USDA to Restart Collection of Pesticide Data

 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will resume a portion of its survey of the use of farm chemicals that was cut during the Bush administration. The surveys historically have provided crucial publicly available data on the amount and types of pesticides used on a variety of crops and livestock operations nationwide.

The data have been used by states and federal agencies for scientific research and policy planning and implementation, including the administration of clean water programs and chemical risk assessments. The data also have been used by the crop chemical industry to gather usage data and by environmentalists, farmers, and many others.

The Agricultural Chemical Usage Reports, collected by the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) since 1990, are the only publicly available data on national pesticide use. The USDA had been steadily dismantling the program, first by reducing the frequency of the chemical use surveys, then reducing the number of crops covered, until finally cutting the program entirely in April 2007 to save an estimated $8 million annually.

A coalition of 44 environmental, sustainable farming, and health advocacy organizations had urged the previous USDA secretary to reverse the decision.

The USDA announced on Tuesday the resumption of its data collection activities for fruit crops. The Obama administration has included funding for a full, reinstated program in its 2010 budget.

The policy reversal is a welcome change and a partial restoration of the public’s right to know about the use of poisons near their homes, schools, watersheds, and on their food. However, NASS should go much further with its data collection, emulating California's system for tracking pesticide use in the state. In California, all agricultural pesticide use must be reported monthly to county agricultural commissioners, who report the data to the state's Department of Pesticide Regulation.

Obama's USDA also announced this month that the agency will conduct the first survey of organic agriculture. The results of this survey will influence farm policy decisions, including funding allocations and community development activities.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack described the survey as "an opportunity for organic producers to share their voices and help ensure the continued growth and sustainability of organic farming in the United States."

(Brian Turnbaugh* 05/22/09)

Comments

I had great time over here

I had great time over here and i found plenty of things that are pleasant and exciting.I had lot of fun and entertainment over here. Criminal Lawyer Houston

Boric acid, despite it's name

Boric acid, despite it's name is safe and harmless to humans and animals, it's even used in eye drops, it comes in a plastic bottle with a tapered top so you can sprinkle it where ever you see bugs and don't forget under cabinets, refrigerator and especially the stove, now for ants you have to heat water to dissolve the boric acid with a bit of sugar, this mixture you put a few drops on a small piece of card board and place where they are seen, it is very affective. If you have problems finding Boric acid, sevin dust is available in any gardening section and is also very safe and effective.

Interesting read. I was

Interesting read. I was unaware that this was going on.

Lupus Linked to Malathion

In the early 1990s, as Orange County California residents, my sister and I were exposed to the area wide spraying of Malathion. Shortly there after we began having strange and even some life threatening symptoms. By the time I started putting two and two together, twenty years has passed. We are both diagnosed with Lupus. Our family does not have a history of Lupus. I believe and have for some time that Lupus is a industrial created genetic mutation that has caused our immune systems to be compromised. I also believe that Malathion was and is the catalyst. The only exposure we have in common to anything that might be a trigger for a possible predisposition to the disease is Malathion. At the time we were not living in the same household, working together or even spending much time together. The only common factors are that we are sisters and we live in the same county. I believe that Malathion is a dangerous pesticide that should have never been sprayed on an entire population of people. When I think back, I realize what a stupid and inconsiderate decision this was by the CDC and EPA. All I can say now is, thanks for taking the chance at a normal life from me. I have spent my life in and out of hospitals and doctors offices, this has invaded every aspect of my life and is all consuming! I can only imagine what a life without Lupus would be like! Sincerley, Amy Singleton

Three times I have exposed to

Three times I have exposed to pesticides. Each time I was severely injured. Finally diagnosis; Antiphospholipid syndrome. There is a direct cause here and for this not to be observed and treated for pesticide exposure is an outrage. Where is the concern? Why is this allowed? To feed the world? What about the side effects? Here we see why in this case in Florida. The greed of others trump our safety!

