WDFW STILL CLUELESS ON HOOF ROT

[bbarnes]

I'm here to inform all sportsman our ELK herd,is in trouble.The WDFW met today with the TAC GROUP and after a 7 hour meeting,we learned nothing more than we already knew NOTHING.How could this be it's the worlds best scientists,vets and micro biologists.There trying to say its treponema,but admitted it could only be a secondary disease.Also with no public comment allowed,the public couldn't including politicians couldn't comment, or ask questions.We did hear again of there plan to cull the herd, in numerous effected areas.My question is why cull them,if they don't know what it is ?Also why kill them if there saying there OK,for us to hunt and eat?If your putting your faith in this group to figure this out,think again.All of us that have been involved know ,what the real cause is.My biggest concern is for all the sportsman that have paid for tags, and are going to find out there's nothing left to hunt.To say the least after knowing about this, this long and doing nothing,we need action from our law makers not words.

[kentrek]

 


Thank you for your efforts and keeping us informed....I feel they are ten years late too this game....its hard to quantifying the loss of a situation like this but I have no problem calling it a tragedy

[ELKBURGER]

That is very disappointing to hear. Did they even say the word 'Herbacide' as a contributing factor?

[HntnFsh]

That is very disappointing to hear. Did they even say the word 'Herbacide' as a contributing factor?

I dont think they will touch that one with a ten foot pole. Doesnt fit their agenda!

[ELKBURGER]

That is very disappointing to hear. Did they even say the word 'Herbacide' as a contributing factor?

I dont think they will touch that one with a ten foot pole. Doesnt fit their agenda!

If they do not allow public comments then they can stick to thier agenda. We need to keep the pressure on them. We know thier agenda will yield nothing but wasted time and money and a continued decrease in the elk herd.

[pianoman9701]

Was Jon there yesterday, Bruce? I got your message this AM.

[Curly]

They don't like the idea of dealing with the herbicide issue, and the public keeps pushing for something to be done about herbicides, so you can understand why they wouldn't want public input.

Actually, I'm surprised they allowed the public to listen in on the meeting.  Why would they even allow that?

Frankly, I don't see them getting anywhere on the issue, especially if they refuse to even think that herbicides could be a cause.  They seem to be too closed minded to really figure this out.  They are going to be chasing their tail around in circles for quite some time.  They will have meeting after meeting and the elk will continue to suffer.   

[bbarnes]

Yes John Gosh was there he recorded the whole event,and took lots of notes as I did.I don't think some of people ,on the committee have a agenda.It was funny when you tried to give them another perspective,they didn't have time to listen.Also Boom Mora was able to have 20 minutes,to talk about his theory LEPTOSPIROSIS.In my opinion his theory,fits best with the limping elk.All of us who have witnessed OUR sick elk realize,they all don't have overgrown hoofs when they limp.It seems there is a lot more limping, with normal hoofs in my opinion.The WDFW says it TREPONEMA but as we heard yesterday,this is a secondary disease that doesn't inflame joints.There was also a consultant there I'm sure was a LOBBYIST for chemical company's,to explain effects on wildlife.I learned they have done no test on wildlife,not big game anyway,and had no info of what happens when there mixed together.I witnessed lots of disagreements, and the WDFW trying to lead them down the path to blame this on dairy farmers in the area it started.Thank god there were some VETS from that area,that weren't buying it.So now we all go into another hunting season with no answers getting a ROTTEN DEAL.

[bbarnes]

They weren't going to allow the public to be there, until they were shown the state law.Also CURLEY the elk won't be suffering long,there plan is to kill the sick ones,but how do you tell which ones are sick.By there own admission they don't know which ones are sick,or the carriers.Some of the samples tested from elk with deformity didn't, test positive for TREPONEMA.As a matter of fact only 4 did out of 43 elk seems a little suspect to me.

[bbarnes]

This is the message I will be sending to all of the law makers in the effected areas.

