5/2/13
Hon. William Owens
US House of Representatives
Washington, DC USA
Dear Congressman Owens,
Thank you for the assistance of your office in motivating the US Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) to provide a response to my letter dated
12/18/12 seeking the opportunity to engage in a dialogue on the
subject of minimizing harm that will result from the presence of
industrial contaminants in the environment of the people of the
Akwesasne Reserve in the St. Lawrence River valley. In a letter dated
4/15/13, one Kristina Harper, an employee of the FDA writes to
describe the actions of the FDA relating to persistent organic
pollutants (POPs). The focus of her letter is on the establishment of
standards for contaminant levels in foods. This is not an effective
way to protect people from industrial contaminants. The World Health
Organization (WHO) produced the report “Persistent Organic Pollutants:
Impact on Child Health” for the purpose of setting forth the
scientific research basis for action directed at minimization of the
POPs exposures received by children. The FDA does not have a standard
for dioxin concentrations in food. It does not have such a standard
due to the resistance that the chemicals and food sector corporations
have mounted to the creation of a dioxin standard.
The letter from FDA referred to above is merely an attempt to avoid
the responsibility of that entity to provide the public, especially
populations with excess exposures to toxic substances with warnings of
avoidable health hazards involving the substances for which they have
received excess exposure. In the case of the population residing on
the Akwesasne Reserve, major toxicants of concern are PCBs and
mercury. It is the responsibility of the FDA to warn the residents of
Akwesasne of the POPs exposure health hazard constituted by the
presence of POPs in the animal fat containing foods of the mainstream
food supply, including: meats, fish, dairy products and eggs.
In the Harper/FDA letter, risk assessment is held up as a useful
practice for the creation of standards for food contamination. Risk
assessment has been used by the governmental public health entities to
create the illusion that careful attention is being given to the risk
of harm imposed by exposure to industrial chemicals. Scientific
experts free from any controlling influences of corporations have
reached consensus on the serious limitations of risk assessment. No
risk assessment of any significance has been produced for dioxins,
PCBs or total POPs. This is due to the fact that scientific knowledge
has not progressed to the point where quantification of the disease
risk imposed by gestational, neonatal, childhood and adult exposures
has been accomplished.
Scientific knowledge has accumulated to the extent that consensus
exists among experts that total POPs exposure resultant from average
consumption of animal fats present in foods of the mainstream food
supply, including: meats, fish, dairy products and eggs is imposing a
significant quantity of serious harm upon consumers. The most
important public health protective action at the current state of
scientific knowledge is provision of warning of the POPs exposure
health hazard constituted by the exposure resultant from animal fat
consumption.
FDA has provided no such warning because FDA is controlled by
corporations that have financial links to the various matters of POPs
contamination of the environment and food supply. The FDA must free
itself from corporate control and begin to act upon scientific
knowledge for the protection of the public health.
Considering the vast array of exposures that Americans receive to
toxic substances, many of which are endocrine disrupting chemicals
(EDCs) the only sound public health protection paradigm is exposure
minimization. POPs exposure minimization is of critical importance to
the well being of Americans. POPs exposure minimization can be
readily accomplished by minimization of consumption of animal fats and
minimization of exposure to vehicle and household dust. The first
step toward accomplishing POPs exposure minimization is providing the
public with a warning of the POPs exposure health hazard. The FDA
needs to begin providing this warning.
In her letter, Ms. Harper states that I have not specified which
particular foods are contaminated. I have made very clear the fact
that the presence of POPs in all of the animal fat containing foods of
the mainstream food supply is the exposure problem that I propose to
address. The total POPs exposure entailed in consumption of all
animal fat containing foods available in the mainstream food supply is
the source of harm that POPs exposure minimization education is
designed to protect against. Total POPs exposure is the source of
harm addressed in the WHO report named herein.
I continue to seek the opportunity to speak with Deputy Commissioner
for Food, Michael Taylor. Deputy Commissioner Taylor is a former
Monsanto Corporation employee. His involvement with corporations and
government makes him a person who should take a role in resolving the
problem of corporate interference with government action on chemical
exposure minimization.
Everything stated above is applicable to the general public and the
residents of the Akwesasne Reserve. The residents of Akwesasne are
suffering much harm from past and ongoing exposures to POPs. I seek
the opportunity to speak with Deputy Commissioner Taylor so as to move
forward with creating FDA action to warn the residents of Akwesasne
and the general public of the POPs exposure health hazard.