Much of the conflict revolved

Much of the conflict revolved around the department's attempts to manage the information Shafey acquired and disseminated as he attempted to document incidents of pesticide poisoning around the state. But health officials made no mention of escalating professional disagreements in a March 1 letter charging Shafey with falsifying travel records and engaging in conduct unbecoming a public employee. The latter charge stemmed from a February e-mail Shafey sent to Geoffrey Calvert, a senior medical officer at the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Here's the settlement agreement

I'd expect that from a pest control agency, No it was for reporting pesticide poisoning and DOH didn't want it to get out so DOH did the good ole boy stuff that FL is infamous for. U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges 36 E. 7th Street, Suite 2525 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 (513) 684-3252 (513) 684-6108 (FAX) Case No.: 2000-CAA-0019 In the Matter of: OMAR SHAFEY, PH.D., Complainant v. SHARON HEBER, DAVID JOHNSON, DANIEL PARKER AND RICHARD HUNTER, Individually, and in their official and unofficial capacity, the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, and the STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondents APPEARANCES: Neil L. Henrichsen, Esq. William J. Moore, Esq. Henrichsen Siegel Moore For the Complainant Kevin E. Hyde, Esq. Foley and Lardner For the Respondents Before: Robert L. Hillyard Administrative Law Judge ORDER RECOMMENDING SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSAL OF CASE This case involves a complaint by Omar Shafey, brought under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7622; Water Pollution Prevention and Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1367; and, the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2622, in which he alleged violations, discrimination, and wrongful termination of employment by the Respondents, Sharon Heber, David Johnson, Daniel Parker, and Richard Hunter, individually, and in their official and unofficial capacity, and the Department of Health for the State of Florida. After issuance of the findings of the Regional Supervisory Investigator of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration,Atlanta, Georgia, the Complainant filed a notice of appeal and requested a formal hearing. A hearing was scheduled to commence on August 6, 2002, in Tallahassee, Florida, before the undersigned Administrative Law Judge. The parties, on August 2, 2002, filed a General Release and Settlement together with a Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice. The Settlement Agreement is dated July 18, 2002, and is signed by Omar Shafey, Complainant; David Johnson, Daniel Parker, Sharon Heber, Richard Hunter, and representative for the Florida Department of Health, Respondents. The Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice is signed by Neil Henrichsen, attorney for the Complainant and Kevin E. Hyde, attorney for the Respondents. The agreement provides for complete settlement of all disputes between the parties and payment of an amount to the Complainant which the parties wish to remain confidential. All parties have been represented by counsel throughout the proceedings. After review of the General Release and Settlement, I find the agreement to be reasonable and recommend approval. Therefore, it is recommended that the following Order be entered by the Secretary of Labor, It is hereby ORDERED that the General Release and Settlement dated July 18, 2002, between Omar Shafey, Complainant, and the named Respondents, is approved and the Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and it is further, ORDERED that the hearing scheduled to commence on August 6, 2002, is CANCELED. A Robert L. Hillyard Administrative Law Judge NOTICE: This Recommended Order will automatically become the final order of the Secretary unless, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 24.8, a petition for review is timely filed with the Administrative Review Board, United States Department of Labor, Room S-4309, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20210. Such a petition for review must be received by the Administrative Review Board within ten business days of the date of this Recommended Order, and shall be served on all parties and on the Chief Administrative Law Judge. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 24.8 and 24.9, as amended by 63 Fed.Reg. 6614 (1998).

