A massive animal-poisoning test being pushed by children's health
and environmental advocates as a means of protecting kids from the
harmful effects of pesticides is, in reality, doing just the opposite.
The results of a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) test are being used
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a basis for
weakening children's protection from potentially harmful pesticides.
Although the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA)
requires that children's exposure to pesticide residues be 10 times
lower than adult levels, it has a loophole: It allows the EPA to use a
different margin of safety "if, on the basis of reliable data ... there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children." So, instead of applying an additional 10-fold "children's
health safety factor," the EPA has been relying on data from crude
animal tests conducted by pesticide manufacturers to claim that these
chemical residues are safe for children at much higher levels.
This means that the EPA is using the results of the DNT and
other animal studies as an excuse for providing infants and children
with substantially less protection from pesticide risks than the law
would allow. For example, in its revised assessment of organophosphate
pesticides, the EPA removed the 10-fold children's health safety factor
entirely for 18 chemicals, reduced it to three-fold for 10 others, and
retained it for only six. The end result is that infants and children
are now worse off than they would be if the DNT testing had never been
In the DNT test, groups of female animals are forced to
swallow or inhale a test chemical during their pregnancies and while
they nurse their young. Their offspring are then subjected to a variety
of crude behavioral tests, after which they are killed and their brains
weighed and examined. A single DNT study can kill as many as 2,600
animals. Yet despite this massive body count, the DNT test has never
undergone proper scientific validation to determine whether it reliably
predicts chemical effects in humans.
In an attempt to rectify this toxic boondoggle, PETA and
the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) filed a legal
petition with the EPA in September 2004, calling on the agency to repeal
its test guidelines for DNT studies in favor of the full application of
the FQPA-mandated 10-fold safety factor. The EPA responded to our
petition on January 3, 2005, with a formal denial, to which we have now
responded with a lawsuit alleging that the agency's continued reliance
on the DNT and other nonvalidated animal tests as a basis for setting
children's health safety standards is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of
discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with the law.
Read more about the EPA and developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) tests:
Almost all of us grew up eating meat, wearing leather, and going to circuses and zoos. We never considered the impact of these actions on the animals involved. For whatever reason, you are now asking the question: Why should animals have rights? Read more.