Permethrin pros and cons: Two Islanders argue tickicide endangers Island

When Tyler Heiden Jones and Amedeo Teseo bought their house on Shelter Island, it was to be a retreat from New York City and eventually a place to retire. Now they’re questioning if they made a mistake.

What’s troubling Mr. Heiden Jones and Mr. Teseo is the Island’s ongoing use of 4-poster units — feeding stands that brush deer with a tickicide, permethrin — meant to reduce the tick population and the diseases they carry.

Both men have careers that employ organic products. Mr. Heiden Jones comes from the cosmetic industry, working for several companies that stressed natural and organic products. He’s currently general manager of Kosé Corporation, which touts its use of only natural cosmetics.

Mr. Teseo is a horticulturist who has worked for the celebrated Wave Hill, a 28-acre public garden in the Bronx, and had private clients such as David Rockefeller and Martha Stewart. He’s turned down clients, he said, if they insist on using non-organic products on their properties.

“I don’t care, I’m not going to get myself sick,” he said. Instead, he tries to educate potential clients on safer alternatives for lawns and gardens, he said.

Both, through their work in finding natural instead of chemical solutions to problems, have been inspired to do extensive research into permethrin.

Observing the Deer & Tick committee for the past two months, Mr. Heiden Jones said members seem to have “a disregard for anything that contradicts” their personal opinions.

“They’re gung-ho on one method — 4-posters,” he said. He sees most of their comments are driven by emotion rather than facts or data.

RISK AND REWARD?

There are committee members strongly in favor 4-posters; others push for more attention to culling the Island’s deer herd; and most seek a balance between both approaches.

Mr. Heiden Jones and Mr. Teseo want the committee to seek out more scientific facts and data in making decisions about how to prevent tick-borne diseases.

They believe manufacturers of permethrin products have a strong, effective lobby to push its use, and point to a number of studies of permethrin that cause them to fear its ongoing use here. As concerned as they are about permethrin’s use on 4-posters, they’re bothered by neighbors who have their lawns sprayed with the tickicide on a regular basis and then let their children and grandchildren play on them.

Studies generally agree that children and those with compromised immune systems are more likely to experience sensitivity to the tickicide, but most conclude the effects on people are usually temporary and not serious.

A pesticide information project conducted in 1993 by the Cooperative Extension Offices of Cornell University, Michigan State University, Oregon State University and University of California at Davis found little indication of serious effects in humans and no conclusive evidence that it causes cancer. It did show that permethrin would kill fish if it got into waterways. The Cooperative Extension study showed “practically” no toxicity in birds, but advised it is toxic to bees. It was found to breakdown in soil and groundwater.

“Very little leaching of permethrin has been reported,” according to the study.

It tends not to be poisonous to most plants, although certain ornamental plants have been adversely affected, the study concluded.

And because of the low concentration used to treat fruits and grains, it tends to have no negative effects studies show.

LOOKING LONG-TERM

Still, the two men point to other studies showing it destroys forests, interferes with the growth of saplings and enables invasive plants to thrive.

A Journal of the American Medical Association report states that permethrin-based medication for head lice is less effective now than when it was first introduced because the lice have built up a resistance.

That led Mr. Heiden Jones and Mr. Teseo to speculate whether permethrin on 4-posters is as effective at killing ticks as it was when first used.

A National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC) publication reports permethrin is effective with insects because their systems can’t break it down quickly, so it causes them to have muscle spasms, paralysis and death. The NPIC is a joint effort between Oregon State University and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, according to the NPIC website.

“Cats are more sensitive to permethrin than dogs or people because it takes their bodies a long time to break down the ingredients,” the NPIC report states.

The health effects depend on the type of exposure, according to the NPIC, that describes dogs and cats who get the tickicide on their skin as twitching their paws, their ears or rolling on the ground. But for cats, they generally can’t walk normally and may experience muscle tremors and seizures and may die from the exposure, according to the report.

If the tickicide gets into soil, it’s broken down by microorganisms, according to the NPIC study.

For people, however, it usually passes through the body quickly, the NPIC states. It may result, however, in temporarily red eyes, scratchy throat, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting, the report stated.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, a division within the World Health Organization, said it could draw no conclusions that permethrin contributes to cancer, nor is there an indication it has an effect on women who used a 4 percent permethrin-based medication during pregnancy.

A DIFFERENT TAKE

On the other hand, a website called Beyond Pesticides — not associated with any universities or governmental bodies, but with board members who are medical doctors and academics from various universities whose area of expertise has been in environmental toxicology — reports that Persian Gulf War veterans exposed to both permethrin and DEET have experienced tremors, hyperactivity, ataxia, convulsions and paralysis.

The veterans reported chronic symptoms of headaches, loss of memory, fatigue, muscle and joint pain and an inability to coordinate muscle movements, according to Beyond Pesticides.

But there’s no information on the concentration of the chemicals used or of possible interactions between them.

What Mr. Heiden Jones and Mr. Teseo want, they said, is an updated study on both the long-range effectiveness and possible effects of permethrin, believing that the results will lead the committee to abandon its use.
Committee member Marc Wein has called for such a study and while others have agreed it’s needed, there has been no money from the federal, state or county governments to offset the cost.

FOLLOW THE CORN

The two men also take issue with Committee Chairman Mike Scheibel’s statements that deer tend not to migrate from their home turf and won’t leave it to seek out the corn that is used to bait 4-posters. In a recent conversation with the Reporter, Mr. Heiden Jones and Mr. Teseo cited their own experience this year with a large number of deer crossing their property. The men counted 21 deer crossing their property, an unusually high number, after three 4-poster units were deployed around their Rocky Point house.

After they spoke with Animal Control Officer Beau Payne and saw a map of where and when the units were placed they drew the conclusions that the deer were being attracted by the corn. They also suspect that providing food has the effect of increasing the herd.

In years past, they would see a doe with a single fawn. Now they tend to see a doe followed by two or more fawns. They believe the deer are healthier and better able to procreate since they have ready access to food.

An ongoing study in Washington State finds that its white tail deer continue to expand their range, while it’s generally observed that those in the Midwest and East have a home range of a few thousand acres. But the study has observed that even in those other areas, the migration for food and water is expanding.

As for suggestions that to save money, less corn be used and units be refilled less often, Mr. Payne explained recently that the Environmental Protection Agency dictates the amount of permethrin, the frequency of refilling the units with corn and other information considered optimal for their use. Localities using the units aren’t free to make changes to the regimen.