Pesticides and Human Testing

Amanda PorterStaff WriterFor years, scientists, researchers, and sponsors have tested chemicals, drugs, and other products on rats and other small animals. But questions have always remained – is it ethical? Do products affect rats the same way they affect humans? Can we trust company sponsors to be honest in their research?Recently, pesticide companies have again come under fire – this time for paying human volunteers to swallow, inhale, and absorb through the skin the neurotoxins they make. Debates rise over dosage levels – when do they become dangerous, and how do scientists know in the early stages of testing? Volunteers can be exposed to levels ranging from a single bug to four weeks of daily doses. Blood and urine are tested for pesticide metabolites and psychological markers that may reveal chemical reactions to the toxins. Need some fast cash? Volunteers can make as much as two hundred dollars a day, although no information was available to determine if future medical problems from testing were covered. Some public health advocates say that testing on humans is a way for producers to get around the laws that limit them. Richard Wiles, of the Environmental Working Group, is an adamant challenger to the ethics of human testing. “They assume that….a human test is going to work out in their favor.” He says that what is dangerous is that the testers think that when something goes wrong “they can stop the study.” What is forgotten is what happens after. It leads some to wonder if testing is stopped too late.We consume pesticides every day. We eat them on produce, drink them in water, and spray them on our skin. Most people can say, however, that the little they know about pesticides is that high dose exposure is bad for your health. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required sets of regulations for testing on humans. Researchers can only use 1/100 of the highest daily dose that does not appear to affect the most sensitive animals on humans, and the amount producers can use on grains and produce is a ten-fold decrease of that. Children cannot be tested on at all, though some argue that if ethics don’t apply, children might as well be tested too – as pesticides affect adults differently than children. According to Discover magazine, critics are worried most about the science behind the testing. Unlike drug testing trials, pesticide-testing procedures on people are not specified or reviewed by anyone outside the company doing the testing. Some experiments test less than a dozen people, making the results inaccurate. Christopher Portier of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, a testing agency located in Triangle Park, North Carolina, says of questionable research, “if the testing is ethical, but you do it wrong, it’s still not ethical.” Portier questions the benefit of pesticides. He says he can understand the human testing of pharmaceuticals, that could have health benefits. But what is “beneficial” to society as a whole is hard to determine, and is often a matter of opinion. With a rapidly expansive population, more food is required. Without some pesticides, insects and disease could take over vast areas of crops, reducing production and increasing their cost. Researchers test the chemical compounds called organophosphates, which are in the most toxic and widespread pesticides. These neurotoxins poison the nervous system, slowing reaction time between cells. Overdoses of organophosphates can cause blurred vision, twitching, paralysis, difficulty breathing and abdom- inal cramps.There are five common pesticides that the government regulates at close levels. DDT was first used as an insecticide. Use of DDT was banned in 1972 in the US, but is still used widely abroad. Chlorpyrifos-methyl, used on grain in storage,was also once widely used, but many producers have voluntarily cut back on concentration levels. Endosulfan, Malathion, and Dieldrin are three other commonly used pesticides. Three of these are scaled as “moderately persistent” in soil. While media, magazines, and news anchors warn about the hazards of consumption of pesticides, it isn’t likely anyone will die of a pesticide overdose in the next few days. Most dangerous chemicals have been banned in the United States. Supporting US products is not only good for your health in this case, but it is also good for the economy. The easiest way to reduce your pesticide intake is to simply wash produce well before consumption-something the public is advised to do anyway. Chemical pesticides are something important to be aware of, like anything you eat. Whether you feel human testing is ethical or not, most of us aren’t getting paid to take any risks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention comment that while it is known that pesticide toxins are not currently a high concern, not enough research has been done to determine the health effects on the majority of the American population.