Summary Of UPDATE
According To The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data …
Regulatory agencies, like U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Health Canada, conduct an EXHAUSTIVE SERIES OF RISK ASSESSMENTS to evaluate the human health and environmental impacts of a pest control product prior to its registration.
It is widely recognized that these regulatory agencies are LEADING WORLD AUTHORITIES ON PESTICIDE TOXICOLOGY, EXPOSURE, and EPIDEMIOLOGY.
Currently-used pest control products have been TESTED IN MORE WAYS THAN VIRTUALLY ANY OTHER SET OF SUBSTANCES.
The GENERAL STANDARD for the registration of a pest control product is that there are NO UNREASONABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO HUMANS OR THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN THE PESTICIDE IS USED ACCORDING TO LABEL DIRECTIONS.
2,4-D Herbicide plays a VALUABLE ROLE in protecting and enhancing lawns, gardens, public parks, playing fields, lakes, and ponds for public enjoyment.
2,4-D Herbicide has been evaluated in multiple life-time animal bioassays that have demonstrated that the herbicide is NOT A CARCINOGEN.
The American Cancer Society estimates that 60 per cent to 70 per cent of cancer deaths in 2012 will be related to over-weight or obesity, physical inactivity, poor nutrition, and smoking. 15
――――――――――――――――――――
The Industry
Task Force II
On 2,4-D
Research Data
May 30th, 2013
James W. Gray, Carol J. Burns, and William M. Mahlburg
The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Response To Anti-Pesticide Report Entitled Increased Cancer Burden Among Pesticide Applicators And Others Due To Pesticide Exposure By Alavanja et al [ Alavanja, Ross, & Bonner ]
Selected And Adapted Excerpts
――――――――――――――――――――
James W. Gray, BS, Executive Director, The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data, Kansas City, Missouri
Carol J. Burns, MPH, PhD, Senior Epidemiologist, The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, Michigan.
William M. Mahlburg, BA, Technical Representative, The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data, Kansas City, Missouri
Mr. Mahlburg and Dr. Burns are Technical Representatives to The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data.
The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data was organized to provide funding for the ongoing Good Laboratory Practice ( GLP ) research studies required to respond to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Registration Review and Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency pesticide re-evaluation programs.
The 2,4-D Task Force is comprised of those companies owning the technical registrations on the active ingredient in 2,4-D herbicides.
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Introduction
We agree with the introduction to the article by Alavanja et al that research should identify pesticides that are potential human carcinogens and that policies should be in place to reduce human exposure to them. 1
However, we respectfully disagree that currently registered pesticides have resulted in excess cancer risk to those who are highly exposed.
The review of cancer burden by Alavanja et al concluded that « pesticides do cause cancer ». 1 [ ?!?! ]
However, the authors’ description of their analysis indicates that the review is NOT PARTICULARLY EXHAUSTIVE in either depth or scope.
They assert that uses need to be curtailed in the ABSENCE OF CLEAR EVIDENCE OF HARM and in the FACE OF CLEAR VALUE AND SOCIETAL BENEFITS.
However, it should be emphasized that uses for 20 of the pesticides discussed in Table 5 in their article have in fact been « curtailed » and are NO LONGER REGISTERED by the US Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ).
As representatives of manufacturers of the herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid ( 2,4-D ), we would like to provide additional information to the review by Alavanja et al, because it applies to a currently registered pesticide for which exhaustive laboratory, animal, and human research has NOT SUPPORTED EVIDENCE THAT IT CAUSES CANCER.
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
EPA Assessments
The EPA and other regulatory agencies conduct an EXHAUSTIVE SERIES OF RISK ASSESSMENTS to evaluate the human health and environmental impacts of a pesticide prior to its registration.
The EPA subsequently requires and evaluates new data periodically.
The GENERAL STANDARD for pesticide registration is that there are NO UNREASONABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS TO HUMANS OR THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN THE PESTICIDE IS USED ACCORDING TO LABEL DIRECTIONS.
The REGULATORY STANDARD with respect to the SAFETY OF PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN FOOD IS REASONABLE CERTAINTY OF NO HARM, taking into account the aggregate of dietary exposure and other exposures for which there is reliable information.
Hazard characterizations and risk assessments conducted by the EPA thoroughly evaluate the potential health effects of the product that may occur from different types of exposure to users of the product ( applicators and handlers ) or to by-standers.
