RFK Jr. The Defender - July 21, 2023


Murdering the Bees with Dr David Carpenter


Episode Stats

Length

23 minutes

Words per Minute

133.08229

Word Count

3,123

Sentence Count

169


Summary

Dr. David Carpenter is a public health physician who received his MD from Harvard Medical School. He pioneered the study of neurotoxicological impacts on IQ and altered behavior in children. Dr. Carpenter s research is focused on the environmental causes of human disease, especially chronic disease of older age, such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, thyroid disease, and neurodegenerative diseases. He has studied the rates of hospitalization for these and other diseases in relation to living near hazardous waste, fossil fuel power plants, and other sources of contamination. He played a major role in the creation of the School of Public Health, a partnership between the University of Albany and the New York State Department of Health, and he was the first dean. He is an expert on endocrine disruptors, which PCBs are one of the most widely used pesticides in the world. He is also an authority on pesticides, which are now ubiquitous around the world and that most scientists are now focusing on as the culprit and the disappearance of many, many pollinators, including the honeybee and other honeybees. In this episode, we talk about the science linking neonicotinoid pesticides to the decline of honeybees and other pollinators and what the impacts are globally, and why they are so important to our economy and the impact they are having on our environment. We also discuss the impact of the pesticides on other insects, like the bee and other insects we eat, and how they are affected by the neoniconductors. This episode is produced and edited by David Carpenter, who is a professor of public health at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and the Center for Excellence in Public Health and Public Health at Harvard Medical Center. Thanks to David Carpenter for coming on the show and to Dr. David for his contributions to the podcast. Music by Ian Dorsch and the Electric Light Orchestra, and for providing the sound design and editing by Kevin McLeod and the production of the music used in this episode was produced and mixed by Ian McLeod and the music was produced by Jeff Perla in collaboration with the excellent music was written and produced by Bobby Lord, and the mixing and mixing and mastering by Matthew McElroy, and Bobby Lord on this episode is provided by the excellent sound design, and our thanks to the help of the excellent engineering team at The Electric Light Company, and we were edited by John McDermott, Jr., and the excellent research at the Electric Music Project, and his excellent mixing and editing is by the Johns Hopkins Yard.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, today we're joined by one of our perennial favorites, Dr.
00:00:05.000 David Carpenter.
00:00:06.000 Dr.
00:00:06.000 Carpenter is a public health physician who received his MD from Harvard Medical School.
00:00:12.000 His earlier work focused on basic neurobiology and electrophysiological techniques.
00:00:18.000 He pioneered the study of neurotoxicological impacts on IQ and altered behavior in children.
00:00:27.000 He had a research position at the National Institute of Mental Health and the Armed Forces Radio Biology Research Institute in Bethesda.
00:00:36.000 Afterward, he became director of the Wadsworth Center of Laboratories and Research in New York State Department of Health.
00:00:43.000 And he played a major role in the creation of the School of Public Health, a partnership between the University of Albany and the New York State Department of Health And he was the first dean.
00:00:52.000 Dr.
00:00:53.000 Carpenter's research is focused on the study of environmental causes of human disease, especially the chronic disease of older age, such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, arthritis, thyroid disease, and neurodegenerative diseases.
00:01:08.000 He has studied the rates of hospitalization for these and other diseases in relation to living near hazardous waste, fossil fuel power plants, and other sources of contamination.
00:01:19.000 I first met Dr.
00:01:21.000 Carpenter back in the early 1980s when he was Considered one of the world's authority on PCBs.
00:01:29.000 And he played a critical role in helping us in the 30-year battle to get PCBs out of the Hudson River, polychlorinated biphenols.
00:01:38.000 And he is an expert also on endocrine disruptors, which PCBs are one.
00:01:44.000 But I wanted you on today to talk about the disappearance of pollinators, and particularly bees.
