Organophosphates Endanger Our Children’s Future
25 years ago, when Dr. Brenda Eskenazi and her UC Berkeley team at the School of Public Health began taking blood and urine samples of pregnant women and young children in the Salinas Valley, they figured that anyone living within one km (.6 mile) of organophosphate(OP)-treated fields was likely to be exposed via spraydrift.
Over time, they discovered that, as these same children entered the school environment, they began to display symptoms of learning disabilities, ADD, ADHD, autism, lower IQ and cerebral palsy. Decades later, this blue ribbon longitudinal study strongly links OP exposures to the above-mentioned struggles in school and later life, and living within one kilometer of OP applications has been a yardstick for potential pesticide exposure ever since.
What those CHAMACOS (little children in Spanish) studies did NOT have was a notion of what percentage of pregnant women in California lived with 1 km of OP-sprayed fields. A new study* found that, in 2021, on the average in our state, 7.5% of women (29,000 total) lived within one km of OPs, and overall OP use in the state had declined 54%.
However, in Monterey County, organophosphate use rose 26%, with 50% of pregnant women living within 1 km of OP sprays, the highest percentage in the state; in adjoining Santa Cruz County, 29% of pregnant women lived within 1 km of OPs, making it the 4th highest percentage in the state. This creates an alarming crisis in education and public health.
Miriam Rotkin-Ellman, the study’s lead author, said: “Organophosphates are really notorious for being tracked in on people’s shoes, and sticking in rugs years later,” she said. “The actual harm experienced by folks living in these danger zones is higher than what we’re estimating based on just one slice of the pesticide problem and one slice of the chemical soup that we know folks are experiencing.”
*For information on the study, visit bit.ly/4q9YlYO
Woody Rehanek
Watsonville
•••
Stolen signs suppress free expression
Several of my “No on Prop 50” yard signs have been pulled out or stolen, and I’ve noticed several others in the neighborhood vanishing as well. This goes beyond mere politics—it’s a direct assault on free speech. Stealing campaign signs constitutes vandalism and violates the law. Worse still, it conveys a chilling message: “Your voice doesn’t belong here,” eroding the very foundations of our democracy.
I harbor no resentment toward those responsible. I cherish my community, including those with differing views. I’d happily sit down over a cup of coffee to explain my perspective on this important issue. Agreement isn’t required, but mutual respect for one another’s right to express and be heard is essential.
Michael Lelieur
Santa Cruz County Republicans Central Committee Chairman
