(Beyond Pesticides, October 14, 2025) With escalating environmental, health, climate crises tied to petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers, Beyond Pesticides is calling the transition to organic land management a mandate, not a choice. Additionally, as a solution, organic agriculture has returned competitive yields with chemical-intensive farming and higher profitability. In the context, the Beyond Pesticides and its network is supporting the Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act, S.1385 and H.R. 5703, to help grow the organic sector and asking members of Congress to cosponsor the legislation. If passed, OSRI will make strategic investments into the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) organic agriculture research, assisting farmers to meet the growing demand for organic products and keep organic dollars circulating in rural and regional economies. The House and Senate bills include the same legislative language. 

As the health, biodiversity, and climate crises escalate, Beyond Pesticides views organic agriculture and nonagricultural land management as a social good, necessary to a sustainable future. Given the dismantling of many federal environmental programs and the weakening or undermining of pesticide regulation, the transition to organic alternative has taken on increased importance, according to public health and environmental advocates. The true cost of conventional, petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use is integral to any calculation of the overall economic benefit of organic practices. Most of the costs of chemical-intensive land management are not borne by the pesticide user or chemical companies, but by society or taxpayers who bear the cost of environmental and human health harms, lost ecosystem services such as die-off of pollinators, water contamination, and the cost of fighting climate-induced fires and flooding. 

Research in recent months finds: consumption of organic animal-based and plant-based foods is positively associated with higher cognitive scores; organic rice paddies in the Mediterranean region have greater ecosystem biodiversity than their chemical-intensive counterparts; “organic farming equals conventional yield under irrigation and enhances seed quality in drought, aiding food security;” organic corn outcompetes with chemical-intensive corn in Kenya; organic agriculture fosters insect biodiversity that provides ecosystem services like pollination and biocontrol; and, organic grain cropping systems contain higher concentrations of total nitrogen and soil organic carbon, exceeding those found in chemical-intensive systems. 

OSRI (H.R. 5703) was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on October 6 by Representative Eugene Vindman (D-VA), with co-sponsor Michael Lawler (R-NY), and reintroduced in the U.S. Senate (S.1385) in April by sponsors John Fetterman (D-PA) and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), and cosponsors Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Peter Welch (D-VT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Angus King (I-ME). The legislation seeks to ensure “organics research is prioritized at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and [increased] funding for research agencies and universities, [as well as ] provid[ing] much needed support to the organic farming industry.” 

Specifically, OSRI strengthens federal commitments to organic agriculture by: 

• Creating the Coordinating and Expanding Organic Research Initiative at the USDA to assess and efficiently expand the agency’s organic research portfolio. 

• Increasing funding for the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) from its current budget of $50 million annually to $100 million by the end of the next Farm Bill. 

• Formally authorizing the Organic Transition Research Program to support farmers transitioning to organic practices, renaming the program to the Researching the Transition to Organic Program (RTOP). 

• Doubling Farm Bill support for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative to improve market transparency, help inform targeted market development investments, and improve risk management tools. 

• Directing the USDA’s Economic Research Service to evaluate the full economic, ecological, and community impacts of organic agriculture. 

At a time when food security and economic resilience are more important than ever, OSRI helps ensure that U.S. producers, not foreign suppliers, are meeting the needs of American consumers. 

Letter to U.S. Congress
A growing body of evidence demonstrates the environmental, health, climate, and economic benefits of organic agriculture. As crises escalate, organic agriculture and nonagricultural land management must be viewed as a social good, necessary to a sustainable future. Societal transition to organic practices requires a reorientation to its value as a public good. Given the dismantling of many federal environmental programs and weakening or undermining of pesticide regulation, it is critical to support the organic alternative. The true cost of conventional, petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use is integral to any calculation of the overall economic benefit of organic practices. Most of the costs of chemical-intensive land management are not borne by the pesticide user or chemical companies, but by society or taxpayers who bear the cost of environmental and human health harms, lost ecosystem services such as die-off of pollinators, water contamination, and the cost of fighting climate-induced fires and flooding. 

Research in recent months finds: consumption of organic animal-based and plant-based foods is positively associated with higher cognitive scores; organic rice paddies in the Mediterranean region have greater ecosystem biodiversity than their chemical-intensive counterparts; “organic farming equals conventional yield under irrigation and enhances seed quality in drought, aiding food security;” organic corn outcompetes chemical-intensive corn in Kenya; organic agriculture fosters insect biodiversity that provides ecosystem services like pollination and biocontrol; and organic grain cropping systems contain higher concentrations of total nitrogen and soil organic carbon, exceeding those found in chemical-intensive systems.

Fortunately, members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate have reintroduced the Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act, S.1385 and H.R. 5703, which will make strategic investments into USDA organic agriculture research, assisting farmers to meet the growing demand for organic products and keep organic dollars circulating in rural and regional economies.

In April, Senators John Fetterman (PA-D) and Sen. Adam Schiff (CA-D), reintroduced OSRI, S.1385, to ensure “organics research is prioritized at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and [increased] funding for research agencies and universities, [as well as] provid[ing] much needed support to the organic farming industry.” The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Peter Welch (D-VT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Angus King (I-ME). Representatives Lawler (R-NY) and Vindman (D-VA) have introduced a House version, H.R. 5703.

Specifically, OSRI strengthens federal commitments to organic agriculture by:

*Creating the Coordinating and Expanding Organic Research Initiative at the USDA to assess and efficiently expand the agency’s organic research portfolio.

*Increasing funding for the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) from its current budget of $50 million annually to $100 million by the end of the next Farm Bill.

*Formally authorizing the Organic Transition Research Program to support farmers transitioning to organic practices, renaming the program to the Researching the Transition to Organic Program (RTOP).

*Doubling Farm Bill support for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative to improve market transparency, help inform targeted market development investments, and improve risk management tools.

*Directing the USDA’s Economic Research Service to evaluate the full economic, ecological, and community impacts of organic agriculture.

At a time when food security and economic resilience are more important than ever, OSRI helps ensure that U.S. producers, not foreign suppliers, are meeting the needs of American consumers.

Please cosponsor OSRI.

(Beyond Pesticides, October 10-13, 2025) On Indigenous Peoples’ Day (Monday, October 13), Beyond Pesticides acknowledges that we recognize that the land we are situated on is the ancestral lands of the Ncothtank (Anacostan), and neighboring Piscataway and Pamunkey peoples, who have served as stewards for the region’s land, water, and air for generations. In reverence for the sovereignty and leadership of First Nations, and with respect for the wisdom of Indigenous peoples globally, environmental and public health advocates continue to advocate for the elimination of petrochemical-based pesticides and fertilizers, and the advancement of organic regenerative criteria that align with ecologically-based food and land management systems.

This year, Indigenous Peoples’ Day falls on the petrochemical fertilizer industry-supported Global Fertilizer Day, which promotes synthetic fertilizers, rather than recognizing the value of agroecology—the shared understanding of the inextricable link that binds agricultural and ecological systems.

Reflection of Turbulent U.S. Position on Indigenous Sovereignty

The federal holiday on October 13, traditionally known as Columbus Day, has for many been reoriented to recognize that the “discovery” of the Americas was, in fact, an invasion of the Western hemisphere by European colonists who expropriated unceded land and devastated Indigenous cultures, self-governance, and ways of life. In fact, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted in 2007, found:

“[I]ndigenous peoples have suffered from historic injustices as a result of, inter alia, their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, thus preventing them from exercising, in particular, their right to development in accordance with their own needs and interests.”

The Biden Administration took steps toward recognizing Indigenous systems when issuing proclamations on previous Indigenous Peoples’ Days in 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, as covered in previous Daily News. The 2024 Proclamation on Indigenous Peoples’ Day reads as follows:

“The history of America’s Indigenous peoples is marked by perseverance, survival, and a deep commitment to and pride in their heritage, right to self-governance, and ways of life. Since time immemorial, Indigenous peoples have built and sustained powerful Tribal Nations, cultivated rich cultures, and established vibrant communities. And their discoveries and knowledge still benefit us today. But because of our Nation’s failed policies of the past, generations of Native peoples have faced cruelty, violence, and intimidation. They were forced to leave their homelands, prohibited from speaking their own languages and practicing their sacred traditions, and forced into assimilation. Indigenous lives were lost, livelihoods were ripped away, and communities were fundamentally altered.  Despite the trauma and turmoil, Indigenous peoples have persisted and survived.  Their stories are testaments to the bravery and resolve of generations to preserve their heritage, cultures, and identities for those to come after them.”

In May, President Trump said he would not recognize Indigenous Peoples’ Day.

Numerous funding pools and programs are being targeted for dismantling, as highlighted by the National Indian Health Board, as well as a joint report produced by Portland State University (PSU) and Northwest Environmental Justice Center. The Trump Administration’s Discretionary Budget Request, proposed for Fiscal Year 2026, includes:

• 4 percent overall reduction in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) topline funding ($4.16 billion), and elimination of Environmental Justice programs, overlapping with Tribal Pesticide Programs;
• $617 million reduction to Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Programs that Support Tribal Self-Governance and Tribal Communities;
• The proposed elimination of the Indian Guaranteed Loan Program and Indian Land Consolidation Program (in partnership with the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD]);
• The proposed elimination of all EPA Pesticide Program Implementation Grants, including the elimination of multiple State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAGs) and Categorical Grants, including:
  • Diesel Emissions Reduction Grant Program
  • Small and Disadvantaged Communities Drinking Water Grants
  • Beaches Protection Grant Program
  • Brownfields Program
  • Environmental Information categorical grants
  • Lead Program
  • Nonpoint Source (Section 319 of the Clean Water Act) categorical grants
  • Pollution Control (Section 106 of the Clean Water Act) categorical grants
  • Pesticides Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Cooperative Agreement Program
  • Pesticides Program Implementation Grants Program
  • Pollution Prevention (P2) Categorical Grants Program
  • Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) Program
  • Radon Program categorical grants
  • State and Local Air Quality Management Program
  • Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Compliance Monitoring Program
  • Underground Storage Tanks (UST) Program
  • Wetland Program Development Grants Program
  • Resource Recovery and Hazardous Waste Grants
• $187 million cut to Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) construction program;
• Approximately $530 million of the $1.19 billion congressionally allocated funds to Northwest tribal nations in FY24 are at risk of being cut; sixty programs identified by PSU researchers were named in the GOP-led spending bill for potential cuts.
• Proposed elimination of various National Institutes of Health (NIH) programs, including:
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities ($534.4 million);
  • National Institute of Nursing Research ($197.7 million);
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health ($170.4 million);
  • Fogarty International Center ($95.2 million);
  • Office of the Director, Extramural Construction Grants for Biomedical Research Facilities ($80 million).
• Proposed reductions for several programs that specifically serve Tribal Nations in the Administration for Children, Families, and Communities (ACFC):
  • Proposed elimination of Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Formula Grants for Indian Tribes ($45.6 million decrease from FY25 levels);
  • Proposed elimination of Community Services Block Grant Formula Grants for Indian Tribes ($6.7 million reduction from FY25 levels).
• Proposed reduction of operating funds for Bureau of Indian Education post-secondary programs from $183.3 million to $22.1 million, including “career and technical schools, community colleges, four-year colleges and universities,” as reported by The Guardian in July 2025.

For additional information on federal funding cuts and further analysis of the Portland State University report, see recent coverage by Oregon Capital Chronicle.

Disproportionate Risks, Environmental Racism

In 2022, a report published in The Lancet Regional Health: Americas reflects on and identifies the “environmental violence related to pesticide exposure” that Indigenous Peoples in North America, and globally, have historically and continue to face on their lands. The authors of the report include experts from Harvard Medical School, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, United Nations Global Indigenous Youth Caucus, Mass General Brigham’s Department of Emergency Medicine, Division of Medical Toxicology, George Washington University, Stanford University, Boston Children’s Hospital, and Yale University. Three of the authors are members of First Nations, including Victor A. Lopez-Carmen of the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe and Yaqui Nation, Anpotowin Jensen of the Oglala Lakota Nation, and Dr. Marcos Moreno of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe.

The report unpacks the role of federal and international pesticide law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA] and Rotterdam Convention [see Daily News here], respectively) in perpetuating environmental violence by permitting the manufacturing and exportation of pesticides banned in the United States to Indigenous communities outside of the country, gathering testimonials from members of the Yaqui Nation in Sonora, Mexico. “More than 80 testimonies were collected according to official UN testimony standards by Indigenous rights organizations, including the International Indian Treaty Council (IITC), and submitted to the various UN human rights bodies,” say the authors. There are 20 testimonies with open access that can be read here.

Additionally, in a survey-based study published in Journal of Environmental Health in 2023, approximately 11,326 participants identifying as “American Indian and Alaska Native” shared their experiences with occupational and environmental exposures for the Education and Research Towards Health (EARTH) Study in the Southwest U.S. and Alaska. Pesticides and petroleum ranked first and second among the most commonly reported hazards for participants in the Southwest U.S. The goal of this study was to provide “baseline data to facilitate future exposure-response analyses.”