I know we have had our differences regarding hoof rot and the management of our elk herds.  But, I always felt that we wanted the same thing, to solve the hoof rot problem, and create a healthy heard for our children's future.  But, after spending seven hours today listening to the TAG meeting I have to ask,  is the best WDFW has to offer?  If so I feel the future of our states elk herd is in big trouble.  So, once again I find myself asking you my State law maker to step in, take action and do something about this problem.  It was obvious to that the WDFW's theory of Treponema bacteria, derived from the dairy industry was not being accepted.   And just an  FYI,   they will never be able to sell this to the public,  treponema is a secondary issue no the primary issue, as was pointed out clearly today by the TAG group.   If the WDFW thinks there going to kill off the herd to cover up the real issue your constituency is never going to go stand for it.   Action should have been taken years ago when the disease was first reported, instead of the WDFW's wait and see, do nothing policy.   Our rural community's are facing economic disaster with reduced hunters and new private timber company fee access.  So, again I ask you Mr. Orcutt, to step up, get involved and do something to help the voters in your district.  Please do not let the WDFW manage our herd into extinction,  get on board with live animal testing.  Become proactive, the future of all the elk in SW Washington are counting on you. 

[Curly]

Is Dr. Mora going to be able to implement any of his ideas to help see if his theories are correct?

And, when wdfw kills limping elk, are they going to be donating the meat to a food bank?  Afterall, the meat is supposed to be fine according to them.  I wouldn't think they'd need the entire elk for whatever testing they may do.  So, it will be interesting to see what they do with the meat.

[bbarnes]

They need to do live study's when the animal dies the HOST dies with it.Until this is done i don't think will know the cause.Also soil samples,blood samples,and a third party to test these things that has no dog in the fight.

[bobcat]

It will be interesting to see the decrease in the number of west side elk tags that were sold this year.

I have not hunted the east side for elk since 2005, but I bought an east side tag this year, partially due to the access fees, but the primary reason being the elk hunting in SW Washington is not that good anymore. And even if you do kill an elk, you don't know if it will be fit to eat.

It just might take a dramatic drop in elk tag sales for the WDFW to really begin taking this seriously.

But then I don't really know, maybe they are doing all they can to solve this issue. They've definitely stepped it up a notch since last year, no doubt about that.

[t6]

Im sure that they knew they had to open the meeting.  Pretty sad that they made an effort to close it until the issue was pushed. 

[t6]

Now that their own advisers have told them that Treponema Bacteria is not the cause of the "Hoof Rot" if anything a secondary issue, we should help WDFW out by starting a "What our next guess" Contest. 

Remember.... It can't be anything that is communicable to humans and it can't be related in any way to toxic chemicals. 

It may require some thought... it took WDFW nearly 20 years of observation, and the last five in "Intensive Study" to come up with their first three guesses. 

Lets see what we can come up with.  We can submit our list to WDFW and if they use one of them, we'll declare a King or something. 

 

[Mfowl]

It will be interesting to see the decrease in the number of west side elk tags that were sold this year.

I have not hunted the east side for elk since 2005, but I bought an east side tag this year, partially due to the access fees, but the primary reason being the elk hunting in SW Washington is not that good anymore. And even if you do kill an elk, you don't know if it will be fit to eat.

It just might take a dramatic drop in elk tag sales for the WDFW to really begin taking this seriously.

But then I don't really know, maybe they are doing all they can to solve this issue. They've definitely stepped it up a notch since last year, no doubt about that.

I wonder how many other hunters share your thoughts on this. I'm curious/dreading what the crowds will be like on the eastside during the general seasons. I am also wondering with the increased draw tags in many of the Yakima GMU's for this season if the number of hunters putting in for those tags has swelled.

[bobcat]

Yeah, I'm hoping not too many applied for the east side muzzleloader cow elk permit that I applied for!

[billythekidrock]

Yeah, I'm hoping not too many applied for the east side muzzleloader cow elk permit that I applied for!

Same here. Maybe I will go with you next year.

[bobcat]

Yeah, I'm hoping not too many applied for the east side muzzleloader cow elk permit that I applied for!