Thank you for your attention to this correspondence.
joyous in Nature,
Donald L. Hassig
_________________________________________________________________________________
5/3/13
Thomas Frieden, MD, Director
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, Georgia USA
Transmitted by electronic mail to <steve.hunt@mail.house.gov>
Dr. Frieden,
I have read your letter to Congressman William Owens dated 4/11/13.
Thank you for demonstrating your interest in the subject of persistent
organic pollutants (POPs) exposure minimization. The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) do indeed provide educational
outreach on the subject of chemicals and groups of chemicals that are
POPs. However, CDCP does not at this time provide any educational
outreach on the subject of POPs exposure minimization. Currently the
CDCP does not have any public educational information on the subjects
of total POPs exposure and damages to health. In 2010, the World
Health Organization (WHO) published, “Persistent Organic Pollutants:
Impact on Child Health”. A considerable period of time has passed
since publication of this landmark public health protection document.
WHO recommends action to minimize the exposure that the children of
the world receive to POPs. No significant action has been taken by
governmental public health entities in the United States to move
toward accomplishment of POPs exposure minimization.
I have spoken with Dr. Michael Hatcher an employee of the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, an agency contained within the
CDCP. He has expressed the position that the above named WHO report
is valid. It is time for the CDCP to commence work on the production
of an educational piece on the subject of POPs exposure minimization.
This document must warn the non-expert reader of the POPs exposure
health hazard constituted by the presence of harmful levels of POPs in
the animal fat containing foods of the mainstream food supply,
including: meats, fish, dairy products and eggs.
In your letter to Congressman Owens you refer to the creation of two
environmental health documents, one focusing on PCBs, the other on
dioxins. These documents do not suffice as POPs exposure
minimization education pieces. It is total POPs exposure that is
imposing a significant quantity of disease risk upon those who consume
average quantities of animal fats. When will the CDCP begin work on
producing a public health education piece on the subjects of total
POPs exposure and damages to health with a recommendation for exposure
minimization?
Thank you for your attention to this correspondence.
joyous in Nature,
Donald L. Hassig
5/3/13
Judith A. Enck, Regional Administrator
Region 2 HQ
US Environmental Protection Agency
New York, NY USA
Transmitted by electronic mail
Ms. Enck,
I have read your letter dated 4/9/13. This letter can only be
described as ridiculous. The information on persistent organic
pollutants (POPs) that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
presents to the American public on its POPs webpage fails to warn the
public of the existence of the POPs exposure health hazard. There is
no mention in the EPA information of the fact that all animal fats are
contaminated with POPs so as to lead to harmful exposures for those
who consume average quantities of animal fat containing foods
available in the mainstream food supply including: meats, fish, dairy
products and eggs. Every American parent would agree that the EPA
POPs information fails to provide a warning of the POPs exposure
health hazard. These parents will someday take action to hold EPA
accountable for having failed to take reasonable action directed at
accomplishing minimization of the total POPs exposure received by
their children. They will confront EPA with the fact that EPA did not
tell them that current levels of food supply contamination resulted in
exposures that were inflicting harm. They will complain of the fact
that EPA kept them in the dark about the risk of serious harm that
exists in the total POPs exposure received by the average consumer of
mainstream food supply foods containing animal fats. The EPA POPs
information makes no mention of the mainstream food supply foods that
contain POPs: meats, fish, dairy products and eggs.
Not only does the EPA information fail to provide a warning of the
existence of the POPs exposure health hazard, it serves to provide
assurance to the public that the mainstream food supply is safe. This
assurance is provided by the EPA POPs webpage content found below.
“A number of populations are at particular risk of POPs exposure,
including people whose diets include large amounts of fish, shellfish
or wild foods that are high in fat and locally obtained.”
All non-experts reading the information on the EPA POPs webpage would
conclude that the mainstream food supply was safe. It is obviously
the intention of EPA to cause them to conclude this. How dare you
attempt to continue this deception by refusing to acknowledge it.
You are a deceiver, Ms. Enck. You are part of a team of deceivers all
of whom are controlled by the greed of corporate entities. The greed
you and your allies are controlled by is greed for money, greed for
social status and greed for political power.
You have no credibility as a protector of the environment and the
public health. The Truth is coming out concerning the presence of
industrial chemicals in foods. The American people are beginning to
comprehend that EPA allowed this contamination to occur and that EPA
is now attempting to conceal the damages to health caused by exposure
to these contaminants. As the numbers of enlightened Americans
increase EPA sinks lower in its public approval. The day is not far
off when EPA will fall.