The EPA evaluates various sensitive sub-populations to these exposures as a normal process.
For example, toxicology testing includes a wide array of doses, routes of exposure, durations of exposure, and critical life stages including development and reproduction, as well as bodily metabolism and excretion.
The EPA integrates their analyses to compare toxicity with environmental exposure concentrations, and then uses this information to make their « no unreasonable adverse effects » determination.
The aggregate of dietary and incidental exposures are also considered to make a finding of reasonable certainty of no harm in comparison with potentially sensitive sub-populations, in addition to the general population.
The EPA’s current Registration Review program functionally continues the re-evaluation process conducted under re-registration by requiring currently registered products to be reassessed to update older studies or to illuminate new areas of science.
Additional studies are required from time to time, such as the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program assay test orders.
It is widely recognized that the EPA is a LEADING WORLD AUTHORITY ON PESTICIDE TOXICOLOGY, EXPOSURE, and EPIDEMIOLOGY.
The EPA’s final risk management decision integrates the law, the data, and the experienced judgments of many experts into registration of protective label directions and precautions.
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Comments
The review by Alavanja et al 1 suggests that pesticide applicators are at an increased risk of cancer. [ ?!?! ]
However, a recent study by Koutros et al of more than 50,000 pesticide applicators and their spouses in Iowa and North Carolina reported a 7 per cent to 18 per cent DEFICIT OF CANCER. 2
These investigators observed that this finding was consistent with previous observations among farmers.
Another comprehensive review of cancer among pesticide manufacturers and applicators by Burns concluded that « there is little indication of increased cancer risk among pesticide manufacturers or sprayers ». 3
With respect to 2,4-D, the review by Alavanja et al highlights that 2,4-D is the most commonly used herbicide in both the home and garden market ( Table 2 in their article ) and the commercial market ( Table 3 in their article ). 1
However, EXPOSURE STUDIES HAVE DETECTED LITTLE MORE THAN TRACE LEVELS OF 2,4-D in the urine of the general population 4 , and the children of applicators 5 .
Evaluations of these and other exposure studies have CONCLUDED THAT ACTUAL EXPOSURES ARE WELL BELOW THE CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS made by policy makers for the registration process. 6
As noted above, the review by Alavanja et al selectively provides examples of studies showing links between a pesticide and a cancer. 1 [ ?!?! ]
The single National Cancer Institute ( NCI ) epidemiological study from Kansas that was selected as evidence of an association between 2,4-D and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Table 5 in the article by Alavanja et al 1 DID NOT EVEN EVALUATE 2,4-D per se, but only asked participants about herbicides. 7
Furthermore, De Roos et al concluded, « [T]his analysis of the pooled data found no association with having ever used 2,4-D » referring to the NCI’s studies in Kansas and Nebraska. 8
Although some studies have reported an association between a CANCER and the use of 2,4-D, independent investigations with more robust methods DID NOT VALIDATE these findings. 9
Several published reviews of 2,4-D and cancer have concluded that 2,4-D DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER in animals or humans. 9-11
In addition, it is important to understand that the International Agency Of Research On Cancer has NEVER made 2,4-D a priority to evaluate.
Their 1987 classification of phenoxy herbicides concluded there was « inadequate » data to classify 2,4-D for carcinogenicity in animals or for genetic activity in short-term tests. 12
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Mechanisms Of Toxicity
With little exception, we agree with the authors’ assertion that pesticides « have diverse chemical structures and exhibit a variety of biological modes of action in both target and non-target organisms ». 1
However, this statement is PERPLEXING when considered alongside their later conclusion that, « cancer risk does not seem to be limited to one functional class of pesticides … or to one chemical class … » 1
The acknowledged diversity of chemical compounds and modes of action represented in pesticides appear more likely to support the position that PESTICIDES ARE NOT ALL SOMEHOW ALIKE IN POSING A CANCER RISK.
From a toxicological point of view, the answer seems to result from over-interpretation of nascent molecular toxicology data that include exposures that are unrepresentative of actual human exposures.
Currently-used pesticides have been TESTED IN MORE WAYS THAN VIRTUALLY ANY OTHER SET OF SUBSTANCES.
A large array of species, exposures, doses, and life stages are included such that we have an excellent understanding of what is and is not biologically plausible for these compounds.
