Pesticide contamination in residences (crossposted)

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

 

I am sending this email from a new locale.  Like all housing, it has its upsides

and downsides - well, okay, some places have NO upsides.  However, the downside

to this place is that it was previously occupied by smokers but I hope that will

be manageable with air purifiers (when I can afford to purchase them).  The

housing is shared but I have a decent degree of latitude in providing all the

household products in use. 

 

Between June 9 and July 30 of this year, I rented a room in a house that served

as a residence, a B & B periodically,  and as a massage therapy office in western

Ma.  The owner, (also in residence),  had stated in the ad for the rental that

no scented candles would be tolerated and also requested a few other concessions

from renters.  It seemed like we would be able to negotiate any problems that

might arise in this shared housing scenario.  I was assured that this house had

not been exterminated and that a neighboring farm was operated without any

chemicals. 

 

Unfortunately, while there, I experienced CNS symptoms early on in which were of

great concern.  I couldn't figure out the origin and installed an air purifier

but gave notice as per our month to month agreement when I paid my second

month's rent.  The owner said I was welcome to stay on until I found a new place

if it took more than a month.  However, the second week in July, fumes began

entering the home from the meadow side of the structure which faced the

direction of the farm. There was no mistaking the kinds of symptoms they induced

as being from pesticides. 

 

Unable to find a new rental but too sick to stay in that location, I left. Test

results came in a week later from two sources.  Analysis of the air purifier

filter in my bedroom showed high levels of chlordane (heptachlor), a persistent

and highly toxic organochlorine pesticides that was banned back in the late

eighties.  Many homes show significant contamination today with this old

favorite used in agriculture and residentially for termites and ants etc.  A

gift that just keeps on giving...  The levels were three times the OSHA levels

for a workplace tolerance although, of course, they measure air samples in a

different manner.  Nonetheless, my testing constitutes proof

that concentrations are present which should not be considered 'normal'

background residual levels for this contaminant.

 

Second finding:  Significant plasma cholinesterase suppression in blood tests

indicating I was also being exposed to a current use organophosphate, likely

from the farm or other nearby external source.

 

As you are all aware, our current administration has a policy of non-enforcement

for any and all pesticide regs.  I filed inquiries with the Department of Health

and the Department of Food and Agriculture in Massachusetts but neither agency

would look into it citing very faulty science. The assertions (both of which

were negated by EPA personnel I contacted) were as follows:

 

1. The farm, located 0.4 miles from the residence, is simply TOO FAR away to

receive any significant drift from any pesticide applications.

 

2. Cholinesterase suppression should be at a 70% level of inhibition to be

considered significant. 

 

The former is nonsense and the latter represents a level of exposure that would

likely prove fatal.  These agencies also refused to contact the farmer or even

the home owner where I was located.  Neither dealt with the chlordane issues at

all and the local department of health never even answered my calls.

 

I filed a formal complaint then with the Dept of food and agriculture which

required them to contact the farmer.  However, law only requires reporting of

restricted use pesticides and not general use.  So, the only reported

application is from last April for a pre-emergent herbicide to be named later in

the final report, according to my last phone message from the investigator.  To

be clear, I did not want to file a complaint regarding the likely legal use of

pesticides - only an inquiry to determine what had happened to me and current

dangers to others in that community. However, I was forced to make this an

adversarial event in order to get even this much information rather than the

cooperative approach I undertook at the outset.

 

Since we will have a new administration with some regard for science and its

messages, I am persevering in my efforts to have houses tested for chlordane

along with other mandated toxicants such as asbestos, radon, lead and CO (varies

with locale).  No attention is paid to chlordane in this country despite the

widespread use it enjoyed and in spite of the fact that its legacy appears even

more persistent than DDT.

 

I have the attention of the EPA and some investigative reporters who have all

the details pertaining to these events.  The office of Senator Kerry assisted me

in filing for the inquiry although legislators are very bad at dealing with

enforcement issues.  They opt out saying it isn't their job but still monitor

cases like mine. I did ask for the return of my rent monies given the high

levels of contamination seen but was refused by the owner and small claims court

does not recognize me as an expert witness.  To qualify for return of monies

spent on renting this 'faulty' product (a room), I would have had to spend

thousands on experts just to reclaim a smaller outlay of monies.  I did not ask

for damages despite having to discard all my belongings due to contamination

since the owner did not apply the chemicals personally.  I have no quarrel with

the home-owner, despite their failure to inquire into actual farm practices. 

People now working on the

state and federal levels on this matter will be attending to the general issues

of this form of contamination, long ignored in our society.

 

Inflated housing prices are passed on to renters despite many homes being

contaminated beyond permissable levels.  Thus far, attention has mostly been

drawn to home owners with no thought for the many renters out there.  The New

York Times pointed to statistics showing that the more than half of mortgage

defaults were due to medical costs.  How many of those medical problems had

their origin in the dwellings themselves?  Full disclosure of likely

contaminants based upon location and history should be confirmed by testing done

by owners who rent their properties and permitted by prospective buyers who want

to know if their investment in real estate is sound.