00:01:53.000 And the role of the neonicotinoid, neonics, we call them pesticides, the class of pesticides, is now ubiquitous around the world and that most scientists are now focusing on as the culprit and the disappearance of many, many pollinators.
00:02:13.000 But we're seeing now these dramatic, I would say, global extinctions that are going on of bees and other pollinators.
00:02:20.000 You know, I'm 69.
00:02:22.000 I think you're a little bit older than me, right, David?
00:02:26.000 I'm a little bit older.
00:02:27.000 I'm 86.
00:02:28.000 Oh, my God.
00:02:29.000 You're a lot older.
00:02:33.000 My brain still works, I think.
00:02:35.000 Yeah, your brain works a lot.
00:02:36.000 I would trade you.
00:02:39.000 So, you know, when we were kids, we saw bees, butterflies everywhere.
00:02:44.000 And bumblebees were ubiquitous and, you know, honeybees, everything.
00:02:50.000 It's very, very rare now to see a bumblebee.
00:02:54.000 And so tell us about what the science is, you know, linking neonics to the disappearance of bees and to other pollinators and what the impacts are globally.
00:03:05.000 Well, you know, let me start by saying that when I was a kid and first driving, you'd drive your car along the road and you'd get smashed insects on your windshield all over the place.
00:03:18.000 And that doesn't happen anymore.
00:03:20.000 Why doesn't it happen anymore?
00:03:22.000 It's because we have used pesticides so much That the number of insects in general, not just pollinators, but the number of insects in general in our environment has gone way down.
00:03:35.000 This has had enormous impacts on a whole variety of things.
00:03:39.000 It's impacted the population of birds that we have because most birds eat insects and there are fewer insects and so there are fewer birds.
00:03:49.000 Now, the specific incidents of the pollinators, which are a whole variety of species of bees, not just the honeybee that we all know, or the bumblebee.
00:04:00.000 I've had a personal experience with the bumblebee when I put my bare foot in a boot that had a bumbly in the bottom, and they do sting and that hurts.
00:04:08.000 But they play a very important role.
00:04:12.000 In our economy, especially in agriculture, because plants don't pollinate well unless they have insect vectors to transport the pollen from the male to the female sex hormones of the plants.
00:04:29.000 And we're at a state right now where in orchards and nut farms, there are so few bees left That people have to import colonies of bees to bring them to the fields at the time that the pollination has to occur because the natural population is gone.
00:04:53.000 All right, let's talk about the neonicotinoid pesticides because this is the class of pesticides that's been most implicated in the decline of pollinators.
00:05:05.000 Now, nicotine, which everybody thinks about being related to cigarettes, but nicotine is an agonist for the neurotransmitter acetylcholine.
00:05:16.000 Acetylcholine is what's released from our nerves that triggers muscle contraction.
00:05:22.000 If you're bitten by a cobra or another one of the neurotoxic poisonous snakes, They block our nicotine receptors, and we die because we can no longer breathe or move.
00:05:36.000 Now, the nicotinoid pesticides act on those same receptors, and the nicotinic receptors for acetylcholine, the neurotransmitter, exist throughout the animal species.
00:05:52.000 They exist in honeybees, they exist in bumblebees, they exist in mosquitoes.
00:05:57.000 All of the insects use acetylcholine as a transmitter.
00:06:02.000 Neonicotinoid pesticides block that effect, and they in fact do it more potently than they act on the human nicotine receptor.
00:06:15.000 So while the nicotinoid pesticides are not benign for humans, They're much more potent in preventing the effects of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine in insects.
00:06:29.000 And there is a variation of the different species of insects and what the affinity of these nicotinoid pesticides is for their nicotine receptors.
00:06:43.000 And it turns out that bees of all sorts are particularly vulnerable to nicotinoid pesticides.
00:06:51.000 What appears to happen when bees are exposed is that their movements are disturbed, and particularly their ability to navigate back to where they came from.
00:07:06.000 So they can't find their way back to their hives.
00:07:09.000 And that results in their not being able to find the fields of apple blossoms or nut blossoms or whatever kind of blossom that they have such an important role in for fertilizing.
