WASHINGTON, Oct. 19, 2016 - The “voluntary departure” of one
of the scientists appointed to EPA’s Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) on the
carcinogenic potential of the pesticide glyphosate has forced the agency to
postpone the SAP meeting that was supposed to take place from Oct. 18-21, until
later this year.
In its initial announcement on Oct. 14,
EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs said the delay was “due to recent changes in the availability
of experts for the peer review panel” and that “given the importance of
epidemiology in the review of glyphosate’s carcinogenic potential, the agency
believes that additional expertise in epidemiology will benefit the panel and
allow for a more robust review of the data.”
The timing of the announcement raised questions about whether the delay
had been prompted by concerns raised in an Oct. 12 letter from CropLife America
(CLA). In the letter, the crop protection association objected to the
appointment of the lone epidemiologist on the panel, Peter Infante. CLA wants clearer
guidelines on how
epidemiology – the study and
analysis of the patterns, causes, and effects of health and disease conditions
in defined populations – should be used in evaluations of crop-protection
products.
Last month, CropLife America (CLA)
submitted a
letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Regina
McCarthy requesting that the Agency publish its proposed framework for the use
of epidemiological studies in human health risk assessments for the regulation
of crop protection products in the Federal Register. The letter is a follow-up
to a 2010
CLA petition to EPA – which the agency later denied - asking that the
Agency “promulgate a rule establishing clear and scientifically-sound criteria
for selection of epidemiological studies to be incorporated into the Office of
Pesticide Programs (“OPP”) risk assessment for a given pesticide product.”
“As we look back at the landscape of the
past 6-plus years since our petition and EPA’s denial of that petition, it is
our belief that much, much more has been said about the use of epi data, how it
is evaluated for scientific veracity, and whether epidemiological information
has had consistent and meaningful impacts on risk assessments. In fact, looking
at two recent EPA risk assessment approaches on two different chemicals, it
seems there is significant inconsistency in the EPA approach,” wrote CLA
President and CEO Jay Vroom
EPA, however, insisted that the delay on the glyphosate review and the
CLA’s most recent letter were unrelated.
“The meeting is being postponed due to the voluntary
departure of a panel member, and the agency was not able to backfill in a way
that would provide broad coverage and balance of experience for epidemiological
expertise,” EPA said in a statement. “The letter is a separate issue from (the)
decision to postpone. We will review the letter and respond appropriately.”
Ironically,
EPA would not say which member had “voluntary” left. Attempts to reach
Infante for comment, by both phone and email, were not successful.
#30
For more news, go to: www.Agri-Pulse.com
