Home
Posted: Monday, April 11th, 2016 by BioTechAwareness
DID YOU KNOW ?:
*****BIOTECHNOLOGY DID NOT QUALIFY FOR MANDATORY REPIRATOR PROTECTION UNTIL 1998
*****EXPOSURES TO BIOLOGICS ARE NOT AS SAFE AS THOUGHT
BIOLOGICS DEFINITION:
*commercial products derived from biotechnology.
BIOTECHNOLOGY DEFINITION:
*the manipulation (as through genetic engineering) of living organisms or their components to produce useful usually commercial products (as pest resistant crops, new bacterial strains, or novel pharmaceuticals); also : any of various applications of biological science used in such manipulation
BIOLOGICS = BIOTECHNOLOGY DID NOT QUALIFY FOR MANDATORY REPIRATOR PROTECTION UNTIL 1998
Protecting Employees - Original Occupational Safety and Health Act; OSH Act of 1970
When the United States established the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), after the passing of the OSH Act of 1970 , working men and women believed they could go to work each day without concern for their mandated rights to a safe and healthy workplace environment.
OSH Act of 1970 Included Mandated Respiratory Protection; however it Excluded Biological Hazards & Blood-borne Pathogens
Included in the OSH Act of 1970; OSHA had adopted the Respiratory Protection Standards (29 CFR 1910.134 and 29 CFR 1926.103); to protect employees who were exposed to hazardous air contaminants in the workplace. Following is an extremely small example of some of those hazards, including their applicable Code of Federal Regulations (none are biological):
Through the years, there had been numerous changes to the Respiratory Protection Standards of the OSH Act of 1970; by the additions to and/or removal of sections and/or subsections by way of revisions and amendments. However, biological hazards / blood-borne pathogens were not included.
It wasn't until 1998, almost three decades after the passing of the OSH Act of 1970, did OSHA release the first revision to the Respiratory Protection Standard (with the same name and number). This revision included exposures to biological hazards and blood-borne pathogens.
The 1998 revision of the Respiratory Protection standard was published in the Federal Register Vol. 63, No. 5 Thursday January 8, 1998, Rules and Regulations.
What is not known by many; is there is (AND WAS) a Mandatory Medical Evaluation Questionnaire [see Appendix C to § 1910.134: OSHA Respirator Medical Evaluation Questionnaire [This can be found in the above referenced Federal Register Vol. 63, No. 5 Thursday January 8, 1998 beginning in the top of the foremost right column on page 1282]. The instructions begin with:
"To the employer: Answers to questions in Section 1, and to question 9 in Section 2 of Part A, do not require a medical examination."
Part A. Section 1. (Mandatory) The following information must be provided by every employee who has been selected to use any type of respirator (please print).
1. Today's date:_______________________________________________________
2. Your name:__________________________________________________________
3. Your age (to nearest year):_________________________________________
4. Sex (circle one): Male/Female
5. Your height: __________ ft. __________ in.
6. Your weight: ____________ lbs.
7. Your job title:_____________________________________________________
8. A phone number where you can be reached by the health care professional who reviews this questionnaire (include the Area Code): ____________________
9. The best time to phone you at this number: ________________
10. Has your employer told you how to contact the health care professional who will review this questionnaire (circle one): Yes/No
11. Check the type of respirator you will use (you can check more than one category):
a. ______ N, R, or P disposable respirator (filter-mask, non-cartridge type only).
b. ______ Other type (for example, half- or full-facepiece type, powered-air purifying, supplied-air, self-contained breathing apparatus).
12. Have you worn a respirator (circle one): Yes/No
If "yes," what type(s):___________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
Part A. Section 2. (Mandatory) Questions 1 through 9 below must be answered by every employee who has been selected to use any type of respirator (please circle ''yes'' or ''no'').
(Question) 9. Would you like to talk to the health care professional who will review this questionnaire about your answers to this questionnaire: Yes/No"
*Employee Exposure To Airborne Contaminants, Physical hazards, and Biological Agents Necessary and Appropriate
Part A. Section 2.
