may I spea so~ that they wi, Lhear? Chairman Pitts: hear alrig t? everyon~ sp aks up. May we ave the door little ,bit of the noise. i Dr. Shearer: a! hat people an be exposed to pesticides safely is based on a o'f assumptions a d myths. And these include Cit t at, te m t that pesticid s registered with the EPA have passe t~ ngent healt testing. That, as of the present time is still a mYih. i n 1972 Qong ess passed an am ndment to the Pesticide Law (FIF )!r quiringtha pesticide registrations be supported by a valid data ba e df health.t;est in a variety of areas, that included chronic: health eff cts. And EPi) is in the process f trying to enforce this at the present tiim , and very ew pesticides h ve yet met these requirements and b~e ir -registered according to th law. The final step in the proces~ wdu d be re-reg.stration and th t would indicate that there is a valid ib se of test ata to support he registration. Neither 2,4-D or GI Pli.o ate has 'bee re-registered t the present time. They're both in th PIt. :,0 ess of obta.ning the necess ry data. Now, the tests tha a!.te required fo this re-registoation and which should show no unr asdn ble hazard re really very inimal. There's a large number of t e~, but then t re are many dif erent kinds of health effectstha~ we' e conceined about, in peopl And, the tests Lnclude; testing f va ious kinds f accute exposu e: oral dermal and inhalation exp suie and vario s kinds of sub- hronic health effects, chronic health eff cts uch as oirt defects, ferti ity, effects on fertility, cancer rb tat.ons and 'so metabblism tes s that will help to interpr~t the 0 et ata. . VOl 11 ~~,'~" (\67 I, Minutes, Week of J nuary 14, 1985 Page 4: In 1980, EPAhad atspeCial review concerns about th. e health effects though there are h ndreds of paper health and metabol c effects of 2, did not meet the d ta requirements have to be repeate. And nearly a tests were ordered to be repeated ~ancer studies in ats and mice an studies, sub-chron c oral and neur obism studies, acu e oral and derm tion studies. In all of these cat Now, the industry, I the manufacture to try to start these tests and th and some of them h ve been submitt all been submitted and all been re of the significanc of the tests. the results of the e. tests done by released to the pu lic or publishe literature. SO:1' w have only, as as the testing to eet data requir industry that th.e . hortertests ha which, how you and no word th toxicity tests. avbeen completed review of it. So, we know that ah, older information, many of which i that are not part f the current d they don't meet cu rent data requi different nor. more relev,~nEto 2,4 requirements that re the same for standard data requirements require organophosphates of other carbonat the cholinesterase fy.stem... And, of catagory. 2,4-D ia neuro-toxin not, had there not been dEhuman ex severe neuro-toxic~ty from 2,4-D i not have been requ1red, simply on it has been requir~d and the test . the National Toxicplogy Program di neuro-toxicity testing and release report simply said that " in resea 2,4-D, rats expose repeatedly to to display a progrkssive alteratio effect was dose an! time related." of a published pap r certainly but an area of great c ncern. The con 1959 was the first p blication of peripheral neurop't y, resulting an t~ng ~ng ln t'i ands and feet the limbs with ext e ely full reco and three years. . ere have been, PUbli.shed that wer~ exposed on. ly t 50 cases of 2,4-D peripheral neuro the person was exp sed to more tha is 2,4-D but there is a possibilit involving the othe chemicals. So not a clean resear study. Howev 50peopl~ reported in the publishe suffered periphera europathy fol I ,did bring some or I r~search reports i~ anybody on the t jwon't try to go f rough in great A Istudy was done, p blished in 198 b~ studying worker~ involved in th in this country. ~erve conduction e~ployed in the ma ~facture of phe t~at manufacture 2,~-D also manufa s~udy of the twop enoxyherbicides a Ivery significant increase in slo ! ! I I 2,4-D, out of turn, because of d came to the conclusion that al- in the literature concerning the D these tests, these old tests, n effect at the time and would of them, all of the significant cluding oncogenicity and it's a reproductive study, teratogenicity toxicity studies, standard metab- toxicity studies and dermal absorb- ories the data was insufficient. got together and formed a coalition have been working on these tests to the EPA, but they have not ewed byEPA to determine the validity nd, as far as public information he manufacturers have not been in the peer reviews, scientific r as the new test data, as far ents we have only the word of the been done and were satisfactory t the cancer tests or the neuro- et. And, certainly no public peer what we have to go on then is the ludes, the studies include tests a requirements. In other words ments because they tested something specifically, than do the standard II pesticides. For instance, the euro-toxicity testing only for , those that are known to effect ourse, 2,4-Ddoe.n1t fall in that a different kind and it would rience of a number of cases of human, neuro-toxicity testing would e standard protocols, however, supposedly under way. Meanwhile do a little rather superficial something less than an adequate h on the neurological effects of rious does of 2,4-D were found in neuro-muscular function. The Which isn't really the equivalent. t does indicate that ah, this is rn arose long, long ago I think person exposed to 2, 4-D who developed paralysis, beginning with numbness nd progressing to paralysis of ry, not fully recovered after two s Dr. Dost said. about 20 cases 2,4-D. There have been well over thy published that the other cases one catagory. The Common factor of synergistic or other effects ou can't say that it's a, it's , there are, asI said, more than scientific literature who have wing 2,4-D exposure. II leave some of these published bard would like to have them. etail every paper. trying to investigate this problem, manufacture of phenoxyherbicides elocity studies ,of,the workers xyherbicides. Unfortunately, those ure 2,4,5-T, so this is a joint ogether. And, they did detect ng of nerve conduction velocities. Val 11 fACE iO 168 "All together" it nerve conduction v highly significant objectively demons country, that ther a $, "46% of t , . , 1 city test v~ d,. fference". : r ted, even th , p a effect b ! I peripheral nerves. ow, there h~ e that indica:tethat 2~4-D has adv~ s system also. The n mal studies: .1" 1960's, it has bee ~rgly ignor~ a paper bY.. D essitY,ia. a.,:,.. Humphrey i.(',., severe problem wit pe central p . study, studied onl . 19h doses anp. it's hard to extra,o ~te, except with more dose lev,l : and more d~ low-dose chronic e f cts being of ' mental exposure to a ~hemical. ! 1985 Minutes, Week of J Page 5: study group had one or more slowed s 570 in the control group - a this indicates that it can be h working in the factories in this europathy,or nerve damage to the been a number of studies in animals effects on the central nervous lude, way clear back into the early but it was published at that time, Dessity et al, that points to ous system. Unfortunately this 's very hard to use that as a, t the study should be done at, rent species, and longer term studies, re conern generally with environ- , , More recently and bonsiderabl~ that 2, 4-D in the r !in interfer~ of compounds throu !the, in and, plexsus and that c ~in compounp , wi th the tra'tlsport .. 