August 15, 2012
Larry E. Hammond, 2,4-D Task Force
Toxicological data has been misrepresented to express alarm and multiple health effects. Detection does not mean health concerns. To a large segment of the public and environmentalists, exposure to pesticides means harm. EPA guideline testing requires determining toxicological limits of a pesticide called hazard, thus those values are the focus of the alarmists. The NOAEL, nor the 100X lower RfD, nor realworld biomonitoring exposure is considered. Selected old publications and adverse findings are highlighted. In contrast there is a huge difference in the recent 2,4-D one-gen reproduction study; the male systemic toxicity NOAEL is ~13,000-fold higher than 2,4-D exposures reported in human biomonitoring studies. Also, there is a huge difference between the Agency’s 2,4-D reference dose and the CDC NHANES biomonitoring. After rigorous analysis of the relevant scientific data, expert panels and government agencies all reach the same conclusion: 2,4-D is acceptable for use according to label directions.