Children are considered a vulnerable population, especially when it comes to being subjected to environmental exposures. Children in our society suffer the most from the plaguing environmental issues that invades our society because they are more susceptible and carry more sensitivities relating to various substances. Children are affected by pesticides exposure via food and environmental elements and are more susceptible to adhering to the adverse effects. According to the Center for Disease Control& Prevention between the ages of six and eleven have the highest levels of pesticides in their bodies when compared to any other age category. Children eat more, drink more and breathe more and are still developing, therefore they are more susceptible to the effects of pesticides. Depending on what type of substances they are exposed to, the chemical(s) may play a critical role in determining the effects that may have a negative occurrence in their lives. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) states that because children have a higher surface volume ratio than adults, any exposure to pesticides may affect them proportionately more. The most current legislation that concerning this issue is the H.R.432: Ban Poisonous Additives Act of 2011.
Who is affected by the issue?
This issue affects a variety of people. Obviously affects the child, physically, mentally and emotionally as well as the parents. The community is also affected because it can cause anxiety and worry among other families who share the same community because of the result.The child loses because they end up suffering from the consequences of being exposed to such poison, but it’s sad because they have no choice and they have no voice. Parents and families lose because it brings about frustration and stress.
This issue affects a variety of people. Obviously affects the child, physically, mentally and emotionally as well as the parents. The community is also affected because it can cause anxiety and worry among other families who share the same community because of the result.The child loses because they end up suffering from the consequences of being exposed to such poison, but it’s sad because they have no choice and they have no voice. Parents and families lose because it brings about frustration and stress.
Who gains, and what do they gain?
People who work in agriculture gain because it secures their jobs, farmers gain because it keeps them in business, the government because they have the ability to regulate laws for capital gain. Grocery stores where chemically induced foods are being sold may also be affected. Last but not least, the producers of the pesticides gain from this issue because they are continuously making money from their products.
People who work in agriculture gain because it secures their jobs, farmers gain because it keeps them in business, the government because they have the ability to regulate laws for capital gain. Grocery stores where chemically induced foods are being sold may also be affected. Last but not least, the producers of the pesticides gain from this issue because they are continuously making money from their products.
What are the consequences of the issue?
Pesticides in school age children may pose immediate effects such as nausea, dizziness, respiratory irritation, asthma and headaches. More detrimental effects consist of developmental issues, reproductive problems as well as learning disabilities like ADHD, Autism, and cancer. Because of the effects that can occur from exposure, families suffer, parents in particular. For instances they may lose pay from their jobs if because they have to tend to their sick child. This issue may pose implications to families as far as expenses in health care; medicines, doctor bills. Not just from a monetary perspective, it causes frustration and anger on parents and family members because no one wants to see their child suffer especially from something that is out of their control.
Pesticides in school age children may pose immediate effects such as nausea, dizziness, respiratory irritation, asthma and headaches. More detrimental effects consist of developmental issues, reproductive problems as well as learning disabilities like ADHD, Autism, and cancer. Because of the effects that can occur from exposure, families suffer, parents in particular. For instances they may lose pay from their jobs if because they have to tend to their sick child. This issue may pose implications to families as far as expenses in health care; medicines, doctor bills. Not just from a monetary perspective, it causes frustration and anger on parents and family members because no one wants to see their child suffer especially from something that is out of their control.
What is the economic impact of the issue?
Parents more than likely bear the economic costs that result from their child being sick. This may include parents paying for medical care, medicine and missing days from work. Depending on the living situation of the suffering family, the government may also bear economic costs if the family cannot afford private health care, they may need governmental assistance for care. However, if the act was passed, health care systems would benefit because there will be less medical attention and treatment required. The government would also benefit because they could save money by not having to allocate money out to for medical assistance.
What is the social impact of the issue?Parents more than likely bear the economic costs that result from their child being sick. This may include parents paying for medical care, medicine and missing days from work. Depending on the living situation of the suffering family, the government may also bear economic costs if the family cannot afford private health care, they may need governmental assistance for care. However, if the act was passed, health care systems would benefit because there will be less medical attention and treatment required. The government would also benefit because they could save money by not having to allocate money out to for medical assistance.
The social costs of the issue are that society may end up paying with their taxes, for health care for the children in which this issue affects. Community schools and day cares may be affected by enrollment issues associated with such issues. Because if children exposed to hazardous chemicals in a school setting, whether it is through pesticides in the foods in schools or the environmental elements of the outdoors, parents may be skeptical about sending their children into an environment that may pose such risks to their children. The social benefits of having pesticides are that it’s cheaper for the school system to purchase food that contains these chemicals. Also from an environmental perspective, the pesticides help keep away pests and rodents that may otherwise be an issue in the public settings.
What are the barriers?
Some of the barriers to the issue may be making a strong case concerning the issue. Not having enough parental and community support on the matter. Some parents may not believe that the issue warrants such attention because of their trust in the governmental system. Companies may very well advocate that the chemicals used in their products are safe. Communities may not want such issues to be emphasized towards their community’s reputation.I believe that some of the barriers can be overcome if there is enough grass root advocacy on the matter. If the sufficient research conducted is presented in manner that showcases the severity,implications of the matter and how the issue not only affects the individual but have effects on the community as well, parents and community leaders, I believe, will help with the break down of those barriers.