2, 4-D out p significance that rs certainly one yet that seems know that,! the acute symptoms ~ develop a: tomary acute effec s,: short-term: is one of those ch .balsithat wl from the brain all .ng il to rem. of time. 2,4-D in e ~ere with t products and neuro}t ~nsm tters ~ also that prevent p. iin d mage oir interaction then wit the transpp of the brain. And~, his ay have undoubtedly has alrt :to dl with t nervous system effrc 'S an I certa,i exposeclp~bple devfl p. hat's a of North 'Carolina r '001., f Medi:c I Is there POSSiblysr Chairman PittS:r Dr. Shearer: Andr 'observed ef:f present time for an !pest:Lcide. : statement. First t e no Observed of test, each roun Of exposure" meaningless unless qucite the 'P relevant to. Seco !the quality! no observed effect ~Vel fora ~a species can vary aousandfold 'i a gross observatio , ,as a lot of! histoP4thology or ! inical chemiis or the right bioche icalcomponen you don't look for au don't find at the right organ nd use the ~i find an effect and herefore yoU;' effected by this. F1nland in the 1970's showed Iunctioncr the blood brain -D to r~ts or related phenoxy-herbicide d up spme hours later with a low then a much higher percentage fter the previous dose, than if without the previous treatment as an alteration in the permeability emical.: They also showed there of 2,4~n and blood cells in the Another study by :l and Dilatai tha. t 2, 4-D had the1c pac~ ty to ~tn barrier. After gi i g a dose of! NCPA either one, i pis was foll dose of radio actie ~racer of 2~ of the chemical go .hto the brai it were given, the t acer were gi with 2,4-D. In-,ot e ! words, ther of the brain for m r : of the sam~ were capillary inj r'es as a resu spinal fluid. j , terest'" I think, is the demonstration ith the transport of certain classes of the brain, through the choroid likewise~ then interfere competitively he braip~ This is of practical ould knoW, and I haven't found you're efPosed to 2,4-D and among e headache, that's one of the cus- ects, if! you take aspirin, aspirin prevent the excretion of the 2,4-D in the prain for a longer period excretion of some of the degradation need tbibe excreted from the brain ain toxitity. So, it has a strong system f~r chemicals in and out mething to do, it probably, it nervoU's, ,system effects, the Central with the terrible headaches that per by Ktm and Otuama (?) University i of wat:e ? ! levels can be determined at this re are s~veral probleIIE with this fect level differs with each type h animal! specie,ir.,tested. So, it's iculartvpe of study that it's If observ:at~on varies widely. The ~ cular k.iP. d of test in a particular e endingoh whether it's based on ~ 'livestock studies have been, r and w~ether or not the right organ a's studi~d. In other words what . these .sjtudies, if you don't look testt,o. look at it, you don't e no observed effect level is drastically 11 rAG~ III 169 v' Minutes, Week of Ja uary 14, 1985 Page 6: Dr. Shearer, Contin ed: I read the an r. Dost was us ng a "no observe standard for compar ng all of the ex studies and the exp, sure studies, pa a no observed effec level of 20 mg/ wrong with that. Frstly, that's an animal level wi thou at least a 100 to human because of species differen number directly as. safe level, or that number comes f' om a old paper b Study" by Hanson do. e by the FDA in the studies that th EPA has deemed testing standards ad must be repeat rats for a good StU,' y and they did n that are required t: . be done on all study and therefore! it was a very, a the no observed eff', ct level could b even for the animal:, simply because in the right way. 'nd it is a study And has not yet bee111 replaced. There are a number ~f studies alread existing that indicates probability of a lower no obserted effect level han that. In fact the EPA itself is using another pa't of the same st dy, using the dog st~dy instead of the rat study as thl ir standard now or setting food tolerances. They unfortunately have 0 use something. You have to set foo~ tolerances, if a chemical is allow d to fall and la king good data they have to use what data is available. i So, they're usin the dog' study and they're using the number of 12~ m /kg rather than he 20. That isn't alot different and doesn't solve t:e problem of the tudy not being adequrte. He states that the ~umber is based 0 reproductive effects. Actually the.re exists a.studl..' of reproductive effects l.:n. rats, by Constantinova is the first author which shows an ffect on the fetal rats, synergist~ ic effects between ,,4-D and its fir t breakdown product, which is 2,4 I di-choloropheno1 Wh!' n the acedic aci section., ..isc.leaved ~.ff in the firdt step of metabolism.] You know 2,4-di cholorophenol, one-t~nth of a I milligram per kilog:am of each cause significant hemorrhage in the fet~l rats. So this woulf' be a synergisti m that could be seen' during break- 1 down of the 2,4-D i, the environment. Now, 2,4-D is not degraded in th~ human body. 2,4-dilcholorophenol is notfot'med in the human body but i~ could be very rapidly absorbed from he environment during the environ- I me .ntal breakdown, .oi'." 2,4. .-.D . And, i.n f.act., 2.., ,4. -, dicholoroPh......enol. does get I into the air becaus: it's a high vol tile, it's a highly volatile com-I pound. It's more vlatile than the sters of 2,4-D which are also mod-' erately volatile. 'nd it is the, it's the compound that smells bad, it's the thing that~i people smell in he woods' for two or three weeks after a spray. Not I the herbicide it elf, but. ..thiS. phenol 1.,. c break.' down product. So, you c,n detect it simp y by your nose at extremely low levels. :1 Chairman Pitts: Ho II long does that ersist naturally in the environment? ranscript of the previous hearing effect" level of 20 mg/kg as his osure studies. All of the drift es and pages of testimony accepting g. Well, there's several things animal level. You never use an old safety factor to extrapolate es. You don't use the animal o effect. level for humans. Secondly Hanson, the "Chronic Health Effects he early 1960. And that's one of ot sufficient for modern standards, d. It used to few animals, to few t d6 histopathology on all the tissues he animals. So, it's a very limited moderately insensitive study, so off by a hundred or a thousandfold they didn't look at the right tissues that has been required to be replaced. Dr. Shearer: It de ends, it depends on sunlight, sunlight breaks it down. It depends on the, 'ou know; circums ances.' If it were trapped under the soil, the microbiall processes break hat do~n too. It it" s in the air : then it could persi t for quite a lo g time. ,In fact it's been shown ' in a study, a study! of a pesticide, ,4-D factory in PorttLand Oregon, I' can't remember howr>>any years ago th.s was, it's not a real recent pflper. But, it showed that II they were vent in 2,4-di-cholorophenol out of the I f. actory an.d it was I' aP.able of' tainti g v. egetabl. e s in a ve.fS. etable garden! a mile away. Peopl, were complainin down wind of the taste. That thetr vegetables didn't t II ste right and th y determined that it was the 2,4- , di-cholorophenol.o, it's capable f lasting in the air a long, long, enough to drift a c nsiderable dista ce and is absorbed, reacli!y_ botl1.~into human lungs and int I, vegetables. - .. - . , Chairman Pitts: Wa there Where people were e I, ting? Dr. Shearer: Well, teOPle II any healt Where the were VOl study: done on that $pecific incident? . report of cases? to eat that. See the phenol 1 fACE f'O 170 Minutes, Week of Ja uary 14, 1985 Page 7: ed): has such a, a, much stronger odor and tastti . And the peop e were not eating th~ tainted t I understand t at~ ' whether there were or there weren t than the taste of th~ir veget~bles Chairman Pitts: Wa there any compl or that sort of thi'g at that time? Dr. Shearer: The Piper didn't repor any complaints from I the people other I I Chairman Pitts: An' that was in Por from inhalation or headaches Dr. Shearer: That as in Portland, 'v~ forgotten the author of the paper, but I know I have it in the f.les, I don't have that one with me. But, it just indica'es that it's not imrtlediately broken down in theair~ that it can drift ad there can be a factor of interaction between the herbicide and the b j eakdown product. . , Besides 2,4-di-chol1rophenol being r idly absorbed through the lungs, 2,4-D is also very1apidly absorbed t rough the lungs. It's been shown so in a paper publi hed by Burton e al, Kansas City MiSsouri. It shows a almost imme,iate absorbtion f 2,4-D through the lungs in rats. This was a careful ,aboratoryexperi nt.And this