00:07:26.000 And if the blossoms are not fertilized, if the pollen from the female is not gotten to the male organ, the fruit or the nut will not develop.
00:07:38.000 So this is a major problem.
00:07:41.000 Now, nicotinoid pesticides have been outlawed in many parts of the world, especially in Europe.
00:07:47.000 The US always lags behind in regulation to protect both people and the environment and the ecosystem against pesticides.
00:08:01.000 Neonicotinoid pesticides are widely used in agriculture and the agricultural community, with the exception of the fruit and nut community, has been very resistant to restrictions on use of nicotinoids.
00:08:18.000 I've been very involved in the attempt here in New York State to ban nicotinoid pesticides.
00:08:25.000 We have not been successful yet.
00:08:28.000 We almost were successful in the last state legislature, but not quite.
00:08:33.000 So it is a risk versus benefit debate.
00:08:37.000 There are benefits of pesticides to most kinds of agriculture.
00:08:42.000 Many plants, corn particularly, does not depend on pollinators to get fertilization.
00:08:51.000 Nicotininoid pesticides are used in corn, soybeans, a lot of the grain crops, and they're effective in killing the pests that would Generate worms and whatnot in those crops.
00:09:07.000 But the effect of these pesticides on our fruit and nut crops are absolutely devastating.
00:09:15.000 And there has been a general lack of will in this country to consider those pollinators more important than the agricultural benefits of nicotininoid pesticides to the general agriculture.
00:09:31.000 Now, and I want to get to the, you know, this whole notion of agency capture and why exactly EPA refuses to regulate this very dangerous and devastating pesticide.
00:09:44.000 But I just want to talk a little bit about the action of the pesticide.
00:09:48.000 It acts, neonics act differently than other pesticides in that They act systemically.
00:09:56.000 So rather than remaining on the surface of the plant, where the insect then would land and uptake them, they are absorbed by the plant and distributed throughout its entire system to the seeds, to the leaves, to every, you know, to the trunk, to the stem, to every part of that plant.
00:10:17.000 And the amount of neonicotinoids in the plant is really, when it comes to flying insects, is extraordinarily toxic.
00:10:30.000 There's enough, in a single grain of corn, there's enough neonic to kill 80,000 bees.
00:10:38.000 And, you know, there may be impacts on human beings too that we're not seeing.
00:10:44.000 Well, you're absolutely right.
00:10:45.000 And the fact that the neonicotinoids distribute to all parts of the plant is one of the reasons they're so effective against corn pests and soybean pests and so forth.
00:10:57.000 But it's precisely the reason they're so deadly to the pollinators.
00:11:02.000 And the problem is that agriculture is many, many different products.
00:11:09.000 And if you simply only look at the cost of using a pesticide that selectively targets pollinators, you can't just consider the production of corn.
00:11:22.000 Now, to talk about EPA, I have a number of friends at EPA, and I fight with EPA almost daily.
00:11:29.000 EPA is a regulatory agency, and it has to balance the costs versus the benefits.
00:11:38.000 It is very much beaten up by industry.
00:11:42.000 It's beaten up by farmers, at least the farmers that grow corn and soybeans.
00:11:48.000 And so it isn't that the scientists of EPA don't recognize the dangers of nicotininoid pesticides on pollinator crops.
00:12:00.000 But it's that there is not the political will.
00:12:04.000 Good scientists at EPA don't have authority to implement regulation.
00:12:09.000 That's a political decision which balanced the pressure of the industry versus the health effects.
00:12:17.000 Now, EPA is not primarily a health agency.
00:12:21.000 It's a regulatory agency.
00:12:23.000 I will never forget discussions around contaminants in fish, where I found EPA to be on the good side because they were making advisories on rates of fish consumption based on the health effects.
00:12:39.000 Whereas another agency, FDA, who had the authority to regulate the interstate commerce in fish, had actually been sued by the fishing industry in the Hudson River and prevented from making recommendations and standards for sale of fish cross-state boundaries based only on health considerations.
00:13:02.000 And the result was FDA had a standard for fish consumption based on the levels of PCBs, for example, that said, well, FDA allowed sale of fish contaminated to a level that EPA said don't ever eat any.