Hypothesizing alternative mechanisms of cancer causation for these well-studied compounds relying on a minimal number of exploratory molecular studies appears BLATANTLY SPECULATIVE in comparison with the rich animal toxicology database.
For example, 2,4-D has been evaluated in multiple life-time animal bioassays that have demonstrated that the herbicide is NOT A CARCINOGEN.
Other studies regarding genetic toxicology and toxicokinetics are also contra-indications for carcinogenicity.
Reaching for new pathways to toxicity needs to seriously consider the substantial mass of current understanding and justify a departure from well-established principles.
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Societal Value
Crop protection products provide significant, measurable benefits to society.
The CropLife Foundation states that crop protection technology, which includes all pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, as well as bio-technology products, helps to control the thousands of weed species, harmful insects, and numerous plant diseases that afflict crops.
Without these important crop protection and pest control technologies, US food production would decline, many fruits and vegetables would be in short supply, and the price of food would rise. 13
There are other positive aspects of crop protection and public health pesticides that are often taken for granted.
The responsible and safe use of pesticides provides human health benefits by controlling household pests such as termites, roaches, ants, rats, and mosquitoes, which carry and can transmit deadly diseases.
Herbicides are used to control vegetation that clogs waterways or threatens to obstruct highway, utility, and railroad rights of way, thus providing for safe transportation.
Maintaining electrical right of way ensures that critical power flow continues to be available for medical care, computer networks, refrigeration of our food supply, and countless other public safety applications.
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
Conclusions
2,4-D Herbicide plays a VALUABLE ROLE in protecting and enhancing lawns, gardens, public parks, playing fields, lakes, and ponds for public enjoyment.
The National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program 14 conducted a biological and economic assessment of the uses of 2,4-D and phenoxy herbicides in the United States.
They found that « the phenoxy herbicides have greatly aided human-kind by increasing worldwide food production and reducing the drudgery of weed management while generating an outstanding record of human and environmental safety ».
The study concluded that the general public would be impacted with « net societal losses from not using phenoxy herbicides of 2.559 billion dollars annually ».
The regulatory guidelines identify the risks posed by pesticide use and weigh these against the benefits from such use.
Indeed, Kushi et al appreciated the clear benefits, stating that, « overwhelming scientific evidence supports the overall health benefits and cancer-protective effects of eating a diet rich in fruits and vegetables ».
With regard to the MINISCULE RISK OF PESTICIDE RESIDUE ON THE PRODUCE, the study states, « at present, there is no evidence that residues of pesticides and herbicides at the low doses found in foods increase the risk of cancer ». 15
Recently published reports from the American Cancer Society demonstrate that the DEATH RATE FROM CANCER in the United States has FALLEN 20 PER CENT from its peak in 1991.
The American Cancer Society estimates that 60 per cent to 70 per cent of cancer deaths in 2012 will be related to over-weight or obesity, physical inactivity, poor nutrition, and smoking. 15
Eating fruits and vegetables is a clear benefit to human health.
Ensuring an abundant supply at reasonable cost will extend the availability to those most in need.
――――――――――――――――――――
UPDATE ― 2,4-D Herbicide ― The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
References
1 Alavanja MC, Ross MK, Bonner MR. Increased cancer burden among pesticide applicators and others due to pesticide exposure. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:120-142.
2 Koutros S, Alavanja MC, Lubin JH, et al. An update of cancer incidence in the Agricultural Health Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52:1098-1105.
3 Burns CJ. Cancer among pesticide manufacturers and applicators. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2005;31(suppl 1):9-17.
4 Department of Health and Human Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Third National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Environmental Health, Division of Laboratory Sciences; 2005:389-395.
5 Alexander BH, Mandel JS, Baker BA, et al. Biomonitoring of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid exposure and dose in farm families. Environ Health Perspect. 2007;115:370-376.
6 Hays SM, Aylward LL, Driver J, Ross J, Kirman C. 2,4-D exposure and risk assessment: comparison of external dose and biomonitoring based approaches. Reg Toxicol Pharmacol. 2012;64:481-489.
7 Hoar SK, Blair A, Holmes FF, et al. Agricultural herbicide use and risk of lymphoma and soft-tissue sarcoma [ erratum in JAMA. 1986;256:3351 ]. JAMA. 1986;256:1141-1147.
8 De Roos AJ, Zahm SH, Cantor KP, et al. Integrative assessment of multiple pesticides as risk factors for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma among men. Occup Environ Med. 2003;60:E11.
