Breaking: Bush* names Stephen Johnson new head of the EPA....

"24 year veteran of the EPA"

lets get busy and find the truth about this Stephen Johnson guy!

1981! Gee, who was stocking government offices with bureaucrats in 1981?

Color me surprised if this guy will be any friend of the environment.

He worked at Hazelton Lab and Litton Bionetics according to google search. Looks like the first one did studies for the tobacco industry.

http://www.epa.gov/adminweb/administrator/biography.htm

http://www.epa.gov/adminweb/administrator/biography.htm

At least he's actually a scientist . . . and Clinton gave him an award in '97. But shrub gave him one in '01 . . . so I think that makes the first one moot. I'm reserving judgment until I know more about him.

in 1969

a bit of history on this page


On the next slide, reprinted from the United States Congressional Record, Litton Bionetics is listed as the sixth leading biological weapons contractor for the U.S. Army in 1969.

The next slide is reprinted from the journal Nature, December 5, 1970, wherein you can see Dr. Gallo from the NCI as lead author, with co-investigators from Litton Bionetics, reporting on their studies of RNA-dependent DNA polymerase (more commonly known as "reverse transcriptase") in human acute leukemic cells. As you may recall, Dr. Gallo was the 1984 alleged 'discover' of HIV. It was later determined that he did not discover it alone, but with Luc Montagnier from France. Dr. Gallo was then credited with the co-discovery of the AIDS virus. Yet, the problem is, this unique enzyme that is central to the function of HIV/AIDS, and critical to leukemia virus activity as well, was being investigated before 1970. This is approximately fifteen (15) years prior to Dr. Gallo¹s alleged discovery of HIV, and almost nine (9) years before his is credited for the discovering the first leukemia virus


http://educate-yourself.org/vcd/vcshepbvaccineoriginofhivaids18jul02.shtml

~snip~

Stephen Johnson, of the EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, said the agency had no choice but to turn down the Aventis application. "Some of the world's leading experts on allergenicity and food safety told us there was not enough data to conclude with reasonable certainty that there was an acceptable level of that people could eat," he said. "That leaves us no room" to allow StarLink.

The EPA approved StarLink as animal feed in 1998, but did not allow it for human use because of concerns that it contained a protein that broke down slowly and could cause dangerous allergic reactions. A public interest group found StarLink's genetically modified protein in taco shells last fall, and it has been at the center of the often contentious international debate over crop biotechnology ever since.

Johnson said the agency was studying how it might respond to the panel's recommendation that it expand its study of possible allergic reactions to StarLink. The panel said the federal government should ask specialists to report suspicious reactions to corn -- which is not a common cause of allergic reactions -- and should expand research into the entire field of genetically improved crops and food allergies.

In addition, the panel said that "every attempt" should be made to further test two people who reported severe reactions and who have offered to undergo skin testing and to eat StarLink products under medical supervision.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0728-04.htm

It gets worse... read my post at the bottom... :scared:

a Defense contractor, which makes war toys for the sleaze boys


why am I not surprised.

http://www.ss.northropgrumman.com/pressrelease/news/00_12_21a.cfm

Looks like he likes our kids consuming Atrazine in our water systems...

4. EPA’s 2003 atrazine decision is risky to children

After finding high exposures to the pesticide atrazine, EPA’s decision -- now under challenge in court -- was to allow industry to monitor the watersheds of concern rather than immediately undertake substantial steps to lessen exposure.

The EPA adopted an “unprecedented” approach with this pesticide. Atrazine, one of the two most widely used agricultural pesticides in the United States, is mobile and persistent in the environment. It was recently banned by the European Union.

The Agency, after finding atrazine (which is frequently detected in drinking water) at “levels of concern” for infants in more than 30 water systems, asked industry to more frequently monitor the water systems of concern, rather than taking steps to protect these residents. According to the Los Angeles Times, the Agency’s approach to “entrust testing for water pollution from atrazine, one of the most heavily used weed killers in the country, to the chemical's manufacturer,” is “unprecedented.” Actions such as prohibiting the use of atrazine in a watershed will happen only after data are submitted showing that high exposures have occurred.

As a result, the EPA has been sued for allowing industry lobbyists undue influence over the pesticide’s safety assessment.

Toxicologically, the EPA agrees that atrazine exposures “have a common toxic effect, delayed puberty,” but this effect is described simply as a biomarker rather than a health effect with possibly profound impact on the growth of the developing organism.