Same here. Maybe I will go with you next year.

We will have to wait and see if there are any elk left on the east side for next year. After the enormous number of cow permits this year, along with the Yakama tribe slaughtering them all winter, I don't have high hopes. Might have to head to Idaho next year.

[t6]

As a wetsider, we've lost access, and game numbers.  No way to justify buying a hunting license in WA.  Next year I will be out of state. 

[motg9_6]

it really surprises me the lack of drive to solve the issue. its seems a few autopsies and and couple live samples the worlds best scientists/vets/etc could easily figure out the issue. It seems to me there is something political going on here with WDFW and we are all going to suffer. (my theory, if there's not game to hunt then there's no reason for us to have guns, just another way to make us dependent on the government.)

i was really optimistic when i herd RMEF was getting involved but they seem to be just going along with WDFW. If you are a RMEF member i suggest sending emails letting them know the disappointment, i blow up there facebook page every once i awhile also. they are the only group with the pull and backing to get anything done.

[bobcat]

I think it's about time to get the Sierra club involved. I'll be writing some letters this weekend when I have time.

[motg9_6]

I think it's about time to get the Sierra club involved. I'll be writing some letters this weekend when inhave time.

i have really mixed feelings about the Sierra Club, i think they have their own agenda and may not be interested in protecting our elk to let the hunters get a chance and tagging one. i think they would rather see no hunting at all.  at this point i think their pressure to wdfw would be great but im not sure they are the kind of group that we want taking the lead on this issue. i would rather see Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Mule Deer Foundation or a foundation supported by hunters and conservatives together tackle this issue.

[pianoman9701]

it really surprises me the lack of drive to solve the issue. its seems a few autopsies and and couple live samples the worlds best scientists/vets/etc could easily figure out the issue. It seems to me there is something political going on here with WDFW and we are all going to suffer. (my theory, if there's not game to hunt then there's no reason for us to have guns, just another way to make us dependent on the government.)

i was really optimistic when i herd RMEF was getting involved but they seem to be just going along with WDFW. If you are a RMEF member i suggest sending emails letting them know the disappointment, i blow up there facebook page every once i awhile also. they are the only group with the pull and backing to get anything done.

RMEF is willing to give money to help elk, which is a good thing. They are unwilling to get involved in a political battle, which is what is necessary for anything to happen on this. It was the same with the wolf issue in our state. When I wrote to Mr. Allen about them being completely absent during the wolf plan hearings, he voiced concerns about butting heads with the the DFW and closing any open doors they already had there. I understand and I'm disappointed.

There's been very compelling evidence provided from a CDC scientist and another farrier who's consulted with scientists. Yesterday, Dr. Mora was supposed to give a presentation to the DFW in Vancouver. If anyone was there, please give a recap. Up to this point, I believe they've been largely ignored and I'm afraid that the only reason they're listening to Dr. Mora at all is that so many of us have screamed at them for not doing so previously. This has to do with bags and bags of money to politicians, long time relationships with powerful corporations, and people who'd possibly like to fix but have their hands tied. It's very frustrating.

[pianoman9701]

It will be interesting to see the decrease in the number of west side elk tags that were sold this year.

I have not hunted the east side for elk since 2005, but I bought an east side tag this year, partially due to the access fees, but the primary reason being the elk hunting in SW Washington is not that good anymore. And even if you do kill an elk, you don't know if it will be fit to eat.

It just might take a dramatic drop in elk tag sales for the WDFW to really begin taking this seriously.

But then I don't really know, maybe they are doing all they can to solve this issue. They've definitely stepped it up a notch since last year, no doubt about that.

They just increased damage tags for two units in this area at the request of the timber company who owned the land. They had previously reduced them by 15 each (30 total) for a couple of years. I have plenty of MH points and would've drawn something this year. No way I'm putting special permit applications into that area.

[t6]

it would be nice to see them use sound scientific practice to determine the cause rather than picking a cause and attempting to explain it with poor jumbled up garbage. 

I would like to see independent research done by someone without  any skin in the game.  I think thats the only way we are going to see honest answers. 