9 Garabrant DH, Philbert MA. Review of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid ( 2,4-D ) epidemiology and toxicology. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2002;32: 233-257.
10 Munro IC, Carlo GL, Orr JC, et al. A comprehensive, integrated review and evaluation of the scientific evidence relating to the safety of the herbicide 2,4-D. J Am Coll Toxicol. 1992;11:559-664.
11 Burns CJ, Swaen GM. Review of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid ( 2,4-D ) biomonitoring and epidemiology. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2012;42:768-
786.
12 International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity: An Updating of IARC Monographs Volumes 1 to 42. Supplement 7. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987.
13 CropLife America, CropLife Foundation. The Importance of Crop Protection Products. croplifeamerica.org/. November 1, 2012.
14 US Department of Agriculture. Biologic and Economic Assessment of Benefits from the Use of Phenoxy Herbicides in the United States. NAPIAP Report No. 1-PA-96. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture; 1996.
15 Kushi LH, Doyle C, McCullough M, et al; American Cancer Society 2010 Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. American Cancer Society Guidelines on nutrition and physical activity for cancer prevention: reducing the risk of cancer with healthy food choices and physical activity. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:30-67.
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
Background Information From An Independent Perspective
2,4-D Herbicide Is SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE
2,4-D has been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the urban landscape since 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-year UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
2,4-D DOES NOT CANCER.
Both United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and Health Canada conducted reviews of the scientific literature and concluded there was no evidence of a link between cancer and 2,4-D.
According to EPA, 2,4-D is NOT CLASSIFIABLE AS TO HUMAN CARCINOGENICITY.
According to The 2012 von Stackelberg Study, there are HIGHLY IMPLAUSIBLE CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES WITH 2,4-D. ( See below. )
The TOXICITY of 2,4-D is NOT VERY HIGH when compared to TABLE SALT.
Despite the opposite claims of activists, NO regulatory body in the world classifies 2,4-D as a human carcinogen.
2,4-D has been used for the control of broad-leaved weeds in the Urban Landscape SINCE 1946.
2,4-D has a 65-YEAR UNBLEMISHED SAFETY RECORD regarding long-term risk to health.
2,4-D is SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE and will CAUSE NO HARM.
To evaluate the full body of evidence, please take a look at The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data.
In 2012, Dr. Katherine von Stackelberg conducted a study to determine whether there was ANY VALIDITY to the suggestion from some EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES that 2,4-D may be associated with an increased risk of Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma ( NHL ), Hodgkin’s Disease, Leukemia, and Soft Tissue Sarcoma.
The combined evidence indicates it is HIGHLY IMPLAUSIBLE that exposure to 2,4-D and/or MCPA are associated with a risk of developing Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma ( NHL ) or other lymphohematopoietic cancers.
Toxicological studies in rodents show NO EVIDENCE OF CARCINOGENICITY, and regulatory agencies world-wide consider chlorophenoxies like 2,4-D as NOT LIKELY TO BE CARCINOGENIC or UNCLASSIFIABLE AS TO CARCINOGENICITY.
In other words, 2,4-D DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER.
WEB-PAGE & REPORTS ― 2,4-D HERBICIDE
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – EVALUATIONS & ASSESSMENTS ( Web-Page )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – HIGHLY IMPLAUSIBLE CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES WITH 2,4-D – ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( EPA ) – CANCER CLASSIFICATION WITH DESCRIPTORS – PART 1 OF 3 – 2012 11 00 ( Report )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA – REVISED WEB-SITE – MYTHS VERSUS FACTS – UPDATE – 2012 09 00 ( Reports )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – THE VON STACKELBERG STUDY – IMPLAUSIBLE CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES – 2012 02 01 ( Reports )
REFERENCES ― VON STACKELBERG
REFERENCE — 2,4-D — 2012 02 01 — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES & POTENTIAL MECHANISMS FROM EXPOSURE — VON STACKELBERG — 1
REFERENCE — 2,4-D — 2012 02 01 — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES & POTENTIAL MECHANISMS FROM EXPOSURE — VON STACKELBERG — 2
REFERENCE — 2,4-D — 2012 07 11 — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES — THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D — VON STACKELBERG
REFERENCE – 2,4-D — 2012 07 11 — A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES — HARVARD CENTER FOR RISK ANALYSIS — VON STACKELBERG
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
Background Information From An Independent Perspective
The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data
This organization was established to address the regulatory data requirements of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency ( PMRA ).