Additionally, the EPA acknowledged inadequate data regarding children’s exposure in a home setting to this pesticide. In spite of these data gaps and concerns for children’s exposure to this pesticide, the Agency proposed lessening the FQPA safety factor for this pesticide.

One positive note is that the EPA did keep the children’s safety factor for dietary exposures “because of the absence of reliable evidence showing that a different safety factor would be protective of infants and children.”

Sources:

Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, National Academy of Sciences, 1993
“Toxicology Data Requirements for Assessing Risks of Pesticide Exposure to Children’s Health,” EPA policy paper, 1998
40 CFR § 158.340 Toxicology data requirements
EPA Fact Sheet on Pesticide Registration “Data Requirements,” Web document at: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/data.htm
Letter to EPA Administrator Browner from the Children's Environmental Health Network, May 11, 2000, downloadable from http://www.cehn.org/cehn/Browner.html
Letter to EPA Administrator Browner from the Children's Environmental Health Network, May 12, 1999, downloadable from http://www.cehn.org/cehn/dntltr.html
Natural Resources Defense Council staff notes summarizing DNT data, November 12, 2002
February 26, 2004 NGO letter to EPA Administrator Leavitt on “Finalization of Revisions to 40 CFR Part 158: Toxicity Testing Requirements to include developmental neurotoxicity testing,” downloadable from http://www.cehn.org/cehn/toxicity.html
“4 States Sue E.P.A., Citing Health Risk of Pesticide Residue,” The New York Times, September 16, 2003
July 8, 2002 letter from Jay Vroom of CropLife America and Allen James of RISE to EPA Assistant Administrator Stephen Johnson critical of speakers at NEETF educational forum on pesticides
August 13, 2002 letter from EPA Assistant Administrator Stephen Johnson to Jay Vroom of CropLife America and Allen James of RISE agreeing with their criticisms of NEETF educational forum on pesticides


http://www.cehn.org/cehn/reportpesticide.html

How the hell did we miss this one???


http://www.newfarm.org/news/2005/0205/021005/chem_people.shtml


~snip~
EPA avoids regulation of chemical experiments on humans


WASHINGTON, DC, February 8, 2005 (ENS): Experiments that intentionally dose human subjects with pesticides and other chemicals will be evaluated and approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a wide open case-by-case manner, the agency says in a draft notice for publication in the Federal Register.

The EPA is seeking public comment on this case-by-case method of considering experiments that involve human subjects in a notice dated February 2 and signed by Susan Hazen, acting assistant administrator in the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

The guidelines proposed by the agency are all voluntary and non-binding upon the experimenters, the EPA or the public.

The notice defers adopting legally binding protections for infants, fetuses, pregnant women, and prisoners that apply to all medical and drug testing overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Instead, EPA announces that it "indends to publish a proposed rule” at some time in the future.

~snip~

The EPA is forming a panel to review the study. In a January 24 letter to then EPA Deputy Administrator Stephen Johnson, the Environmental Working Group requests that the makeup of the panel be "fair and balanced."

"By that we mean that there should be no past or present pesticide or chemical industry employees, consultants or contractors on the review panel, and that there must be several individuals with strong public health credentials, including expertise in pediatric environmental health," wrote Environmental Working Group Senior Vice President Richard Wiles.

Johnson, who has defended the CHEERS study, has now been elevated to the position of EPA Acting Administrator, following the departure of former EPA Adminstrator Mike Leavitt January 28 to head the Department of Health and Human Services.

Wiles notes that his organization and others object to the "fundamentally unethical nature" of the CHEERS study design, which proposed to "stand by and simply observe what the study acknowledged to be high pesticide exposures to infants and small children."

<sarcasm>

"CHEERS which proposed to "stand by and simply observe what the study acknowledged to be high pesticide exposures to infants and small children." ...Dr Death

it is like the absolute scariest novel I have ever read that is REAL!!!

:cry:

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush elevated Stephen Johnson, the acting head of the Environmental Protection Agency, nominating him to the top job on a full-time basis on Friday. Bush called Johnson ``the first professional scientist to lead the EPA.''

Johnson, a career government employee who has been with the agency for 24 years, had become its temporary head six weeks ago. Bush announced the nomination in a ceremony in the White House Roosevelt Room.

``He knows the EPA from the ground up and has a passion for its mission,'' Bush said. If confirmed by the Senate, Johnson would become the first professional scientist to head the agency and would be its 11th administrator.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4841330,00.html

If he's been promoted by bush, he's done something really dirty to make bush proud of him. x(

I hope there is a hell, or something like it so Bush can burn for eternity alongside his 'buddies'.

Yuck!