On the subject of international solidarity, earlier this summer, the United Nations observed International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples, a critical acknowledgement of Indigenous “food sovereignty, food security, biodiversity conservation and climate resilience,” as outlined in the report of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Eighteenth Session (July 14–18, 2025). As the report states, under Article 20 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, “Indigenous Peoples possess distinct economic systems rooted in traditional knowledge, practices and resources and have the right to sustain, strengthen and develop these systems in accordance with their cultures, traditions, values and aspirations.” It continues, “When deprived of their means of subsistence and development, this article provides that Indigenous Peoples are entitled to just and fair redress.” In a statement recognizing the importance of the day, Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, focuses on the need for Artificial Intelligence (AI) to recognize that, “Indigenous Peoples have long been stewards of knowledge, biodiversity, and sustainable living [and] [w]ithout their meaningful participation, AI systems risk perpetuating historical injustices and deepening the violation of their rights.” (See Daily News here.)

Call to Action

It is our collective responsibility as environmental and public health advocates to stand in solidarity with Indigenous peoples, groups, and organizations. Beyond Pesticides was created from concerns of agricultural in/justice stemming from continuous farmworker exposure to pesticides and synthetic agrochemical inputs.

• We highlight Harvest of All First Nations (HAFN) because of their leadership in Boulder County, Colorado (“within the territory of the Hinóno’éí (Arapaho) people, and that 48 contemporary tribal nations lived, camped, hunted, and traded here for centuries”) in advancing holistic, community-centered solutions and an organic future.
• HAFN’s Food Justice & Sovereignty Program (FJS) is aimed at cultivating equitable community spaces and biodiverse gardens, empowering underserved communities through hands-on education and opportunity to connect with the land. The core activities include free bilingual educational programming focused on Indigenous agricultural practices, cultural empowerment, and community revitalization. In addition, FJS grows over 1,000 pounds of ancestral foods and medicines, donating 100 percent of the harvest to food relief organizations throughout Boulder County.
• At the 35^th National Forum Series, Healthy Hives, Healthy Lives, Healthy Land: Ecological and Organic Strategies for Regeneration, you can learn more here about the environmental health effects facing Indigenous communities from Robert Shimek, former executive director of White Earth Land Recovery Project. There are also groups like Indigenous Environmental Network that are devoted to “address[ing] environmental and economic justice issues (EJ).”

While community-based, Indigenous-led organizations are continuing to model the restorative, organic agroecosystems that communities across the country wish to see, EPA announced a concerning update on October 7 in terms of the potentially indefinite termination of the Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee (PPDC), one of the only (somewhat) public forums to address EPA officials. The notice reads: “While undergoing its biennial review required by law, the charter for PPDC has temporarily expired as the agency makes some minor adjustments to the charter. While EPA is planning to expeditiously recharter PPDC, consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. § 1008(c)), the activities of PPDC and its workgroups will temporarily cease until rechartering is complete. As a result, EPA has cancelled the November 2025 full committee public PPDC meeting.”

Meanwhile, Beyond Pesticides has developed and actively maintains the Keeping Organic Strong resource hub, a one-stop shop for you to learn about changes in organic regulations. There is currently an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the integrity of national organic standards, as the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) convenes to discuss key issues and allowed materials in organic agriculture. Public Comment Webinars are scheduled to be held on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm EDT, pending updates on the government shutdown. For more background, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page. The Fall NOSB meeting will be held both in person in Omaha, Nebraska, and virtually, via live-stream from November 4, 2025, to November 6, 2025.

🆕 To advance principles of land management that align with nature, Beyond Pesticides is convening the 42^nd National Forum, The Pesticide Threat to Environmental Health: Advancing Holistic Solutions Aligned with Nature, bringing together scientists and land managers working to recognize and respect the ecosystems on which life depends. Scheduled to begin on October 29, 2025, 1:00-3:30pm (Eastern time, US), the virtual Forum is free to all participants. See our featured speakers! ➡️ Register here.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources: National Indian Health Board ; Portland State University ; Journal of Environmental Health ; The Guardian ; Oregon Capital Chronicle ; The Lancet Regional Health: Americas ; Harvest of All First Nations ; White Earth Land Recovery Project ; Indigenous Environmental Network

(Beyond Pesticides, October 9, 2025) The 42^nd National Forum Series, The Pesticide Threat to Environmental Health: Advancing Holistic Solutions Aligned with Nature—scheduled to begin on October 29, 2025, 1:00-3:30pm (Eastern time, US), will focus on aligning land management with nature in response to current chemical-intensive practices that pose a threat to health (see Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database), biodiversity, and climate. The virtual Forum is free to all participants. ➡️ Register here.

The Call to the Forum, states:

We are all affected by how land is managed, food is grown, and nature is protected. Different experiences and perspectives may bring us to care about health and the environment and the devastating adverse effects of pesticides and toxic substances. However, ensuring a livable future requires us to cultivate a collective concern about daily decisions on the management of our personal and community spaces, the practices used to grow the food we buy, and the care that we as a society give to complex and fragile interrelationships that sustain the natural world on which we depend.  

The Pesticide Threat to Environmental Health: Advancing Holistic Solutions Aligned with Nature challenges participants—as concerned families, community residents, purchasers of products, advocates for policy, decision makers, and workers—to think holistically about ways we can join together to solve the existential threats to health, biodiversity, and climate for which petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers are major contributors.  

Speakers will talk about strategies, literally building from the ground up. Whether living in a rural area, a city, or suburb, people are intricately linked by the shared environment. And for this reason, the Forum is intended to focus on embracing, in a practical way, natural systems that serve as the foundation for life. 

The Forum begins with case studies on what is being done now to integrate nature into the food production system in ways that are beneficial to the organisms in the environment and the health and economy of the areas where they live. The speakers will talk about their research and practical experience in identifying practices that embrace nature with a collaborative spirit and teach about the value of bats, birds, and beavers in productive agricultural and land management systems, exemplifying the path forward in all aspects of modern life. 

According to Beyond Pesticides, the costs (Tegtmeier and Duffy) of conventional, chemical-intensive agriculture, reliant on petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers, have proven to be unsustainable, with incalculable trillions of dollars in present harm and future catastrophic losses, or externalities, associated with current toxic products and practices that are widely used, but unnecessary to productivity and quality of life. The focus of this Forum session calls for a reorientation, replacing toxic practices with the nurturing of natural systems that sustain life. 

The speakers at the Forum provide an opportunity to step back, widen the lens, and think about redefining communities’ and individuals’ relationship with nature in all aspects of practices and advocacy.

➡️ Join the virtual Forum as participants come together to empower effective action and chart a path for a livable and sustainable future. Registration provides access to all sessions of the Forum.

Session 1: October 29, 2025, 1 – 3:30 PM Eastern, including Q&A 

Danilo Russo, PhD
Professor of Ecology, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

Danilo Russo, PhD, is a full professor of ecology, an international leader in bat research, and coauthor of A Natural History of Bat Foraging: Evolution, Physiology, Ecology, Behavior, and Conservation. In A Call to Protect Common Species: Bats as a Case Study (Conservation Letters, A Journal of the Society of Conservation Biology, 2025), he writes the following: “The ongoing biodiversity crisis highlights the need for targeted conservation efforts, yet the focus often remains on rare and endangered species. This overlooks the vital role of common species, which are the ecological backbone of ecosystems, supporting the stability and functioning of biodiversity. We argue that common species, especially their population dynamics and potential tipping points, are too often neglected and that their conservation is urgent. We illustrate this issue using bats (Chiroptera) as a model. This diverse mammalian order features key ecosystem service providers, including insectivores, pollinators, and seed dispersers. Bats are sensitive to anthropogenic pressures, and many species, including common ones, face population declines and the impact of ecosystem disruption. Research and conservation must urgently be expanded to include common species. Through case studies, we demonstrate how common bat species are indicators of environmental changes and the urgent need to monitor their populations. We provide recommendations for improving research, enhancing conservation policies, and adopting a more inclusive framework acknowledging the indispensable role of common species in ecosystem services and biodiversity.”

Dr. Russo’s interests include habitat selection, resource partitioning, sensory ecology, social behavior, evolutionary biology, biogeography, and invasion ecology. Much of his research focuses on bats, but he also works on a range of other model organisms to answer the specific questions he is interested in. In 2019–2023, he chaired the Scientific Committee of the UNEP/EUROBATS Agreement (i.e., the Agreement on the Conservation of Populations of European Bats). Dr. Russo proudly serves as the editor-in-chief of the top-ranking zoological journal Mammal Review. He is also the main proposer and the chair of the Management Committee of the EU COST Action “CLIMBATS” (CA18107). Professor. Russo has published ca. 170 scientific articles in internationally respected journals, including Nature Communications, Current Biology, Ecology Letters, and Biological Reviews. He has conducted fieldwork in many regions and environments across the globe, from African rainforests to Israeli deserts and European beech woodlands. Dr. Russo obtained a PhD in Zoology at the University of Bristol in 2002.

Jo Ann Baumgartner
Executive Director, Wild Farm Alliance, Watsonville, CA

Jo Ann Baumgartner is the executive director of the Wild Farm Alliance (WFA) and coauthor of the recently released Protecting Birds in Agricultural Landscapes: Reduce risks to beneficial birds on the farm (2025), and many publications on the intersection between biodiversity conservation and agriculture, including beneficial birds, the conservation mandates within the National Organic Program regulations, and the co-management of food safety and conservation.  

Wild Farm Alliance focuses on farmland flyways, farmland wildways, and farmland waterways, advising farmers on the installation of nest boxes, perches, and other habitat features that support beneficial birds that provide pest control services. WFA helps farmers with the planting of hedgerows, habitat patches, and corridors that facilitate movement of beneficial species and links wild areas with farmland. The organization also supports the restoration of riparian buffers and protecting waterways across farms, improving water quality, reducing erosion, and protecting aquatic and terrestrial species. By publishing guides, offering webinars, creating short videos, hosting field days and offering technical support, WFA enables farmers and land stewards to adopt wild farming practices. Before joining WFA, Ms. Baumgartner addressed crop, livestock, and fiber issues, was senior research editor for a book of California’s rare wildlife species, and was an organic farmer for over a decade. For her Master’s research in the Environmental Studies Department at San Jose State University, she studied bird predation of insects in apple orchards. Her undergraduate degree is in Soil and Water Science from University of California Davis. Ms. Baumgartner is based in Watsonville, California, and has been with WFA since the organization was founded in 2001. 

Sam Earnshaw
Author, Expert in Hedgerow and Farmscape Installation and Management, Watsonville, CA 

Sam Earnshaw is the author of Hedgerows and Farmscaping for California Agriculture: A Resource Guide for Farmers (2018), which is an acclaimed tool in the protection of ecological balance and increased farm productivity. (The guide is available on the Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF) website.) Since 1996, Mr. Earnshaw has planted hedgerows, windbreaks, grassed waterways, and riparian plantings on over 100 farms. He continues to work on the design and installation of conservation plantings and is a Technical Service Provider with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). Hedgerows and grassed waterways are increasingly being planted on farms and can have multiple functions, serving as: habitat for beneficial insects, pollinators and other wildlife; erosion protection and weed control; waterway stabilization; windbreaks; non-point source water pollution and groundwater pollution reduction; a surface water infiltration tool; a buffer from pesticide drift, noise, odors, and dust; living fences and boundary lines; biodiversity enhancement; and an aesthetic resource. Many hedgerow plants attract native bees and other pollinators, and some, such as citrus or other fruit trees and herbal plants, have economic returns. As with any planting, problems and issues can be dealt with through management practices.

In 1992, Mr. Earnshaw began working as Lighthouse Farm coordinator for CAFF, sponsoring monthly meetings and field tours for farmers, sharing techniques in biologically based farming techniques. His work with local California growers in Watsonville, Santa Cruz, Salinas, and Hollister through this program led to CAFF’s leadership in land use and water issues on the Central Coast. In the mid-1980s, he and his wife, Jo Ann Baumgartner, started their farm in Santa Cruz, California (Neptune Farms) and marketed organic vegetables and cut flowers to retail stores, farmers’ markets, and wholesalers. Mr. Earnshaw has a degree from University of California Berkeley (1974) with studies in forestry.

Tony Able
Chair, Southeast Beaver Alliance, Decatur, Georgia

Tony has a dedicated career championing clean water and healthy ecosystems. Tony retired in 2022 after 35 years of distinguished service with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). During his tenure, he specialized in natural stream and wetland restoration, contributing his expertise to a wide range of environmental issues, including watershed management, groundwater remediation, hazardous waste cleanup, non-point source pollution, wetlands protection, and water quality management. Mr. Able’s work with the Southeast Beaver Alliance focuses on how beavers can serve as critical partners in the restoration of streams and wetlands to promote environmental health. As part of his outreach, he leads educational tours at Legacy Park in Decatur, Georgia, which provide opportunities to see beaver ecology in action. Mr. Able also provides education about innovative techniques, such as fencing and flow devices, that allow humans to manage flooding and damage to infrastructure effectively, thereby decreasing human-beaver conflict concerns.

He is deeply involved in a variety of conservation efforts, currently serving on the Board of Directors of the Southeastern Trust for Parks and Land, where he helps to conserve natural landscapes and build public parks that benefit local communities and ecosystems.  He is also a dedicated volunteer with Trees Atlanta, where he plants native trees to support local biodiversity and ecosystem restoration. Mr. Able holds a Bachelor of Science in Geology from Georgia Southwestern University and a Master of Science in Geography from Western Kentucky University. His lifelong commitment to environmental stewardship continues to drive his work and volunteer efforts, making a lasting impact on the natural world and the communities he serves.