The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data was formed to work closely with the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency ( PMRA ).
Its role is to fund new research and provide information to each agency as required by their respective pesticide re-registration and re-evaluation programs.
The 2,4-D Task Force is made up of those companies owning the technical registrations on the active ingredient in 2,4-D herbicides.
They are Dow AgroSciences ( USA ), Nufarm, Ltd. ( Australia ) and Agro-Gor Corporation ( USA & Argentina ).
The Task Force does not conduct the research required by EPA and PMRA, it simply funds the scientific research needed to meet all agency requirements and keep 2,4-D registrations in the United States and Canada constantly up to date.
All research funded by the Task Force is conducted under stringent Good Laboratory ( GLP ) Practice guidelines.
In an effort to provide the public with the most accurate and up-to-date information, The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data takes the additional step of submitting the research findings to scientific journals for peer review and publication.
As well, given its long history of use, 2,4-D has been WIDELY STUDIED by independent researchers and regulators around the world for decades.
To learn of the history and benefits of 2,4-D, explore the web-site [ see below ] to find out more about the success of a product that has garnered over 65 years of research and evaluation to become the ONE OF THE MOST TRUSTED SELECTIVE HERBICIDES available to consumers, turf managers, farmers, ranchers, and other users wishing to protect their green spaces and crops from undesirable vegetation.
WEB-SITE ― THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA
REPORTS & REFERENCE
FORCE OF NATURE — 2,4-D HERBICIDE — 2012 09 00 — UPDATE — THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — REVISED WEB-SITE — MYTHS VERSUS FACTS ( Reports )
REFERENCE — 2,4-D — 2009 04 14 — THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — WEB-SITE — WELCOME
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
Background Information From An Independent Perspective
2,4-D Herbicide Has Been Researched Ad Infinitum
On July 22nd, 2000, The Industry Task Force II On 2,4-D Research Data issued a statement to the Canada’s Federal Standing Committee On Environment And Sustainable Development ―
The toxicology database alone exceeds 4,000 PEER-REVIEWED, PUBLISHED STUDIES, PLUS HUNDREDS OF UNPUBLISHED STUDIES that the manufacturers must fund for the various regulatory agencies throughout the world.
Additionally, there are now MORE THAN 100 PEER-REVIEWED, PUBLISHED EPIDEMIOLOGIC ( HUMAN ) STUDIES pertinent to 2,4-D.
If anything, 2,4-D SEEMS TO BE RESEARCHED AD INFINITUM.
The reason anti-pesticide activists keep insisting on more research is that they either have little comprehension of the extent of the current data package or the fact that the weight of today’s scientific evidence simply does not support their allegations.
REFERENCE
REFERENCE — 2,4-D — 2000 07 22 — NOW THE FACTS ABOUT 2,4-D — HUNDREDS OF RESEARCH STUDIES — THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — NATIONAL POST
――――――――――――――――――――
Discover What Anti-Pesticide And Enviro-Lunatic Terrorists Are Doing And Saying About Subversively Imposing Their Life-Style Choices Against Our Society
Read … Force Of Nature ― The Whole Truth From An Independent Perspective.
Communities and businesses are being HARMED and DESTROYED and RAPED by PROHIBITIONS against pest control products used in the Urban Landscape, and by other ACTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORISM.
We are living in the 9|11 Era of Anti Pesticide and Environmental Terrorism where at least ONE SUBVERSIVE ACT OF TERROR is perpetrated EVERY SINGLE DAY by these terrorist.
We are living in the DARK AGE OF ANTI PESTICIDE TERRORISM where sound science is trumped by FAKE SCIENTISTS, JUNK SCIENCE and UNVERIFIABLE SECRET EVIDENCE through FABRICATION, INNUENDO, and INTERNET RUMOR ― scientific research PROVES that pest control products CAUSE NO HARM and can be USED SAFELY.
An informed public is better able to protect itself and its communities and businesses from so-called activists who are THE LEAST QUALIFIED TO PROVIDE ANY ADVICE about pest control products or the environment.
NORAHG is the National Organization Responding Against HUJE that seek to harm and destroy the Green space industry, and the well being of our communities.
