My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL49967
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL49967
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:29:54 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 5:33:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1986104
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/15/1998
Doc Name
NDUSTRY TASK FORCE II ON 2 4-D RESEARCH DATA
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />2,4-D <br />Science and Public Perception <br />by <br />Donald L. Page, Executive Director <br />Industry Task Force P on 2,4-D Research Data <br />Exclusive to Wheat Life <br />As pointed out in an article in Wheat Life's October, 1996 issue, the 2,4-D Task <br />Force had submitted the last of the 270 reseazch studies required by the U.S. Environ- <br />mental Protection Agency (EPA) for the re-registration of the herbicide 2,4-D, and that <br />while ongoing research continues, that phase of the eight year, thirty million dollar project <br />has been completed. By and large, these studies simply confirmed what is already known <br />about 2,4-D, the world's most extensively researched herbicide, and certainly no new "red <br />flags" were raised. The toxicology studies confirmed that 2,4-D, even at extraordinary <br />high doses - -many thousands of times higher than what might be found in the environ- <br />ment - -does not cause cancer in laboratory animals. The studies also confirmed that 2,4- <br />D does not cause birth defects, has low potential to cause neurotoxicity in both short- and <br />long-term exposures and does not cause genetic damage. Nor is it likely to present any <br />threat to wildlife. <br />Is industry research valid? <br />This is a question being raised increasingly often by anti-pesticide advocacy <br />groups. Such advocacy groups invariably forget that ninety percent of all American re- <br />search is done by U.S. industry, and that American research is second to none in the <br />world. They also assume that the 2,4-D studies were done by either the Task Force or its <br />four member companies, a gross misconception. This very specialized research was actu- <br />ally done by more than 50 research laboratories and scientific consulting companies across <br />the country (a list of all of them can be made available on request). The research compa- <br />nies were selected on the basis of their proven ability to meet EPA's extraordinarily strin- <br />gent Good Laboratory Practices (GLPs) and on the basis of competitive bids. <br />What are GLPs, and why is a GLP study important? Good Laboratory Practices <br />are a system of strict regulations and controls which must be met on any industry research <br />used for regulatory purposes. This requires, among other things, that each step of the re- <br />search beproperly verified and recorded by the researcher responsible. GLPs requve an <br />independent quality audit of each study, something that necessitates the hiring of an inde- <br />pendent GLP quality assurance consultant for each study. An unintentional GLP violation <br />can invalidate a study, requiring it to be done over. Since research is very expensive, you <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.