I've read the proposed EPA guidelines. If you'd like to check out the document yourself, you can find it at:

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-GENERAL/2005/September/Day-12/g18010.htm

I don't deny that this is something to be concerned about HOWEVER it isn't quite as "let's poison children" as some advocacy groups claim.

Intentional dosing of children is ILLEGAL and any research that includes results from intentionally dosing children (ANY children) will not be supported, funded, or accepted by the EPA. Period.

HOWEVER... children can be used in observational studies so long as the researchers aren't changing the children's environment. So, for example, it is ok under EPA guidelines to monitor the health of children of farm workers so long as you don't tell them how much time to spend indoors vs out. And, as your alert states, it is ok under certain circumstances to include children as subjects in these observational studies without parental approval. For example, if they are wards of the state, then technically the government is their guardian and can give blanket approval.

I'll leave it to you to make your own decision about the ethics of observational studies on children. There are some pretty significant parental consent loopholes that I think should be resolved. Unfortunately, the period for public comment on the proposed regulations ended 12/12. Doesn't mean the public can't mount some sort of after the fact campaign though.

I think it is really important that people go to the source for issues like this. I find that very often both the pro-side (like the EPA press office) and the con-side (like enviromental advocacy groups) often put a pretty hard spin on the issues and the truth lies somewhere in between.