The article by Sisi Tang on Mrs. Obama’s garden warrants further elaboration on the issues with sewage sludge. Sewage sludge may well be a source of antibiotic resistant bacteria and other pathogens. Current standards from EPA do not control for these issues. Below is part of a memo that is going to high-level government officials. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the memo.
In this memo, I raise a number of questions impinging not only upon EPA, but also upon the jurisdictions of FDA, H&HS; and CDC.
I have found through non-EPA sources, a published EPA paper written by Meckes in 1982. ( www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?;arti=2418348pageindex=1) It discusses and demonstrates the production and dissemination of antibiotic resistance by sewage processing. Thus it is evident that EPA has known about the production and entrainment of antibiotic resistance in sewage and its byproducts since at least the early 1980
Posted by DrEdoMcGowan on Sep 24, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Well we have brought the Obama garden back again, in spite of the fact that biosolids were not the likely source of the lead found in the soil samples. The most recent analysis found lead at 14 ppm, very low for an urban soil. We have tried to address this issue and would suggest a look at http://www.mabiosolids.org for our thoughts and research on this matter.
The question of lead species, which I have not seen raised before, is one which I will need to research. A couple of abstracts discussing lead chloropyromorphite seem to suggest this is a less soluble form, and the issue of lead mineralogy would seem to relate more to direct ingestion than plant uptake. Again, the lead levels in the soil are very low, and likely not caused by biosolids addition. If you would like to see what Dr. Johnson has to say about the Obama garden lead, go to http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eddie-gehman-kohan/the-only-thing-toxic-abou_b_224854.html.
Why is Cornell the only university polled about the current state of the regulations? Cornell has a long-standing opposition to biosolids land application, however the majority of the research done on biosolids shows it to be a beneficial soil amendment which does not pose a danger to health or the environment. I also find it interesting that the reporter connected intersexed fish in the Potomac and biosolids runoff. I have not seen this research and would be interested in how she came to this conclusion. Biosolids land application, when done according to the federal and state requirements, will generate little or no runoff, and the work I have seen so far on estrogenic compounds in biosolids suggest they are retained in the soil and subject to degradation by the soil environment.
Regarding the reference to health effects, I would direct the reader to the very recent report by the Virginia Expert Panel on biosolids which found no credible evidence of health impacts from biosolids land application. You can find this report at
http://www.deq.state.va.us/info/biosolidspanel.html
Posted by Michael Wardell on Oct 3, 2009 at 5:47 PM
http://www.medindia.net/news/US-Judge-Orders-Compensation-of-Farmer-Ruined-by-Sludge-Used-as-Fertilizer-33915-1.htm
I am concerned about S 510
2749 passed the house
Michael Taylor is food safety czar
He was a vice president of Monsanto
politics co-opts science.
In the name of making food safe
a law will be passed to ruin small farmers
and make food less safe.
Posted by henry buehler on Oct 13, 2009 at 10:51 PM
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
The article by Sisi Tang on Mrs. Obama’s garden warrants further elaboration on the issues with sewage sludge. Sewage sludge may well be a source of antibiotic resistant bacteria and other pathogens. Current standards from EPA do not control for these issues. Below is part of a memo that is going to high-level government officials. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the memo.
In this memo, I raise a number of questions impinging not only upon EPA, but also upon the jurisdictions of FDA, H&HS; and CDC.
I have found through non-EPA sources, a published EPA paper written by Meckes in 1982. ( www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?;arti=2418348pageindex=1) It discusses and demonstrates the production and dissemination of antibiotic resistance by sewage processing. Thus it is evident that EPA has known about the production and entrainment of antibiotic resistance in sewage and its byproducts since at least the early 1980
Well we have brought the Obama garden back again, in spite of the fact that biosolids were not the likely source of the lead found in the soil samples. The most recent analysis found lead at 14 ppm, very low for an urban soil. We have tried to address this issue and would suggest a look at http://www.mabiosolids.org for our thoughts and research on this matter.
The question of lead species, which I have not seen raised before, is one which I will need to research. A couple of abstracts discussing lead chloropyromorphite seem to suggest this is a less soluble form, and the issue of lead mineralogy would seem to relate more to direct ingestion than plant uptake. Again, the lead levels in the soil are very low, and likely not caused by biosolids addition. If you would like to see what Dr. Johnson has to say about the Obama garden lead, go to http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eddie-gehman-kohan/the-only-thing-toxic-abou_b_224854.html.
Why is Cornell the only university polled about the current state of the regulations? Cornell has a long-standing opposition to biosolids land application, however the majority of the research done on biosolids shows it to be a beneficial soil amendment which does not pose a danger to health or the environment. I also find it interesting that the reporter connected intersexed fish in the Potomac and biosolids runoff. I have not seen this research and would be interested in how she came to this conclusion. Biosolids land application, when done according to the federal and state requirements, will generate little or no runoff, and the work I have seen so far on estrogenic compounds in biosolids suggest they are retained in the soil and subject to degradation by the soil environment.
Regarding the reference to health effects, I would direct the reader to the very recent report by the Virginia Expert Panel on biosolids which found no credible evidence of health impacts from biosolids land application. You can find this report at
http://www.deq.state.va.us/info/biosolidspanel.html
http://www.medindia.net/news/US-Judge-Orders-Compensation-of-Farmer-Ruined-by-Sludge-Used-as-Fertilizer-33915-1.htm
I am concerned about S 510
2749 passed the house
Michael Taylor is food safety czar
He was a vice president of Monsanto
politics co-opts science.
In the name of making food safe
a law will be passed to ruin small farmers
and make food less safe.
register a new account »Posting Security