It should be science that drives the decision on human tests, not emotion, McConnell said. What we're seeing now is some political science. Seeking guidance, EPA officials in December convened the special scientific panel of medical researchers and ethicists. It was originally scheduled to release a report in March. However, the panel,s inability to reach a consensus has delayed the EPA,s efforts to write a policy governing the tests.
Some members hope the panel,s work expresses their concerns.
There was a lot of alarm expressed on this panel about how these tests could be used, said Dr. Herb Needleman, a pediatrician at the University of Pittsburgh and a leading researcher on the effects of lead on children. There was widespread feeling these kinds of human studies should be done only in the most compelling of situations. The focus on pesticides comes from the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act, passed unanimously by Congress and aimed at making sure the diets of children younger than 12 are better protected from pesticide residues. The EPA measures the risk by weighing eating habits and pesticide residues on foods against the pesticide levels considered safe for human consumption. Researchers try to find how small an amount of pesticide can be ingested by lab animals such as mice, rats and dogs without showing ill effects.