9. Would you like to talk to the health care professional who will review this questionnaire about your answers to this questionnaire: Yes/No
Just recently; USA Today's articles "Inside America's secretive biolabs", "Labs cited for 'serious' security failures in research with bioterror germs" and "New lab incidents fuel fear, safety concerns in Congress" have raised some extremely important information of which some concerns spoken of are; research and development laboratories are being protected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the CDC, as well as several other Federal and state agencies, and the article, New lab incidents fuel fear, safety concerns in Congress states, "... because they're deemed to pose serious threats to people and agriculture and could potentially be used as bioweapons" and "Federal regulators have secretly threatened to revoke permits to study bioterror pathogens"
Posted: Thursday, September 11th, 2008 by BioTechAwareness
Agraquest's submission to the EPA in 1999 of "new active ingredient" (QST713 - bacillus subtilis) AND in support of their pesticide petition
Agraquest's 4/26/1999 submission,"EPA has received a pesticide petition 8F5032 from AgraQuest, Inc., 1105 Kennedy Place, Davis, California 95616, proposing pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for the microbial pesticide Bacillus subtilis QST 713 strain in or on all raw agricultural commodities (RAC).
Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA, as amended, AgraQuest, Inc. has submitted the following summary of information, data, and arguments in support of their pesticide petition. This summary was prepared by AgraQuest, Inc. and EPA has not fully evaluated the merits of the pesticide petition. The summary may have been edited by EPA if the terminology used was unclear, the summary contained extraneous material, or the summary unintentionally made the reader conclude that the findings reflected EPA's position and not theposition of the petitioner."
Agraquest's 6/16/1999 submission, "2. File Symbol: 69592-L. Applicant: Agraquest Inc., 1105 KennedyPlace, Davis, CA 95616. Product Name: QST 713 Technical. Microbial Fungicide. Active ingredient: QST 713 strain of dried Bacillus subtilis at 5%. Proposed classification/Use: None. For use in manufacturing or formulating end-use products to control various fungal plant pathogens and terrestrial use.
**Agraquest only received a "CONDITIONAL TIME-LIMITED REGISTRATION [view 4 page form→HERE ] from the EPA on 6/20/2000 (Janet L. Anderson, Ph.D, Director - Biopesticides and Pollutions Preventon Division) as the EPA themselves found fault....
Listed on the above June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical:
•The submitted manufacturing processed did not have sufficient quality control fermentation batches.
Data required
•Data for the 12 month storage stability of the end-use product has not been submitted.
•Additional data described in the December 12, 1999 review and March 8 2000 letter are required to upgrade submitted process, MRID# 44519-04 to acceptable. This includes:
•1) A formal submission that clearly describes new quality control steps taken to assure the consistent CFU/g values and limit microbial impurities in the Technical Powder.
•2) A 5 batch analysis of Technical Powder produced from cell cultures with latest QC.
•3) Raw data for the above mentioned 5 batch analyses.
Ecological Effects Data Required
•A 21 day Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Study must be performed. Attenuated and filter sterilized controls should be used in the test. Test lab should attempt to determine cause of death and whether pathogenicity involved.
•[Shrimp] Required due to report of disease in terrestrial amphipod crustacean associated with B. subtilis infection. Protocol must be submitted before initiating study.
•QST Technical was shown to cause mortality to parasitic Hymenoptera. MRID 44619-14 is graded supplemental. Potential pathogenicity was not investigated.
•[HONEY BEE] All test concentrations showed treatment related mortality. MRID 4456519-17 is supplemental due to the short test duration and the lack of a determination as to whether mortality was due to toxicity only or whether pathogenicity contributed.
PLEASE NOTE: The submissions of April , 1999 and June , 1999 by Agraquest to the EPA were one of the products, [QST Technical wettable powder] that “Research Technician / Assistant Researcher” had transferred from LARGE drums into 24 pound bags for shipment. He was told "it was safe" and didn't wear a respirator.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30th, 2008 by BioTechAwareness
"One" of the Agraquest Products that the injured/ill Assistant Researcher was exposed to was QST 713 Bacillus Subtilis Technical. This was the Seven Hundred Thirteenth microorganisms that Agraquest "screened". This bacterium was also discovered in a peach orchard by Agraquest scientist, Sherry Heins.
The 4/1999 and 6/1999 submission to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Agraquest of "new active ingredient" (QST713 - bacillus subtilis) only received a "CONDITIONAL TIME-LIMITED REGISTRATION from the EPA on 6/20/2000 (Janet L. Anderson, Ph.D, Director - Biopesticides and Pollutions Prevention Division) as the EPA themselves found fault.... Storage Stability, Manufacturing Process - toxicity/pathogenicity to; Freshwater Fish, Freshwater aquatic invertebrate, paleomonetes vulgaris (shrimp) and HONEY BEES.
Alarming reasons were questions to cause of death in Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate, question of Bacillus Subtilis infection in shrimp, questions of death to "HONEY BEES" and Agraquest DID NOT meet guideline requirements in their submission (studies) on the toxicity and pathogenicity to "FRESH WATER FISH".