➡️ Join the virtual Forum as participants come together to empower effective action and chart a path for a livable and sustainable future. Registration provides access to all sessions of the Forum.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, October 8, 2025) A study, Pesticides detected in two urban areas have implications for local butterfly conservation, published in partnership with researchers at Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, University of Binghamton (New York), and University of Nevada, reports widespread pesticide residues in the host plants of butterflies located in green spaces in the cities of Sacramento, California, and Albuquerque, New Mexico. Just 22 of the hundreds of collected samples had no detectable residues, with all other samples containing some combination of 47 compounds of the 94 tested pesticides in the plant tissue. Of the 47 compounds, 4 are neonicotinoid insecticides linked to adverse effects for bee and pollinator populations based on previous peer-reviewed research. The fungicide azoxystrobin and the insecticide chlorantraniliprole were detected at lethal/sublethal concentrations, according to the report authors.

“Residential landscapes have high conservation potential for butterflies and other invertebrates,” says Aaron Anderson, co-lead author of the report and pesticide program specialist at Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. He continues: “But, these findings show how pervasive pesticide contamination can be in towns and cities, and underscore that protecting wildlife in these areas includes addressing pesticides.”

The report’s results underscore the pervasiveness of pesticide drift and dispel the myth that chemicals are only a problem in agricultural areas. Data has long shown that, while the volume of pesticide use in agricultural areas is the concentration of pesticide use per acre is higher in urban areas, “Homeowners use up to 10 times more chemical pesticides per acre in the urban environment than farmers’ usage on crops (US FWS, 2000),” according to a review in Science of The Total Environment. Toxic pesticides are employed for pest management in numerous nonagricultural public contexts, such as mosquito spraying, turf and athletic playing fields, public parks, and other common outdoor (and indoor) areas, as outlined in the scientific literature.

Background and Methodology

The “primary objective [of the study] was to describe the assemblage of pesticides that are present within urban landscapes and their field-realistic concentrations,” according to the authors. The researchers gathered samples from nineteen host plants in the spring of 2022 at 14 sites in California and 10 sites in New Mexico.

The sites include public parks and private yards or pollinator gardens, with volunteers from Native Plant Society and Master Gardeners offering access after a survey confirmed the suitability of the area based on previous/ongoing pesticide use.

At each site, leaf tissue was collected from between six to ten plants per species and stored at the Cornell Chemical Ecology Core Facility for safekeeping. A standardized pesticide extraction method (modified EN 15662 QuEChERS) screened for 94 pesticides (including metabolites or breakdown products) based on three criteria: extensive agricultural or residential use in the U.S., relevance to insects based on toxicity, and quantifiability via the selected methodology of liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).

Data for county pesticide application reports were provided by Sacramento and Yolo counties, with county-specific data for Albuquerque not included due to a lack of availability at the date of the survey. Application data for California included “all pesticide applications made to support agricultural production except for seed treatments.” The authors continue: “They also include non-agricultural pesticide applications made to maintain roadside and railroad rights-of-way, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, and any application of a restricted material and/or made by a licensed pest control operator (e.g., landscaping or pest management professional). Consumer home-and-garden uses are not included.”

The report was published on August 22, 2025, in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, a journal of Oxford University Press. Funding for this report included grants from the National Science Foundation and Carroll Petrie Foundation. The authors declared no conflicts of interest in writing this study.

Findings

As mentioned, the researchers found widespread contamination of host plants (314 out of 336) for butterfly populations and likely other beneficial insects and pollinators, with a mixture of detections reported on most plant samples spanning insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, one antibiotic, one degradate (breakdown product; think microplastic to plastic), and one adjuvant.

The following compounds (and their “families”) were screened and detected at least once across the samples:

• Fourteen Insecticides
  • Chlorantraniliprole (Diamide)
  • Methoxyfenozide (Growth Regulator)
  • Clothianidin (Neonicotinoid)
  • Imidacloprid (Neonicotinoid)
  • Thiamethoxam (Neonicotinoid)
  • Dinotefuran (Neonicotinoid)
  • Acephate (Organophosphate)
  • Carbaryl (Carbamate)
  • Fipronil (Phenylpyrazole)
  • Bifenthrin (Pyrethroid)
  • Spirotetramat (Ketoenol systemic)
  • Spinosad (spinosyn A/D) (Fermentation-derived)
  • Pyriproxyfen (Juvenile hormone analog)
  • Metaflumizone (Semicarbazone sodium channel blocker)
• Ten Herbicides
  • Atrazine (Triazine)
  • Ametryn (Triazine)
  • Propazine (Triazine)
  • Prometon (Triazine)
  • Terbutryn (Triazine)
  • Thiobencarb (Thiocarbamate)
  • S-metolachlor (Chloroacetanilide)
  • Oxyfluorfen (Diphenyl-ether)
  • Pendimethalin (Dinitroaniline)
  • Diuron (Substituted urea)
• Twenty Fungicides
  • Azoxystrobin (Strobilurin)
  • Pyraclostrobin (Strobilurin)
  • Kresoxim-methyl (Strobilurin)
  • Fluopyram (Succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI)
  • Boscalid (SDHI)
  • Propiconazole (Triazole)
  • Myclobutanil (Triazole)
  • Tebuconazole (Triazole)
  • Difenoconazole (Triazole)
  • Triadimefon (Triazole)
  • Chlorothalonil (Broad-spectrum)
  • Mancozeb (Dithiocarbamate)
  • Captan (Phthalimide)
  • Thiabendazole (Benzimidazole)
  • Thiophanate-methyl (Benzimidazole)
  • Metalaxyl (Acylalanine)
  • Iprodione (Dicarboximide)
  • Fenhexamid (Hydroxyanilide)
  • Cyprodinil (Anilinopyrimidine
  • Pyrimethanil (Anilinopyrimidine)
• Oxypyrimidine degradate (insecticide)
• Fumagillin (Antibiotic)
• Adjuvant (Piperonyl butoxide)

“The good news is that everyone can help protect wildlife in urban spaces by eliminating at-home pesticide use,” says Anderson. He continues: “This study improves our understanding of the risks pesticides pose to butterflies in urban landscapes, and will allow us to improve our conservation efforts for these species.”

Azoxystrobin and chlorantraniliprole were highlighted as specific compounds of concern due to their significantly high level of detection and known toxicity to insects. Azoxystrobin was found in 84% of Sacramento samples, with 51 plants exceeding residue levels of 0.67 ppb (parts per billion), which the authors attribute to a field-realistic level known in previous studies to show reduced monarch wing size at this level. With half-lives ranging from 0.4 to 17.5 days and repeated applications being a common practice, researchers warn of prolonged exposure. At the same time, chlorantraniliprole was detected in 33 plants, with 7 plants exceeding monarch larval LC50 values—LC50 referring to the lethal concentration at which 50 percent of the population would likely perish from exposure.

Previous Research

The widespread contamination of farmland, waterways, and whole ecosystems with neonicotinoid insecticides, treated seeds, and associated products emphasizes a critical need for stricter pesticide regulations, according to environmental advocates.

Reports published in the last year from state and local governments (Wisconsin and Iowa, respectively) and in partnership with academic institutions and nonprofit organizations (Connecticut and Minnesota, respectively) on the prevalence of neonicotinoid contamination in their waterways and soils are deeply concerning. For example, a recent report from University of Connecticut, Neonicotinoids in Connecticut Waters: Surface Water, Groundwater, and Threats to Aquatic Ecosystems, published in partnership with University of Connecticut and Norwalk River Water Keeper earlier this year found that 46% of Connecticut waterway samples are contaminated with levels of the neonicotinoid insecticide imidacloprid—one of the most widely used insecticides in the U.S. on lawn and golf courses. (See Daily News here.)

The toxicity and pervasiveness of neonicotinoids are reinforced by peer-reviewed scientific literature. Scientists at the Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Ulm University in Germany exposed embryos of South African clawed frogs (Xenopus laevis) to three neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, and its metabolite clothianidin), which led to developmental effects down to a molecular level. These frogs are a well-established model species often used in ecotoxicology studies as bioindicators for overall environmental and ecosystem health. When amphibian species like Xenopus laevis are exposed to contaminants in the water, it leads to negative impacts in the food chain and harms biodiversity. The study concludes that exposure to neonicotinoids directly or through contaminated water leaves entire ecosystems vulnerable. (See Daily News here.) Pesticide mixtures pose a serious threat to habitats and ecosystems surrounding agricultural fields, threatening crucial biodiversity hubs.

A study led by researchers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Cornell University, and Michigan State University detected 42 pesticides, including several neonicotinoids, such as imidacloprid and acetamiprid, at very high concentrations. One very significant result of the study is the finding that distance does not affect the number of active ingredients detected—in other words, just as many active ingredients are found at 32 meters from the field as at two meters. (See Daily News here.)

There is increased scrutiny on the failure of the pesticide registration process, as defined by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), to adequately assess the health effects of pesticides—including neonicotinoids more broadly. An analysis published in Frontiers in Toxicology last year by Natural Resources Defense Council, Center for Biological Diversity, and Center for Food Safety, finds serious flaws in the EPA process based on the first comprehensive assessment of unpublished rodent-based developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) studies, conducted between 2000-2003 and submitted by pesticide manufacturers as part of the registration process. (See Daily News here.)

Call to Action

You can take action today by learning more about non-toxic alternatives to pest management through our programs on Mosquito Management and Insect-Borne Diseases, Nontoxic Lawns and Landscapes, and other resources based on your interest. See here to access additional Daily News and to learn more about the scientific literature on neonicotinoids and other pesticides, please see our What the Science Shows on Biodiversity webpage.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2025) Published in Environment International, a study utilizing silicone wristbands provides a snapshot of chemical exposure in over 600 participants across 10 European countries. Using the wristbands as passive and noninvasive samplers, the researchers find that organic farmers’ wristbands contain lower pesticide levels than other groups, offering insight into the benefits of organic and disproportionate risks to farmers using chemical-intensive methods. The results further reveal prevalent environmental pesticide mixtures, in addition to highlighting exposure to current-use pesticides (CUPs) and legacy (banned) pesticides that occurs through multiple exposure routes to workers, residents, and consumers.

“Our study offers a comprehensive analysis of non-dietary pesticide exposure patterns among various populations across the EU [European Union], underscoring its widespread prevalence and identifying significant occupational and residential predictors,” the authors explain. As pesticide exposure occurs through both dietary and nondietary routes, such as through dermal (skin) contact and inhalation of contaminated air, there “is a growing need for aggregated [total; combined] exposure estimates across occupationally and nonoccupationally exposed populations.”

The study includes testing for 193 pesticides, both legacy pesticides and CUPs, captured in silicone wristbands worn by farmers, residents living close to treated fields (neighbors), and the general population (consumers) in a total of 641 participants. Through liquid and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, the researchers detect 173 out of the 193 pesticides (89%) across all samples. “Per wristband 9 – 74 (median of 36) pesticides were detected in conventional farmers (FC), 8 – 66 (median of 20) in organic farmers, 3 – 66 (median of 20) in neighbors and 2 – 54 (median of 17) in consumers,” the authors report.

Notably, insecticides, such as permethrin and chlorpyrifos, are the most commonly detected across all groups (>85%). The analysis of pesticide mixtures also finds that one combination of three insecticides occurs frequently, in 72 % of all samples, of permethrin, chlorpyrifos, and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE), a breakdown product of the legacy pesticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). DDE is still found among the most common food residues in the United States. (See Daily News coverage here and here.)

Background

“Given the co-occurrence in the environment of both legacy pesticides and several CUPs, concerns have been raised regarding possible health risks from these mixtures,” the researchers note. (See here.) The connection of single pesticide exposure to a myriad of adverse health effects is widely documented, while research on pesticide mixtures is showing not only cumulative effects, but synergistic effects that magnify the toxicity of individual chemical exposure. (See Beyond Pesticides’ coverage on synergy here and the Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database for more information.)

Based on previous research, in the EU, there are over 500 active substances authorized for professional use. The EU, however, relies more on the precautionary principle than the approach of the U.S. for risk-based regulation to establish mitigation measures. One study, titled “The USA lags behind other agricultural nations in banning harmful pesticides,” highlights how many pesticides still widely used in the U.S., with upwards of tens to hundreds of millions of pounds applied annually, are banned in other countries, including those in the EU.

“Pesticides banned in the EU account for more than a quarter of all agricultural pesticide use in the USA,” the study authors write, which they point out includes use of pesticides that “have not appreciably decreased in the USA over the last 25 years,” with the majority staying constant or increasing in volume over the last 10 years. With higher rates of pesticide use in the U.S., including pesticides banned in the EU countries, among others, and deficiencies in regulatory approaches, the results of the current study in the EU are even more concerning for implications in the United States.   

The various exposure routes to pesticides leave all individuals at risk. While research indicates diet as a main contributor to pesticide exposure for nonoccupationally exposed populations, “some recent studies suggest an additional contribution from other routes of exposure, such as inhalation and dermal exposure, as equally or possibly more important than dietary exposure for certain CUPs.” (See here, here, here, and here.) Understanding all exposure routes, as well as cumulative and aggregate exposure, to pesticides allows for a more accurate representation of body burden and the subsequent health risks.