What are the resources?
One main resources needed is money. With money, more attention can be diverted towards this issue for research and coming up with ways to counteract the problem. With money, there could more environmental friendly schools implemented as well as chemical free food served to children. Money could be generated by fundraising for this cause or maybe writing grants to philanthropist who would be willing to invest in resolving this issue. Also we would need to show the statistics as evidence that demonstrates the seriousness of the problem.
What is the history of this issue?
In 1993, the National Research Council released a report that focused on the scrutiny of organophosphate pesticides exposure in the diets of infants and young children. This scrutiny led to the passing of Food Quality Protection act of 1996. This act was passed because the aggregated residue that was found in foods of the diets of young children caused intolerance of foods and toxicities that caused unknown effects at the time. Because of the increasing safety concerns of the pesticide, many of organophosphates were phased out that were once used. In August 1999, EPA announced cancellation of major "kid’s food" uses of the organophosphate (OP) pesticide methyl parathion and significant restrictions on the use of another OP, azinphos methyl. Scientific data indicate that these uses do not provide the extra measure of protection FQPA demands for children.
Allies & Opponents
In this case In order to create a common ground for allies and opponents there would need to be a law mandated or stipulates that the foods (especially kid friendly foods) that are given to children in schools and public settings should be labeled with an indication that the food contains pesticides and school affiliates should give notice to parents. If its environmental such as a playground, there should be some indication that the grass near the playground has been sprayed with pesticides. This way, it’s the parents’ choice on whether or not they allow their child to be at risk.
How do I want policy-makers to vote on this proposed policy?
I want policy makers to vote yes to ending pesticide exposure among this particular vulnerable population. I feel there is something that needs to be done because children do not have a voice and as the research indicated, they are the most susceptible population in reference to this issue. Children trust in authoritative figures therefore there should be a law mandated to ensure their safety in this aspect as well. Even though children may not be aware of the issue at hand, they deserve to have safe, clean foods to eat as well as a safe,clean environment to grow in.
In 1993, the National Research Council released a report that focused on the scrutiny of organophosphate pesticides exposure in the diets of infants and young children. This scrutiny led to the passing of Food Quality Protection act of 1996. This act was passed because the aggregated residue that was found in foods of the diets of young children caused intolerance of foods and toxicities that caused unknown effects at the time. Because of the increasing safety concerns of the pesticide, many of organophosphates were phased out that were once used. In August 1999, EPA announced cancellation of major "kid’s food" uses of the organophosphate (OP) pesticide methyl parathion and significant restrictions on the use of another OP, azinphos methyl. Scientific data indicate that these uses do not provide the extra measure of protection FQPA demands for children.
Allies & Opponents
In such situations, parents, health care providers, health insurance companies and school administrators and the EPA may be in support the issue. On the other hand opponents of the issue may include, grocery stores, pesticide producers, schools may also be opposed to the issue because they may not want to expend money to implement programs to accommodate the disabilities that may result from children being affected by pesticides ingestion.
How can you involve allies and opponents in advocacy efforts?In this case In order to create a common ground for allies and opponents there would need to be a law mandated or stipulates that the foods (especially kid friendly foods) that are given to children in schools and public settings should be labeled with an indication that the food contains pesticides and school affiliates should give notice to parents. If its environmental such as a playground, there should be some indication that the grass near the playground has been sprayed with pesticides. This way, it’s the parents’ choice on whether or not they allow their child to be at risk.
How do I want policy-makers to vote on this proposed policy?
I want policy makers to vote yes to ending pesticide exposure among this particular vulnerable population. I feel there is something that needs to be done because children do not have a voice and as the research indicated, they are the most susceptible population in reference to this issue. Children trust in authoritative figures therefore there should be a law mandated to ensure their safety in this aspect as well. Even though children may not be aware of the issue at hand, they deserve to have safe, clean foods to eat as well as a safe,clean environment to grow in.
This is an excellent topic to become more aware of and to do something about. Pesticides for adults is dangerous enough but when it comes to kids, they are more vulnerable than adults because they often cannot choose where they live and what they do etc. because their parents or guardians make those choices for them. Pesticides not only will have immediate effects on children but long term effects which is even more scary.
ReplyDeleteHey Chnice!
ReplyDeleteAs a mother of young ones yourself, I can see why you posted on this topic. when you mentioned how the pesticides are more toxicly concentrated in a child's body, it reminded me of a statement that I heard at the Food Inc. presentaiton on campus. According to Robert Kenner who created Food Inc, a pesticide is a 1,000 times more potent to the fetus than the actual mother! YIKES.
I'm glad you commented on poisonous additives that are affecting Autism. I remember seeing a billaboard that said the rates of Autism are now 1 in 1,000 compared to the 1 in 100,000 a couple of decades ago. I know that may be due to more advanced diagnoses' but I have a hunch that pesticides might be a contributing factor.
Thanks for the info
~Greenmachine Shannon f
Wow what a scary topic to learn about! I know that there are so many pesticides out there, but I'm sure when I was a little kid I never understood the concept. It's really hard for me to understand how anyone would think that letting a child consume chemicals is ok. I hope that this bill gets passed...kids shouldn't have to worry about if the food they are eating is full of chemicals or not.
ReplyDelete