was the 2,4--D acid, and one should expeit that the ester would be absorbed more rapidly than the acid because th yare much more l.pid soluable. Thei esters are highly lipid solua,le, whereas the id is much less so,'and since animal membranes are pri,r lipid membrane, lipid soluable compounds a gener~lly absorbed through me,branes much fast than water soluable compounds, but it showed - let's s,e if I've got th number here - The time necessary for 50% absorbtion :f the 2,4-D was 1.4 minutes, which is pretty rapidl You don't exhale muh at that rate. i I want to go back t the matter of re roductiveeffects and the possibility of synergistic effets at a very low level. It's also be~n demonstrated by a study done by !he United State Council on Environmental Quality, a' federal council, ju't a few years ag , that of all the teratogenic com-' pounds, chemicals, jot just pesticides, ,known to be teratog~nic orcaus$ birth defects, in b' th human and ani ls, where there was.' data on human~ and animals, humansiwere the most se sitive species. In other words, · effected at the low st dost of any - in,all the cases. And they w~re etght they had eight chem cals. There were also eight chemical$ that ca'4sed I other reproductive'ffects other tha birth defects. And humans were t~e most sensitive spec;es in seven case. 'So, when one is going to talk a9out, especially about re'roductive effect, really a one hundredfold safety i margin is not adequ~te. In the case of Thalidomide, for instance, a I notorious teratogen' humans were sev hundred times as sensitive as i hamsters. It tookne seven-hundretof the hamster dose caused human i birth defects. Sone needs to be a ittle careful about that arbitrary one hundredfold saf ty factor. ' It is true, as the, your other said, that 2,4-D is rapidly excreted from human and animal bodies, however, this certainly does not prevent a hit aid run effect. I other words, irreversible al~ terations that pers.st beyond the li ,beyond the time of the chemical being in the body. jHit and run inju .es can include damage to nerves, cancer, mutations, lancer initiation .TI,the first step is a hit and run effect, mutations, .nd apparently so <;1.amage to the immune system is caused after, by hi '-run chemicals t t'are long gone before the problem manifests itself. eripheral neurop hy in fact, manifests itself' generally after the chemical has bee excreted to the poihtwhere you can't get positive ,lood and urine t ts. Inmost cases,. the tests wil be negative, which's rather inconve ent in terms of being able to prove the cause of :he peripheral ne opathy because by the time you're sick enough to real' ze there is a ma r' problem it's too ~ate to do,' confirming tests. he chemical has a tually been excreted. VOl 1 rACE rtt 171 Minutes, Week of January 14, 1985 Page 8: I Dr. Shearer (Continued): Now the av ilable cancer tests on 2,4-D, I consist of only three world wide. 0 Ie was the Hanson paper, the ~D~ study in the early, '60's and that is the best data available even ithlough it doesn't meet current standards. rtshowed sign.ificant, increase' iln cancer in male rats at the highest dose. tested. And it showed so~e trends toward. increase in tu.mors or ~ Ijlaligna,n. t tumors, t:. hey comP.a~ed in both ways. It did not show a sig~ificant ipcrease at a particQl~r dose in the femal~ rats. So it generally isn't accepted as proof ~~ carcinogenesis, although it is certai ly highly suggested that this I histology, did histopathology on the tissues instead of just grossl autopsies, and used more animals. It'sa good chance that one wo~l find a statistically significant cancer i crease. ' One other study was done. by, under co tract with the national Cande Institute back in the 60's, it was a e~tremely poor study. The matlerial w.as given S'ubCU.. taneously, WhiCh. is lot '. relavant to human.,. environrn.e~tal exposure. We're not going to inject ourselves with it. And, ah a =Iew of the chemicals were tested orally, lincluding 2, 4--D, but at far t'o; low a dose and far too short a time, and too few animals. So that' study has been deemed by EPA Scientific Ad isory Panel to be useless rega dless of the results , positive or negative. And in fact the oral test ~asl negative and the subcutaneous test was positive. But, the advisory Ipanel has said just don,' t show us that test any more, it's meaningless qeclause of the poor quality. So, that rules ~out test number 2, t};1e third lo~e was done in the Soviet, Union and the I ublished paper gives very little, very lit.tle detail,eXC,.ePt to ind.ic.I.ate th..at in .t. ests .for.co..mp,le. te ~',a cin- ogenesis, when 2, 4--D induced the enti e' process, in mice and rats,' it was negative. But, when they tested it'for cancer promoting abilit , will it promote the deyelopmentalca cers that have been started by~ la known initiator- -and this was skin c1ancer in the mice - the old sltaJndard promotion test - it was. a strong pro bter in that study. ,So, to me ithis sug.gests thai t prObablY.. the POsi.tive rles1+l..ltS.' in.. th.e H.an so.~, studyma'..y Ibe due to promotion too, rather than bei g a complete carci ogene In ~Ither words, I don't consider it proof that 2,4LD is a complet 'cancer inqucer only that it's, it is a promoter and th~ 2,4-d:;[.-cholorop ~mol has 'belen shown in a good American study to be a cancer ,promoter. So 'promot'io1n seems to be fairly, firm. But, as farl- as whether it can initiate c,a~cer or not, I think that's pretty much, PEetty much an open question. I he reason is that I.have ...,doUbts about th.1e H.anson s,. tudy, is p,.e high iP,. cidents of tu. mors .i.n thecon.t.r.'"Ol animalS.. I~fl YO'"u.ha. ve,..a fairly i.,ghb.aCkg',..rol..und incidence of cancer, it means you ha e an initiato in t ose ani mall 's environment .A. ~.. r, fOOd,.'. water or so lie thing ...A' nd,a pro 0, ter then. '..1ill increase the incidence of cancer. E~n if itisn' an i itiator ip the presence of a dirty environment of so e kind why, ou re lly can't' distinguish. So, the cancer questio i~ somewhat pen y t, quite :oPlen, in fact . As.far as .mu.t. agenicity the ~. bi,lity t.o ca se muta. tion, I p. olte that Dr. Dost said that 2,4-D had bee tested in t e Ames, test hund~eds of times, which is certainly a stupidl waste of mon y bec ~se the Ame,s test is a bacterial test and you don't need more t an tw or three' repetitions to show that it is negati e' in the Ame test. The Amels certainly doesn't rule out mutagenicity, it measur s onl one kindl point mutation and only in micro-orga isms and its necessary to do' mutation tests and many. differentteslt systems. mea uring point mut'.ation chromosomal damage, and other kinds of damage to D A, thgenetic In terial and. th,ere are .many tests andEPA is r11eqUiring a ba tery f eight d,.if1fe.rent tests of which the Ames test in class is one, . one of th~' eight. Well, a. number of t. h. esetest,.s have been do e 0.'.n 2,4-D an the a. jority o'f Ithe tests in mammalian cells have been POlsitive . Only one t st I kno~ of in micro organisms has: been positive generally it' not mutant in Ilmicro- organisms. It definitely seems to bel a, chromosome damaging chemic'al in hig.her. organi .sms,. ..A. nd t. here' s so~' . i.. ndicat.,~. on f .po~.., t. -mut,. ati. on. I in cells of, I believe it was hamsters, when teste. But~ it's bee1 shown to cause chromosome damage in man cells as well, human cel,ls in~cu1.ture as well as animal cells. So, it is ver likely a mutage which means that it could be a cancer initiator. here is alot of correl- ation between those twp particular abilities. VOl rACt r u 17 w Minutes, Week of January 14, 1985 Pa$e 9: ! 1 Dr: Shearer Continued: There was dis ussion about the h If-life i~ he environment of 2,4-D with a favorite umber being about if teen days. The half-life in forest soil in t e P Cif.iC Northwest ,tfat was fro..' m testing done in Oregon~that's probab y a pretty good nu ber for up here. But you should know that that est, when th y mea ure the half life of 2,4-D they're 6nly looki g at the first st p of 'he breakdQwn. They're simply saying we don't, alf. f the 2,4-D is not 2,4-D anymore. They're not saying that it's gon. T.' ere are six r sev n step? in th~ microbial breakdown of 2,4.....D :with varying time perio s thati it takes toigoeach step, assuming that the m terial remai sin he soil where the microbes can break. it down. When it volatiliz s int .the air it's not longer subjected to the sar(J.e sour esas in the soil. 