I demand that the EPA replace the information that it presents on its
POPs webpage with a warning of the POPs exposure health hazard as
described in the 2010 World Health Organization (WHO) report,
“Persistent Organic Pollutants: Impact on Child Health”. This must
be done immediately. The EPA is responsible for much of the
unnecessary exposure that Americans are receiving to POPs. EPA was
responsible for warning Americans of the POPs exposure health hazard.
Rather than provide this warning EPA chose to deceive Americans by
providing information indicating that the mainstream food supply was
safe. Americans will eventually hold EPA accountable for having done
this. EPA will be reformed by the actions of Americans who are very
displeased with the harm to the environment and public health that EPA
has caused.
Thank you for your careful attention to this correspondence.
joyous in Nature,
Donald L. Hassig
EPA Defends Against Criticism of Failure to Provide Warning of POPs Exposure Health Hazard
In a letter dated 4/9/13, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck takes the position that the information on the EPA webpage addressing persistent organic pollutants (POPs) provides the American public with a warning of the existence of the POPs exposure health hazard constituted by the presence of POPs in the animal fat containing foods of the mainstream food supply, including: meats, fish, diary products and eggs. EPA Region 2 Administrator Enck is a deceiver. Her deceptive words attempting to deflect criticism of the agency’s failure to warn the public of this avoidable health hazard are a source of harm to the people of New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and eight tribal nations, including the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe. The EPA must admit to its failure to educate on the subject of POPs exposure minimization. Having admitted to this failure, EPA must then set about creating a POPs exposure minimization educational outreach. So many people in EPA Region 2 live in the vicinity of POPs contaminated sites. They have received excess exposures to POPs as a result of living near these sites. Regional Administrator Enck must learn to have compassion on the people who have received respiratory exposures to the POPs that evaporate from contaminated sites. If she is not capable of learning this compassion, she must be replaced. Her deceptive letter follows.
4-9-13 Letter from EPA Defending Against Criticism of Failure to Warn of POPs Exposure Health Hazard
Director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Writes to Congressman William Owens in Response to Question Concerning Minimization of Children’s Exposures to POPs
Thomas Frieden, MD, Director Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) has written to Congressman William Owens in response to questions concerning educational outreach on the subjects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) exposure and disease outcome. Dr. Frieden describes several types of action that CDCP has taken and continues to take involving individual POPs and subclasses of POPs. However, his letter makes no mention of action to warn the public of the POPs exposure health hazard. He writes of work in progress on creating a document focusing on PCBs and another on dioxins. Hopefully, these documents will provide warning of the dangerous exposures that consumers are receiving to these chemicals. Nonetheless, these documents are not the documents that are needed to warn the public of the harm to health that is caused by the total POPs exposures entailed in consumption of animal fat containing foods available in the mainstream food supply, including: meats, fish, dairy products and eggs.
The Truth is slowly coming out regarding the lack of use of scientific knowledge on the subjects of chemical exposure and disease outcome to protect public health. The POPs exposure health hazard warning should have been provided to the public by no later than 2010 when the World Health Organization published, “Persistent Organic Pollutants: Impact on Child Health”. No such warning has yet been provided by any governmental public health entity. The governmental public health entities are under the control of corporations in every nation. It is the work of grassroots organizations that will lead the way in preventing disease via the provision of warnings of avoidable health hazards.
4-11-13 Letter from CDCP concerning POPs health hazard
4/19/13
Dear St. Lawrence County Policy Makers,
The United Nations Environment Programme and the World Health
Organization have recently published a report titled, “The State of
the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals”. The report presents
the scientific evidence, which is available on the subjects of
endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) exposure and damages to health
in wildlife and humans. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are
EDCs. There are approximately 800 chemicals that act as endocrine
disruptors. EDCs include BPA, fluoride, mercury, phthalates and all
of the POPs. Due to the widespread and heavy exposures that nearly
everyone is having to EDCs, it is highly important that action on POPs
exposure minimization take place. The matter of endocrine disruption
provides a strong impetus for POPs exposure minimization education.
Minimizing POPs exposure takes a large step toward reducing EDCs
exposure.
Please see our news release, which follows for more information on EDCs.