[motg9_6]

 

[jongosch]

Sorry for the delay, guys, but I should have a full report finished soon.  So much going on!!  For now here's some snippets of the TAG meeting.  I think we can officially put WDFW's treponema theory in its grave after this meeting.  There's no doubt that the bacteria are present, but they are not the underlying cause.  Repeat.  TREPONEMA IS NOT THE CAUSE OF ELK HOOF DISEASE.  FYI: Kristin Mansfield is WDFW's epidemiologist.  The rest are members of the Technical Advisory Group.

Besser  – “The non-consistent thing is there’s lots of dairy farm areas with elk with treponemes without elk hoof disease.”
Kristin Mansfield – “Which areas?”
Besser – “Whatcom County.”

Parros – “It seems like we’re building a case for treponema, but I’m a little concerned about the way it’s presented.  It seems as if dairy cattle are transmitting the disease.  I’m a little cautious because we’ve made the case that treponema occurs in cattle and sheep, and cattle and sheep have this disease that looks similar to the one in elk, that a lot of the public will interpret that as direct transmission.  And I’m a little concerned about using that.”

Fairbrother – “I also have a little bit of a concern because the treponema hypothesis still requires an initiating event… Until you figure out what that triggering event was you’re not going to be able to really understand the disease.”

Dale Brown – “This is going to sound really bizarre and I’ll just throw it out there because I don’t really care what you think about me.  The first time you showed me those pictures, I thought, this looks like toxic shock syndrome.”

 

[t6]

Be careful Mr. Brown.... they may bar you from future meetings for thinking like that.     

[jongosch]

I just found this.  It may prove to be our magic bullet:

"Roundup herbicide, for instance, was found to be 125 times more toxic than its active ingredient glyphosate studied in isolation."

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/roundup-herbicide-125-times-more-toxic-regulators-say

At the TAG meeting in Vancouver, Anne Fairbrother, an ecotoxicologist, said that glyphosate is the most commonly used herbicide.  The elk nutrition study conducted by researchers from the University of Alberta said the same thing. 

And now, once more, here's the quote from Dale Moore, a clinical professor from WSU, and a member of WDFW's Technical Advisory Group, "This is going to sound really bizarre and I’ll just throw it out there because I don’t really care what you think about me.  The first time you showed me those pictures, I thought, this looks like toxic shock syndrome.”

[jongosch]

Sorry t6.  I meant to say Dale Moore.

[Caretaker]

I shot a small 5x5 in Toledo several years ago.  We could smell the foul stinch as we approached it.  It definately had hoof rot.  I contacted the biologist for that area and offerred the animal to him but he refused it stating they had all the information they needed on the disease.   Appears now thats not the case.

[Bob33]

http://tdn.com/lifestyles/scientists-strive-to-answer-questions-surrounding-elk-hoof-disease/article_47b57d6c-ed00-11e3-95ad-001a4bcf887a.html

[pianoman9701]

"The group also heard a presentation about herbicides by Anne Fairbrother, a veterinarian and principal scientist with the Exponent research company in Seattle.

Herbicides have “no known mode of action in mammals,” Fairbrother said. They’re “practically nontoxic to mammals according to most of the studies that have been done. We haven’t had any observations of direct effect that we’ve been aware of on wildlife and most of these herbicides have been around for several decades.”"

Exponent Research specializes in protecting large corporations from liability, especially in the areas of biological and chemical liability.

Here's an article from the LA Times regarding their research for client Toyota:

"Toyota calls in Exponent Inc. as hired gun
The California engineering firm is known for helping big corporations weather messy disputes. It denies accusations that it skews results to benefit its clients.
February 18, 2010|By Ken Bensinger and Ralph Vartabedian
Email
Share

When some of the world's best-known companies faced disputes over secondhand smoke, toxic waste in the jungle and asbestos, they all turned to the same source for a staunch defense: Exponent Inc.

