Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Thursday, March 15, 2018

NPMA: To Win We Must First Define Our Enemies and Our Allies, Part I

Definition leads to clarity.  Clarity leads to understanding.  Understanding leads to good decision making.  Good decision making leads to harmony! 

Rich Kozlovich

Over the last two years our industry has been asked by the National Pest Management Association (NPMA) to go to Congress on Legislative Day and ask our Representatives and Senators to bump up the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) budget by tens of millions of dollars.  I have some questions:
  • Who at NPMA makes such irresponsible decisions?
  • Who initiates such an irresponsible idea?
  • Did anyone vote on this?
  • If so, who were they and what would possibly possess their minds to think this was a “good thing”?
The EPA was born in corruption with President Richard Nixon.  His goal was to ban DDT.  He appointed William Ruckelshaus as the first director, an underground activist who made the decision to ban DDT irrespective of the fact none of his science advisors agreed, nor did Judge Sweeney, the federal magistrate who ruled none of the claims against DDT stood the test of scientific validity.  Ruckelshaus admitted years later his decision was a political decision, not a scientific one. 

As a result, Nixon, Ruckelshaus, Rachel Carson and the EPA are responsible for the blood of up to 100 million innocent victims, who’ve died unnecessarily from malaria, and hundreds of millions who‘ve been unnecessarily sickened every year since.  And that’s only malaria, that doesn’t count all the other insect borne diseases DDT could have prevented.  Because Rachel lied millions died, and the EPA knew it!

Has anything changed at the EPA?  Absolutely not! The radical agenda of EPA’s activists outranks science, economics or the human disasters they’ve created.  EPA was born in corruption and has remained corrupt ever since, with a virtual lava flow of scientific dubious and destructive regulations.  The fact they've done some good things doesn't give them a pass on who and what they really are. 

Then we have what’s called “sue and settle” regulations, which Pruitt has ended.  An illegal conspiracy to force regulations on the nation they don’t have the power or authority to impose.  A corrupt scheme between corrupt EPA officials and green activists via court decisions.   The greenies sue and the EPA either puts up a halfhearted effort to defend against that suit or they settle giving the greenies all they desire with the imprimatur of the federal judiciary. 
I've been told we don't want to do anything that offends EPA because we want them to trust us.  Our real concern should be is whether or not we can trust them.  And history has shown the answer to that concern - from the beginning of EPA until right now this very moment - is we can't, and we need to stop bending over the barrel for them and the chemical companies. 

Can someone explain to me why that isn’t the definition of a criminal conspiracy that could be prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as RICO?

The current Director, Pruitt, has ended that practice, but what about all the damage that’s been done by those who participated in these corrupt actions?  Who will make those who’ve suffered from this illegal conspiracy whole again?  Who has even been fired for this?

But their “conspiracies” are even broader, more mendacious and more insidious.  Tell you what – we’ll come back to that!

They've spent untold millions promoting a pest control system that doesn’t exist.  IPM!  In point of fact there is no such thing as IPM in structural pest control. (Please see The Pillars of IPM.)
In 1996 the Congress in an effort to fix something called the Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938 passed something called the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). The Food Quality Protecting Act was supposed to be a pro-pesticide law, but with EPA tinkering it’s became the most anti-pesticide laws passed since Nixon.  We lost carbamates and organophosphates and now we have bed bugs.  For more information on this please go to my article, We Don’t Need No Stinking Badges. As a result, whole categories of safe effective chemistry was lost to the structural pest control industry, and to the general public.
They’ve instituted regulations to impose restrictions on the use of pyrethrins and pyrethroids based on dubious conclusions and industry played into this.   

And I’ll call it for what I absolutely believe what it is – a conspiracy between big corporations and the EPA that screws the structural pest control industry and the public, raising costs and reducing the effectiveness of our treatments. 

And this is the agency we want to have an increased budget?  Really?  Have we lost our minds?

The truth of the matter is this effort to increase the EPA’s budget is in effect blatant Corporatism.  This effort is all about chemical companies desire to get their products registered as quickly as possible, and I don’t fault them for that.  That’s good business.  But why are we being a party to this?   Is this increase in budget good for the pest control industry?

Do we really believe the EPA doesn’t have the money to do one of their core responsibilities? 

Recently it was reported one of the EPA’s core responsibilities is to clean up Super Fund Projects. How’s that been working? 
"With little media attention EPA under Pruitt has stepped up its efforts to clean the nation’s most toxic Superfund sites, putting the properties back into productive use. In 2016, Obama’s EPA remediated and removed only two sites from Superfund’s national priorities list (NPL). By comparison, in Pruitt’s first year, EPA cleaned up and removed seven sites from the NPL. It’s amazing what the agency can do when it focuses its efforts on core functions. "

We now have an EPA administrator who recognizes just how bad the EPA is for this nation, who before he was the administrator, “successfully sued the EPA numerous times, including convincing the courts to place stays on the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule and the Clean Power Plan (CPP).”