Thank you for your interest in using scientific knowledge to protect
public health.
joyous in Nature,
Donald L. Hassig
______________________________
News Release
4/19/13 For Immediate Release
Donald L. Hassig, Director
Cancer Action NY
315.262.2456
_________________________________________________________________________
UNEP and WHO Publish “The State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting
Chemicals”
2013 United Nations Environment Programme – World Health Organization
Report, “The State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals”
A report summary is available at the URL found below.
http://www.unep.org/pdf/EDCs_Summary_for_DMs%20_Jan24.pdf
The full report can be accessed at the following URL.
http://www.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78101/1/9789241505031_eng.pdf
“Endocrine disruption is causing harm to the health of humans and
wildlife around the world. In a landmark 2013 report, the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Health Organization
(WHO) have set forth the state of scientific knowledge on the subjects
of exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and damages to
health associated with exposures. Persistent organic pollutants
(POPs) are a major group of EDCs. Considering the widespread and
heavy exposures that people and animals are having to EDCs and the
serious damages to health associated with exposure to these chemicals,
it is of great health protection importance that POPs exposures be
reduced to an absolute minimum.”-Donald L. Hassig
Development from a single cell into a mature organism and reproduction
are critical parts of human and animal life. Normal function of the
endocrine system is of critical importance in both arenas. Three
areas of scientific knowledge serve as foundation for concerns over
EDCs: (1) the high incidence and increasing incidence of many
endocrine-related disorders in humans; (2) observations of
endocrine-related effects in wildlife populations; and (3) animal
studies demonstrating linkage between exposure to endocrine disruptors
and disease outcome.
“Approximately 800 chemicals are known or suspected EDCs. The speed
with which the
increases in disease incidence have occurred in recent decades rules
out genetic factors as the sole plausible explanation. Environmental
and other non-genetic factors, including nutrition, age of mother,
viral diseases and chemical exposures, are also at play, but are
difficult to identify. Despite these difficulties, some associations
have become apparent. Wildlife populations have been affected by
endocrine disruption, with negative impacts on growth and
reproduction. These effects are widespread and have been due primarily
to persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Bans of these chemicals have
reduced (wildlife) exposure and led to recovery of some (wildlife)
populations.”-Joe DiGangi, International Persistent Organic Pollutants
Elimination Network (IPEN)
Organisms are more vulnerable to the harm imposed by exposure to EDCs
during critical windows of development: gestation, infancy and
puberty. The mother’s body burden of EDCs is of great significance to
the health of offspring due to exposures that take place within her
body and as a result of nursing. POPs are contaminants of breast
milk, making this group of chemicals especially significant in health
of newborn and infants.
For more information, contact:
UNEP
Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson and Director of Communications (Nairobi) on Tel:
+41 79 596 5737 / +254 733 632 755 or Email: nick.nuttall@unep.org
Bryan Coll, UNEP Newsdesk (Nairobi), Tel: +254 20 762 3088 /+254 731
666 214, Email: unepnewsdesk@unep.org
WHO
Glenn Thomas, Communications Officer, Department of Communications, WHO, Tel:
+41 22 791 3983, Mobile: +41 79 509 0677 Email: thomasg@who.int
Nada Osseiran, Communications Officer, Public Health and Environment, WHO, Tel:
+41 22 791 4475, Mobile: +41 79 445 1624 Email: osseirann@who.int
Town of Russell Helps Residents Access WHO Report Recommending POPs Exposure Minimization for Children
The Town of Russell now provides assistance to residents in accessing the 2010 World Health Organization (WHO) report, “Persistent Organic Pollutants: Impact on Child Health”. A PDF file for this report can be accessed from the town’s website. This landmark WHO report recommends action to minimize the exposures that children around the world receive to persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are industrial chemicals that exhibit certain properties, which make them particularly dangerous to humans, including: resistance to breakdown, solubility in fats and accumulation in the body. POPs are contaminants of all animal fats. POPs exposure has been found to cause chronic diseases including: cancer, diabetes and heart disease. POPs are endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Much harm to wildlife and human populations has been caused by POPs exposures.
“The Town of Russell is taking a strong, leadership role in raising public awareness of the POPs exposure health hazard. Former Town Board Member David Whitford deserves recognition for his efforts to create educational outreach on POPs exposure minimization. Supervisor Robert Best and the members of the current Russell Town Board demonstrate their love of children, good health, good government and scientific knowledge by their work building POPs exposure minimization education. It is truly wonderful knowing these good Americans. I believe that the goodness in the American people will overcome all of the bad energies and actions of the greedy corporate people who are damaging our nation. We live in an exciting time of great good change coming.”-Donald L. Hassig