[See the four (4) page EPA form here→ June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical]
Listed on the above June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical:
•The submitted manufacturing processed did not have sufficient quality control fermentation batches.
Data required
•Data for the 12 month storage stability of the end-use product has not been submitted.
•Additional data described in the December 12, 1999 review and March 8 2000 letter are required to upgrade submitted process, MRID# 44519-04 to acceptable. This includes:
•1) A formal submission that clearly describes new quality control steps taken to assure the consistent CFU/g values and limit microbial impurities in the Technical Powder.
•2) A 5 batch analysis of Technical Powder produced from cell cultures with latest QC.
•3) Raw data for the above mentioned 5 batch analyses.
Ecological Effects Data Required
•A 21 day Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Study must be performed. Attenuated and filter sterilized controls should be used in the test. Test lab should attempt to determine cause of death and whether pathogenicity involved.
•[Shrimp] Required due to report of disease in terrestrial amphipod crustacean associated with B. subtilis infection. Protocol must be submitted before initiating study.
•QST Technical was shown to cause mortality to parasitic Hymenoptera. MRID 44619-14 is graded supplemental. Potential pathogenicity was not investigated.
•[HONEY BEE] All test concentrations showed treatment related mortality. MRID 4456519-17 is supplemental due to the short test duration and the lack of a determination as to whether mortality was due to toxicity only or whether pathogenicity contributed.
PLEASE NOTE: The submissions of April 28, 1999 and June 19, 1999 by Agraquest to the EPA were one of the products, [QST Technical wettable powder] which the injured/ill Assistant Researcher was instructed to transferred, from LARGE drums, to 24 pound bags for shipment. He was told "it was safe" and "it wouldn't hurt a fly". He didn't wear a respirator.
Posted: Sunday, December 7th, 2008 by BioTechAwareness
Agraquest is the biotechnology company that searches throughout the world for the "novel" microorganism (fungus, bacteria) to be used in the place of chemicals for diseases of plants and insect control. Although not known unless it has affected someone close to you, these plant diseases also produce diseases in humans as well. Remember, when a new microorganism is found it has to be screened and identified (if possible) and then it is tested on various bacteria and fungal diseases of plants or against insects. This took place in David's workplace environment at Agraquest. David Bell and many other microbiologist like him are exposed daily, and more times than not, without knowledge to these human disease producing microorganisms that are in their workplace environment.
Where does Agraquest "search" for the "novel" microorganism? [Meaning of "novel"; "of a new kind; different from anything seen or known before"] Agraquest and/or it’s representatives have made public where they search for these microorganisms in soil, plants, plant roots, lichen, leaves and/or it’s litter, mulch and other decaying organic matter, fruit, bird feathers, dead insects, lake beds, forests, dunes and ocean caves, animals from terrestrial sources, marine sources (sponges, sea urchins, etc.) insects of all kinds, rain forests, jungles, dry creek beds, orchards, farm fields, and gardens. This is only what has been published. (This information was obtained through searching articles and interviews by or about Agraquest. (This information was obtained through searching articles and interviews by or about Agraquest. “Excerpts” from these references can be viewed [ HERE ]
Included within these "excerpts" is the article: "March of agricultural technology continues, Bio-warriors come in from the cold" (August 24, 2000) in which states:
•"Partnering in the project with Davis, CA-based AgraQuest are Drs. Elena Stepanova and Elena Ryabchikova, State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology ("Vector"), New Siberia Region, Russia."
•"[Vector} once a top secret biological warfare research facility in the Soviet Union"
Also included in the "excerpts" in the article, "Recruiting microbes to do the dirty work";By Michael Kanellos Staff Writer, CNET News.com - April 11, 2006 in which states:
•"The microbe for root-knot nematodes studied at AgraQuest was discovered in an Eastern European creek by scientists once associated with a bioweapons lab in Siberia. The company's first product, Serenade, derives from a microorganism found in a peach orchard near Fresno, Calif., where a farmer had noted that a particular strand of trees never got hit with the dreaded brown rot. And the active ingredient in a fungicide called Sonata is a patented strain of Bacillus pumilus, originally found in a garden in Micronesia."
Agraquest's product QST 20,799 is the fungus, muscodor albus that was found in a cinnamon tree in Honduras.
The point is that microbes, fungus and bacteria from locations from the around the world have been and still are at the Agraquest lab. These are "known", "WHAT" are the "unknown"?