[Pharmwaste] RE: Seattle Times Editorial on Pharms

Wed Jan 21 14:09:58 EST 2009

Can everyone cease hitting "reply all" to all e-mails, PLEASE??

Tracy Baroni Allmon, R.Ph., J.D.

V.P., Public Policy

CVS Caremark

1300 I Street, NW

Suite 525 West

Washington, D.C. 20005

From: pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us
[mailto:pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us] On Behalf Of Sue
Dayton
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:07 PM
To: 'Pete Pasterz'; 'Melody LaBella'; pharmwaste at lists.dep.state.fl.us;
'Zero Waste Forum'
Subject: RE: [Pharmwaste] RE: Seattle Times Editorial on Pharms

I agree with Pete wholeheartedly. 

Sue Dayton

Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League

North Carolina Healthy Communities Program

PO BOX 44

Saxapahaw, NC 27340

(336) 525-2003

sdayton at swcp.com

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that
matter.   -  Martin Luther King Jr.

________________________________

From: pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us
[mailto:pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us] On Behalf Of Pete
Pasterz
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 1:36 PM
To: Melody LaBella; pharmwaste at lists.dep.state.fl.us; Zero Waste Forum
Subject: [Pharmwaste] RE: Seattle Times Editorial on Pharms

Do let pharmaceuticals leak from landfills

Patrick Moore is considered by many "activist groups", including
Greenpeace, to be an industry sell-out.  While I pass no judgment on
this indictment, notice the solution he proposes:  He scoffs at the idea
of an industry take back program because 1] It is not necessary because
the amount of drugs is small  [though this contradicts his thesis that
improper disposition is indeed a problem]    2]it will be costly [to
industry?] and  3] be energy inefficient contributing to greenhouse
gasses [though he does not quantify the extent of this problem...and in
other contexts he has dismissed anthropogenic global warming].  He
rather proposes landfilling the drugs  [which according to EPA will leak
into groundwater, perhaps converted in form in a stew of other
chemicals] or take to "local collection programs"....where will such
programs then take this material, how will it be disposed, at what cost,
and what efficiency of transport?

And, of course note the industry-apologist mantra:  "It's important to
note that, to date, no risk to human health from exposure to trace
pharmaceutical compounds found in drinking water has been demonstrated
in the scientific literature."  

No, of course they have not YET been traced...to human health problems,
but they HAVE BEEN to other organisms.  This statement has been used to
defend all sorts of practices such as smoking, asbestos mining, sludge
deposition, etc.    How much other environmental damage must occur
before we have irrefutable HUMAN damage?  Who is/will be funding the
effort to trace them?  

The fundamental issue is do we follow the "precautionary principle", or
the current "proven innocent" model.  Industry responsibility systems
may force the industry to reassess the numbers of redundant drugs,
whether all ailments require a drug treatment, and the appropriate
dosage so that they are metabolized instead of being wasted...such
programs do not have to be set up to be cost or energy-inefficient.

* Pete Pasterz, NCQRP

Cabarrus County Recycling and HHW

PO BOX 707 

Concord, NC  28026

www.cabarruscounty.us/waste

If you're not for ZERO Waste, how much Waste ARE you for?

From: pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us
[mailto:pharmwaste-bounces at lists.dep.state.fl.us] On Behalf Of Melody
LaBella
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:15 PM
To: pharmwaste at lists.dep.state.fl.us
Subject: [Pharmwaste] Seattle Times Editorial on Pharms

Don't flush pharmaceuticals down the drain

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

By Patrick Moore

Special to The Times

AS a lifelong environmentalist with nearly four decades of activism
under my belt since I helped found Greenpeace in 1971, I've thought a
great deal about environmental health and human safety.

One issue that has received a lot of attention recently is the presence
of trace amounts of pharmaceuticals in the environment. Some activist
groups have raised concerns this represents a threat even though the
medicines are found at extremely low levels.

As with many other issues, in the case of pharmaceuticals in the
environment, it comes down to this: We must weigh the significant
benefits of a healthier population against potential environmental risks
across the landscape.

The lives of millions of people around the world have been vastly
improved thanks to the prescribed use of pharmaceuticals. And research
is continuing daily for new cures, at a cost of tens of billions of
dollars annually in the U.S. alone.

It is also inevitable that a small amount of ingested pharmaceuticals
will eventually show up at trace levels in wastewater, given the human
body seldom metabolizes the entire medicine, and given the improved
analytical testing technologies that have developed over time.

An even smaller portion - 10 percent - of detectable trace elements in
wastewater are the result of consumers flushing unused prescriptions
down the toilet.

The Pharmaceutical Assessment and Transport Evaluation (PhATE) model has
been developed by industry as a tool to estimate concentrations of
pharmaceutical residues in surface waters that result from consumer
pharmaceutical use. The PhATE tool is being used to track compounds in
11 representative watersheds across the U.S. to model concentrations
into the future.

This science-based approach is working to continually improve our
understanding of environmental risk from pharmaceuticals. It's important
to note that, to date, no risk to human health from exposure to trace
pharmaceutical compounds found in drinking water has been demonstrated
in the scientific literature.

But some activist organizations still push for costly and unnecessary
controls. In Washington, Oregon and Illinois, for example, interest
groups who believe that any trace amount of any compound in wastewater
must be stopped at all cost are proposing an elaborate take-back plan.

This is wrong for a number of reasons.

First, detecting minute trace pharmaceutical compounds in wastewater
does not mean you've identified a problem - or even the risk of a
problem. Obviously, we should not indiscriminately send toxic waste into
the environment, yet our detection methods have become so sophisticated
that low levels of nearly everything are going to be found nearly
everywhere. A take-back approach to eliminate such low levels will be
enormously costly, difficult to manage, and offer no added benefit to
human health or safety.

Second, a take-back program will likely result in increased
greenhouse-gas emissions from the additional infrastructure and
transportation needs the program will require - all for a new program
that, if past take-back subscription rates are any indicator, will be
used by only a small fraction of the public.

Earlier this year, industry joined with the American Pharmacists
Association and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in launching the
SMARxT disposal program. The goal of the program is to educate the
public about not flushing or pouring unused medicines down the drain,
but instead to use the household trash disposal or local collection
programs as alternatives.

I believe a simple education program like SMARxT is far more likely to
result in reduced amounts of pharmaceuticals going into wastewater than
the costly approaches being proposed by some activists.

I subscribe to the old scientific maxim that the difference between a
medicine and a poison is in the dose. While in recent years we have
drastically increased - from parts per thousands to parts per million,
and currently parts per trillion - our ability to detect
human-introduced compounds in the environment, it is still important to
place things in perspective, recognizing that the poison is in the dose.

In most cases, the best approach an individual can take to reduce
consumer-discarded pharmaceuticals from wastewater is to ensure the
substance is never flushed, unused, down the drain.

An adviser to government and industry, Patrick Moore is a co-founder and
former leader of Greenpeace, and chair and chief scientist of
Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. in Vancouver, Canada.

Copyright (c) 2009 The Seattle Times Company

DISCLAIMER:
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.dep.state.fl.us/pipermail/pharmwaste/attachments/20090121/3803d80b/attachment.html