Study Methodology and Results

With an objective of assessing exposure to multiple pesticides and their environmental transformation products in different populations across 10 European countries, this study uses silicone wristbands as passive samplers to trap pesticide residues encountered by individuals. Silicone wristbands offer an approach to pesticide monitoring that is non-invasive, lower cost, and minimally disruptive to participants, while also demonstrating efficacy in capturing exposures to different pollutants, including pesticides. (See scientific literature here, here, and here.)

These wristbands are “a good proxy for inhalation and dermal exposure routes, since [they] capture volatile and semi-volatile compounds that are in the air and also compounds that adhere to the skin or are dermally excreted, offering a valuable alternative to understand the contribution of environmental pollution to personal exposure levels,” the researchers state.

As part of the SPRINT project, funded by the EU Horizon 2020 program, this study pertains to the 2021 spraying season. Participants were recruited in each country (Slovenia, Portugal, Switzerland, Spain, the Netherlands, Italy, France, Denmark, the Czech Republic, and Croatia) in areas that cover the different crops throughout the European climate zones.

The 641 participants are defined as farmers, neighbors (i.e., people living in the vicinity of agricultural fields and without being involved professionally in farming), or the general population (i.e., people living at greater distances from the fields than neighbors and having no professional involvement in farming), and wore the silicone wristbands continuously for one week during the 2021 growing season. Participants also answered a questionnaire with information regarding their lifestyle, including questions about dietary habits, time spent indoors, number and type of pets, and professional and home use of pesticides.

The results show that all samples contained a mixture of substances, with different populations having higher numbers of certain types of pesticides. “From the 60 analyzed fungicides, 57 showed significant differences in detection frequency between the wristbands of at least two different groups,” the authors write. Of the 54 herbicides analyzed, 43 show significant differences. “Farmers in conventional fields had higher detection frequencies for several fungicides and herbicides compared to other groups,” the researchers report. For insecticides, 44 of the 59 analyzed compounds show significant differences between groups; however, the higher detection frequency in farmers was less pronounced.

In performing statistical analyses, the data reveals that four predictors are shown to be related to higher pesticide detection, including being responsible for pesticide spraying application, use of pesticides at home, working in the agricultural sector, and having pets in the last 12 months. In summary, the authors say, “Our study revealed substantial variation in the occurrence of pesticides across different population groups, with a higher detection among farmers from conventional fields.”

Previous Research

Within the study, the researchers reference scientific literature with results that support and further explain their findings. This includes:

• A study performed in the Netherlands reports similar predictors for residential pesticide exposure.
• Research finds banned pesticides, which are very persistent and widespread, linked to “possible illegal use and/or long-range atmospheric transport pesticides in the gas-phase.” (See here and here.)
• Pesticide concentrations in the same order of magnitude as the current study are noted in previous published studies. (See research here and here.)
• A pilot study in the Netherlands finds the fungicides boscalid and azoxystrobin in most of the wristbands and in the same concentration ranges as the current study.
• “The presence of pets was a significant predictor for an increase in certain pesticide concentrations in wristbands, such as propoxur, fipronil and its transformation product sulfone. This finding provides robustness to the model results, as both are not authorized for agricultural uses, but commonly used in a home-setting with an authorization as biocide application, e.g. in anti-flea treatment of pets.”
• Another study reports “high levels of fipronil in silicone samplers from participants who reported using flea and tick products containing fipronil on their dog.”

See additional examples of silicone wristbands used for pesticide monitoring in Daily News coverage here, here, here, and here.

Organic Solution

As this study confirms, organic farming methods provide lower exposure to individual pesticides and their mixtures. As Beyond Pesticides has previously reported, there is pesticide pollution impacting organic practices due to pesticide drift and the persistence of these chemicals in soil and water. The full transition to organic land management, including the elimination of petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use, will achieve the lowest exposure possible.

Organic practices mitigate pesticide risks and protect and enhance biodiversity, safeguard public health, and mitigate climate change. To learn more about the benefits of organic land management, see here and here. Become an advocate for organic parks by engaging with your community leaders and advertising your commitment to pesticide-free spaces with a “Pesticide Free Zone” sign. Help support Beyond Pesticides’ mission by becoming a member or making a gift contribution today.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Figueiredo, D. et al. (2025) Non-dietary personal pesticide exposure using silicone wristbands across 10 European countries, Environment International. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412025004854.

(Beyond Pesticides, October 6, 2025) [Comments are due by 11:59 pm ET on October 8, 2025.] As the public comment period for the upcoming National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting closes on October 8 at 11:59pm, under consideration is an issue that goes to the heart of organic integrity—contamination-free compost. In response to a petition from the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI), a certifier of packaging and products for commercial composting, the NOSB’s Crops Subcommittee (CS) voted to keep synthetic compostable materials out of compost permitted in certified organic production. According to comments submitted by Beyond Pesticides, compost from plant and animal materials is of fundamental importance to organic practices. Composting is one way that organic growers meet the requirement in law to “foster soil fertility, primarily through the management of the organic content of the soil through proper tillage, crop rotation, and manuring.” The integrity of organic production has always been tied to the integrity of compost.

Beyond Pesticides provides the public with comments on all the issues before the NOSB, which can be accessed here: Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page. (The organization urges members of the public to copy and paste from the issues below or Fall 2025 issues page. Submissions can be made at Regulations.gov. Note: Regulations.gov has disabled the one-click option. Comments are due by 11:59 pm ET on October 8, 2025.) 

Contaminants in broadly defined “compost feedstocks” cannot be predicted, but history suggests that more persistent toxic pollutants will be found. Under the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), the NOSB controls allowed synthetic materials in organic production. Research continues to raise alarms about the hazards associated with the use of plastic, including the microplastic particles that are distributed in alarming amounts throughout the environment and taken up by organisms, including humans. Only synthetic materials that are specifically added to the National List through the prescribed process should be allowed in compost destined to be an input into organic production, according to the Crops Subcommittee and Beyond Pesticides, which urges that BPI be denied. 

Beyond Pesticides has taken the following positions on key issues, and urges the public to comment:

Keep synthetic “compostables” out of organic compost 
Please support the proposal of the Crops Subcommittee (CS) to keep synthetic compostable materials out of organic compost. Compost from plant and animal materials is of fundamental importance to organic practices. Composting is one way that organic growers meet the requirement in law to “foster soil fertility, primarily through the management of the organic content of the soil through proper tillage, crop rotation, and manuring.” The integrity of organic production must be maintained by preserving the integrity of compost. Contaminants in broadly defined “compost feedstocks” cannot be predicted, but history suggests that more persistent toxic pollutants will be found. The NOSB must maintain control over synthetic materials allowed in organic production, as required by the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Research continues to raise alarms about the hazards associated with the use of plastic, including the microplastic particles that are distributed in alarming amounts throughout the environment and taken up by organisms, including humans. Only synthetic materials that are specifically added to the National List through the prescribed process should be allowed in compost destined to be an input into organic production. The NOSB should reopen the workplan item on contaminated inputs that is currently on hold. 

Eliminate nonorganic ingredients in processed organic foods as a part of NOSB’s sunset review
Materials listed in §205.606 in the organic regulations are nonorganic agricultural ingredients that may comprise 5% of organic-labeled processed foods. The intent of the law is to allow restricted nonorganic ingredients (fully disclosed and limited) only when their organic form is not available. However, materials should not remain on §205.606 if they can be supplied organically, and we can now grow virtually anything organically. The Handling Subcommittee (HS) needs to ask the question of potential suppliers, “Could you supply the need if the organic form is required?” Materials on §205.606 up for sunset review this year made from agricultural products that can be supplied organically should be taken off the National List of allowed materials. 

When the HS examines the health effects of materials on §606, it must include the effects of chemical residues, impacts on the environment, and worker exposure. It is absurd to judge whether may be allowed by looking at health and environmental effects of the pure substance in isolation from the effects of its production, use, and residues.

Allow the use of pear ester in organic production only as a component of traps 
Pear ester is a chemical synthesized to be structurally and functionally identical to a volatile substance emitted by mature and ripening pears and other fruits. It is attractive to codling moths and is used in various ways to control them. As a component of traps, it is consistent with organic practices and can be helpful to organic fruit growers. Microencapsulated pear ester distributes microplastics in the environment and is incompatible with organic practices.

Keep synthetic hormones out of organic milk production 
Oxytocin is available as a synthetic hormone and currently allowed in organic dairy. A vague annotation has resulted in some producers using it inappropriately for milk letdown. Oxytocin is a hormone and, even if rarely used, it leaves organic dairy farmers open to valid criticism that they can still use hormones. For this reason, the two largest organic milk buyers in the U.S. did not support it remaining on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances. Alternative treatments are available. The NOSB should allow oxytocin to sunset or be removed from the National List. If it remains on the National List, the NOSB should adopt the recommended annotation, “use in post parturition therapeutic applications within 3 days after birth. It may not be administered to increase an animal’s milk production or for milk letdown.”  

Eliminate the blanket allowance of “inert ingredients”  
Despite repeated recommendations from the NOSB, the National Organic Program at USDA has not moved to evaluate individual “inert” ingredients, which may be more toxic than active ingredients allowed in organic production and make up the largest part of pesticide products. The NOSB should delist them unless individually reviewed under the National List review standards. 

Ensure that online organic consumers have full information 
The law requires that organic products are labeled with the organic seal, ingredients, and identification of the certifier. This labeling is not always visible to online consumers. The NOP must require full labels to be provided in online sales platforms. 

Beyond Pesticides provides the public with comments on all the issues before the NOSB, which can be accessed here: Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page. (The organization urges members of the public to copy and paste from the issues below or Fall 2025 issues page. Submissions can be made at Regulations.gov or through our Action pages linked below. Note: Regulations.gov has disabled the one-click option. Comments are due by 11:59 pm ET on October 8, 2025.) 

📣 Protect Organic Integrity through Continuous Improvement [synthetic compostables, synthetic hormones in organic milk, inerts, full labeling information]

📣 Last Chance This Fall To Tell the NOSB To Uphold Organic Integrity [synthetic compostables, nonorganic ingredients/sunset review, pear ester]

The Fall National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting is scheduled for November 4 – 6, 2025. The public meeting of the NOSB is preceded by an opportunity for public comments in writing and via online webinars on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm ET. 

(Beyond Pesticides, October 3, 2025) A study published in European Journal of Nutrition finds that consumption of organic animal-based and plant-based foods is positively associated with higher cognitive scores. Among women, there was both better cognitive function before testing (at baseline) and up to a 27 percent lower MCI [mild cognitive decline] score over the course of the study period for participants identifying as organic consumers, even if there was consumption of just one of the seven food categories.

Over the 3.7-year study period, the authors conclude, “Our study found that organic food consumption was associated with higher cognitive scores for both sexes, yet the association with reduced incidence of MCI was observed exclusively in female participants.”

While it is important to note that additional research is necessary to corroborate these results, these findings support the calls of environmental and public health advocates across the country who are calling for political leaders to take action by mandating organic-sourced meals for public institutions and programs, including National School Breakfast and School Lunch Program, hospitals, public universities, and other institutions.

Background and Methodology

The data for this study is drawn from robust datasets for the U.S. population, including 2012 data from University of Michigan’s Health and Retirement Study (HRS) – “a longitudinal panel study that surveys a representative sample of more than 20,000 Americans over the age of 50 every two years” —as well as an HRS supplemental study, the Health Care and Nutrition Study (HCNS)—“ utilizing validated Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ) to assess food consumption and nutritional status, conducted in 2013.” In terms of sample selection, 6,077 participants were selected for a cross-sectional analysis, and 4,882 participants were selected for a longitudinal analysis. Participants from the initial pool (8,021 participants) were excluded from the two analyses based on age, conflicting responses for organic food consumption, negative sample weights, extreme total energy intake, or missing baseline cognitive data. The median follow-up between studies was 3.7 years because of the structure of HRS and differing follow-up durations for participants based on when they were last observed, identification of cognitive impairment, or when they dropped out of the study.

Organic food consumption was measured based on two questions in the FFQs:

1. “In the last year, have you eaten any organic food? (Yes/No)”
2. “Which organic food have you eaten in the last year?” with categories including milk, eggs, meat, fruits, vegetables, bread/cereals, and prepared frozen meals.

If participants answered yes to question one, they are considered organic food consumers, with foods categorized based on whether they are animal-based (e.g., milk, eggs, meat) or plant-based (e.g., fruits and vegetables). The Organic Diet Diversity Score (ODDS) was calculated as the number of food categories participants consumed out of the seven total food categories (milk, eggs, meat, fruits, vegetables, bread/cereals, and prepared frozen meals). A high ODDS score is greater than three, whereas a low score is less than three.

The researchers used a methodology from previous studies to measure cognitive function and gleaned scores for measuring mild cognitive impairment (MCI) through the “Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status” (TICS). TICS measures memory (immediate and delayed 10-noun recall), working memory (“the number of times participants can consecutively subtract seven from 100 over five trials”), and mental processing speed (counting backwards by multiples of 10). The Langa-Weir classification method was utilized for HRS participants to organize three score ranges: dementia (0-6), middle cognitive impairment (7-11), and normal cognitive function (11-27).

There are other covariates (independent variables that may impact the study results) that were kept in mind, including participant demographics, health behaviors, existing medical conditions, and diet quality (based on the Alternative Mediterranean Diet Score). HR stands for hazard ratio, a score used to analyze mild cognitive impairment over time. A hazard ratio of less than one indicates decreased risk, while a HR greater than one indicates increased risk. For further information on statistical analyses, see page 4 of the study.