Malathion spraying leads to

Malathion spraying leads to Dr. Shafey's Dismissal in Florida Apr 5, 2000 - 02:10 AM Tampa Tribune Shafey firing raises issue of autonomy By JAN HOLLINGSWORTH Four days before health officials launched an investigation into Omar Shafey's travel records, the state epidemiologist fired off a prophetic e-mail to his new boss entitled ``ethics.'' In it, Shafey, 38, alluded to continuing discord over his refusal in January 1999 to alter the conclusions of a controversial Medfly report. ``The department can retaliate against me by not cooperating with other surveillance goals ... and/or fire me for some other perceived violation of procedures,'' Shafey wrote in the Dec. 6 memo. However, added Shafey, he was a scientist in a career service position who could not be fired without cause. Less than three months later, health officials accused the epidemiologist of falsifying his travel records and fired him. The circumstances surrounding Shafey's dismissal raise questions about the autonomy of government scientists acting in the public's interest and whether their work can be effectively shielded from political pressures. In a complaint filed last week with the U.S. Department of Labor, Shafey's lawyers contend state health officials retaliated against him for airing his concerns about the health risks of crop dusting urban populations with malathion bait to combat the Mediterranean fruit fly. The crop-killing pest poses a serious threat to the state's agriculture industry. Widespread aerial spraying has long been viewed as the cheapest, most effective remedy, even in the face of growing opposition to the practice. The administrative action, filed under federal whistleblower statutes, alleges Shafey's new bureau chief, David Johnson, suggested in November ``that he should conform his professional recommendations'' to the official policy of the health department ``or consider leaving.'' Health officials won't comment on the dismissal, citing pending litigation. But department records obtained by The Tampa Tribune document Shafey's meteoric fall from grace, which culminated March 2 with the nationally respected scientist being escorted from the agency's headquarters by a police officer. Some of the more than 1,000 pages of investigative reports, e- mails and memos shed light on growing tensions between Shafey - a former Peace Corps volunteer and Greenpeace activist - and his superiors. Much of the conflict revolved around the department's attempts to manage the information Shafey acquired and disseminated as he attempted to document incidents of pesticide poisoning around the state. But health officials made no mention of escalating professional disagreements in a March 1 letter charging Shafey with falsifying travel records and engaging in conduct unbecoming a public employee. The latter charge stemmed from a February e-mail Shafey sent to Geoffrey Calvert, a senior medical officer at the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In it, Shafey noted that potassium chloride used in the state's first execution by lethal injection had not been approved for that use by the Food and Drug Administration. Health officials called the correspondence ``inappropriate'' and ``outside the scope of your job duties and outside the jurisdiction of the Department of Health.'' Calvert, in his e-mail reply to Shafey, called it ``another example of your stellar sleuthing and your tenacious efforts to identify the truth.'' Ironically, it is accusations of deception that form the foundation of the charges against Shafey. ON DEC. 10, SHARON HEBER, head of the agency's division of environmental health, asked the Inspector General's office to look into a trip Shafey took to Immokalee in early November. Shafey was to investigate a methyl bromide spill that injured dozens of farmworkers as well as rescue workers who responded to the scene. According to the Inspector General's report, Heber was ``concerned about the appropriateness of his travel'' because Shafey stayed in Miami rather than in two closer alternatives - Fort Myers or Naples. Heber, one of two health officials who altered the draft of Shafey's Medfly report to discount a link between aerial Medfly spraying and documented illnesses, cited state rules that call for employees ``to select the most economical method of travel.'' Investigators concluded that although Miami was a longer commute, Shafey ended up saving the state a total of $47.11 by staying with a friend instead of paying for a motel room. Nonetheless, the three-month investigation continued. Shafey's records, including parking stubs, toll receipts, phone calls and e-mail, were meticulously examined to reconstruct his movements during the four-day trip. Investigators concluded the epidemiologist had not traveled to Immokalee on