Now that same engineering and consulting firm has been hired by Toyota Motor Corp. as it seeks to fend off claims that sudden acceleration in its vehicles could be caused by problems in its electronic throttle."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18/business/la-fi-toyota-exponent18-2010feb18

I'd be very interested to find out if one of their clients is one of the big timber companies. When a company specializes as a "big gun" for large corporations who produce toxic waste, their "contibutions may be suspect. 

[Bob33]

"The group also heard a presentation about herbicides by Anne Fairbrother, a veterinarian and principal scientist with the Exponent research company in Seattle.

Herbicides have “no known mode of action in mammals,” Fairbrother said. They’re “practically nontoxic to mammals according to most of the studies that have been done. We haven’t had any observations of direct effect that we’ve been aware of on wildlife and most of these herbicides have been around for several decades.”"

Exponent Research specializes in protecting large corporations from liability, especially in the areas of biological and chemical liability.

Here's an article from the LA Times regarding their research for client Toyota:

"Toyota calls in Exponent Inc. as hired gun
The California engineering firm is known for helping big corporations weather messy disputes. It denies accusations that it skews results to benefit its clients.
February 18, 2010|By Ken Bensinger and Ralph Vartabedian
Email
Share

When some of the world's best-known companies faced disputes over secondhand smoke, toxic waste in the jungle and asbestos, they all turned to the same source for a staunch defense: Exponent Inc.

Now that same engineering and consulting firm has been hired by Toyota Motor Corp. as it seeks to fend off claims that sudden acceleration in its vehicles could be caused by problems in its electronic throttle."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18/business/la-fi-toyota-exponent18-2010feb18

I'd be very interested to find out if one of their clients is one of the big timber companies. When a company specializes as a "big gun" for large corporations who produce toxic waste, their "contibutions may be suspect. 

Interesting. Thanks.

[pianoman9701]

It might also be helpful to find out by whom they were invited.

[pianoman9701]

Oh god, look at this:

http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/investigations/toxic-influence/story/exponent-inc-herbicide-paraquat-parkinsons-disease/

Company pays government to challenge pesticide research showing link to Parkinson's

"This story is being co-published with Politics Daily.

In an unusual scenario that raises questions of conflict of interest, a company that conducts research on behalf of the pesticide industry has paid a U.S. government agency to help prove some controversial chemicals are safe.

The company, Exponent Inc., based in Menlo Park, Calif., is known for its scientific research on behalf of corporate clients facing product liability concerns. In this case, Exponent is trying to refute research showing that even a small amount of combined exposure to two agricultural chemicals, maneb, a fungicide, and paraquat, an herbicide, can raise the risk of Parkinson's disease, a progressive disorder of the central nervous system.

Exponent is listed as a member of CropLife America, the trade group that represents pesticide manufacturers, and also has worked regularly for Syngenta, which makes paraquat. (edit, and Atrazine!!!)

The federal agency involved in this instance is the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Federal ethics rules generally prohibit government employees from accepting money from businesses related to their jobs, which helps ensure that government staffers remain unbiased and free of corporate entanglements. Although NIOSH has statutory authority to accept 'gifts,' it does not "utilize" that authority to accept corporate donations for research, according to an agency spokeswoman.

Exponent was able to circumvent these restrictions, however, by donating $60,000 to the CDC Foundation, an independent, 501(c)(3) public charity. The foundation in turn passed the money along to NIOSH.

Exponent managing scientist Laura McIntosh said in an interview the company donated the money and sought participation by researchers at NIOSH to enhance the credibility of its study of maneb and paraquat. McIntosh said they wanted to make their research "bulletproof."

"We have a professional money-laundering facility at the Centers for Disease Control Foundation" said James O'Callaghan, the NIOSH researcher running the government's part of the project. "They accept projects from anyone on the outside."

Arthur Caplan, who runs the University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics, finds the arrangement disturbing. "If you have a private sector entity that has no interest and is just giving general money for support, that's not a conflict," Caplan said. But when a company or industry has "a stake in the outcome," or offers "support which is difficult to track, when it's not very transparent, it makes for trouble...I don't think every private dollar is tainted, but at the same time, when you're in areas where somebody has a dog in the fight, that's going to raise appropriate questions about conflicts."