Here’s an administration that wants to cut a twenty three percent from the EPA budget and eliminate “dozens of programs”.  But now the NPMA wants our industry to go to Congress to plead with them to add tens of millions back to that budget.  Is it possible Pruitt knows better than the NPMA as to what the EPA needs to perform its core functions?

If the EPA is in such dire economic straits, I have a suggestion that can go a very long way in finding those millions the chemical companies think EPA needs.  Eliminate that core responsibility of registering chemistry from the EPA and return that responsibility to the Department of Agriculture.   Then eliminate all…..and I mean all…. The EPA regional offices.  Every state now has an EPA of their own, why does the EPA need regional offices?

But we have to come back to the core question.  Why are we adopting this stance to increase EPA's budget? 

Because that’s what “our allies”, the chemical companies, want us to, and please don't insult my intelligence claiming otherwise.

The chemical companies are at best leaky vessels as allies.  They treat us as allies of convenience, and we need to recognize that and treat them in exactly the same manner.  When it suits our needs, we defend them.  When it doesn’t – we don’t! If those in leadership can’t understand that, or do but don’t have the courage to act accordingly – we need to take a real hard look at that leadership.

I've talked to a number of the members of the Ohio Pest Management Association who will be attending Legislative Day and none of those I talked to will support this scheme.  One told me he will present NPMA's information and then specifically tell his Representative and Senator he absolutely does not support this budget increase for EPA. 
I encourage every member of every state association attending to take that stance. 
Let’s try and get this once and for all – There’s no good government or bad government.  There’s only limited or unlimited government, and EPA is now and always has been out of control.  They need to become far more limited, or better yet - eliminated, which I will address later.    
We have a window of opportunity with the Trump administration to fix many things.  But when that window closes, and it will at some point - it may close forever.   Leadership needs to get that!  It's now a matter of win or go home!
One more point.  I'm an autodidact who's willing to publicly debate anyone involved with our industry who disagrees with me on any of these points or issues, irrespective of their position or education.  I encourage NPMA to set up such a debate.

Monday, February 26, 2018

Has Scott Pruitt Brought Armageddon to the EPA?

Calvin Beisner 2/6/2018
According to two former Administrators, current federal Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has set the agency back by anything from several years to as much as three decades due to “regulatory rollbacks, mass attrition and budget cuts.”

That sounds ominous. It isn’t.

 At present EPA is operating under FY2017 funding levels. While projected FY2018 funding cuts will be substantial, they have not yet taken place.......To Read More....

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Democrats Offer Compromise on Deadlocked Pesticide Funding Bill

Posted Feb. 21, 2018
  • Pesticide Registration Enhancement Act tied up in the Senate since last summer
  • Democratic amendment would allow the legislation to be reauthorized in exchange for policy provisions
Four Democratic senators offered a compromise to move forward a stalled bill on funding the EPA’s pesticides office, but it’s unclear whether other lawmakers will agree to the offer.
Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Cory Booker of New Jersey, and Kamala Harris of California unveiled Feb. 21 an amendment to the the Pesticide Registration Enhancement Act of 2017 (H.R. 1029) that would reauthorize the legislation through 2023—three years longer than the bill currently proposes—in exchange for two commitments from the Environmental Protection Agency.
The senators want the EPA to uphold and implement the Obama administration’s rules to shield farmworkers from pesticide exposure, and to respond to objections filed to the agency’s decision not to restrict the agricultural insecticide chlorpyrifos, which has been linked to neurodevelopmental delays.........To Read More....

My Take - First - if these four loons are for anything - until more information becomes available - a rational person would wisely be against it.   Secondly, when the word "linked" is used as a scientific term it means nothing.  It's mere speculation and opinion, and an opinion that may not be widely shared in the scientific community.  Linked in this context is known as a "weasel word"! Third, it would be wise to remember chemical manufacturers, as allies, are at best leaky vessels. 

Friday, February 23, 2018

Drinking Raw Milk Is Flunking IQ Test

By Alex Berezow — February 9, 2018  @ American Council on Science and Health

Every single day, you take several IQ tests. You just aren't aware of them.

Did you look both ways before crossing the street? Did you get a flu shot? Did you buy that $4 organic banana? These are all IQ tests, and the result is either pass/fail. Occasionally, flunking one of these daily IQ tests has very real consequences.

The CDC reports that, in August 2016, at least 17 people in Colorado flunked an IQ test when they consumed raw milk and became sick. Milk samples and patient samples both tested positive for antibiotic-resistant Campylobacter jejuni, which causes vomiting and diarrhea.

Thankfully, they learned from this experience. Just kidding. The CDC says, "Although [individuals] were notified of the outbreak and cautioned against drinking the milk on multiple occasions, milk distribution was not discontinued."

That's not just flunking an IQ test. That's like getting kicked in the face by a horse, then tickling its rear end one more time just for fun.