'So only the fi:rststep is measured. The sec nd s ep, as I.sai , the ilext prod~ct is. the 2 ,4-di-cholorop1:J.enol, par of. hich will vo atilif$ if it c~n get out of the soil. It will be high y volatile a d wil 'driftl. Beyond that there are a number of other chem cals of high molec lar weight. Organic chemicals, chlorinated c mpou! ds, which ha e the potent~al' of being toxic but have'nt ,been tes ed a all, by any of th Be tests.' So you have remaining in the soil f r so e time, an u known time, these variol1:s intermediate steps befor you get the 2,4- brok 1'1 down: to! known safe compounds. So 15' days is a .rath r misleading state ~nt. There wasa statement by Dr. Dost, he ' the soil, that is cont~adicted b eve 2, 4-Dand also, partici.1larly by ver Dow'sown scientists, Haymaker a d ot they were developing the new her icid Tordon, and he states "It appear ., li easily leached under high rainfa 1 co then that the 2,4-D is readily 1 ache to the soil.. I understand that lyph concern here. That is one that oes that it does and that in ordert was so:il movement, you need erosion,wher the chemical itself will wash. I J:hink the last point I'd like questions will reveal what you r talk too long - but the point I' I noticed the bees came up and n of 2,4-D that are relevant to Ii One is that 2,4-D changes the me animals no longer recognize them eat the toxic plants which they previously had sense enough not poisoning but the animal died of Another factor is that! under cer the nitrate concentration in cer toxic to livestock andespeciall nitrate or nitrites u,nintelligi the nitrite, by gut m~cro-organi way then the other large animals cardio-vascular failure.at a low can die of shock and t'hen you re shows on autopsy. Whereas, catt they will s.:ill, a change in the bloods not able to carry oxygen easily detectable what the cause changes can result in poisoning dying 'of the herbicide. And the icides and ~otother herbicides. aid that 2,4 y soil paper early one!f er in 1963!p Picloram $n e 2,4-D anQ. ditions. It and it does sate, Roundu indtightly that one in as with 2,4- D bin ,tightly, to I've I~er read on om'D,.'O. '.'.Chem.. i C,.:", al..,.comp any. blish d a paper! when er th : trade' name ,4,5- , Tordbn is was k own clear back notb ~d tightly , is . chemical! of o soi. We do know o a c eek you need you ertaintY don't, e before que wanted me to to make con er livestock k and undoub abol sm of some' t as tl xic plants I, revi usly recogpi o ea. And this ,the oxic plant! n ain limaticcohd ain lants to the to' orses. As h le f r a conver~i . he horses -re and sheep!, e. It put~ on' thave tnu sheep if the have hemogl 's a brown! c ath was. ~o estock whetr-e charact r!is ink that'sl a I " - I think' your ~ I shoulpn't ffect on livestock. I e are twq effects edly Iso to wildlife. xicpl~nts, such that nd the livestock will ed as toxic, and ould l~ad to l~vestock t of the 2,4-D.! tions 2,4-D increases point ~hat it can be rses respond to the n of the nitrate to pond '~. p a diffe:rent n that; horses suffer hemi to shock and they h of anything t'hat frepoisoned b~ nitrates bine emia and ,the lor a d it's f~irly these: two kinds of they're not dix:ectly ic of phenoxy qerb- good p~ace td ~top. CdmmissionerBrown: I. don't hav an I Chair~an Pitts: I have a questi,tl i Atlanta on Agent Orange on the v ter of veterans who were exposed to gen . , que tions of Dr. Shearer? Chairman Pitts: Larry John. , Rf ~7 t paper ddne in a large number :understand is regards s. It w Orange, Week of January 14, 19 5 C Pitts (continued): a D Yes.. C airman Pitts: And, in readin W1t two p YS1cian-epidemiologi f om another county in the Sta~ of it was that there were not t h d expected to see in that stu w ich,theytested, and I haven' d viated from the notmalpopula t at deviated or that were much w re statistically higher, and t ink.a cardiac probl~m, I canu t at paper, have you seen that p I'v~ p~abably see this was 'a, just a D . I C airman Pitts: It was primari ~. Shearer: A father is expos Father's were . Shearer: No, I hqven't rea mp ete y, I've heard of the p n't think I have the complete that male exposure 'in there. o birth defects in regard t02 t.ke it down the Oregon coast a o her words they wer,elookinga t an mutagenic effects. Wherea h ve to be mutageniC: effects at ter exposure it probably CQU d it could be teratogenic, bu C airman Pitts: Are there, is t at you can provide for us or i al tracking or tracing done 0 e'ther in Oregon or have occurr t specifically. . Shearer: There have been- ogy, certainly. There was 0 ale~ epidemiologi~ study done e lives of exposed forest wor 1 w numbers of people, which ma s'gnificant increase fnmis-car w rkers. Forestry anclcommerci i older forestry, over 28, for d.d not find them in. ~gricultur t interpret except [t"h.at it's a 1 rger population, $0 that you ed hundreds of pe9ple in each a hint that there Gould be .a done, and a confirmation far ,. airman Pitts: So~' I?-o one has er areas an where.. the same ast sample other ~orest worke c oss seciton of pemple. I I I i . eai. t~r , . pi tht d be ohl I , eris, esl i , ia'ge lisp stiry lisp li,tt ad! a cl,as prlob sU]t"e VOl i II tion of 2 4- and 2,4,5-T. paper and <Ii one phys.~i shington, ~h atic chan es at very f hat paper nd I thin . '. and I d s I think II the th f you hav cussing that paper n-he lth.director ir i terpretation that some people f the parameters e with: me, actually at t ere were only three eve III ;know if they sPi1~ab. ifida and I can you comment on I c:rtainlY,? 't r c~ll the paper. in hildren of.... 'm not, I ca defects s ud rth defec :s I and it w is , the CDC out ny paper, nd to us r:e I haven't ews of it but I ':re looking only st of the claims ~ exposure, 'exposure, in ssibly rather ather would qsure; Shortly hemi al in the seman erio I !of time. are qere other papers hav igood epidemiolog- tst C\t occurred hat ou can point paper. I I've read , and of c is a - Ith.nk m ve been with has not ~e ogenic ef ,e h defects ong time arrying t for a sho 's a great er small gon looki nd found very inse s in the wi e I yers. Thy and commer i yers. suspicios, but ore sensii e stu for a goo I tudy. em and a bt er st bf good epidem- ally too small carriages in ~ng with this ~hey found a ung forestry ti find them yers and they little hard f you had a y. You really So, it's more dy ought to ded that i c. ent 0 expand into al may hav eenu ed and to at icultural Iw rkersto get a broader ,1. m* 1 4 ~AGE I , ! emiologic in Sweden, erbicides ere was I I inutes, Week of Jan~ary 14, 19851 age ill: I I I r. Shearer: I haven't heard f1Lny such, $tu y in t lS country. We do aV$ the epi emiol of course, that indic'ated that pe<i>ple work. ng wi ad a higher incidence of canc r., i And, ah, part. o e study that separated 2,4-D an~ its rel ted h a d the' others that c:ontain PC D dioxin. I othe et ~way from the possibility hat thedio in wa problems and they st~ll showeH a~ignifica t inc sarcoma in those people workin wtth 2,4-D and r t at.one is pretty convincing. Tltten there's bee tissue sarcoma in, nqted in th.s .