Abstract
Arguing that the 2006 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) human-subjects rule allows use of unethical third-party research (on pregnant women and children) in setting pesticide regulations, this article first (a) provides a brief history of U.S. pesticide regulation, particularly regarding childhood safety. Next it (b) outlines ethical and scientific loopholes in the 2006 EPA rule; (c) shows how the Human Subjects Review Board, mandated by the 2006 rule, has been implemented in flawed ways; and (d) illustrates that one source of problems with the rule may be influence by those with conflicts of interest.
MeSH terms
-
Chemical Industry / legislation & jurisprudence
-
Chemical Industry / standards
-
Child Welfare* / ethics
-
Child Welfare* / legislation & jurisprudence
-
Child, Preschool
-
Conflict of Interest
-
Ethics Committees, Research / legislation & jurisprudence
-
Ethics Committees, Research / standards
-
Female
-
Government Regulation*
-
Guideline Adherence / ethics*
-
Guideline Adherence / legislation & jurisprudence
-
Guideline Adherence / standards
-
Human Experimentation / ethics
-
Human Experimentation / legislation & jurisprudence
-
Human Experimentation / standards*
-
Humans
-
Pesticides / toxicity*
-
Politics
-
Pregnancy
-
Pregnant Women*
-
Toxicity Tests / ethics
-
Toxicity Tests / standards
-
United States
-
United States Environmental Protection Agency / ethics
-
United States Environmental Protection Agency / standards*