The authors of this study are based at Southern Medical University and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research in Guangdong, China. They declared that no additional funding was received for drafting this study.

Results

“[W]e revealed a clear relationship between a higher level of organic dietary diversity with lower incident cognitive impairment among females,” the researchers state. Sixty-one percent of cross-sectional participants identified as organic food consumers. In terms of ODDS scores, female participants with greater diversity of organic food consumption “had better cognitive scores” and “only female consumers with high ODDs were associated with lower incident MCI.” The researchers conducted sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of their findings: “Null associations between consuming organic food (including both sub-categories) and MCI incidence were detected among male consumers.” After conducting a Kaplan-Meier analysis (see Figure 2, page 7, in the study to learn more), the researchers concluded that “there was no association detected among male consumers.”

“After a median follow-up of 3.7 years,” the hazard ratio (HR) for organic animal food consumers was 0.81. This finding is noteworthy because it indicates that “organic animal food consumption was significantly associated with declined incident MCI [meaning that there was a lower risk of developing mild cognitive decline over time.” As a result, with a 95 percent confidence interval (statistical significance), organic consumers in this study had a 19 percent lower risk of developing mild cognitive impairment over time, after adjusting for the covariates. The beta coefficients (β) represent the association between organic food consumption and cognitive test performance at baseline (before tests were conducted). In other words, a beta coefficient of ~0.3–0.4 means that, on average, organic consumers score about 0.3 to 0.4 points higher on the cognitive tests compared to non-organic consumers. The beta coefficients for organic animal-based food and plant-based food were .35 and .38, respectively. While this appears marginal, the findings were statistically significant and accounted for confounding health variables. Included above is a summary table listing the analysis type (cross-sectional versus longitudinal), exposure to organic food, tested outcome (cognitive score, incident MCI), and key results.

Previous DN

Adopting a fully organic diet can reduce pesticide levels in urine within just two weeks “by an average of 98.6 [percent]” and facilitate faster DNA damage repair relative to a diet of food grown with chemical-intensive practices, according to findings from a randomized clinical trial published in Nutrire. Researchers at the Federal University of Rio Grande (Brazil) conducted this study, which was a double-blind randomized controlled trial, meaning that neither the researchers nor the participants knew who was going to be assigned to each group, minimizing bias. (See Daily News here.)

A 2023 study published in Environmental Health Perspectives finds urinary levels of glyphosate significantly decreased through an organic diet for pregnant individuals living further than 0.5km (~1,640 feet) from an agricultural field. However, the study finds that adopting an organic diet among pregnant individuals living closer than 0.5km to an agricultural area does not significantly decrease glyphosate levels, indicating alternative sources of contamination outside of diet. (See Daily News here.) A 2020 study published in Environmental Research finds that glyphosate levels can be reduced by up to 70 percent after just one week on a fully organic diet. Research participants comprised individuals from four geographically and racially diverse U.S. families hailing from Baltimore (Maryland), Atlanta (Georgia), Minneapolis (Minnesota), and Oakland (California). Urine samples were collected during a six-day period in which all subjects consumed a diet of conventionally grown and raised foods, and again during a six-day period of only organic food consumption. Although the study sample was small (16), the number of urine samples assayed (158) was sufficient for researchers to make statistically significant conclusions. (See Daily News here.)

To learn more about the connection between organic land management and public health, see “Cultivating Healthy Communities” – the 2021 National Pesticide Forum hosted by Beyond Pesticides and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

Call to Action

Beyond Pesticides has developed and actively maintains the Keeping Organic Strong resource hub, a one-stop shop for you to learn about changes in organic regulations. There is currently an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the integrity of national organic standards, as the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) convenes to discuss key issues and allowed materials in organic agriculture. The deadline for written comments on the Fall 2025 issues is 11:59 pm EDT on October 8, 2025, and the Public Comment Webinars will be held on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm EDT.

The public can see a discussion of issues before the board and submit comments (using Beyond Pesticides’ positions as a foundation) by October 8. To submit comments, please click HERE. For more background, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page. The Fall NOSB meeting will be held both in person in Omaha, Nebraska, and virtually, via live-stream from November 4, 2025, to November 6, 2025.

You can also take action here by contacting your members of Congress to co-sponsor and support organic bills that have recently been introduced in the first year of the 119^th Session of Congress.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source: European Journal of Nutrition

(Beyond Pesticides, October 2, 2025) This year marks an advancement of various state-level neonicotinoid laws and regulations, including in Maine, Vermont, and Connecticut—emphasizing surging public support for pesticide reforms.

The Maine legislature passed, and Governor Janet Mills (D-ME) signed into law on July 22, 2025, LD 1323, which commissions the Board of Pesticide Control to study the impacts of neonicotinoids and neonicotinoid-treated seeds, which advocates hope will help advance future legislation to prohibit the use, distribution, and sale of neonicotinoid insecticide products. Meanwhile, after years of grassroots advocacy, the Connecticut legislature advanced, and Governor Ned Lamont (D-CT) signed SB 9 into law, which will partially restrict the nonagricultural use of neonicotinoids on turfgrass, starting in 2027. There was a more comprehensive effort that failed to move forward (HB 6916), which would have gone further by restricting or prohibiting the use of neonicotinoids on trees, shrubs, and treated seeds (see here for Beyond Pesticides comments).

Maine and Connecticut join eleven other states (California, Nevada, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, New York, and Vermont) in taking steps to restrict or prohibit the use of neonicotinoids. (See Daily News here.) Whether it is a campaign to ban glyphosate, paraquat, chlorpyrifos, atrazine, or any of the hundreds of individual active ingredients registered with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), environmental and public health advocates grow concerned that the whack-a-mole approach to pesticide reform fails to meet the moment of cascading crisis on stability of planetary boundaries, including public health, biodiversity, and climate resilience.

Maine

The original Maine legislation had four fundamental changes to neonicotinoid restrictions in the state, which unfortunately did not make it into the final bill:

1. Crop-specific bans for outdoor applications for crops “during bloom.” There is also a prohibition of post-bloom use on leafy vegetables, brassicas, bulb vegetables, herbs and spices, and stalk/stem/leaf petiole vegetables. The ban is also extended to soybean and cereal grains (all these stipulations are subject to “emergency” exemptions (discussed below). This would have gone into effect on January 1, 2026.
2. Bans the sale, distribution, or use of neonicotinoid-treated seeds for soybeans and cereal grain. This would have gone into effect on January 1, 2026.
3. Similar to New York and Vermont, there is an exemption process where the Commissioner of Agriculture can issue exemptions based on “agricultural” or “environmental” emergencies for the use of neonicotinoids once this law goes into effect. To be eligible for exemption, farmers are required to go through integrated pest management training, conduct a pest risk assessment, and maintain use records for treated seeds (if approved). Exemption orders do not last longer than a year, and they are specific to a certain geographical area, “which may include specific farms, fields or properties.”
4. Exemption orders would be reported to the Committee on Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry, mirroring Vermont’s approach but distinguishing itself from New York’s failure to incorporate this specific measure for accountability. (See Daily News here.)

The bill, as passed, will require the Board of Pesticide Control to study the impacts of neonicotinoid-treated seeds and neonicotinoids broadly on public health and pollinator health. The Board is required to submit a preliminary report by January 15, 2026, to the Joint Standing Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry; a final report with recommendations is due by January 15, 2027. (Learn more here.)

Before this law, Maine had already taken a leadership role by eliminating all outdoor (nonagricultural) uses of these chemicals, even by lawn care companies, back in 2021. (See Daily News here.)

There is a grassroots movement across the state that is not only standing up for community health but also actively defending local laws against industry influence and public complacency. Just earlier this year, the South Portland City Council was considering an exemption for their municipal pesticide and fertilizer ordinance to permit the use of the diamide insecticide chlorantraniliprole/acelepryn to address issues of grub control. A campaign to reject the waiver was led by Avery Yale Kamila, cofounder of Portland Protectors, and supported by Beyond Pesticides. The proposed change was soundly defeated on Monday, March 3, 2025, after public engagement and a near-unanimous city council vote [6-1 vote]. The adoption of the Portland pesticide ordinance followed the adoption of similar laws in Ogunquit, neighboring South Portland, and other jurisdictions like the City of Takoma Park and Montgomery County, both in Maryland. Thirty-four jurisdictions throughout Maine have restricted pesticides, including on public and private property (See Daily News here.)

Connecticut

The Connecticut legislation (both SB 9, which passed, and HB 6916, which did not) fails to address the broad scope of pesticide contamination across agricultural and non-agricultural uses; more concerning, however, is the failure to incentivize a transition to organic land management. In testimony, Beyond Pesticides lays out four main changes it says are needed for a neonicotinoid (or any individual or class of pesticides) prohibition in legislation:

• To this end, the following provision in italics (below) in the bill should be stricken: Section (c) (1) The Commissioner of Energy and Environmental Protection may issue a written order to suspend the provisions of subsection (b) of 1 of this section if the commissioner determines that: . . (C) the use of a neonicotinoid will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment, including on nontarget organisms, surface water quality and groundwater quality.”
• Similarly, the following text in italics in the same section should be stricken: “(D) no other less harmful pesticide or pest management practice will be effective to address such environmental emergency.”
• Provision (D) should be replaced with the following language: (D): “no other pest management practice, including organic management practice with delineated allowable substances, will be effective to address such environmental emergency.”
• The following new section should be added to define “delineated allowable substances:”
  • Natural, organic or “non-synthetic.” A substance that is derived from mineral, plant, or animal matter and does not undergo a “synthetic” process as defined in the Organic Foods Production Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6502(21), as the same may be amended from time to time.
  • Pesticides determined to be “minimum risk pesticides” pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and listed in 40 C.F.R. § 152.25(f)(1) or (2), as may be amended from time to time.

Based on data collected from government sources and independent monitoring, a multidisciplinary team of researchers at the University of Connecticut finds that 46% of Connecticut waterway samples are contaminated with levels of the neonicotinoid insecticide imidacloprid—one of the most widely used insecticides in the United States on lawn and golf courses. The authors relied on federal data from EPA and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), state-level data from Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT-DEEP), and a small-scale data collection study by the Clean Rivers Project funded by the nonprofit Pollinator Pathway, Inc. In their report, Neonicotinoids in Connecticut Waters: Surface Water, Groundwater, and Threats to Aquatic Ecosystems, the researchers provide the most comprehensive view to date of neonicotinoid levels in Connecticut and offer critical recommendations for future testing within the state and nationally, given glaring data gaps. (See Daily News here.)

Vermont

The Vermont legislature passed H.706 in June of last year—a bill that narrows and reduces the use of neonicotinoid insecticides and neonicotinoid-treated seeds. The legislature came together to override a bill vetoed by Governor Phil Scott (R). At the time of passage, there were still major questions regarding best management practices for neonicotinoids and neonicotinoid-treated seeds that would be promulgated by the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets (VAAFM) moving into this year.

Beyond Pesticides submitted comments on proposed Rule 25P031, Best Management Practices for the Use of Neonicotinoid Treated Article Seeds and Neonicotinoid Pesticides, urging VAAFM to adopt the implementation of an Ecological Pest Management (EPM) or strongly defined Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program for indoor environments, and Organic Land Care (OLC) practices in the outdoor environment. The specific additions for the best management practices include the following:

• Add the definition of EPM (or Strong IPM) to include:
  • “Eliminates or mitigates economic and health damage caused by pests;
  • Minimizes, or eliminates to the extent possible, the use of pesticides and the risk to human health and the environment associated with pesticide applications; and, c. uses integrated methods, site or pest inspections, cultural practices, pest population monitoring, an evaluation of the need for pest control, and one or more pest management methods, including sanitation, structural repairs, cultural practices, habitat manipulation, mechanical and living biological controls, other nonchemical methods, and, if nontoxic options are unreasonable and have been exhausted, a defined set of least-toxic pesticides.”
• Add the six EPM Program essentials, including Prevention, Identification, Monitoring, Record-Keeping, Action Levels, Tactics Criteria, and Evaluation (more details in the next section).
• Add definition for what is considered a “least-toxic pesticide” to include: a. EPA-classified minimum risk pesticides (7 CFR 205.601) and b. USDA organic certified pesticides. (40 CFR § 152.25)
• Add definition for what is not considered a “least-toxic pesticide” to include: a. An EPA-registered pesticide that is not organic certified.

As stated in the comments, it is important that the proposed rule prioritize ecological pest management practices, best defined in federal law as “organic,” as the alternative that must be assessed relative to the use of neonicotinoids and related compounds because of the numerous deficiencies in the EPA pesticide registration process on which Vermont relies for determinations of safety.

Previous Research

There continues to emerge a variety of peer-reviewed scientific literature on the human, wildlife, and ecosystems-wide impacts of neonicotinoids.

A recent study conducted in Pennsylvania and published in Environmental Entomology earlier this year highlights threats to nontarget organisms from neonicotinoid insecticide exposure. Carabid beetles, the target of the current study, are, according to the researchers, “some of the most common predaceous, soil macrofauna found in Mid-Atlantic agroecosystems, and they are active throughout the growing season.” (See study here.) This causes these beetles to frequently encounter neonicotinoids through multiple exposure routes. The authors continue: “In systems where neonicotinoids are applied to leaves (i.e., foliar sprays on many vegetable crops), carabids may experience topical exposure at rates up to 100 to 1,000 ng [nanogram] of active ingredient,” the authors say. (See Daily News here.)