one of those days, although an attorney Shafey met with confirmed during two separate interviews that he had. The attorney did admit, after some prodding, ``that she could have been wrong about the day, but she still thinks the meeting was Friday,'' according to the investigator's interview summary. Investigators then moved on to inspect Shafey's next trip, a six-day conference in Chicago. An examination of those records led to the conclusion that Shafey had worked three-fourths of one day and received reimbursement for a full day's expenses ``resulting in an overpayment of $12.50.'' According to the report, investigators never asked Shafey about the Chicago trip or the $12.50 discrepancy that resulted in one of the most serious charges, against him. THE NEWS of Shafey's firing rocked the participants of the Pesticide Poisoning Surveillance Program, a CDC-funded project that Shafey had coordinated since its 1998 inception. By most accounts, he is a careful scientist of unquestioned integrity. ``I have found him to be one of the most professional, well organized and socially responsible individuals I have ever met,'' said Dennis Penzell, medical director of the Suncoast Community Health Centers in Ruskin. Some members of Shafey's pesticide working group, consisting of physicians and representatives of industries where pesticides may pose an occupational hazard, said they believe he may have been too conscientious for his own good. That sentiment is echoed by Marc Lappe, a former California health department toxicologist who warned in 1980 that aerial Medfly spraying posed a public health risk. Lappe's draft report, like Shafey's, was altered by his superiors. ``I think there's a pattern of behavior in which large bureaucracies attempt to protect themselves from having to take unpopular actions and from having to be responsible to the people they serve,'' said Lappe, who testified before the California State Assembly about his experience. Lappe resigned from the California health department in the wake of the Medfly controversy there, but not before officials stripped him of all involvement in policy decisions or discussions. THE BEGINNING OF the end for Shafey appears to be November, when Johnson took over as bureau chief. That was the same month Shafey took the investigated trips and the same month the CDC published an article supporting the epidemiologist's original conclusions that aerial spraying malathion bait to eradicate the crop-killing Medfly was linked to reported illnesses. In his interview with the travel investigators, Johnson called Shafey ``a hard worker'' and ``a smart man with a lot of talent.'' But, he added, ``He has some difficulty in following the rules and tends to go around them.'' Shafey's annual job evaluations mentioned no problems with the epidemiologist's ability to work within the system, commending him for his progress in developing the pesticide surveillance program. Nonetheless, Shafey found his professional responsibilities diminishing. In late February, Johnson informed Shafey that he could no longer ``perform the classification of acute illness'' in cases of pesticide poisoning. It was Shafey's classification of spray-zone-related illnesses that prompted the controversial Medfly report. Shafey's removal from classification duties brought a swift response from CDC, the state's partner in the surveillance program. ``Who is responsible for this decision?'' wrote the CDC's Calvert to Johnson in an e-mail the following day. Calvert said the classification system is fundamental to the integrity of the program and stressed the importance of it being ``conducted in an objective and scientific manner.'' ``Please explain how you will ensure that the classifications are conducted in a high quality and timely fashion.'' Calvert has not, to date, received an answer from the department. Less than two weeks later, Heber presented Shafey with a letter informing him of the department's allegations and its intent to terminate him. Heber reported that Shafey gave her ``a very aggressive stare'' and closed the door to her office, shutting out Johnson on the other side. The next day, Shafey was placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation of the incident. A Tallahassee police officer was summoned to escort Shafey from the building. According to the police report, the officer found him ``to be calm but upset.'' An additional charge of ``abusive language'' was added to the roster when the epidemiologist called Johnson, among other things, ``a worm'' and ``excrement.'' A hearing in which Shafey was to be given an opportunity to respond to the charges was canceled and he was terminated March 3. Jan Hollingsworth covers the environment and can be reached at (813) 259-7607 or jhollingsworth@tampatrib.com See SHAFEY, Page 6

