In what can only be described as weird science, pesticide manufacturers are exposing human subjects to potentially dangerous doses of their toxic products. Their hope is that these "volunteers" won't show ill effects and government officials will weaken health standards for many pesticides.

It's almost hard to know where to begin in pointing out the problems with this practice. In short, these tests are unsafe, unethical and unscientific.

In 1998, the Clinton administration agreed and banned the use of human pesticide tests in setting public health standards for pesticides. Now, at the behest of the pesticide industry, the Bush administration is on the verge of reversing this ban. PennPIRG is working to stop them.

Human Testing Is Inherently Unsafe
Pesticide companies like Amvac Chemical have paid "volunteers" to drink or otherwise expose themselves to doses of toxic pesticides, including one derived from World War II nerve gases, often at levels far above those considered to be safe.

Human pesticide test subjects are monitored for a short period of time, often as little as a few days. Yet the effects of exposure to dangerous pesticides often take years to manifest themselves.

Human Testing Is Unethical
Unlike patients in clinical drug studies, human subjects don't benefit from being dosed with toxic pesticides. That's one reason why human pesticide testing violates several international agreements, including the Nuremberg Code.

Worse, a congressional analysis showed that companies repeatedly misled people about the nature of the pesticides being tested on them, dismissed negative test results, and failed to gain the proper consent of their volunteers.

Human Testing Is Unscientific
The results of human pesticide tests are inconclusive at best and highly suspect. As Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group has said, "We question whether short-term feeding studies, conducted on a handful of healthy adults, can form the basis of any assurance that pesticides are safe for tens of millions of infants and children."

Meghan Purvis, from PennPIRG's federal lobbying office, is working to stop the Bush administration from using human pesticide tests to weaken public health standards.

Tell the Bush Administration: Restore the Ban on Human Pesticide Tests
The Bush administration is now considering whether to allow human pesticide tests in the setting of health standards for pesticides, reversing a Clinton administration ban.

These tests are unsafe for the subjects, fail to meet basic ethical standards, and produce highly questionable science. Their only purpose: To make it easier for pesticide manufacturers to delay or attack health standards.

PennPIRG has joined a nationwide coalition of consumer and environmental groups in opposing the Bush administration's policy. But we need your help.