~ountry, hen y ~mall groups of industrially epo~ed peopl. Bu ereialso exposed to .2,4,5-T- .t?oesn't s parat ! Of cburse tha 'slone of 0 r pro some of th.slit ep~rate the two. e papers I've seen r. Shearer: No, I only know f the one s em. t was practically impo sible to do as restricted. So, it's only sLnce 1979, f dQing that kind of a study. There cert tudies done. The human epide io~ogy is a o t6e point that is 'generally ac~epted th or cancer offset the negative human epide o insensitive. There is so m chlvariatio ou c:lon1thave a inbred closel controlled ally in the controls,. Now, y u ~ook at t oing to have a lifetime incid nc~of 25% ansen study or a little worse, m~king it udy t that that. inly extr post iolog in a lifet e, th f c.an n ins separated re 2,4,5-T od possibility re s\lch itive science. studies cause it's ation. ent, espec- rols,are as the dy. haLrman Pitts: Well, I don't o !won t as that question, uestion. One of the things t truck me was, that when we we hat'first stage breakdown of ear,was that? waht to get off 0 I ut!that's, I gues atl I was wo derin e talking a out 2 ,4~D and the stud tangent phicciil t really ophenol d, what I don't remember I think it was i hough. In the 60's. r. Shearer: Yes. Was ,this manufactured in I r. Shearer: It wasri' t exactl ai, you kno t was a report of acontamina iop, proble he ~ompany did to quit lettin tpe phenol Were they for I don't remember PR but, to conta sci ntific study. wha they, what tack . thing? r - ;it was that way. hairman Pitts: If it was in range question wasn~t culmina 't t eAg~nt Well, it wasn't I was just couldn't a 2',4,5-T 2,4,-di- r. Shearer: oxi~ity. n acute g b;ut ah. Pitts: But, it perlod of time I t over a ther, through 17 r. Shearer: Well, in mos ourna s 0 have the usual onclusions, introbuQtion, tudies that ~ been publ f them don't meet alot 0 id. · Jhairman Pitts: I really ayen t evoted 100% 0 hat, I can inquire bytele eems there is a tremendou I I I I I or thro h cr tact with -chP. orophenol,is thel fficeof Drinking nwa er, drink~ng n'tl hat that's the t th nthemajority er,1 think, a~d it n e~ demiologic study. I ' or ~ e radrn in wells One, f the questions ge~ re is to,. to make the nly judgement hatl e really have any , thb e's alot of' .tera ure, and tome ne p Tape) , opip'on in ,the l~me- nd t e rules of scientific eade" g some of' tt~e r t ted as scientific atu that I've been nb:~ tl~~l~h;~d ~~~ ecte to make a decision , fr~ ght with v ids leals faulty re orting rim~ ts were se 'up nclp ions are 0 ten roce~ ures that., ere are appears? . " . . I hedl . n research tioh,results an ta b d so on,f it Iv u see that o t~ 1 you what I I tol plead ignorJnc in Is ti~e to this, ]'v onl~ ahd by writing a relq d I. th. I~n ~s. ' I : I r. Shearer: Well you're igh that there's an full tthat doesn't have data in t. There's an awfJ.l t oIf eing"" circulated by the nu aciturers and by t usle he Extension Service tha QO snIt give tqe qat to b ents. And there were a n be olf statements I in r. ID hat I know that he has da at at: is contradioto tol e shared our research pap rs relttymuch haver s redl veri the years, and there' a atlter of diffe1l'en ofl nd ~mphasis too, I.n athe wo dsl,.' he feels that lillt on't hurt you. I think t at llittle bit ,of Ica cer i 'hing added to alot of can er . n bur environment ,it 'Is nsul t to the body , Cjl.nd de ine lyl we know, · scien ific!a here's2no threshold for c rei oglenisis and tqat evexjy dditive in terms ofnumbe of cdlls initiated a "stla ait;Lng to be promoted by orne hirg else, mayl1e ,4-1. hairman Pitts: I guess a lit lei bit of cancer on' tl urt you as s ~t s not ~n you. I r. Shearer: Well, it raf es insurance ~at s. I o t~i wallt oni~t the~r I I I Week of Jan~ary 1 i I , I i I I , 851 I I I I e aerosol , I i' I I r. Shearer: Well, actual orme ~n water chlorinati ater at EPA, the level of ater, that are form~d by nly'time people have been f people ih this country ould be hard to do, certa spme extent 2,4, itj is a con~ern 0 ou~ cholorpnenols in~tion. SQ, it sed. to that 'one, ink chlorina,teq w really hard to jdo I ' ither the chlo~in coming or goi~g. ha ybuknow, our 'ch h u.e~. t. ion andth~t' thisls the on~y qne 01 qpe s t ion on. IAn t isl question, the be om~' (End of si;de d ry~ng to get tqei of sc~entific rea~on s ho~e process'. ,In be n ~oisted off qn, mb e much of the ~it t w6 make a dectsi s 0 ~ittle informat po it~on like this e s des is so, in ~ac on id~r as faulty,1 a eg rda, to how the lex c rr~ed out, where pa erl and all of ~he wn nfver appe9rs lor th~se papers publ atl of data pre$en ground material, . 1 And as you iea tahdards but they j , , ot of pape informatio s and even ck up thei st's testi hat he sai hem with e nterpretat le bit of! just one' just one m ly we 'know little bit ted on th~ Ah, so. .1. out hairman Pitts: I g4ess i r w atever ~t is that get hat I have for you ~s, is ju<;igement based ona hea hat we can make and by la egal right to judge this .nformation on both sides t .seems like there, ,it ha esides editorialize ilike ight and alot of the rule ormat have been lost in t . hings that I see that hav 'nformation, they don't re aught to read. How in fa f information where there . re ~ay people sitting in hen the information 'on bo nd error and what I would nd lack of information in nd how the experiments we imes the main'themeof th uppbsed to have been put ~ow we get.baak sdions and I d6n' I, , ',i o~this, the aftta e~s in presenttng i ' " point, is to stop an si e'of t cas too b 11 ~ACf I]) :117 : ' 'I Week of January 1 ,'1 85' hairmau (Continued) i erea ng t e Nat~ona ead, you know, this stuff iation. This is where we here's alot of anecdotal .nformation. I think this nd that's.... r. Shearer: Well, er, t ey re very oxiCity testing of 2,4-D hich are always aneddotal correlation between expo hen, you find you've got a ame< thing why then that's nimal studies andepidemi bntrolled. But those ane .nformation is really ery avei of a problem. hairman Pitts: I gue o you ecause that's eviewing this, that ',s gain I don't know sin ases of exposure sinc nswer, either we're a bout this problem. " e~you read, it's rerr, you know the dO~' to you withbu in....~. .,' the editoria mat.on that is ho eal~y a dis ervic , I i I ,I PO[1". H. s are. a Th~ EPA wo f i~ were'n me' nhysicia and, J symptom e l'it of th rnflng that c isttudies t 1 : ~n that ,. . I able becaus 1 I I tp iapologi fbilnd in't ocE Ifrustra n't:had the d w~ still wrqng ques I , I ways ldn't for note and ~ m and ne sh at ar itua t it's e for e Ias ion t backg aven' ions , I selrilous abo t it ot in~ I serious about th.s question. i I hat Ithose q estio forrMation c mes 0 stridns now? I I I mei ~f them. I tilme that you c t~ey give you a i I I to, have sta Jaquary of or~ Ithis an ake la full and ido the c~#tainly no~gh of it rei ~ any, a I i , i issioner Denn son: s.tat.emen.t t af yQ........u we come by th sea d you just sq t of Shearer: Okay for e Ii ou use a var1ety 00 ing for is no or is not true i he efifiect: woilr! 'f er ed effect lev ou : thereymaY\BC o b~cupy th IiJe to, i I ab9ut the igh:i;ficance gh, ~hat aga n. 1 , I palr~icular tratiion, on c~ri comet low I enough la;r lexperim notlseen is u tl~dn 't lo ch ~ower no , i ted t 1983. I ha wo ye tatis he re publi y mea s tim you o obs they study set apo ose t nt. the n k for effec e cases ib's almost stories that you y any subs tan- of this. 'That ff as scientific e whole qhestion. ecdo al and yet they e re~Uiring neuro- oselinical r~ports a pe uliar response, wri es a paper and hey . ay pretty much the ld d better studies, at 1 ast moderately n at least, anecdotal he f.rst warnipgwe g my frustration and a half in approach.' Once I wonder, twenty ome sort of ' an we' ,e not serious til Ihe EPA did it's he a~proach to, get the tha were asked by are going to be serious? exp ct that those ind.cation when they'll er study and euro toxi~ity nIt eard anytping s pI s usually another cs a~d so on. : Sq, rts ught to be out. and ake it available ng t the conclusions. aybe go over ffect levels and this que~tion. e species, due to arch protocol, if re what y~:)U: are t you're l.ooking highest dose or effe t level, noiob- he ~.ght thing, of course, leve than what you've I I i I V, t1 ~AGE ~.