Additionally, a recent study published in Insects finds honey bees experience sublethal effects when exposed to the neonicotinoid insecticide thiamethoxam that threaten the survival of bee larvae and the health of bee colonies. “Our finding reveals that thiamethoxam exerts sublethal effects on larvae, significantly impairing the fitness of reproductive bees,” the authors explain. “Specifically, exposure altered juvenile hormone III, ecdysone titer, and acetylcholinesterase activity [enzyme activity necessary for nervous system and cognitive functioning] in reproductive larvae, with these effects showing a negative correlation with pesticide concentration.” (See Daily News here.)

Inaction on neonicotinoids and the broader pesticide addiction continues for nonagricultural and agricultural forms of pest management. A recent analysis of agricultural neonicotinoid insecticide regulations, published in Pest Management Science, evaluates the varied approaches being taken for bans and exemption-based restrictions. Despite the proliferation of peer-reviewed research linking neonicotinoid exposure to adverse environmental and health effects, “regulations have spread from the EU to Canadian provinces and, subsequently, to specific US states, becoming increasingly voluntary and less restrictive over time,” the authors highlight. (See Daily News here.)

Call to Action

For additional analysis of peer-reviewed science on neonicotinoids, see here. What The Science Shows on Biodiversity provides access to scientific studies organized by pesticide impacts on bees, other pollinators, and beneficial organisms. There is also a subsection on parasites and viruses that impact pollinators.

You can also put the science and policy findings into action by subscribing to Action of the Week and Weekly News Update, as well as registering to become a Parks Advocate for the Parks for a Sustainable Future Program—providing in-depth training to assist community land managers in transitioning two public green spaces to organic landscape management, while aiming to provide the knowledge and skills necessary to eventually transition all public areas in a locality to these safer practices.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources: LD 1323 , SB 9, HB 6916

(Beyond Pesticides, October 1, 2025) A novel study in Scientific Reports combines computational analyses with toxicological data to identify pathways affected by exposure to the weed killer glyphosate. The analyses identify glyphosate targets that correlate with kidney injury and kidney cancer, revealing pathways with significant glyphosate-induced alterations, including the dysregulation of nitrogen metabolism that leads to ammonia accumulation and oxidative stress, both of which contribute to renal (kidney) damage and carcinogenesis (development of cancer).

“This study provides a comprehensive investigation into the molecular mechanisms by which glyphosate may contribute to kidney injury and kidney cancer, employing an array of bioinformatics tools for target prediction, toxicity assessment, pathway enrichment analysis, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation,” the researchers state. The results of the analyses and simulations highlight the molecular mechanisms underlying glyphosate’s nephrotoxic (damaging to kidneys) and carcinogenic (cancer-causing) effects.

Study Importance and Background

Glyphosate, known as a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide, has been used for agricultural and nonagricultural purposes for decades and is the most extensively used herbicide worldwide. This widespread use is largely due to its application to genetically engineered, glyphosate-tolerant crops. Both glyphosate and its main metabolite (breakdown product), aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), are detected in water, soil, and food, which then represent multiple pathways for exposure to nontarget organisms, including humans.

There is a wide body of science connecting glyphosate to threats to public health, wildlife, and the environment. Both research and litigation provide evidence of the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate, as well as toxicity to kidneys. Studies show both acute and chronic effects of glyphosate exposure, “triggering oxidative stress, inflammation, and apoptosis [cell death] in renal cells, culminating in structural and functional kidney damage.” (See scientific literature here, here, and here.)

Additional epidemiological research links glyphosate exposure with higher rates of renal diseases, including chronic kidney disease (CKD) and renal cell carcinoma. “Both in vitro [in a test tube or petri dish] and in vivo [in a living organism] studies reveal glyphosate’s capacity to disrupt mitochondrial function, modulate gene expression involved in detoxification, and generate reactive oxygen species (ROS), collectively contributing to renal cell injury,” the researchers point out. (See here and here.) They continue, “Given these findings, there is an urgent need to unravel the molecular pathways by which glyphosate may drive kidney injury and cancer progression, especially under conditions of prolonged exposure.”

Methodology

To better understand the mechanisms through which glyphosate can impact kidney function and cancer development, without the limitations seen in traditional toxicological approaches with complex substances like glyphosate, this study utilizes network toxicology as a “transformative framework for dissecting the complex biological interactions triggered by chemical exposures.”

As the authors explain, “Unlike traditional toxicology, which often focuses on individual molecular pathways or isolated targets, network toxicology employs systems biology to analyze the chemical’s impact across interconnected molecular networks.” This approach allows for analysis of glyphosate’s cellular and systemic effects that result in deleterious impacts on health.

Utilizing computational approaches allows for “the prediction and prioritization of potential interactions between small molecules like glyphosate and complex biological systems,” the researchers state. They continue, “Specifically, methodologies such as molecular docking and simulation analysis are employed to predict the binding affinity and favored orientation of glyphosate with proteins implicated in critical cellular processes—particularly those related to renal function and carcinogenesis (e.g., key enzymes, receptors, or transporters identified from network analyses).” For more information on the specific databases and computational tools within the study, see the methodology section for more details.

Study Results and Implications

Through network toxicological analyses and simulations, this study predicts glyphosate’s ability to incite kidney toxicity and carcinogenicity, which adds to the current body of science with existing toxicity data that indicates that increasing doses of glyphosate heighten risks of adverse health effects. The results include:

• The prediction of 47 drug targets of glyphosate, 20 of which overlap with kidney injury and 31 with kidney cancer, represents how glyphosate can modulate specific pathways through key targets to cause diseases, shown through the creation of a “drug-target-pathway network.” (See here.)
• Additional predictions from databases indicate “that glyphosate’s co-toxicity primarily involves kidney injury. Additionally, the databases predicted carcinogenicity, neurotoxicity, respiratory toxicity, and ototoxicity [ear poisoning] for glyphosate.”
• Analyses of protein-protein interaction networks involving glyphosate-induced effects show ten targets for glyphosate-induced kidney injury and ten targets for kidney cancer. These targets include matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) that play crucial roles in processes such as tissue remodeling, wound healing, and embryonic development, as well as in diseases such as cancer and chronic inflammation. The authors note, “While MMPs are known targets in cancer biology their specific implication in glyphosate-induced renal toxicity represents a significant mechanistic advancement elucidated by our network-based approach.”
• Gene Ontology analyses reveal prominent biological processes, including proteolysis (breakdown of proteins), extracellular matrix disassembly, negative regulation of apoptosis, and collagen catabolic process for glyphosate-induced kidney injury and cancer.
• Significant signaling pathways involved in glyphosate-induced kidney injury include bladder cancer, adherens junction (provides adhesion between cells), endocrine resistance, relaxin signaling pathway, estrogen signaling pathway, fluid shear stress and atherosclerosis, nitrogen metabolism, proteoglycans in cancer, diabetic cardiomyopathy (heart muscle disease), and lipid and atherosclerosis. The pathways related to glyphosate-induced kidney cancer include nitrogen metabolism, metabolic pathways, bladder cancer, adherens junction, endocrine resistance, relaxin signaling pathway, estrogen signaling pathway, and fluid shear stress [frictional forces impacting blood flow] and atherosclerosis. As a note, nitrogen metabolism is the pathway with the highest enrichment [higher statistical significance] in both glyphosate-induced kidney injury and kidney cancer, which offers insight into less-explored mechanisms of glyphosate toxicity.

“In summary, this study employed a robust computational strategy to propose that glyphosate may exert nephrotoxic and carcinogenic effects primarily through disrupting extracellular matrix integrity via interactions with MMPs and PLG [plasminogen, an enzyme involved in breaking down blood clots and other processes such as inflammation], and by dysregulating nitrogen metabolism,” the researchers state. These results advance the mechanistic understanding of glyphosate toxicity, beyond general oxidative stress, which is crucial in understanding the health risks from both short-term and long-term exposure.

Previous Research

Studies upon studies highlight the adverse effects associated with the widely used weed killer glyphosate, ranging from endocrine disruption and reproductive dysfunction to neurotoxicity and developmental impacts, among others. As shared in previous Daily News, in 2013, the Center for Public Integrity highlighted that glyphosate bonds with toxic heavy metals in the environment, such as cadmium and arsenic, forming stable compounds. These compounds are present in food and water for consumption and do not break down until they reach the kidneys. Thus, farmworkers exposed to glyphosate are likely to have these toxic metals in their kidneys. Additionally, in 2019, researchers Sararath Guanatilake, MD, and Channa Jayasumana, PhD, were awarded the Freedom and Responsibility Award from the American Association for the Advancement of Science for their work in uncovering the link between glyphosate and chronic kidney disease. (See Daily News coverage here.)

A previous Daily News, entitled “Kidney, Liver Damage Linked to Chronic, Low-Dose Glyphosate Exposure,” highlights a research study published in Environmental Health that links chronic, ultra-low dose exposure to glyphosate in drinking water to adverse impacts on the health of the liver and kidneys. Further research finds glyphosate causes changes to DNA function, resulting in chronic diseases such as kidney and liver diseases, diabetes, and Parkinson’s. Multigenerational effects from glyphosate exposure are also documented, with research associating cancer development with DNA alterations through oxidative stress mechanisms. (See Weed Killer Glyphosate Linked to Multi-Generational Adverse Health Effects and EPA Overlooks Glyphosate and Roundup Ingredients’ Cancer, DNA Damage, and Multigenerational Effects for more information.)

Mitigating Health Threats: The Organic Solution

As Beyond Pesticides has advocated for over 40 years, organic agriculture and land management practices offer a holistic approach that protects health and the environment from the harmful effects of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers. Adopting organic methods mitigates health threats in the current case of glyphosate and kidneys, as well as all other toxic chemicals that are not allowed under organic standards.

As stated in previous Daily News, kidneys are one of the most important organs for filtering waste out of the body. However, kidneys are often the main target of pesticide toxicity mediated through oxidative stress, as well as other mechanisms elucidated in the current study. Therefore, human and ecological health must be protected by shifting to organic systems and supporting the organic movement by buying and growing organic food.

Organic methods provide many health and environmental benefits, eliminating the need for chemical-intensive practices. Research shows that switching to an organic diet has health benefits, even showing that glyphosate levels in the human body can decrease by 70% after one week. (See here and here.)

Get involved! Contribute your voice and help protect organic integrity through continuous improvement of organic standards. The Fall National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting is scheduled for November 4 – 6, 2025. The public meeting of the NOSB is preceded by an opportunity for public comments in writing and via online webinars on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm ET, that concern how organic food is produced.

Please copy Beyond Pesticides’ comments and fill out the form here before clicking the blue button “Click here to go to Regulations.gov.” After pasting comments into Regulations.gov, we encourage you to please consider personalizing and adding text before final submission! For a complete discussion of topics, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Dong, Y. and Zhu, J. (2025) Network toxicology reveals glyphosate mechanisms in kidney injury and cancer, Scientific Reports. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12375789/.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 30, 2025)  A pioneering study has measured the concentrations of pesticides in clouds. Prior to this, rainwater has been tested and found to be a common depositor of pesticides. But there is far less information about the role of clouds themselves. The findings add to general scientific understanding that pesticides go everywhere: into soils, water bodies, and the bodies of plants and animals—even when they are not intentionally applied. There are many studies of pesticide concentrations, including their metabolites, so-called “inert” ingredients, and degradation products, in soil, water and the atmosphere. The study was published in Environmental Science & Technology last August by a team of scientists from the University of Clermont Auvergne and the Laboratoire Phytocontrol in France and the University of Torino in Italy.

Clouds are collections of water droplets, as opposed to molecular gases or aerosols, which are simply fine particles or liquid droplets of any substance capable of becoming airborne. Aerosol and gas-phase chemicals are known to travel widely in the atmosphere and do not require the presence of water to do so. Contaminants in rain have been studied to some extent, but rain is a separate analytical category from clouds. A study published last month found 14 pesticides in rainwater in an agricultural area of Brazil. The authors noted that rainwater must be considered a source of pesticide exposure and should not be used as drinking water, but did not report on whether the pesticides arrived by atmospheric transport. Local sources are more likely—Brazil leads the world in pesticide usage, at more than 800 tons a year.

No environment, no matter how pristine it seems, escapes atmospheric pollutants. The more volatile a chemical is, the more it will spread in the atmosphere. For example, one study found endangered marmots on Vancouver Island contaminated with PCBs, PBDEs, hexachlorobenzene, and other industrial compounds, likely originating in Asia. There is also a well-known conveyor belt of atmospheric pollutants from lower latitudes to the Arctic, where the local environments become reservoirs: tundra, permafrost, ice, water, plants and animals. The exposure of polar bears to PCBs notoriously leads to endocrine disruption and failing reproduction in the species. One of the manifold concerns about climate change is that these Arctic reservoirs are releasing long-sequestered chemicals back into the atmosphere for further transport. For details, see Beyond Pesticides’ June 2023 analysis of an important study in Nature Communications.