 

Contact your legislators with the request to list chlordane among important

toxic chemicals for assessment in your region.  Additionally, request that all

farms be required to file notices with their local municipalities regarding the

use of both restricted and general use pesticides at least two weeks prior to

applications so that neighbors can know what is happening in their vicinity. 

Mosquito spraying is listed, howevere obscurely, on websites for towns and

cities or on the back pages of newspapers.  Why not agriculture as well?  It

does not make the practice illegal but provides information to neighbors as to

potential sources for health issues and allows them to narrow down the scope of

what to test for on their properties with regard to drift.

 

Drift onto another person's property is recognized in law as a problem. Of

course, drift into the body of another person is of less importance so owners,

rather than renters, will have at least have the privilege of contesting unsafe

practices. Ignorance of contamination will have to stop being adequate assurance

of impunity in real estate transactions if the cycle of passing sick houses on

from one party to another is ever to cease.  Some leases in NYC as I

recall, indemnify the owners from responsibility for any asbestos or chlordane

on the property.  If it is widespread enough to appear in some standard lease

forms, it is widespread enough to be causing massive problems in the population.

 

I used Pacific Agricultural Labs in Portland, Oregon, for the pesticide

analysis.  Always use an out of state lab for toxics analysis to avoid conflicts

of interest between labs and the home states certifying them for business.  A

lab in NYS advised me this was wise.

 

Regards,

Barbara  Rubin

[Guest guest]

In that part- (really, the farther north and east you go, the worse it

gets) of the country, there is a significant amount of mercury that

is deposited in the soil from coal burning etc. When soil is tilled,

leaves disturbed, etc, the total mercury vapor content in the air is

increased dramatically downwind of the tilling.

Its something to consider. Were the fields recently tilled?

Its quite possible a similar situation exists with organochlorine, as

it clearly does with lindane. (see below)

Also, fallen, rotting leaves contain mold toxins, and endotoxins in

very large quantities.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17707885

Sci Total Environ. 2007 Dec 15;388(1-3):379-88. Epub 2007 Aug 20.Click

here to read Links

A note on elevated total gaseous mercury concentrations downwind

from an agriculture field during tilling.

Bash JO, DR.

University of Connecticut, Department of Natural Resource

Management and Engineering, 1376 Storrs Road, Unit 4087, Storrs, CT

06269, United States. jesse.bash@...

Elevated mercury concentrations were measured at the University of

Connecticut's mercury forest flux tower during spring agricultural

field operations on an adjacent corn field. Concentrations at the

tower were elevated, a peak of 7.03 ng m(-3) over the background

concentration of 1.74+/-0.26 ng m(-3), during times when the

prevailing wind was from the direction of the corn field and during

periods when the soil was disturbed by tilling. Strong deposition to

the forest was recorded at the point of measurement when atmospheric

mercury concentrations were elevated. The strongest deposition rate

was a 1 hour maximum of -4011 ng m(-2) h(-1) following the initial

peak in atmospheric concentrations, Analyses of the meteorological

conditions and mercury content in agricultural soil, manure and the

diesel consumed in the tilling operation indicate that the source of

the mercury was from the agricultural tilling operations and it was

advected over the tower enriching the atmospheric concentrations above

the forest canopy leading to deposition. These results indicate that

agriculture operations resulting in a disturbed soil surface may be a

source of atmospheric mercury originating from the pool of mercury

bound in the soil. This represents a previously undocumented source of

mercury emissions resulting from anthropogenic activities.

PMID: 17707885 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Related Articles

* Accumulation and transformation of atmospheric mercury in soil.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12663184

Sci Total Environ. 2003 Mar 20;304(1-3):209-14.

Wang D, Shi X, Wei S.

College of Resources and Environment, Southwest Agricultural

University, Chongqing 400716, PR China. wangdy@...

Field investigation and simulating experiments were carried out

for understanding the accumulation and transformation of mercury in

soil in relation to the deposition of atmospheric mercury. A positive

correlation between the atmospheric mercury concentration and the

content of mercury in soil was observed in the field investigation,

with the correlation coefficient being 0.741** (n=52). The mercury

content in soil decreased with the increasing distance from the

mercury emission source. Simulated experiment demonstrated that the

higher the mercury content in air was, the higher was the amount of

mercury accumulated in soil, which was in accordance with the results

found from the field investigation. Transformation process occurred

once mercury deposited into the soil. Analyses of soil samples exposed

to air with mercury contents of 796.4+/-186.3 ng/m(3) for 2 months

indicated that 24.58-26.86% of total mercury deposited into the soil

existed in Hg(0) form, 0.10-0.12% in active form, 14.56-18.75% in

HCl-dissoluble form, 0.86-5.84% in organic-bound form and 52.64-55.29%

in residual form.