NORAHG morally represents the VAST SILENT MAJORITY of people associated with turf and ornamental plant maintenance who are OPPOSED to Anti Pesticide PROHIBITION and the CLOSURE or ABANDONMENT of green spaces under the RIDICULOUS PRETEXT of somehow « saving » the environment.
NORAHG is a NATIONAL NON PROFIT NON PARTISAN organization that does not accept money from corporations or governments or trade associations, and represents NO VESTED INTERESTS WHATSOEVER.
NORAHG is dedicated to reporting the work of RESPECTED and HIGHLY RATED EXPERTS who promote ENVIRONMENTAL REALISM and PESTICIDE TRUTHS.
NORAHG pledges to deliver comprehensive reports that are worthy of peoples’ time and of peoples’ concern, reports that might ordinarily never have breached the parapet.
NORAHG was the brainchild of William H. Gathercole and his colleagues in 1991. Mr. Gathercole is now retired, although his name continues to appear as founder.
Force Of Nature was launched by NORAHG for CONTINUOUS transmission on the Internet on January 1st, 2009 ― however, the VERY FIRST Stand-Alone FORCE OF NATURE Report was issued on September 19th, 2008.
On January 1st, 2009, Force Of Nature Reports were launched for CONTINUOUS transmission on the Internet ― however, the VERY FIRST Stand-Alone Force Of Nature Report was issued on September 19th, 2008.
On March 15th, 2010, Uncle Adolph independently launched The Pesticide Truths, an easy-to-use Web-Site that collects relevant reports of information right-off-the-press.
Pesticide Truths and Force Of Nature, in some ways, are like Google for everything concerning the SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES of Anti-Pesticide and Enviro-Lunatic Terrorists.
For The Complete Library of Force Of Nature and A LOOK AT Reports & References, go to the following web-page …
THE COMPLETE LIBRARY OF REPORTS & REFERENCES ( Web-Page )
――――――――――――――――――――
For the original copy of this Force Of Nature Report, and related articles, go to the following link …
FORCE OF NATURE — THE WISDOM OF THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — 2013 05 30 — UPDATE — GRAY, BURNS, & MAHLBURG ( Reports )
FORCE OF NATURE — THE WISDOM OF THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — 2013 05 30 — UPDATE — GRAY, BURNS, & MAHLBURG ( Article )
FORCE OF NATURE — THE WISDOM OF THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA — 2013 05 30 — UPDATE — GRAY, BURNS, & MAHLBURG ( Article — LUNATIC REPORT )
――――――――――――――――――――
Here are previous reports about 2,4-D HERBICIDE, just in case you missed them …
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – EVALUATIONS & ASSESSMENTS ( Web-Page )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – HIGHLY IMPLAUSIBLE CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES WITH 2,4-D – ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( EPA ) – CANCER CLASSIFICATION WITH DESCRIPTORS – PART 1 OF 3 – 2012 11 00 ( Report )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – THE INDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2,4-D RESEARCH DATA – REVISED WEB-SITE – MYTHS VERSUS FACTS – UPDATE – 2012 09 00 ( Reports )
CONVENTIONAL PRODUCT – 2,4-D HERBICIDE – THE VON STACKELBERG STUDY – IMPLAUSIBLE CARCINOGENIC OUTCOMES – 2012 02 01 ( Reports )
――――――――――――――――――――
NORAHG has archived more information on The Pesticide Truths Web-Site …
THE PESTICIDE TRUTHS WEB-SITE
PESTICIDE BANS ARE A FARCE ( Report )
REAL TRENDS AGAINST PESTICIDE BANS ( Web-Page )
CARNAGE CREATED BY CATASTROPHIC ANTI-PESTICIDE PROHIBITION – MAIN WEB-PAGE
THE COST OF PESTICIDE BANS ( Report )
ATTACKS AGAINST GOLF FACILITIES ( Report )
MYTHS ABOUT BANNING PESTICIDES – LEADING SCIENTIFIC HEALTH AND POLICY EXPERTS ( White Paper )
2,4-D HERBICIDE ( Web-Page )
COMPLAINT CHANNELS – COMPLAIN ABOUT THE ANTI-PESTICIDE LUNATICS ( Web-Page )
PESTICIDE LINKS ( Web-Page )
https://pesticidetruths.com/pesticide-qa-links/
THE COMPLETE LIBRARY OF REPORTS & REFERENCES ( Web-Page )
――――――――――――――――――――
――――――――――――――――――――