(PAGE WAS FORCIBLY REMOVED BY

(PAGE WAS FORCIBLY REMOVED BY THE FL DEPT OF AG in 2009) Florida Health Official Does Job So Well He's Fired and Forcibly Removed Karen Charman / TomPaine.com 16nov01 Karen Charman is an investigative journalist specializing in agriculture, health and the environment. Chances are, you know someone who has contracted an unexplained disease: a young, healthy woman who gets breast or ovarian cancer, or an otherwise energetic person who suddenly develops chronic fatigue syndrome, chemical sensitivity, multiple allergies, or fibromyalgia. Most people assume public health officials are working diligently to solve these mysterious afflictions. But the troubling story of Dr. Omar Shafey demonstrates how government agencies sometimes conspire to protect the interests of influential industries rather than the public they are entrusted to serve. In February 1998, the Florida Department of Health (FDOH) hired Dr. Shafey to track pesticide-related heath problems. Although pesticide usage in Florida is comparatively high, cases of pesticide poisoning have been woefully underreported there for years. In Shafey, Florida got both credentials and enthusiasm. An epidemiologist, he has a PhD from Berkeley in Medical Anthropology. After being hired, he traveled the Sunshine state investigating complaints. He uncovered previously unrecognized pesticide exposure routes. He worked to educate physicians on how to diagnose health problems caused by pesticides -- something barely covered in medical school. He wrote recommendations for protecting the public health based on the data he compiled. Initially Shafey's hard work paid off. He was honored with appreciation awards by state and county health departments for "professional, caring and compassionate" service. And he earned the respect of diverse communities: colleagues, academics, farm workers, and ordinary citizens. Yet two years after Shafey began his job, he was fired and forcibly removed from his office in Tallahassee after allegedly overcharging his department $12.50 on a travel reimbursement claim. Shafey claims he was harassed and ultimately sacked for resisting pressure from his supervisors to present results more pleasing to powerful agriculture interests. He is suing the Florida health department and two of his former bosses for wrongful dismissal under whistleblower statutes as well as for infringement of his First Amendment rights. Department policy prevents commenting on pending litigation, says spokesperson Bill Parizek, so Florida health department staff could not answer questions about Shafey or his lawsuit. Shafey's star began its meteoric descent after he refused to alter his recommendation against spraying urban areas with malathion to control an agricultural pest. Malathion is a widely used organophosphate insecticide, a nerve agent (like many pesticides) of the same chemical family as sarin gas. After analyzing medical reports and interviewing patients, Shafey concluded the spraying was making people sick. Florida deployed malathion against an outbreak of Mediterranean fruit fly, or medfly, long considered horticultural enemy number one. The females lay their eggs in about 250 different crops. The medfly is an invasive species, neither established nor tolerated in the U.S. or Japan. An outbreak results in quarantines that prevent growers from selling fresh produce in either country. A medfly outbreak hit Florida in 1997-1998, during which eradication efforts subjected more than a million people, mainly from Tampa to Sarasota, to malathion spraying. Call it collateral damage in the pesticide wars. Public outrage over the spraying led to the passage of a state law in early 1998 mandating the health department to set up a citizen complaint and referral hotline. The law also requires the department to verify complaints, educate health care professionals and refer patients to doctors who know how to treat chemical poisonings. Shafey joined the department soon after the law took effect. Stripped One of Shafey's first investigations began after medflies were found in an abandoned orange grove in April 1998 in Umatilla, a rural town in central Florida's citrus country. A medfly emergency was declared in Lake and Marion counties. After the area was sprayed, the county health department received 14 complaints. Some of those complaints came from Charmaine Kaiser, now 36, her fiancé Dennis Robinson, 38, and the six children in their combined family. Kaiser says authorities were supposed to notify residents door-to-door before spraying so that people would stay inside, but that didn't happen. "The helicopters were right above, not very high up, and they sprayed our house. I ran out to get the kids who were playing outside, and we all got coated," she says. Immediately after the spraying, Kaiser, who works for a local pediatrician, says her family and a lot of neighbors were very ill with long bouts of flu-like symptoms. "Two or three weeks later, I remember we were all vomiting," Robinson adds. "I was just lying on the couch, and every one of us had a bucket or something by us. It was horrible." Since the spraying, Robinson says he has been hospitalized twice a year for pneumonia, and Kaiser and her kids still suffer from respiratory complaints. A few weeks after the spraying, more medflies were found in densely populated Manatee County, just south of Tampa on the west coast, and another emergency was declared. Shafey