* Foliar exchange of mercury as a function of soil and air

mercury concentrations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15081712

Sci Total Environ. 2004 May 25;324(1-3):271-9.

ksen JA, Gustin MS.

Department of Environmental Resource and Sciences, University of

Nevada, Reno, Fleischmann Ag. Room 126, MS 370, Reno, NV 89557, USA.

Previous research has indicated that foliar mercury (Hg) flux is

bi-directional, with influence from both atmospheric and soil Hg. This

work investigated the role of soil and air Hg concentrations on foliar

Hg exchange using a single-plant gas-exchange system. The exchange of

Hg vapor with aspen seedlings grown in soil Hg concentrations of

0.03+/-0.01, 5.8+/-0.5, and 12.3+/-1.3 microg g(-1) and exposed to

atmospheric Hg concentrations of 2.4+/-0.5, 11.0+/-0.9, and 30.4+/-2.2

ng m(-3) was measured. At background atmospheric Hg concentrations of

2.4 ng m(-3), foliage released Hg at all three soil Hg concentrations

and fluxes ranged from 1.6 to 5.5 ng/m(2)/h. At higher atmospheric Hg

concentrations (>11 ng m(-3)), net deposition to foliage ranged from

-9 to -47 ng/m(2)/h, exhibiting increase uptake with higher air Hg

concentrations. Fluxes associated with aspen showed an immediate

response to changes in atmospheric Hg concentrations. Compensation

points, the air concentration where no net flux of Hg vapor occurred,

were 3-4 ng m(-3) in the light and 2-3 ng m(-3) in the dark for trees

grown in soils of 0.03 and 6 microg g(-1) Hg content, and 5-6 ng m(-3)

in the light and 2.5-3.5 ng m(-3) in the dark for trees grown in 12

microg g(-1) Hg soils.

* Modelling of the long-term fate of pesticide residues in

agricultural soils and their surface exchange with the atmosphere:

Part II. Projected long-term fate of pesticide residues.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17346778

Sci Total Environ. 2007 May 1;377(1):61-80. Epub 2007 Mar 8

Scholtz MT, Bidleman TF.

ORTECH Environmental, 2395 Speakman Drive, Mississauga, Ontario,

Canada L5K 1B3. tscholtz@...

In the first part of this paper, a simple coupled dynamic

soil-atmosphere model for studying the gaseous exchange of pesticide

soil residues with the atmosphere is described and evaluated by

comparing model results with published measurements of pesticide

concentrations in air and soil. In Part II, the model is used to study

the concentration profiles of pesticide residues in both undisturbed

and annually tilled agricultural soils. Future trends are estimated

for the measured air and soil concentrations of lindane and six highly

persistent pesticides (toxaphene, p,p'-DDE, dieldrin, cis- and

trans-chlordane and trans-nonachlor) over a twenty-year period due to

volatilization and leaching into the deeper soil. Wet deposition and

particle associated pesticide deposition (that increase soil residue

concentrations) and soil erosion, degradation in the soil (other than

for lindane) and run-off in precipitation are not considered in this

study. Estimates of the rain deposition fluxes are reported that show

that, other than for lindane, net volatilization fluxes greatly exceed

rain deposition fluxes. The model shows that the persistent pesticides

studied are highly immobile in soil and that loss of these highly

persistent residues from the soil is by volatilization rather than

leaching into the deeper soil. The soil residue levels of these six

pesticides are currently sources of net volatilization to the

atmosphere and will remain so for many years. The maximum rate of

volatilization from the soil was simulated by setting the atmospheric

background concentration to zero; these simulations show that the

rates of volatilization will not be significantly increased since soil

resistance rather than the atmospheric concentration controls the

volatilization rates. Annual tilling of the soils increases the

volatilization loss to the atmosphere. Nonetheless, the model predicts

that, if only air-soil exchange is considered, more than 76% of

current persistent pesticide residues will remain after 20 years in

the top 7 cm of annually tilled soils. In contrast, lindane is

relatively mobile in soil due to weaker binding to soil carbon and

leaching of lindane into soil is the main removal route for current

lindane residues near the soil surface. The model predicts that the

soil is a sink for lindane in the atmosphere and that soil residue

levels of lindane in the surface soil are determined by a balance

between dry gaseous deposition to the soil from the atmosphere and

leaching from the surface soil into the deeper soil where degradation

is the dominant loss route. The model suggests that deposition of

lindane from the atmosphere will sustain residues in the soil and, in

the absence of fresh applications of lindane to the soil, eliminating

lindane from the atmosphere would lead to a rapid decline of lindane

residues in agricultural soils of the southern U.S.

etc...

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:10 AM, B.R. <agasaya@...> wrote:

> Hi All,

>

> I am sending this email from a new locale. Like all housing, it has its

> upsides and downsides