The French cloud study analyzed six cloud water samples collected at an atmospheric station in south-central France in late summer 2023 and spring 2024. The samples were collected from the upper margin of the boundary layer, which is the air mass closest to the Earth and influenced by planetary factors, and from the free troposphere, which is the next highest layer where the air behaves with less terrestrial influence. The scientists searched for 446 compounds categorized as “pesticides, biocides, their transformation products and additives.” They found 32 compounds comprising three fungicides, seven insecticides, one biocide and eight transformation products. Among the pesticides were atrazine, cypermethrin, DEET, metolachlor, tributyltin, and fipronil. Mesotrione (a broadleaf herbicide for field corn), DMST (a metabolite of the fungicide tolylfluanid, used on apples, grapes, hops and tomatoes), and triphenyl phosphate (a plasticizer related to the fungicide tributyltin) were found in the highest concentrations. Two samples had total pesticide concentrations above the European drinking water limit. See Beyond Pesticides’ Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management for information on all of the above pesticides. The biocide, anthraquinone, is used as a bird repellent at golf courses and airports and as a seed treatment to discourage birds from eating them. According to EPA, anthraquinone is classed as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”

The authors note that there was no correlation of any class of pesticide with either sampling period, which would have been likely had the pesticides been locally applied. This point, along with the presence of pesticides banned in France, supports the idea that long-range transport from countries where those pesticides are legal is involved. Other studies of aerosols and rain have come to the same conclusion. Further, neither the concentrations nor the types of pesticides found in clouds resembled those in local streams, adding support to the long-range transport concept.

Intriguingly, the study analysis includes “back-trajectory” tracing of the history of various air masses crossing the sample site. In one sample, part of the air mass originated in Spain. This sample had relatively high pesticide concentrations. Other sources included the Atlantic Ocean and northwest France. Samples with air masses coming from the ocean or from land areas covered by forest, natural grasslands and vineyards had the lowest concentrations.

The authors also compare results from aerosol studies with their cloud samples, finding significant differences. In one aerosol study, 58 pesticides were found in boundary layer sites, but only eight of those were found in the cloud samples. Two pesticides in cloud samples (fipronil and cypermethrin) did not appear in any aerosol samples. The authors also note that pesticide transformation products were found in clouds but not aerosols, suggesting that chemical processes in the clouds are converting the actual pesticide formulations in a way that does not occur to aerosols circulating freely in the atmosphere.

Atmospheric transport of pollutants has been acknowledged in science for decades, but its recognition in regulation and policy is much less discernible. One important indicator from a study of persistent organic pollutants in blood and breast milk samples from Arctic populations is that levels of regulated pollutants, such as certain “forever chemicals,” the DDT breakdown compound DDE, and PCBs have declined over time, while the unregulated pollutants have increased. The consequences of exposure to pesticides are as well known as those to PCBs, PFAS, and numerous other chemical bad actors.

According to public health and environmental advocates, the evidence that pesticides are traveling the globe in clouds, as well as in gaseous and particulate form, descending as rain, fog, snow and ice, and adding to the damage from direct exposures, spray drift, food consumption, and other sources, should be the straw that breaks the camel’s back of corporate regulatory capture. It is a sad moment, advocates say, to realize that clouds and rain are not the natural refreshment they used to be. But that same evidence—that eliminating pesticides makes a significant difference in human and ecosystem health—shows that changes can be made. Harmful trends can be reversed. Speaking out to regulators and elected officials, local and national organizing, changing your domestic ecosystem by going organic—all of these push the planet toward healing. See the multiple resources at www.beyondpesticides.org for ways to accomplish all of these things.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources:

Are Clouds a Neglected Reservoir of Pesticides?
Bianco et al.
Environmental Science & Technology September 2025
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.5c03787

Pesticides in rainwater: A two-year occurrence study in an unexplored environmental compartment in regions with different land use in the State of São Paulo – Brazil
Dias et al.
Chemosphere March 2025
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653525000335

Climate Crisis Unleashes Pesticide Contamination from Thawing Permafrost, Elevating Global Emergency
Beyond Pesticides, June 8, 2023
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2023/06/climate-crisis-unleashes-pesticide-contamination-from-thawing-permafrost-elevating-global-emergency/

Arctic Glaciers Entrap Pesticides and Other Environmental Pollutants from Global Drift and Release Hazardous Chemicals as They Melt from Global Warming
Beyond Pesticides, August 20, 2020
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2020/08/arctic-glaciers-entrap-pesticides-and-other-environmental-pollutants-from-global-drift-and-release-hazardous-chemicals-as-they-melt-from-global-warming/

Pesticides Found in Marine Atmosphere Over Deep Atlantic Ocean, Documented for the First Time
Beyond Pesticides, April 16, 2025
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2025/04/pesticides-found-in-marine-atmosphere-over-deep-atlantic-ocean-documented-for-the-first-time/

(Beyond Pesticides, September 29, 2025) With the theme “Our Home Outdoors,” the National Environmental Education Foundation (NEEF) launched National Public Lands Day this past Saturday—defining this year’s event as follows: “Our public lands are more than just places to visit—they are woven into the fabric of our everyday lives. From the trails we hike to the parks where we gather with family and friends, these spaces are our collective backyard, our shared front porch, our natural playground.” At the same time, people are asking their local governments whether they are using petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers on their parks and playing fields that are known to threaten the health of children, pets, wildlife, and the environment. Beyond Pesticides led a nationwide action to “Tell your local officials to make your parks organic.” 

For those engaging with their local elected officials and parks departments, Beyond Pesticides, through its Parks for a Sustainable Future program, offers technical support to transition parks to organic land management through analysis of soil health, development of a plan to improve soil biology to cycle nutrients for healthy plants, training of staff to implement the organic plan, and ongoing consultation for plan adjustments when necessary. Organic systems focus on building organic matter and microbial life in the soil to solubilize nutrients for plant uptake, eliminating the use of petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides and increasing plant health and resilience. 

Through this program and with supporters, including the Parks for a Sustainable Future program, Beyond Pesticides has assisted local leaders in converting the following parks and recreational areas exclusively to organic practices. Last month, as a part of a nationwide push to stop the use of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers, the City of Excelsior, Minnesota, joined Kansas City, Missouri, and dozens of communities across the country to begin its organic transition of demonstration sites on city park land. In addition, Beyond Pesticides has worked with dozens of communities to adopt land management policies in jurisdictions of nearly every state in the country. The goal is to create models that show the viability and cost effectiveness of organic management systems that eliminate petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers that contribute to the current health crisis, biodiversity collapse, and the climate emergency.

Beyond Pesticides invites people nationwide to become a Parks Advocate. The organization advises the following actions:  

• For residents who live in a community that is one of a growing number across the country that has taken action to protect people and environment by adopting organic policies and practices in its public spaces, please take this opportunity to thank community leaders. However, be aware that the pesticide industry is seeking to take those policies away from you.  
• For communities that have not yet taken action to protect its residents and environment by adopting organic policies and practices in its public spaces, please tell them how much you want them to do so. ℹ️ In the event that your local mayor is not in the system and/or you receive an error message that reads “Please provide a valid residential address,” we invite you to copy/paste the sample message below and send an email with a personalized message!   
• Create pesticide-free yard space. Educate the community with a Beyond Pesticides “Pesticide Free Zone” Sign. Please share pictures of organic yards or local parks with Beyond Pesticides and explain why they are so important.  

Sample Letters: 

Thank you letter to community leaders (Please personalize): 

Thank you so much for implementing pesticide-free, organic policies and practices in our parks and public places! I love to spend time in our parks, knowing that I will not be exposed to toxic chemicals. It is great to know that toxic chemicals will not run off from our public spaces into streams and other water. It is wonderful to know that flowers in our parks can provide nectar to pollinators who face so many threats these days.

As I celebrate National Public Lands Day, I thank you on behalf of our local community. 

Letter to community leaders for organic policies (Please personalize): 

When I learned about how many communities protect their citizens and local environment by transitioning to organic landcare in parks and other public places (https://www.bp-dc.org/tools-for-change), I asked why we can’t do the same in our own community.  

Pesticides used in parks, playing fields, and other public places threaten our health—especially that of our children, who are closer to the ground and have greater exposure. Pesticides and chemical fertilizers run off, finding their way to streams. They also threaten pollinators, who are at risk from multiple threats. 

Communities no longer need to figure out how to do this alone. Beyond Pesticides’ Parks for a Sustainable Future (https://bp-dc.org/sustainable-parks-land-care-training) program aims to bridge the gaps resulting from staffing constraints and tight budgets, allowing communities to pilot the transition to organic land care on two public sites. As we celebrate National Public Lands Day, I urge you to email (mailto:[email protected]) or call Beyond Pesticides at 202-543-5450 to get started. 

Thank you. 

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides. 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 26, 2025) National Public Lands Day on Saturday, September 27—first established in 1994 and held on the fourth Saturday of September—is organized by the National Environmental Education Foundation (NEEF) in partnership with the U.S. National Park Service and participating federal agencies. Events are planned at neighborhood, state, and national parks nationwide, and entrance to National Parks will be free for the day. Coinciding with National Organic Month, this year’s theme, ”Our Home Outdoors,” is explained by NEEF as: “Our public lands are more than just places to visit—they are woven into the fabric of our everyday lives. From the trails we hike to the parks where we gather with family and friends, these spaces are our collective backyard, our shared front porch, our natural playground.”

Beyond Pesticides began its work on organic land management in national parks nearly a decade ago at National Historic Sites in Arkansas, Kansas, and Iowa. The program, now the Parks for a Sustainable Future program, partners with local communities in pursuit of a future where (1) public lands, from parks to playing fields, are managed without toxic pesticides, (2) children and pets are safe to run around on the grass, and (3) bees and other pollinators are safeguarded from toxic chemicals. The program to establish model sites nationwide, now operating in 11 states, shows that petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers are not needed to manage parks and playing fields cost-effectively. With the current existential health, biodiversity, and climate threats, communities participating in the program exemplify the important role of organic land management.

Parks for a Sustainable Future

By underwriting the development of organic transition plans and staff training on organic land management practices, the Parks for a Sustainable Future program advances practical, resilient, cost-effective techniques that confront urgent threats to the current health crisis, biodiversity collapse, and the climate emergency, which are exacerbated by petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use. In doing so, the program establishes practical models that demonstrate the viability and cost-effectiveness of organic management systems and offers community land managers site-specific, science-based guidance for a successful program.

Last month, as a part of a nationwide push to stop the use of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers, the City of Excelsior, Minnesota, joined Kansas City, Missouri, and dozens of communities across the country to begin its organic transition of demonstration sites on city park land. As featured by Harvest Public Media and reporter Héctor Alejandro Arzate, Jen Schroeder, a mother of two children in Kansas City, wanted her neighborhood park, where her children play, to be free of toxic chemical use. She saw a flier in her local Natural Grocers [a lifetime sponsor] about the program and reached out to her Parks and Recreation Department. The result: the City is moving ahead to transition two pilot sites to organic practices.

Since laying the groundwork for the program in the early 1980s, Beyond Pesticides has also worked with communities to adopt land management policies in jurisdictions of nearly every state in the country to ensure continuity and accountability. Click here for access to a template for a local pesticide-free model ordinance or policy!

A prime example showcasing the integration of program and policy is the City of New York, where a partnership of environmental, public health, and advocacy organizations— Eco-Friendly Parks for All (EFPA)—teamed up with Beyond Pesticides, New York City Parks and Recreation Department, and Stonyfield Organic Yogurt to celebrate the success of pilot organic land management programs at eight sites across the five boroughs. The program was initiated by the coalition after the city council adopted new legislation on Earth Day in 2021, prohibiting the use of chemical pesticides at all New York City parks.

To incorporate a scientific basis for the transition to organic for local communities, Beyond Pesticides leverages a broad range of tools and resources for the benefit of stakeholders, including the organization’s Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management database to provide decision makers, practitioners, and activists with easier access to current and historical scientific literature on pesticide hazards and safe pest management. In addition, Beyond Pesticides tracks the overall hazards associated with pesticide exposure through its Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database, which documents independent peer-reviewed studies that link pesticides to a range of chronic diseases, including cancer, reproductive harm, neurological illness, respiratory disease, autism and learning disabilities, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes. For additional tools and educational materials on the website, please see the Resources page.

Why Go Organic?

The benefits of transitioning to organic land management extend far beyond individual health! Beyond Pesticides believes in building organic communities:

• For health and safety: Organic food and parks are free from harmful pesticides, fossil-fuel-based substances, and toxic chemicals, making them safer and healthier for all ages. Visit Beyond Pesticide’s 40 Common Lawn and Landscape Chemicals page to delve into the health impacts of pesticides in communities, and the factsheet Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix, which highlights data establishing elevated rates of pesticide-induced illnesses among children.

• For environmental stewardship: Opting for organic parks and products supports practices that protect pollinators, improve soil health, increase biodiversity, and eliminate toxic runoff into water bodies. Learn more about how to protect pollinators in your community by reading BEE Protective, and see our archives in the Daily News Blog on soil health, biodiversity, and water runoff.

• For trust and transparency: The USDA Certified Organic label ensures strict standards and regulations for organic products, providing trust and transparency for consumers worldwide. We provide oversight for parks that use organic land management. Take Action via the Keeping Organic Strong page to keep USDA accountable to the principles and values in the Organic Foods Production Act.

• For just communities: Supporting organic farming practices can benefit local communities and economies, as well as promote responsible animal welfare, and protect farmworkers who are at disproportionate risk from pesticide exposure in marginalized communities. Organic parks are the ethical choice to promote environmental justice. Please see the Black Institute’s Poison Parks report, which shines a spotlight on New York City’s previous reliance on glyphosate-based herbicides and how people of color communities bear the burden of health impacts.