says throughout the duration of spraying there, the health department received dozens of complaints daily, eventually totaling 199. By October 1998 Shafey had confirmed 123 cases of illness related to the spraying, a finding that was later published in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report. The same month Shafey wrote the report that he and colleagues say led to reprisals against him: a draft on the health effects of the medfly eradication program recommending that the department prevent aerial spraying in non-agricultural areas. The final medfly report FDOH issued was stripped of both Shafey's recommendation and his name. Pressured Shafey says he was pressured for months by his supervisors to change his recommendation and conform to health department policy that was much less aggressive about documenting cases of pesticide poisoning than he was. In early December 1999, he says his boss, David Johnson, suggested Shafey consider money and politics as driving forces behind the way the department treated health issues involving pesticides, and that if Shafey could not "bend" to accommodate FDOH policy, he should leave. Johnson denied the conversation, both in e-mail to Shafey copied to his boss and later in court documents. Shafey's boss suggested he consider money and politics as driving forces behind the way the department treated health issues. Johnson wasn't the only one who stood in Shafey's way. For more than a year, department lawyers had denied him access to worker's compensation data that would have helped him protect workers against future poisonings. Eventually, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Washington intervened on Shafey's behalf and sent a letter to Sharon Heber, the head of Shafey's division, urging her to help get the worker's comp data. Three days later, she asked the department's Inspector General to investigate a business trip that Shafey took the month before to see if he had submitted a fraudulent travel claim. Shafey had gone to Immokalee to investigate a methyl bromide spill at an agricultural chemical supply house that injured about 40 people. Heber suspected Shafey had traveled out of the way at the state's expense for his own benefit. Though Shafey flew to Miami, which was farther from his destination than other places, the inspector-general's report acknowledged Shafey saved the state $47.11 because he had no hotel expenses. The inspector-general did conclude Shafey defrauded the department $12.50 on his next trip to the American Public Health Association (APHA) annual conference in Chicago, where he presented his medfly data. The inspector-general said he should have claimed reimbursement for three-quarters of a day's per diem instead of a full day when he returned to Tallahassee, a charge Shafey disputes. Over the next month, Shafey's responsibilities diminished, according to health department correspondence. A cornerstone of the pesticide surveillance program is to categorize to what extent medical complaints are likely linked to pesticide exposure. Despite protests from NIOSH, which funds Florida's pesticide poisoning tracking program, Johnson took the classification task away from Shafey. Something Really Underhanded On March 1, 2000 Shafey was presented with a detailed letter informing him that the department was considering firing him on March 13 for falsifying a travel claim and conduct unbecoming a public employee. The second charge stemmed from some emails Shafey sent to several colleagues at various state and federal agencies questioning whether the state's use of potassium chloride to execute prisoners by lethal injection was a misuse of pesticides, because the chemical was not registered for that use. Although tensions had been rising between Shafey and his supervisors, he was surprised and upset by the move to fire him. At the time, state employees who were not political appointees were protected from being sacked for policy differences with management, so Shafey thought his job was secure. Incidentally, that changed on July 1, 2001, when Florida Governor Jeb Bush's plan to remove career service protection for Florida state workers went into effect, throwing nearly 17,000 positions -- including the one Shafey occupied -- into "at will employment." Now any state worker who refused to bow to the kind of pressure Shafey was subjected to can be fired without cause. After he received the termination letter, there was an incident during which Shafey says Johnson provoked him. Shafey closed his office door on Johnson and admits to calling him "a low life" and "a piece of shit." The next day Shafey was told he could no longer come into work pending an investigation of the "door slamming incident" the previous day. Shafey denies that he slammed the door but just closed it while Johnson was on the other side. "Anything I did at that point was blown all out of proportion," he says. "I think they were afraid I'd go postal, because they knew they were doing something really underhanded." He was instructed to go home and wait to be called in. On his last day Shafey was told to come in immediately to meet with Heber (Shafey's division head) even though his lawyer could not be present under such short notice. Shafey went in and was told he was terminated immediately without any right to appeal because he used abusive language and created an "emergency condition." Then the sheriff was called to escort him out. Burying