00:13:21.000 Now, in this case, I would fault EPA strongly.
00:13:26.000 Because they have not taken a position that allowed the federal government to regulate the sale and use of neotyconoids at a level that would prevent the wholesale destruction of pollinator insects.
00:13:42.000 Yeah, well, you know, when we sued EPA, when we sued Monsanto, we were able to obtain discovery documents, which included Monsanto's secret correspondence with the head of the Pesticide Division at EPA, who was there for, I think, over a decade.
00:14:00.000 His name was Jess Rowland.
00:14:01.000 And although he was accepting a salary as a public official, public health official at EPA, he was secretly working for Monsanto.
00:14:12.000 And he was killing studies for them of Roundup to make sure that the company's profit lines were protected.
00:14:20.000 When it was clear that Roundup was causing cancers in rats, causing cancers in mice, causing cancers in humans, he was doing everything he could to block any additional studies in the US.
00:14:34.000 In fact, he was going to other agencies that were trying to study the links between Roundup and cancer and blocking studies there.
00:14:43.000 In fact, he blocked one at ATSDR, which is another agency that looks at health effects of toxics in the environment.
00:14:49.000 And they wanted to look at the links between Roundup and cancers.
00:14:55.000 And he sent a note saying, I've blocked this and you need to give me a medal for what I did to prevent them from doing a study that has scientific integrity.
00:15:08.000 So you have scientists in the agency who are good scientists, who are doing real science.
00:15:15.000 And then you have the people, a lot of times, who are running the individual branches of EPA, who are making sure that regulatory action never occurs.
00:15:24.000 And historically, the pesticide division has been one of the most corrupt divisions in the agency.
00:15:31.000 That's absolutely right.
00:15:32.000 There's corruption at multiple levels.
00:15:34.000 First of all, a lot of the industry funds research, and you can get any result you want from funded research if you have conflicts of interest there.
00:15:44.000 You can find something not to be toxic because you don't use high enough dose, you don't look at large enough animals, you don't follow them for a long enough period of time.
00:15:54.000 So a lot of the industry-funded research Shows no adverse health effects.
00:16:00.000 You have individuals within the regulatory agency like EPA that have conflicts of interest.
00:16:07.000 And in many times, they got their positions at EPA because of pressure by the industry for EPA officials to hire them.
00:16:18.000 I wrote a preface to a book.
00:16:20.000 It was an interesting experience to review for many different chemicals, for PCBs, for Roundup, for electromagnetic fields, what a magnitude Of conflicts of interest there are in people in the fields.
00:16:36.000 It was interesting.
00:16:37.000 I have a publication.
00:16:39.000 Now, this is on a different subject, but it's on the magnetic fields from electricity.
00:16:43.000 And I looked at publications since the year 2000.
00:16:47.000 In 2000, there were three major meta-analyses showing that high magnetic fields increase risk of leukemia in children.
00:16:56.000 There are about 30 publications since 2000.
00:16:59.000 About a third of them were published by academics, and they all showed a statistically significant increase in the risk of leukemia with exposure to magnetic fields.
00:17:10.000 Another third were published by academics, and they showed an elevated risk, but it wasn't quite statistically significant.
00:17:18.000 The other third was funded by the industry.
00:17:21.000 Not a single one of those publications found any statistically significant association between magnetic field exposure and leukemia.
00:17:31.000 So I think that the lesson here is that conflicts of interest, whether you're a scientist employed by industry, employed by academics in universities, or whether you're a person employed in a federal agency, These conflicts of interest can make major determinations in what you report in terms of what the human health effects are.
00:17:57.000 Now, that's not just true for human health effects.
00:17:59.000 It's true for ecological health effects, as we have in the situation of exposure to neonicotinoids and health of pollinator insects.
00:18:12.000 Well, as you know, there's an axiom in our area of work, which is that statistics don't lie, but statisticians do.
00:18:22.000 There's another one that says that statistics are like prisoners of war.