~ 1 7 I , - hat's what I was, tryin equired there c~n bea are done and every thin n you take the l!owest that the overalll no ob , in you can't dq that. even as I said lis rea things that are !tested ism in the brain for i competitive intdractio at isn't tested If or . I that's not in ~he new requ.rements the new , i , I tocol for the ndw neur -tox.cityte t it is. but it Iwas my impr ssion f lication that i~ wasp imar:lyhad r than general 1 (?) ef ects. That omplete test th~n that. Th y haven I I I when we see no ~bserve eff ct data then tn.at... I I I he lowest level.1 I I re not actually ibe cer ain I I not certain the iright uest. on have been asked, been done on thel anima s te ted. I ch apparently m~st be ort , I I ndard protocols,1 the sanda effects of ever~ speci ic c I of course, youkjnow, I ally, thatther~ afe t nology to find ilt. Yo lexpression of ]painti ntoxicated with ~igita So, . . . I I Right, .~. 're ht assaY$j' ve Dennison: Wh a procels I. Tho~e air I st the ,peep iar , 'I Pitts: W ll, hjjls ori thie tec Gogh' $ b~i~l tif t that hel s his fipil!e I sy. He W'as .,.Is le1-. n things the ThaJ, ri ht and all , I I' I . . . .; . , I I Thari's 'ia or in the immune syste. T ere's such, it!' s ly expandi! eld now, now we'lre 1 arni g about T and ,D and help~!r essor cells and lall t th. ngs that we. just ago. nobqid wanything abou~ and f' ndin the toxlc che6icals he immun~l m. For instance,i alot f my private client!s. many easels,1 pesticide poison;ing ca es, how up, show i of the T ill I p~ cytes and especi:ally 0 the T suppressor clells. balance, Ila J st a few years algo one coul n' t look for that oblem becla se Ie didn't know' th)lere we e su h things as fo!ur asses of ,liT lym hocytes.! '. . I " I I , " .' I ts: Jl th;i t at Van Gogh ah, !sorto going to. intrlo- st1.on Itoiy' i that one of ou~ conce nd my concern lis given Ipo~[n in time we don't knrow wha ightbe dOing! e. And ,lIon t J.<now how. you might s ed s me light pr wHat you mi.ghtl ve You aTIuded to isynerg. stic effects and yolu ome pqint;!s ha I thought had been ma e cl ar before abo~t e of :2,41'" <;1n also a 9-u7stio~ about the inding of2,4-iD ch I ijad ,!a I l.f erent op1.n1.on ori. befor I hard that from lyou. rt of I indi to s, or what sort lof ind' cati n do you have,! whateve~ se rch that might tie done that there are syn~ , ,. i I I I 'OL 11 y~r., itll1. 78 1 , 1985 (Continued) : test t a s all the it sts red by EBA, th s and ,you II 1 the test EPA, cindt the numbe est for me teraction, n thebrai Dennison: I 'veth I , , don't krio an industr I europathy may be am I t. d protocols don't emical. I I we ca9 that we can't Ireally , what comes tlo seems to come' hat they were aYe So served tha should f thqse no 0 erved effect Unt,l all t ly, eally r for, quite s stan e. I w , in excreti mean ings kno g no is, I restl i thes~ of us see. I, , fo:d- ffect be done, served level. e tests ther perficial, stalking nand t is not om reading o do with ay not t revealed right and that i I I I i i ,. 1 Pit s (Contirl1 t a occur, e at may spr.ng upl SO$ is is a hi den probl e road? 'i :1 ic effecrs wi ly or abforma future. j Are cumulat+ve I I think thk bes_ I ,rough me'l;abolii. , if one I partli. in the livert ou're going t. 'll 100k1at t h pyrethtin, f peronyl-~utoxfl in de radinpyrethrtns, he . body, I rnsect 's bot! , but also in causing }c tomucPi'more, mu~h mo synergis$[ but hat ~ nd of anleffe ctivate 9f inac ivate in otheripest. tic or a~ agonistic ~ fect that nee tainly ot er, t ere ~ e alot of oth s that u$ thes liv~ enzymesisyst are inac'l; vated by th same sy$tem. I ' a delibetate i I , i enta~ y when YfU mi QUe1tion is that ~ chtmicals a*d I ~ h,a t k.ind 1 of cp if we hate idF hemical that ance fori it t , eitherinow I , I w what t~e mi V~l is far ompound to kn t~en if the ide, fori inst ce, i [t reaches, activate the ~nzym syste lor inhibit the t's in tabolized by ~ woul pot have to be leV. 1. I would th. nk th ti the smallest' syner ized or ~ntagp ized ,tpere should be! resep e of thelenzy~ , tha would be my e,. ge~... to .2,4- D~, Y 0 u~ ant t Italk abo.ut 2, 4-D. . tran port to the c roid llexus in and out aniontc pesticide, 'ght s,tiergize or ect .1' There's fompe . tion dlr transport so YRr would, f,ou s uld g e,ss that any hav~ some kin~ of inte al'ction with w th the neuro ansmi tiers... I I 1 I I n V r dHltundersta~d, I iid understand lo~...raI'~larrIer w!en I school a~ that my s~fcialty e~ther. I've ~ead and read and ries.... I I 1 , i I I I erent everyi anim An 'there's so many I '. 1 J folks been , I whetheri all 1 d is it f_mmat , I how farl down hings like th . I . age and th~ngs , I m-I fAtt ~J 1 ~9 I ' Well!, th be to dOl then lik~ stance, ~ I I , I I ~nd other hG environment n~ication.s that t':1ing down .Eet at syn- es, metabolism e,sticide ,in- el involved in hf synergism. erate sYQergistic nisecticide. But, blits a liver e, prolong the f the pytethrin t,ive. That's I z~me systems o ld,be a, would onsidered. c~des other than hm~'etare activated they've set I i of Janui,y 14, 1985 , 'i' I I , , :1 Pit s: Let"! say assume that! .. j il Shearer: It OCCUj acci s: R:Lghtl and ntration$rof t ot a themlst to nment' or'! in nat with letlt say 's going t have' ei~ er a at it's go.ng to, crlt te a ad. i als, too though. assum nder centr tifie 're t readi some I~h. at it. takes n~ I have no idea t~ons arS needed 'any of those lFing about, that's y happen .enough here down the he lo. weh like e, I understand ilmals have the -I- . ' ~r anImal.. s you ;{ to consider ~at and which.... I I I I I I like luman' and g ~dually develop I 1 w . . I wasl just onder~~g whether animals ;Jve yo~ a preckse a wer Il~ave to go back me time, immuhe sy trems a e it as i ~ith e kin lof immune systems ~Sh' I!don't krOW. I e t e~ for mo~el tems 9r testing for mmalslexcept for ation iests. hit Jnd run ~ffec that ~ou spoke about, and e*actly hpw th works .: I think I've ~ut il you WOrld m be el rrate a little ic 1 in passipg th ugh t ~ body causes omponent, that wou be a ~it and run h.a ge I.....remain. s~. afte ithe ct.~mical is be..ing n, an4 that's what ancer ~nitiation and d n~ hit an run~ ffects.' The chemical od att a.ll. t ca es a ~~ange in mutat.ion ct re f Cancer inifl' ationl, lit causes a is 't I.necessarny changF lin gene structure. oes 't necess~rily eave k~y chemical I bl ~I ~I I c emical tra. e. ! u can, la mutation tect t!:he exact cha . e in . 'particular e sam~. change I.. no mJ ter W' ~t chemical a che~ical thht ca les a bdint mutation, t chem.icals that. w !'ld caG~e exactly the b lc10king a~ the NA th~tJ you could it cO*ldhavel been 'iadiat~~n. y~u get t~e inf rmatipry on the, the t tthese hi~ and ,un eflfects by actually so I they knrw Whtt.l, cause1 it? I mean it's : I I t*e, causel.and 'fect, i~\ carefully stu.d~es anf! for tutat~t01 it's alot ll~ or in pacte al cel~s, lower or- e ptoper coptrols. You Have controls ls th~t are npt trefted a 4 you have the tr,l.. ,.verythipg. to eparat~ the treated e ~s. I I 1 I! ! ve t..h$re. beenl done tests 01 adequate tests, w. th I'respect: to 2, -D,' s ~t and run... I I ' fot all kirds of1hit a i run effects? 'm not sure. 1 II m t sure Iwhat I'm asking I I I , ! ! I : I. I I t~sts thelir i rogreEs~ . The new hfpe they don't have s~ch a high ey Ire kindl of a ue, i 'I terms of whether or lit's so' e ,.As far as now, t at S one acew ere apparently n.' d I an inju~y lea s to o~her injuries alfnces. ~ot e 1 defi~ed yet. But, I I ! I i I 11 Minutes', Week of Page 16: 985 I lr ~~o i I ~~~. '~t~ ' DrU Sh t at'la t ey're not hL~tollg , in thee lYIqphn1de among ot im~uno og. So, we whiich s far as: as. Imut ns, alot I f an~ as aid, they'r fo~ ch somal abe r I , st~tut of one CQ p tr~ing explain ip DN~ an bstitute;~n on~! pa that indifa :~. ~. I.,~~.. ~ h~~v~h.~; '....t'l as~he positives the1se s. Butt e th~t I e that i~ i c09ld te to ca~ e . or pot ut the hi 1 Commis , ~ ie ~ tirJe a 1 halif 0 No" I Dr. i Sh y 14, I the .m t of t r an orga t, w ow w utag part Fions nent ~y la ~her ~s th p. it, rnal dies hav ted I d ru er Dennis e env~ron ime andt: 's gone .~ ms to be; r: Well; ounts of' o informB. tlehard t: er Brown: to t em r: It's !In was my fits efore thel per on th agram of I , itts: sIt t at "tiks as thef oftoitc well,1 I paperqla data p~p ly inacct,'lta so I'm! r d Tox sIt e get new I n that , our don' ogy " I: ii! i ! 