the Controversy The Farmworker Association of Florida viewed Shafey's ouster as a major setback to their efforts to address pesticide issues on behalf of the state's 400,000-plus farm workers. Tirso Moreno, the association's executive director, says Florida's pesticide safety regulations are too lax to protect workers, and the few laws on the books are not enforced, so pesticide poisonings are rampant. Aside from dealing with acute symptoms associated with individual exposures, Moreno says his community seems to have unusually high rates of birth defects, skin problems, respiratory complaints, and autoimmune diseases, like lupus. Dr. Mohammed Abou-Donia, a professor at Duke University, says it's likely that pesticide exposures are responsible for the health problems of Florida farm workers, but proving it is fraught with pitfalls. Since there is no way to measure all of the pesticides and other contaminants that people are exposed to, it is impossible to link exposures of particular chemicals back to chronic health problems. "We're put to such high standards of toxicological proof, that you can't meet it," says Marion Moses, MD, director of the pesticide education center. The Farmworker Association has been trying to get FDOH to help for years, but until Shafey showed up, he says nobody took their concerns seriously. "When we had workers who had a problem, we always called him," Moreno says. "We don't feel that way now. And since his firing, we haven't expected much from FDOH." Public health colleagues have also expressed regret at Shafey's dismissal. University of Florida health professors Leslie Clarke and Joan Flocks wrote in a letter to former Health Secretary Robert Brooks, that Shafey brought "courage and objectivity" to the often controversial and heated public debate surrounding pesticide use, and they urged the department to reinstate him. The American Public Health Association publicized Shafey's ordeal in a Fall 2000 newsletter of its Occupational Health and Safety Section, and concluded that his tenacity in carrying out his public health duties led to reprisal against him. The International Society for Environmental Epidemiology, a professional organization representing more than 800 environmental scientists, endorsed Shafey's medfly spraying conclusions and said his termination "appears highly irregular." Soon after his sacking, Shafey sued FDOH for wrongful dismissal seeking reinstatement and damages under whistleblower provisions. Such legal actions tend to take time, and Shafey's case is no exception. His first hitch was a report by Occupational Safety and Health Administration inspector Dennis Russell on whether Shafey's complaint was justified. Russell concluded in July 2000 that the department did not retaliate against Shafey, although he talked only to the Florida health department and never tried to interview Shafey. After repeated attempts, Russell could not be reached for comment. Florida has pursued a concrete wall defense. Using a newly popular tactic, the state has invoked -- and the court has accepted -- a "sovereign immunity" defense, which basically says that states are immune from legal action by individuals. Though the doctrine was articulated more than a century ago, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have given states new power to use it, explains Michael Kohn, a lawyer representing the National Whistleblower Center. He calls it "a critical assault" on public health and environmental defense. Meanwhile, before the sovereign immunity decision Shafey amended his complaint to name Sharon Heber and David Johnson individually. Shafey has also filed another action claiming Heber, Johnson, former Secretary Brooks, and Governor Jeb Bush violated his constitutional rights to free speech and due process of the law. On November 1, 2001 the court ruled that Shafey's case can proceed. Meanwhile, Shafey's attorney William Moore of Henrichsen Siegel Moore laments the uphill trudge: "We've been waging this battle for one and a half years now, and we haven't been able to have any discovery yet in the case. I think it speaks volumes about the merits of Dr. Shafey's case and the fact that the state has done so much to try to avoid sitting down and talking about this situation." Harassment of public interest-minded health officials, scientists and technical experts is widespread and rising, says Mary DeVany, chair of the Industrial Hygiene Association's Social Concerns Committee. "There's a lot of pressure being put on people to modify, soften their tone, or hedge their reports to say something is possible instead of 'here's the evidence that it happened,'" she says. "We're talking about an increased acceptance of unethical behavior -- about supervisors and managers putting pressure on their technical professionals to perform unethical acts." De Vany characterizes this phenomenon as "the good corporate soldier syndrome." But the increasing allegiance to corporate interests among public health officials does little to help Florida farm workers or the Charmaine Kaisers, Dennis Robinsons, and other victims among us. source: http://www.tompaine.com/features/2001/11/16/index.html 25nov01 Original Title: PESTICIDE WARS The Troubling Story of Dr. Omar Shafey

Our son had a series of toxic

Our son had a series of toxic exposures in FL Perhaps this is a turn to honesty and intergrity Hope So For Robby

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.