00:18:28.000 You can torture them into saying anything you want them to say.
00:18:32.000 And there's an entire industry of these mercenary biologists and mathematicians, etc.
00:18:40.000 We call them biostitutes, who go to work for industry to generate these kind of studies.
00:18:47.000 And this was...
00:18:49.000 Monsanto actually launched this industry when it was defending DDT against Rachel Carson.
00:18:57.000 And a lot of the blueprint that Monsanto at that time laid out was then later adopted by the Tobacco industry, which was able to deploy these kind of scientists for 60 years.
00:19:10.000 You know, Ulysses Grant, the president of the United States, died of tongue cancer from smoking cigars.
00:19:17.000 And back then, everybody knew that it had come from cigars.
00:19:21.000 So that was in 18, around, you know, 18, probably 1870, in the early 1870s.
00:19:28.000 So 100 years later, in the 1970s, There was still arguments about whether or not cigarettes cause cancer because the cigarette industry, tobacco industry, had created these think tanks and filled them with stables of these kind of mercenary scientists who were generating all this phony science that exculpated Tobacco from the cancer link.
00:19:52.000 So even though this industry, everybody knew this industry was killing one out of every four or five of its customers who used its product as directed and had been doing it for at least 100 years, they were able to escape regulatory oversight for a century by twisting and torturing science to serve their purpose.
00:20:15.000 And David, you and I have seen this.
00:20:17.000 We saw Monsanto Do that with PCBs and the General Electric Company and all of these other substances which, you know, are poisoning our children that are causing these chronic disease epidemics and that are exonerated, you know, one after the other by ostitutes on the payroll of these crooked industries who are making billions of dollars from these products.
00:20:42.000 Yes, you don't have to just torture people to get them to lie.
00:20:46.000 You can buy lies.
00:20:48.000 And that's really what happens most of the time in our current society.
00:20:53.000 You get a good salary if you work for an industry, but you're going to get fired if you don't toe the line.
00:20:59.000 You can get supported for your research by an industry.
00:21:04.000 But you're not going to continue to get support if you find results that don't agree with the bottom line of the industry.
00:21:12.000 The other side is that it's very difficult to avoid any conflicts of interest.
00:21:19.000 I think most academics do that, but not all of them do, because there's a lot of industrial funding for Research done in universities and colleges.
00:21:30.000 And again, if you want to maintain funding, you better not provide a result that's contrary to the bottom line of the industry.
00:21:41.000 And there are many results, many examples of individuals that have been hounded by the industries because their research leads to results which are unfavorable to the product of the industry.
00:21:57.000 Well, David, I wanted to say that if I manage to get elected president, I'm going to bring you in as my scientific advisor, the way that my uncle brought Jerome Wisner in.
00:22:07.000 And, you know, we're going to get rid of these exposures.
00:22:10.000 And we're going to get rid of particularly the exposures that are causing grain injuries in our children, that are causing Chronic disease epidemics like diabetes, like obesity, juvenile diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, all this retinue of autoimmune diseases that has disabled an entire generation of American children of allergic diseases, peanut allergies and eczema.
00:22:33.000 And all these neurodevelopmental diseases, including, you know, the recent drops in IQ all over the world.
00:22:40.000 We've seen there's something, as you probably know, called the Flynn effect that shows that IQ has increased in every decade since 1900.
00:22:50.000 And for the first time in the last A couple of decades, we've seen drops in global IQ, I think, of as much as six points.
00:22:58.000 You know, it's not worth it.
00:23:00.000 We need to eliminate these exposures.
00:23:02.000 And I know it's not going to be politically popular, but I'm also going to restore the bug splatter on everybody's windshield if I get in there.
00:23:13.000 These are the things I study, the things I care about, and I would love to work with you in any way I could.
00:23:24.000 Thank you, David.
00:23:25.000 I'll talk to you soon.
00:23:26.000 Thank you very much for joining us.
00:23:28.000 Take care.