Caplan
Photo by Daniel R. Burke
Arthur Caplan
Science-for-hire firms, Caplan says, must by nature be attentive to the needs of their corporate underwriters.

Caplan is not alone in his view. In his 2008 book, "Doubt Is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health," David Michaels wrote, "While some may exist, I have yet to see an Exponent study that does not support the conclusion needed by the corporation or trade association that is paying the bill." Michaels, who wrote the book before becoming assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health, declined to comment for this story.

In an e-mail explaining their $60,000 donation to the CDC Foundation, Exponent's McIntosh said "That was the mechanism I was asked to use to direct the $ to Dr O'Callaghan's lab ... Jim O'Callaghan said that was the correct pathway, so Exponent signed a contract for the work with the CDC Foundation."

The project originated as a piece of a study funded by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the environmental arm of the British government. Records show that Exponent received a $1.5 million (906,552 British pounds) contract to oversee a study investigating the mixture of chemicals maneb and paraquat and whether or not they raise the risk of Parkinson's disease.

Parkinson's disease results from an insufficient amount of dopamine in the brain, among other changes. Dopamine is required for muscle control, and people with the disease tend to develop tremors, slowness and imbalance, among other problems. They may also experience depression, anxiety and sleep disorders, as well as memory loss and decline of intellectual function, according to the Parkinson's Institute and Clinical Center. The Center is an independent, nonprofit organization in Sunnyvale, Calif., that performs research and provides care.

cory_slechta
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey photo
Deborah Cory-Slechta
In the past 10 years, a growing body of research has shown that even brief exposure to pesticides, both at key points in a person's development, or in later life, raises the risk of getting the disease. Among the most influential work was research done by Deborah Cory-Slechta of the University of Rochester and Rutgers University. Cory-Slechta, working on mice, showed that exposing animals to a mixture of both paraquat and maneb significantly raised their odds of developing signs and symptoms that resemble the disease. In another study, mice that were chronically exposed to low levels of the two pesticides moved less often than mice that were not exposed.

Cory-Slechta's work was published in prestigious peer-reviewed science journals, including "Environmental Health Perspectives." Since then, others have built on her research. In 2009, researchers in California found that exposure to the mixture of maneb and paraquat also significantly increased the risk of Parkinson's disease in people. The study found that individuals who were exposed to both chemicals within 500 meters (547 yards) of their homes had a 75 percent higher risk than those who were not exposed. Both chemicals also carry other health risks.

But the chemicals remain big business. Paraquat, which is used to kill weeds, is banned in Europe but is permitted in the U.S., where some estimates put sales at $1 billion a year. Maneb, which is used to prevent crop damage in the field and to protect harvested crops from deterioration, is being phased out in the U.S. but is allowed in Europe. From numerous interviews with manufacturers' researchers it is clear they are worried about liability from individuals who believe they have developed Parkinson's after using their products or being exposed to the chemicals in food or in their environment.

Although it is common for scientists to attempt to replicate or build on each other's work, Exponent's McIntosh seems particularly committed to refuting the research linking Parkinson's disease to pesticide exposure. In an interview, she was open about her skepticism on the causal relationship between pesticides and Parkinson's. For example, she believes that some of the loss of movement that Cory-Slechta observed could be attributed to mice just "feeling sick" and lethargic after ingesting pesticides. McIntosh's earlier work, partially funded by CropLife America, found no association.

"You can't give animals paraquat and have them develop Parkinson's disease," McIntosh said. "In the 25 years they've been working on it, they certainly haven't discovered a strong association. It's such a lovely hypothesis that people don't want to let it go, and research continues."

Cory-Slechta, who serves on the EPA's advisory committee on Science Integration for Decision Making, and recently chaired the agency's review panel on Trichloroethylene, believes Exponent's work is designed to benefit its chemical industry clients. "Obviously, this has huge implications for the manufacturers, financially," she said. The scientist also said that AstraZeneca, which combined its agricultural chemicals business with that of Novartis in 2000 to launch Syngenta, initially supplied her with paraquat but stopped after her team began publishing their work.