1 I , system are not part 0 the protocol andard EPA IP.roto!colS lthO. ugh in the ic health they wiould obk, at, at that's a prett~ gros kpproach to find that out.~ithou~ ~pecial tests t required to dOttherrilytt. As far tes ting has, bee donl' as I think, y positive, most consts e. h.tlY positive aking of c romos mes ta her thart sub- ther, in, point utat 0 'is what I'm , Where yo knoc out 0 e, ,base of the hat is a, seems less i ely. There is here've bee.. a n mber or, negative publish negativl stu it..S,. I. .as readily at's a problem t 0, i repeating quite a fe of t em, At east three ome damage, .chro oso.m bi-e. '.akage, which ~~~ if that answi rs y ut question so had someqUeS~iOns a.c>ut the half at, that's one t~at's beep brought up you know, sL.mPlil~tica It.. .,..~,....t sounds like unt of timeland rvery Yil'S okay. letely a ca bon ~ioxi el~pd water and t do that. It jrst d esn't work that I 1 ' you elaboraite a ~ittl ~it on what that what do we have I fter wt have a half compound of possibly df~gerous compound? h,;lf of ylou: 2, 4-'-D n~ ~;hen you ~a~e th~ngs of h~ch we h v~ dust negl~g~ble ave with yo the diag am of the breakdown, I ' , mes, but ah... I I I used to them, of I a ,1 (laughter) trying at I did fo Met~o i ~eattle in n to 2,4-D,1 I di n' t In?WI anything o a worldwi~e li erat rfisearch and ides in lakes fo kil i~g, lake weeds, ~s in that one. I' Ilt~ave it that 1980e:tro pape ~nd I didn't ction to it~ it seems t'$t you're to use the ord hamp.o,,:but a leader genetics i . regflrds 0 I t,4-D, thats.. e done a more' th~roug . st~dy of all ody else. I've rried tbget all of the reviews, I. in fact I I f.. ",.:nd the reviews o back and 'Ich~ck them rrference by u. p on the rese. arFh. to PY.'computerized ry so often, eve~y ye rlanda half 1 I I VOl I i Ch I i Mi: e ar: . I Chi , I Mi since tha ,tim$ therle h s been. an ver ments part 0 try and d omething the, that as t~e date. he ,1:, that was th yeat that Hh y completed Tqey did a mo erat$ly t orlo gh review ~ bdt they did pretty g001 ob of it y mJ,',.cbb.y a meC!aniS~ic aplp. 0 Ch. Of. t. aking ng qf the study itse f, but f r whether bo~es of requi ed t sts a~ Jf it did o tij.'.,e current sta.ndards o. fRr tocol? It a 1",echnician c~n. do let1sJa , co. mparing of.what needs to be done. N t paying ~l~"...,.info~ationrt..hattcomes u of some Y djd other thi gs t at are n t part of stions? I stidn of Mike Conin not t~ i I a qonversation Mike that ly oome back fr~m a lraini ou Shere was th~t wh$n 2,4- edi1telY attachI'd to!the so'l ess~on we were rnderlat thl ime and still I I Week of Jin I Pitts: A~d te e forti: t, I thin~ I er: Yes, It w of avai]a 't It t, they dJd y, not fo to any of t the proto 0 ind of a e o their l:t ntion to h old paper ard proto 0 A1y Pitts: Ilh ut ju~t, two year1 you had u e things h d and was a I I I That~s J It bJn Pitts: oJa t at a he i are the r th I'll g you F 0 Dow But 's a othe emic t g er: I be ough, yes he aquife is 1 binding th reo Could 10 you ,referred to at Japer from D ~'~h~mical. .I!l i m~c1 . i I hat ':s just a brl ef srmmary! r i k K~n and Mike, that1s. pre11tt+y y ha~e been unde tha ~mpress n thJt adds a di fere t ele~~n e eas~ly then tra smitted pols~i pposed, when it~s at achedi 0 n t~e water. I thin tha~ g t~at we shoul cer ainl~ thJ leachabili~Y' Y u knolw wat~r and the s u ie done. gr6up up there t attstudie onelof the hightst i cideIljc ~bial...~des. . Now, i. t'sone.dfJt ~n m~nd. But,t wa qu~t1e c ru4. off into a welllfrom Is m wa~hed the her icid, into. nin~elligible I Ii i eanl;as, opposed 0 mitrati ! i ,I wer, spme cases w err it ~P' we1e po, 2,4-D w s rot 0 e tolanbther. T\'e dtdn't h I I I I I - 182 IJOL 11 fACt i ut him on ad some, abo-qt the ourse and as put on and I, is get us some ause it's significant on and that on, into ly to river a particle, t's a signif- ck out. ,4-D has Ontario ontamination f ground e ear that place not ell. rough the red to migrate at migrated any incidence ry r' ):. lef -Diwa 1985 j that. Of course Pikoran in all of the other inal opinion, the Ju ges 0 in.on and there, it was quite 4 farc ~ guess, ed of plaintiff's wi~nesse at they earch, in other word , I w~ 'nt be able rom all these publi hed sF tific papers. e people that did re earch 1959 and esent it. Well, that of cp e,puts an n, on plaintiffs and I then I limited them ey could have. I un4ersto~ t was going out 16 and they were I only wed eight. abs te maximum atives talk to have tiffs. I when they the roblem, that tly:th re's been alot of re ing!in regards to 2,4-D not its lap arently, I have not u r'ad that or do you recal what I was told br out and didn't go: : I , , wal sal thl thl : ad I sh ev s'it:: I Ke: tal e bel n I I D~. er: No, particula ring to a ctor to g mes five course~ h and there ve been, : nimalt: stud 0, the fit I id ha , pos:re , ls ,llno hu~an red 1.11 ~f s u~~n e thtrit isn't a s, i 's tho sa compton complaint II ear f both sides. Oftenl times I b. een: allowed at a critical:, a~kipg to ~t that t~~e so II h~nk that ~f Tom or! ~en wou c qu.estions .of Dr .Sl!1earer~ do :that Ken, if yoh I have I I irt forester you goblcomp~e logy, thing, but I, amd we ~ the,.,.se comments that. I.you, W II limit my questioh~ herel- ques,tions I h~d in Flilis nol that" I read e~ther~1h.ere tih 't. m,.enti<;n th.at in ~.ie noe part! of ~t or, .... i' . , : Dr.! Dost was not uiSlng it. gave you fifty thous nd fql . to :the, he did not! nclu~e t ~,..~.~.:,.'~.~i~a!!~ :~~~~~e~t:~~~~~.~ umber in animals wals I far i h tuallly the lowest oPferve f the ',lOW,. est in a lon~Iterm Ic r d, in other words, ~~n't ~e n . . I ' I a qu7stion a~out th}s 2'1- g a Il~ttle wh~le agio r has t lizes later on? Hals I that. . di-~hlorophenol b. eer t' founj n the ,environment? nirt a normal appliic tion? I ha~ been? I . , . : , s . tt has. I can't! 'j:hink 0 hat :was studied. I I that. That's somelthing 'h I ha:dn' t that: it would be int~: rest n .. ' I I o in the drinking Ja er c ia document talks about presence, it' senqe. I ori&inal reference lapyway frqm the doqument. : ' 11 rM~t m- l 3 both sides el like they pending on n't know. like to make think that hinge a wel , Kef Hil me! prelt ~~~' p~~, I : an h wh' tab. ti,es s dor't y Drl~ y beyond d like to and I have what I think ect level, '5 a thousand ct level, Has , Y' I y!:' I ong time I an: I'd i., e to se ut, in f If Id h ve er: It' s I . ferr ' d ~7so;~r~~~ ~~t ~~; .nking wat crit~ri I I ! : ! I en he said afety, he e 100 fold thousand rms. And d to be in- r than it ec t lYel nic American ngful. Okay 'out this d where 2 when we really ever he author. , i Week of J n ary4, 1985 ! In t '~ng that tests'th that was nking water standar~lof 1 ~resome more, somel rore, 8. fe level in that SjtrdY, ~ e "82 study , ah. .1. I igib. ...le nvrnber and ~.eir. ligiJ1 a safe level. Ther~ isn' : ! ! I I st. s ". and I was.n' t, Il1-ke f~1 ning on 2, 4-D, that: EPA c?j nIt ,most of those t~ings b nding that the.. i s a report that 16 pi the s d and that was prob~ ly m ndustry. They've b" n su I "t aven't been made pu~ ic. I tanding that the rels lts 0 't, ,wasn't sure thaF that ! acturer's claim tha~ thos~1 effect which is a b oad s 'i ! , ! ! I I ous abotlit this, thi!s toxicl about Tansy or some, f thes I've ne~er read thattand I' f...or~..atior".. .o.n, how t~.. t, ho ~ll~ng a:rnmals?! I ! i ? I did6't, well, ~ xic :l ! I I that buit most crittbrs are! ss they iare forced ~.!' th: eatthos'e things un~ ss t tly don'!t recognizei the~. ! . T thipk they arel rev~eJs y fi'eld,j neither iSI tivestl I I I commenti on that bebtuse i in some ~wenty year~ ago, s to spe~ificallyT~ sy Ra 11 you tpe specificl erbici t happen~ is that sbfe of t uch morel attactive ~ d muc nd o,nce '.that happe.nis. and il whetherl they were ~yen t~l '60's and certainly coul~ d some ahimals to t~+ site from that so, I kn'pwthatl I can't Fell you horlspeci f1 study lsomewhere..!. I to see that cause I!tas, ! ! ally pheboxy herbici es, I er : The h ,rt t' en anY'.",.re.t9... them. A, s have.be n I saw tha ~ has done ii.!" an: It i1' S stuff,8 e reSU1tSJO , I .! er: Well: unreasona 1 ation. jl, an: I wa I pose YO..U' e. stock stu y give me n plant a. nd I.