Pasteurization Is a Triumph of Public Health

In Colorado, it is illegal to sell raw milk. Though I once endorsed that policy, I don't anymore. I believe adults should be free to put whatever they want in their bodies, and Darwin can sort things out.

I will, however, continue to relentlessly mock anyone who drinks raw milk. There is no nutritional justification for it and plenty of scientific evidence against it.

It isn't an exaggeration to claim that pasteurization has saved millions of lives. Before the invention of pasteurization, it was fairly common for people to get sick and die from eating contaminated food. Milk alone was known to spread typhoid fever (Salmonella), diphtheria, scarlet fever (Streptococcus), bovine tuberculosis, and even anthrax. Before widespread vaccination, polio could spread in milk.

This grim reality was reflected in the top 10 causes of death in the U.S. in 1900, the top three of which were due to infectious disease: pneumonia/influenza, tuberculosis, and diarrhea/gastroenteritis. Diphtheria was #10.

However, as public health improved, deaths from infectious disease fell. According to Neatorama, which has published a history of pasteurization, infant mortality in NYC fell from 273 per 1,000 live births in 1885 to 94 per 1,000 in 1915. One of the reasons was pasteurization.

The Paradox of Progress

Today, consuming raw milk or cheese is a senseless health risk. The CDC estimates that the risk of becoming sick from unpasteurized dairy products is 840 times higher than from pasteurized dairy products. So, why do people do it?

Because people take our public health triumphs for granted. In our modern society, we have very little to fear. Thanks to pasteurization, our food is safe; thanks to chlorination, our water is clean; and thanks to vaccination, our lives are (largely) free of contagious disease. And as an added bonus, violence is at a globally historic low. Anyone born in a developed country can expect to live into his 70's or 80's.

Completely ignorant of this history, some people have convinced themselves that the "old fashioned" way of doing things was better. In reality, the old fashioned way killed people, which is why society modernized.

Those who insist on rejecting that will have to grapple with the driving force of natural selection.

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Video: Flies Laying Eggs

The Risk-Monger @zaruk 

It is quite fascinating to watch the how many eggs a fly can lay:

As you watch this, tell me again why you are so strongly against plastic packaging and other forms of food hygiene.

IARCgate: Shouldn’t IARC Stop Lying?


Outgoing IARC Director, Christopher Wild, refused to attend the US House Science Committee hearing into the IARCgate scandal. In actions of arrogance never seen before at any UN agency, Wild is snubbing IARC’s single largest funder. To make matters worse, several days ago (on January 11), Wild wrote a regrettably undiplomatic letter to the honourable US Congressional leaders in language that was terse, insulting, demeaning and factually incorrect. As IARC is searching for a new head for this moral train-wreck of an agency, Wild seems determined to leave it in tatters.

As US lawmakers are surely befuddled by such ill-chosen lack of decorum (and by present standards in DC, that is saying something!), the Risk-Monger thought it worthwhile to be the one to answer to Chris Wild’s outrageous claims, trickery and misinformation. The following read-through of Wild’s loathe-letter to America will hopefully shine some light on how horrible IARC has become.  It highlights six different ways Chris Wild, in his letter, lied to the US Congress........To Read More...

Naturopathic Cult Populism


This is Part 2 of the Insignificant Trilogy.

We are witnessing a rapid rise in naturopathic populism.
  • Up to two thirds of Americans are using non-conventional methods to treat cancer. Naturopathic doctors (see an excellent overview) wear white coats, work in clinics and deceptively offer a simple, painless, ineffective alternative to modern medicine.
  • Four in ten in France do not believe vaccines are safe (there is presently a deadly measles epidemic in one French region) and vaccine safety has become an election issue in Italy. Measles cases are up 300% with 20,000 victims last year.
  • Sales in organic food, unregulated supplements and bogus detox programmes have been rising exponentially. These marketing opportunists have attracted the big food manufacturers and brands to move into the organic food space to cash in on financial margins built on fear and lies.
  • It is almost impossible to find a policymaker today in Europe who will stand up and publicly support agricultural technologies (pesticides, fertilisers, plant breeding).
Over the last decade, there has been a concerted attack on scientific expertise, authorities and conventional practices by a coalition of gurus, anti-industry campaigners, interest groups and environmental NGOs. Naturopaths (defined broadly as those blindly favouring natural methods, substances and treatments over conventional scientific ones) operate across a wide range of disciplines from homeopathy, alternative medicine, organic food and supplements, utilising a network of retailers, producers, lobbyists and media actors.

They are zealots (eco-religious fundamentalists) putting forward a naturopathic populism based on fear campaigns, simplistic alternatives and outright lies. Anti-vaxx, anti-chemicals, anti-pharma, anti-industry, anti-trade, anti-science … these agitators have done well by fostering doubts and distrust of experts and regulators while raising an heroic profile of the brave naturopathic guru leading individuals who resists the status quo. This blog will consider how their techniques fit within a populist cult playbook.......To Read More....