Sasha Fuller, a spokeswoman for the British agency Defra, defended the selection of Exponent for the UK study. "The laboratory in question published multiple papers strongly suggesting an association between the chemicals paraquat and maneb and Parkinson's in injected doses in mice," she said in an e-mail. "Defra considered them of sufficient concern that we commissioned the research project in order to see if the results could be replicated under conditions likely to occur in a realistic setting, i.e., when exposed to the same levels and in the same way as people might be in a real-world scenario, rather than by injection." Cory-Slechta and other Parkinson's researchers say this approach may not yield relevant results because mice have a far shorter life span than humans and different physiology, and that this approach is intended to be a distraction from the real issues.

Fuller also said it wouldn't be practical for Defra to ban consultants who work for industry. "Exponent won the tender for this research because they had the required UK and European expertise, provided value for money and had the capacity to deliver," she said.

But British environmentalists note the UK's strong agricultural chemical industry -- and frequent disagreements with the more environmentally conscious European Union. "The UK as a nation is pro-chemical industry. We have a big manufacturing base that generates a lot of money for our treasury," said Elizabeth Salter Green, director of CHEM Trust, a British-based environmental group.

Congress authorized creation of the National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1992 to solicit donations from outside the government to help protect public health. It incorporated in 1994. The foundation's largest donation to date was $25 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to fund disease detection work in Central Africa in collaboration with the World Health Organization.

In a written statement to Politics Daily, the CDC Foundation spokeswoman, Kate Ruddon, said, "Businesses do not tell or even ask CDC to carry out specific research. A research project must fit within the broader context of a public health question the CDC is already interested in or currently studying."

But Exponent's McIntosh acknowledges that it was she who brought the project to O'Callaghan. His lab is performing the study's stereology -- a method of analysis that uses random, systemic tissue sampling and statistical math to provide quantitative data, rather than examining every cell. This research is a crucial part of the Parkinson's study.

In an interview, the CDC foundation President and CEO, Charles Stokes, defended the arrangement. "Partnerships are critical to improving the public's health," he said. "If they are done well, and we think we do them well, society gains in leaps and bounds over systems where people work in their silos and conduct research from start to finish."

He also said he believed the work in progress supports previous studies showing a correlation between exposure to pesticides and Parkinson's disease.

"I've spoken recently with Dr. O'Callaghan at the CDC," Stokes said. "What he said was that the study continues to support other scientists who have found an association between paraquat and Parkinson's. I didn't speak to him about maneb."

McIntosh, who is participating in the project, took issue with that conclusion. "It's premature. We haven't finished the analysis," she said. "What we have at this point is a trend...He's talking about something that's incomplete. It's like saying 50 percent of the votes have been counted. It really doesn't tell you what the final result will be." She also said that Exponent puts up a "firewall" between researchers and funders on individual projects.

But Caplan, the bioethicist, says that doesn't prevent the conflict of interest. "The more specific the funding, relative to a particular science question, by interested parties, the more troubling it is," he said. "If you really want to have industry support, I'm OK with it, but it has to go into a general fund, with the industry uncertain about how it would be spent."

Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, the Washington, D.C.-based consumer advocacy group, also found the arrangement troubling.

"This is a highly questionable and worrisome business relationship between private interests and the government," Holman said. "The CDC Foundation is a pass through for money from private enterprise that wants something out of the government. And so it is in effect really blurring the line between the monitor and those who are being monitored."

Exponent's participation is clearly a sensitive issue for the CDC Foundation. After numerous press inquiries, the Foundation took the project off its list of current programs. When asked about the deletion, spokeswoman Ruddon said that NIOSH's role in the project was finished. Yet in an e-mail on Monday, McIntosh said she was still awaiting the final data set from NIOSH, and did not expect it until later this month. She also said that as co-authors of an eventual publication, the NIOSH staffers will continue to be involved in the study."

