Poop Whistleblower Needed at U.S. EPA

by Catherine J. Frompovich

Readers probably aren’t going to believe this one, but apparently it is true since it’s reported on Government Executive Fedblog as “EPA Employees Told to Stop Pooping in the Hallway.”

However, here’s the question this writer is grappling with regarding snitching on pooping in EPA hallways:

Who will come forward as a whistleblower regarding the poopster(s) at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency when whistleblowers always get the crappy end of the stick from government and the feds?

Also,

What type of ‘espionage’ action will the feds cite regarding crapping in hallways so that pooper whistleblowers can be placed in prison for several years?

Or,

Is some thoughtful EPA employee—or possibly a visitor—courageously leaving hints telling the EPA what’s wrong with it in how it’s fulfilling its mission?

Originally, the U.S. EPA was

Born in the wake of elevated concern about environmental pollution, EPA was established on December 2, 1970 to consolidate in one agency a variety of federal research, monitoring, standard-setting and enforcement activities to ensure environmental protection. Since its inception, EPA has been working for a cleaner, healthier environment for the American people. [1] [CJF emphasis added]

Admittedly, leaving a pile of fresh or aged poop in a hallway certainly is neither clean nor healthful. Isn’t anyone getting the message yet? To this writer, it’s quite apparent: EPA needs to clean up not only its hallways, but its act.

One way EPA can clean up its crappy mis-handling agenda is to get out of corporate back pockets. Another is to unload all deadwood it’s carrying and employ individuals who know something about clean up—not how to be adept in corporate brown-nosing, smooching and politics—and enforce proper pollution controls. Another area EPA must revisit is to get scientific facts correct about genetically modified seed and crop pesticides.

According to “EPA’s Regulation of Biotechnology for Use in Pest Management”

To address these challenges, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have shared responsibility for regulating agricultural biotechnology in the United States. In particular, EPA regulates pesticides created through biotechnology as a part of its regulatory jurisdiction over all pesticides marketed and used in the United States. As such, EPA has tailored its basic regulatory framework to fit the distinctive characteristics of these genetically engineered biological pesticides. [3] [CJF emphasis added]

In that capacity, EPA should be called on the carpet by Congress for inadvertently permitting inordinate amounts of glyphosate to be sprayed on GMO/GE crops growing in the fields because weeds have become resistant to glyphosate thereby requiring more glyphosate spraying. Here’s an example of what happens with crops:

A major concern is the development of glyphosate (Roundup) resistance in junglerice in California. Rotating glyphosate-resistant corn with other glyphosate-resistant crops such as cotton or alfalfa will only increase this problem. To help prevent the development of herbicide-resistant weeds and prevent weed shifts from occurring, it is important to incorporate tillage into your weed management practices, as well as alternating or tank-mixing herbicides that have different chemical modes of action. [4] [CJF emphasis added]

Another aspect of glyphosate, according to the Organic Consumers Association, is:

In May, the EPA announced a final ruling to increase, yet again, the allowed residue limits in food and animal feed of glyphosate, the key active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. Under the ruling, the allowed glyphosate level in animal feed will rise to 100 parts per million (ppm) and 40 ppm in oilseed crops. [5] [CJF emphasis added]

Why, EPA, are you allowing an increase of more parts per million of glyphosate in animal feed and oilseed crops, e.g., canola seeds in particular? Quite frankly, this writer has to ask, “Are you crazy?” That EPA final ruling alone demonstrates, if not documents, the exorbitant amount of glyphosate being sprayed on field crops.

And, here’s still another part of the credibility problem at EPA, as demonstrated at a congressional hearing, when EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy found herself in a hot seat of questions (video link) she apparently had trouble answering. Furthermore, the toxic CTS site in Asheville is just one of numerous apparent mis-handlings by the EPA.

After being asked for a commitment at the congressional hearing, McCarthy was non-committal. Here’s how that went:

McCarthy didn’t commit but said she would do her best. She did acknowledge the importance of addressing the CTS site saying, “This is actually a site that could significantly impact public health, so I think it’s important that we keeping moving this forward.” [2]

In my 2009 book, Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick, available on Amazon.com, I devoted Chapter 20, “The U.S. EPA: A Paper Tiger Without Teeth?”, to EPA’s shortcomings and listed several that readers may not know about and probably should.

Ultimately, finding the poopster(s) at EPA definitely is important; however, EPA’s cleaning up their crappy handlings of environmental and toxic issues is equally important—if not paramount. Please stop crappin’ around!

Notes:

[1] http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history
[2] http://www.wlos.com/shared/news/features/top-stories/stories/wlos_nations-top-epa-official-hot-seat-16734.shtml
[3] http://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/reg_of_biotech/eparegofbiotech.htm
[4] http://ucanr.edu/sites/DavidsPractice/?blogtag=glyphosate%20resistance&blogasset=59200
[5] http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50865/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=10886

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).