Atrazine - Let's Get It Banned! (Save the Frogs Day)

[Omaha Steve]

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6000/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2834




Atrazine - Let's Get It Banned!

Please sign the petition below to get the harmful herbicide Atrazine banned!

Atrazine is one of the world's most common pesticides: over 80 million pounds of it were used on American crops last year, and it has been in use for 50 years. This harmful pesticide turns male frogs into females at concentrations as low as 2.5 parts per billion. Atrazine causes cancer in laboratory mammals and developmental problems in fish. Atrazine is the most commonly detected pesticide in rainwater, groundwater and tapwater in the USA.

Frogs and humans share half our DNA, so Atrazine can't be good for humans either. That's likely why the European Union banned the harmful pesticide in 2004. But the company that produces it, Syngenta (based in Switzerland!) has $11 billion in revenues, and has a huge lobby to keep Atrazine on the market in the USA.

Frogs have been disappearing worldwide in recent years. SAVE THE FROGS! needs your help to ensure Atrazine gets banned by the 3rd Annual Save The Frogs Day (April 29th, 2011)!

Atrazine is the 21st century's DDT: let's get it banned!

Dear Administrator Jackson,
Amphibian populations worldwide are rapidly disappearing, and pesticides are a primary contributing factor, as they inevitably end up in the water bodies where amphibians live and breed. I am writing to urge you to federally ban the sale and use of Atrazine in the United States. Abundant scientific evidence shows that this harmful herbicide can wreak havoc on a variety of wildlife species, at concentrations as low as 2.5 parts per billion. It is unfathomable to allow the use of a chemical that can so easily turn male frogs into females, as has been shown to be the case with Atrazine.

Humans and frogs share half our DNA. For the sake of the world's remaining frog populations, and for the health of ourselves and our children, I urge the United States Environmental Protection Agency to place a federal ban on the sale and use of Atrazine.

Thank you for your consideration.

TAKE ACTION HERE: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6000/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=2834

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Will be sharing this...Thanks for the info.

[Omaha Steve]

2. Kick

[madokie]

3. Does it have a more common name

something I might recognize?

[MajorChode]

6. Probably not

It's an agricultural use herbicide.

http://www.commonchemistry.org/ChemicalDetail.aspx?ref=1912-24-9

[depakid]

4. Atrazine is truly nasty stuff

that ought to have been phased out years and years ago.

[MajorChode]

5. You are right. Atrazine is the 21st century's DDT

Just like Atrazine, the eco-hysteria around DDT reached frantic levels. However, most of the junk science which condemned it back in the 60's has been fully debunked even before DDT was banned. That sad part is, lots of notable scientists questioned the available research on DDT at the time and nobody listened. After the worldwide agricultural ban DDT became largely unavailable, 20 million African kids died of malaria that probably could have been saved if DDT had been widely available. After 30 years, Greenpeace and the WWF finally admitted they fucked up:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E3DF1E39F93BA35752C0A9639C8B63

The study that concluded Atrazine was harmful to frogs is highly suspect. Numerous subsequent studies have been unable to recreate the same results, which is why the EPA has concluded that Atrazine is not likely to cause cancer in humans or reproductive problems with frogs. In other words, the Tyrone Hayes study was junk science. It also defied all reason. Just as you said, Atrazine has been in use for decades. Why is it just recently being alleged that Atrazine affects frogs?
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/atrazine/atrazine_update.htm#amphibian

Banning Atrazine would have zero proven health or environmental benefit. What it would definitely do is raise the price of food which disproportionately affects the poor. There is a price to be paid for eco-hysteria which is why people should be skeptical of making decisions based on junk science.