~.. er: The {o I! an: Well I I on't'ea lso ~ur talk*ng thinl' . mor i w it1s ic pllian ill reailiiz hat ilinl , ! er: But h y do,i 't But, t e app re s about t a at om :~:..re r1a'lY n,t Pitts:, L~t e ma, e sc 001, h s is'!ag could att ~ t an ma i~:s a~~~t 1! ~~~~.~i.;,. w~ 'ed that malt s th'm , ' , normallYlw uld e ,4-D is i4v lvedil 0 , ime, thisJ w s in!1 th it actual~y attrct ansy and 4t suc, um the lite1a ure :, nd Ith~n, I hve ~:a: J i ~:j:: " " 'il Ii , f~G~ It.- ltfJ4t , the EPA oader scope what you've ests on 2,4- ch to go en tests s, that whole completed? PA. There em, analyzed, ter, short han a year ed to EPA, nd I've seen I though ts didn't ment involving iness on, ther weeds. urious about at ef.fect s kill animals. rt enough right. ave several ou know, my field isonous ere taught t by application that they e sugars re palatible not know g about that e been. these animals been now, . . . class. i I II Minutes ' We k of J Pag~i 2 Chafrma,. Pi ts: rea y Chairma' some p', were sp' And, age I don't: Tom Jayl me. but I h back to: you've i on spra. large d' institu I think! , able do in the ' we find: weren't! And so ,: effect ,1 now we '; into ar' ing out! there i! that iti at all.1 what I'i i Chairmai TomJa)i not, i your jo' , .1 operat~i' Ruth wa! that th: peated I i Dr. Sh~ o t e i posure .1 previo~ they d~ there's can be ! plain. i that it . I clients and suf , exposurr home tli ! , Tom Ja~: up was I I Sh~ Y I don't ll, I thi e omethi in of th id this a ur who aps an themo . She are One 0 hearin ut today dequate, t ink.ou eave 'al t lking shere w he fact t a suspici s olatil So we're tr ing to I I o~e plants, i~ must ~t:. : b~ti;~~r~lt~1si~t , ad or a ... I ! ih these instAnces L t~ings when t~ey wer lpctively we~~,aftef pn any spec~~~c ch~ tpat, was the I case. 1 ~::'" ,~r~~f. ~t t~pl ~~~~;.~ ~riting, we' 'appri m? , " I want '0 pasb trere's only ne qu~ .! I wanted t kind~ at what the C aliti b. bginni~g, wa# no. t , n. to po~nt ou~ that! u~ point of vJew tht there were resonabl s im yl, pointed ou many m in ones b ipg that cont ary t , th t this has been a most stu~. 1 tose ~t d~esare now in revi a i. ,owe.' r !:back to grouritd zer ~~ct. v.e p'oi ti.' is, should ~e app, ~~fo mation, but we don'tjknow ~ s~ne g.ist...iC e.,. ~fe c ts, w.e.' r talk!i II d nIt ha el data bases. . Dr. S e i,. of the '.br a.kdown produc, s is la , s ,of thech otrophenol bus ness la t! sn area that ob iousl hasn,' glab ut big,~ig areas of data~ b'si ally s ~te.. I : ! tion? ! I . trying to say g~t positive roof. ere's a doubtt that' tiion, t e one questi ~adioactive trace , n.i n. egative hetlth ef 2i, 4-D. hay or some- you know And these ally s lame i e that them re they did after they he Tansy first. .cal because there's been o and rather ate it. uestions to ion here, bring it s intent, put a ban ere are a eason for doubts. And eas of reason- hat the people d herbicide, and they n effect. iated, in hand so, about getting arer's point- at least the fact been studied The, so Pitts: I've got otle , n' t think it:' s to establ's1j1 a al point. 1 I g ased'on t1j1e e is apo e~ti posure? .1 gue i I Ii th " pe 'has ahd bpat e!br yi su wi wh ake who w tked all t e fl was s vera becam irea s that, it's think it's the kind of 1!1 I had for WtOUld you say cts from re- In most e second ex- had some econdexposure xposure, so r effects hard to ex- ths period, f my private sed in March ectso.f 2,4-D me 2,A-D around athy. i ! VOl 1,1 i o! question ab. oipathy it's b en on e~ some on th ski~ rlevious. And on thle .,..~idn't on'. th~ fir~s.lt. but it seems hat t s~re, w ich i rea 1 ~.e, ove a se eral !m , That' true of one a1rm. H had een ~'X I ~s,the sual cute e ~ when e was usin iick and had tte ne r r poirts t,la t I urders ,ar havf any !u I It .1.8~ erstanding ere's al neu , spil onths ch the feces, s qu nt exp I' ha would if eren,ce 0' a dairy tik sympt 'on hs lat l. a utely I . Uf',. S s one. 0 f t' m y vary , ylwi C~rt II he othe suscep wasn't brought , from.. It m is eit abo~t 2,4-p spe ificalt being chropic exppsure to 2,4J resulting nsitlive, so, that they nq . have an oesnl't fully res ond tolhings that : . urt~erst;;~nd it'ithislcan ocq r with a variety 1 e~i~ments '..' w,,' hatl we c9.'ns,' der natural erta~n people sOfl ' onse!, after one is al' , y sensitized of erery day livtng. be qripleing i isthatl you can be ensitliv to anything ing lis that ther 's alv$ ti~~ people. ~o 0 her :ht that: 2,4-D !;is no the o~ r a entsi, chemical, natur l' hat mos~ of the' thin s ar n I I I I :::tP::n~bout it; befo e... you. thdught on' peop e th t re on other micls ~n thei~~yst ms a. hey more suscep- eY're e~posed tp the e kijd f things? hat the. :medication i. F~r' nstanc.e some he ive~ enzymeb and: if t o~ people would sti ide~ that effect! live enzymes either 'I I ' fAGf tt- 1186 I Week o:lf Dr. I ~4, 198 II :~ ~ w~'" '...' aolmlf. ~ ' ~~~ p~:~:d a~~c;~~~ ~;}' they . ~er g~t into, a ral?h, thle~ tha .1,. ~" ~u ds ik.. e ". ~" he che~,. I. cal. s.nsi~.~,.. bala G~1 And. tha~ lasts for ! long~ I ~i~~' r ~J~ i~~ m~!. ~~. 2, ~r. ~: i1a~th1:' ': obab y!lija e t e sa~e problem if it as e or a.,. .::t. c. sOlfents.1 too and.:,.... not just tli sen ti.. I fz d i ,'s really broad, but it, sit ia I to. i I · ; ~a i.:' , III . . I · Exposure can ~~1 s nsitlization7 er: Y~s, oh y a~~ A d we r It abbut exppsure!of wh re w ;' e about the imm ne I :I! ! : : ;Ila 'i :h 'i'Tb Ii! i i , ~~ ~M~ fl~~r 'iils " II i ! I. I II ! , I , I i this pitn I , . I n tarti I 1 I ' , i !! I ~~tn i II i itl i' c.it alfe lU: ~I.'~~ I IT ~ I've ~al near a Icl er start, oms. er: Yeah stem i just b relate ould p e of t one i the se I ! , what Ru~h is sayi g , Dr. * ~o I I I I a~~~. s~st hat they will, they II immediately ation. That's ong time and that response ords they, insecticide same chemical. an, certainly ing in this m not just s that the ietyof things gs, other y culprit r man.ufactured.. forests not strictly Minu es Page 23: Dr. l on w but port the! whic port January I I : ng oyer dosed or I under I d sed depending w, 2b4-D is not, lis no~. on that class, ~.'c a,p. ions, that involv . he sam.' e trans- would be an effedt the e, one way or itiO.h. depending qn howt ey work and re the other one~ tryi g to be trans- n situation. oh yes this! into consid ratio you private , ifithey would ave, i ht wh t other ht of had in the r sys~e IS at he time l i careful records Qf whab medic'nes exppsure, I don't havf uch 0 portunity nything about it untilj m nths ater. PY 4hinks they'rnot .~' e ting ell. t th~y wonder if they' e ever e... tting abopt a poisoni g cas. .mmedi tely. y not and then I can'tl f.nd ou too s, had they just,takenl a certa.n thing erpe~uation of t~e ehe~i al se sitization nisi an important thing. ourppinion thenl thatl s COUlr be alot mOJe susce certfinly could ,e an ~n eract"on like h ; l' 1 d .1 it Y'. our c 1entsJ an 1h., ans or through altorners h at~orneys who wrovide ome .pf the library res~a to db and to review the recq~ds, which Ilcan ra urse! before r went to r ..d th.~n to Pickt.,e paper t might explain fhat h p nd t~ose papers with s m research ch th t the apers and , I c n read duate school, that I feel ened 0 this expl nation Dr. I e p st he, rds e s to r ers o the , I ! : - ! I~ the c~J1.t y through ,11h 'slusuall It rou ysician. 10do : - I - oe$ 't haime be~ use I a I a or'/;: and. u :, a the situa ilo th ! , I n. I And tin I s hy? ciano , Chai mal Pitts: Sh I Dr. er: tin ~enerous ter for sc ibble. ques~ions. I wa t to th nk yo for ou have less pro lems ge ting out of g out of Austrai~ia. '! I of New Zealand. 1 Ken~illman and tom Jay ,ecause they've ssempling and bringing t ese people ons and provide ~s in~or atio and finel job andfactlitatled us a d as s concerned and ,ll thie udie ces, al.sO! your courtefY" (,*,d of t pe) oul~'have, are l~ft w~th ighti choose as a I Boari t meeiting with anyone s nsti,l.tutes a publ'f..c me.... ti th~t's the case! we will wilil adjourn tht'. s in lor omi~g. I I I . V 11 ~ACE Ilr 187 .. "