[pianoman9701]

In case you missed it, Exponent represents Syngenta who manufactures atrazine.

[t6]

HEY WDFW !!!!!   We know your watching.... We appreciate your new transparency.... Your making it easy to decipher the bs now.   

What's your next step?  Who's your next expert?  How about coming up with real answers? 

Anne Faribrother sounds like another over educated idiot if she expects us to believe that the chemicals have no effect on mammals.  Those studies have already been done and are available by doing a quick internet search.

Maybe the next "Expert" could read a few of them before opening their mouth.

[pianoman9701]

Here's another link where Exponent is defending Syngenta's product Atrazine in the US after it was banned in Europe:

http://www.nchh.org/Portals/0/Contents/Article0565.pdf

Read the section "Closed Door Meetings", which starts on page one.

In this section of the report, where Syngenta met with the EPA privately, "EPA officials held approximately 50 private meetings with Syngenta regarding atrazine in 2003." Further down in that section, we learn that the "Atrazine Monitoring Committee was a group made up of 17 individuals, all either representing the EPA or Syngenta." "According to this Committee’s October 29, 2003, report, "the committee was charged with designing a monitoring program that could answer [several] management questions."

Read further. This is a perfect example of the fox being in charge of the chicken coop. It's important to note that an individual or individuals from Exponent, Inc. (listed as a "product defense firm") were part of the 17-member group.

According the the two authors, "These private negotiations compromised ethical and scientific standards, and violated public trust in a federal agency charged with protection of human health and ecological integrity."

All of this and our DFW used testimony from an individual from Exponent to invalidate research from Dr. Mora and Krystal Davies pointing to Atrazine as a culprit in Hoof Disease. The appearance here is that they've brought in hired guns to support the timber industry in poisoning our elk. I thought the Department of Fish & Wildlife was supposed to protect our wildlife.

Am I still the crazy one conjuring up demons which don't exist? Maybe I am. But the appearance of impropriety should be enough to have you asking questions.

[wence5]

If Atrazine were the culprit then why doesn't this condition show up in NW Oregon, don't they use it there? It just my gut feeling it isn't Atrazine. I think this is caused my elk feeding in an area where domestic cattle that have hoof rot or had hoof and the elk are picking up the bacteria from domestic cattle. I have seen this condition in cattle and it is in the soil. Cattle can be inoculated for hoof rot but the bacteria remains in the soil, and it seems to be a problem where the soil is moist, like SW Washington. 

[jongosch]

If Atrazine were the culprit then why doesn't this condition show up in NW Oregon, don't they use it there?

http://koin.com/2014/07/15/are-chemicals-causing-elk-hoof-rot-disease/

"A veterinarian with the State of Oregon told KOIN 6 News they strongly suspect a few cases of sick elk in Multnomah and Washington counties have the same disease."

http://earthfix.opb.org/flora-and-fauna/article/wildlife-officials-suspect-spread-of-elk-hoof-dise/

"Documented cases had been confined to Southwest Washington. But two hoof samples hunters took in Multnomah and Clackamas counties in Northwest Oregon show similarities to cases of the condition often referred to as elk hoof rot."

[pianoman9701]

I'm not sure how much you've really delved into this to actually have any kind of educated "gut feeling", Wence, but because atrazine attacks the immune system (as does glyphosate), the effects and resulting diseases may be completely different from one population to the next. Antler deformities, hoof disease, lower birth rates, could all be caused by damaged immune systems. There's no proof yet that the spraying has anything to do with hoof disease, as I've stated many, many times. But the fact that the WDFW hasn't tested for agricultural chemicals in any of the toxicologies performed would suggest that they don't want to look in that area. Also, we do have two separate and distinct populations suffering from Hoof disease - the St. Helens herd and the Willapa Hills herd. Incidentally, 100+ elk were reportedly culled from the Tillamook herd last fall for hoof deformities, so you may have that answer to your question. Just because you haven't heard of other problems in areas of heavy spraying doesn't mean they don't exist.