• For climate resilience: Organic farming typically exhibits better performance during droughts and challenging weather conditions. Watering needs are very site-specific, and the type of soil impacts drainage. Once established, a deep root system from organic land management and healthy soil with increased water retention requires less water. Additionally, organic soil management results in the drawdown of atmospheric carbon, contributing to efforts to reduce the adverse effects of carbon on climate.

How To Go Organic

As outlined in Beyond Pesticides’ previous Daily News post, autumn is an ideal season to transition to organic land management, with a focus on the cultivation of healthy soil and proper maintenance practices. High-quality lawns and landscapes can be achieved with practices that build soil health through natural fertilization and cultural practices, such as soil aeration, mowing height, and timing and volume of water.

Image by Sara Grantham, “Vine and Dandy.”

This method, which eliminates synthetic fertilizers and nurtures soil microorganisms, is a “feed-the-soil” approach. By helping to prevent problems that typically arise from chemical-intensive practices via nurturing a soil environment rich in microbial life, it is not only feasible but also economically viable to produce a healthy lawn able to withstand pressures from heavy usage, insects, weeds, drought, and heat stress.

Below are a few steps that can be taken to transition toward organic landcare! For more information, please see Beyond Pesticides’ guides on how to establish and maintain a pesticide-free lawn, as well as the Organic Land Care 101 factsheet!

• Fertilize without fossil fuels: Fertilizing in the early fall allows for plant growth and root development. Nitrogen, the most abundant nutrient in lawn fertilizers, promotes color and growth; however, too much can weaken the grass, alter the pH, and promote disease, insect, and thatch build-up. If applied too late, nutrients can leach directly into nearby surface waters. Be aware of local phosphorus or nitrogen loading concerns. Use safer fertilizers, such as grass clippings, tested compost, and compost tea. Learn more from Beyond Pesticides’ page on Fertilizers Compatible with Organic Land Management under the Tools for Change.

• Analyze the soil: It is highly recommended to test the soil to determine specific needs. In addition to nutrients and pH, ask for organic content analysis and request organic care recommendations. The ideal soil pH should fall between 6.5-7.0, with over 5% organic matter content. Soil test results will ensure that only the materials that are needed are applied. Read Maintaining a Delicate Balance: Eliminating phosphorus contamination with organic soil management for in-depth information on the problem of fertilizer contamination and how to apply fertilizer properly.

• Aerate: If a lawn is hard, compacted, and full of weeds or bare spots, aerate to help air, water, and fertilizer enter the soil. If a screwdriver cannot be easily pushed into the soil, it is too compacted. Getting an aerator on the turf will be especially helpful. Once you have an established, healthy lawn, worms and birds pecking at your soil will aerate it for free!

• Mow high and keep the blade sharp: Mowing with a dull blade makes the turf susceptible to disease, and mowing too close invites sunlight in for weeds, so be sure to sharpen your mower blades frequently. For the last and first mowing, mow down to two inches to prevent fungal problems. For the rest of the year, keep it at three/three-and-a-half inches to shade out weeds and foster deep, drought-resistant roots.

• Overseed with the right grass seed: Grass varieties differ enormously in their resistance to certain pests, tolerance to climatic conditions, growth habit, and appearance. Endophytic grass seed provides natural protection against some insects and fungal disease—major benefits for managing a lawn organically. A local nursery would know the best seed for the area. Remember to check the weed content of the grass seed and that there are no pesticide coatings.

• Develop your tolerance: Many plants that are considered weeds in a lawn have beneficial qualities. Learn to read your “weeds” for what they indicate about your soil conditions. Monocrops do not grow in nature and diversity is a good thing. See more information on our Least Toxic Control of Weeds factsheet.

How To Take Action

There is no better time than the beginning of a new season to reflect on what can be done individually and collectively to have a meaningful effect on health, the health of families and communities, and the legacy to be left behind. Let this weekend’s celebration, and National Organic Month, serve as a reminder of the need to create an equitable and sustainable world for all. This can be achieved by seeking the adoption of a transformative solution that recognizes the urgency to address disproportionate harm caused by toxic pesticide production, transportation, use, storage, and disposal with the organic alternative.

🆕  All national parks that charge an entrance fee will offer free admission this Saturday! We encourage the public to use the National Park Service’s “Find a Park” page and enjoy a trip to our nation’s public lands with friends and family!

Does your community have a pesticide-free park managed with organic practices? Do you wish it did? The time to take action to protect parks and create new ones is now!

 Beyond Pesticides is reaching out to its network and urging people and organizations to tell their mayor to implement pesticide-free, organic policies and practices in local parks and public spaces. See our Action page for additional ways to take action locally in your community!

ℹ️  For more information, please email our team at [email protected] or click here to sign up to take the first step towards becoming a Parks Advocate!

Help defend organic standards against USDA changes weakening public trust in the organic food label!

From the very beginning, with the passage of the Organic Foods Production Act in 1990, “organic” has meant “continuous improvement.” The primary mechanism for continuous improvement in organic production is the high level of public involvement that comes from twice-annual meetings of the National Organic Standards Board.

ℹ️  See this past weekend’s Action of the Week to submit written comments in preparation for the in-person and virtual meeting from November 4-6, 2025. Beyond Pesticides provides draft language via the Keeping Organic Strong webpage and urges public participation, including the opportunity to provide oral testimony virtually in late October. Register here.

  The public can sign up and access the site to leave a message for the NOSB by clicking here to go to the Action page! Please feel free to “copy and paste” Beyond Pesticides’ comments when submitting.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources: National Public Lands Day [NPS]; National Public Lands Day [NEEF]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 25, 2025) Reinforcing numerous studies’ findings of widespread environmental contamination with PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), heavy metals, pesticide metabolites, and pharmaceuticals, researchers detected the chemicals in noncommercial backyard eggs laid in Greece, according to a study published in Science of The Total Environment.

The researchers found that “[o]nly 9 out of 17 samples were compliant to the limit….set by the [European Union] for the sum of PFHxS [perfluorohexanesulfonic acid], PFOS [perfluorooctanesulfonic acid], PFOA [perfluorooctanoic acid], and PFNA [perfluorononanoic acid].” They continue: “[A]s regards PFOS, PFHxS, and PFNA, seven, six and one out of 17 samples, respectively, were above the ML (maximum limit) as set by the EU.”

With current regulatory standards focused on evaluating exposure to individual chemicals and, in some instances, cumulative risk associated with chemicals that have a common mechanism of effect, this study points out the importance of looking at mixtures of chemicals and the potential synergistic effects. There are some fluorinated pesticides defined as PFAS due to their molecular structure and high toxicity, which makes the chemicals highly persistent in the environment. Center for Food Safety, Center for Biological Diversity, and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility reviewed the full list of active ingredients registered with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and found that 66 of the 471 (or 14 percent) qualify as PFAS (see Daily News here); in 2025 alone, EPA approved at least four new active ingredients–Cyclobutrifluram (Herbicide for nematodes), Diflufenican (Herbicide for corn and soybeans), Isocycloseram (Insecticide seed treatment), and Trifludimoxazin (Herbcide for oranges, apples, peanuts, etc.)–that also share the chemistry of forever chemicals, according to reporting by Civil Eats. 

Background and Methodology

“The main objectives of this study were to examine the occurrence of PFAS in home-produced eggs collected from various areas of Greece, to identify potentially contaminated regions and to estimate the probable risk of PFAS intake through egg consumption,” according to the researchers. The sampling of eggs for this study was conducted between April and October 2023, with 75 eggs collected from seventeen backyard coops across five Greek prefectures (local political subdivisions). There were 4-5 eggs gathered from each group, resulting in 17 pooled samples from the chicken coops. The target chemicals for this study included 46 PFAS, as well as any other detectable levels of heavy metals, pesticides, and pharmaceutical residues. The health risk assessment was based on estimated weekly intakes (EWIs) for PFAS and heavy metals from egg consumption. The methodology focuses on screening rather than deriving dietary exposure values for pesticides and pharmaceuticals.

The authors acknowledge this as one of the limitations of this study, however it is important to emphasize that this separation of scientific analysis on exposure levels based on individual classes of chemicals (e.g. pesticides, fertilizers, heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, other petrochemical substances, and their breakdown materials or metabolites) speaks to a broader challenge of regulatory systems failing to engage in comprehensive scientific research that addresses ongoing concerns about public health and ecosystem threats. Considering that researchers used a methodological screening method that emphasizes breadth (detection of pesticide compounds) over actual exposure (quantity of exposure), a recommendation for future studies would be to consider concentration data through tools like liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) with multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) that “can measure many chemical species quantitatively in the same analysis.” (See here for a widely cited primer on modern mass spectrometry techniques in the clinical diagnostics context.) With a stronger screening tool, quantified residues on pesticides and pharmaceuticals could be integrated with the existing EWI data on heavy metals and PFAS to estimate chronic dietary chemical exposure.

It is noteworthy that the authors did not assess quantitative exposure estimates for all of the contaminants in this study (just PFAS and heavy metals) for a number of reasons explored below, one of the most important being that regulatory frameworks for multiple classes of chemical exposure in the U.S. and European Union (and most other nations) are fragmented and fail to assess targeted quantification of pesticide exposure and drift more specifically. Simultaneously, cumulative impacts with other potentially hazardous substances listed under other U.S. environmental statutes are not evaluated in combination with pesticides (e.g., Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act [CERCLA], Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA], Clean Air Act [CAA], Clean Water Act [CWA], Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Endangered Species Act, Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act [EPCRA], among others).

The researchers are based at Greek universities, including National and Kapodistrian University of Athens and University of the Aegean. They declared that they “have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.” The work in this study was supported by the European Commission through various grant programs, including HORIZON-RIA (Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Actions), AgriDataValue, and Horizon 2020 research project Zero Pollution of Persistent, Mobile Substances (ZeroPM).

Results

The researchers were able to confirm their hypothesis that backyard chicken eggs found across multiple regions led to exposure to a cocktail of contaminants, opening the potential for significant long-term health burdens based on existing regulatory thresholds.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the EU counterpart to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), has established a regulatory threshold for the estimated weekly intake of numerous PFAS (PFOS, PFOA, PFNA, and PFHxS), with various regions facing contamination. Attica and Ilia had the highest concentrations, where the average PFAS concentrations for the four tested examples were high enough to exceed EFSA’s tolerable weekly intake (4.4 ng/kg bw/week) and therefore faced the most significant degree of contamination.

The researchers detected six pesticide residues in the gathered samples, including the herbicide dinoterb, insecticides DEET and fipronil sulfone (transformation product), industrial wood preservative pentachlorophenol, pesticide synergist piperonyl butoxide, and fungicide tricyclazole. They also detected the residue of various pharmaceutical products (antibiotics like enrofloxacin, anti-parasitic drugs like ivermectin, and other random residues like carbamazepine, an anticonvulsant, that were detected more sporadically. Pesticides and pharmaceutical residues, however, were found below quantification limits based on the restraints identified in the methodology analysis.

Several toxic heavy metals (e.g., cadmium and lead) and other elements that are toxic at high levels (e.g., iron, zinc, and selenium) were also detected, with the estimated weekly intakes above EFSA’s health-based threshold for cadmium and lead in certain regions (Magensia and Ilia).

“The exposure pathways responsible for the PFAS found in Greek egg samples were not studied in the current article,” say the authors. “However, according to the literature, the potential PFAS exposure pathways for hens living in chicken coops seem to be soil, water, and food.” See a recent related Daily News, Review of Science on Glyphosate Weed Killer in Poultry Production Highlights Extraordinary Health Threats, for additional context on the threat of chemical exposure via poultry products.

Previous Research and Actions

For backyard gardeners and farmers, one of the most direct exposure pathways to the full range of chemical soup that is described in this study is through the sourcing of compost.

One of the more elevated fights in recent memory between the National Organic Standards Board and industry interests looking to weaken regulations is on the issue of allowed materials in compost used on certified organic operations. A petition submitted by industry-aligned Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) sought to allow “compost feedstocks” that might include, for example, “compostable” plastic food containers. It is the position of Beyond Pesticides that compost in organic production should contain only plant and animal waste, and not synthetic materials that could introduce hazardous contaminants like PFAS and microplastics, the latter of which have been found to have synergistic impacts with chlorpyrifos (see Daily News here) and proven evidence of adsorption of additional active ingredients. (See Daily News here.) The current regulations require compost to be made from manure and plant wastes, allowing only synthetics on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances —that is, those that have specifically been approved by the NOSB and USDA through a public comment process. The only synthetic inputs into compost that are currently allowed are newspaper and other paper. (See Daily News here.) See here for a copy of Beyond Pesticides Spring 2025 comments to the NOSB Crops Subcommittee on the proposal on synthetic feedstocks.

This issue has emerged as lawsuits continue to be brought forward to federal courts on PFAS contamination impacting farmers (organic and non-organic) and consumers across the United States, including farmers in Texas and Maine, and consumers nationwide. In July 2024, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on behalf of a group of ranchers and farmers in Texas harmed by PFAS-contaminated biosolids. The plaintiffs charge that their health and livelihoods were severely damaged due to contaminated biosolids leaching from neighboring properties onto their land. (See Daily News here.) In the spirit of environmental and agricultural justice, the discovery of widespread contamination of farmland in Maine and years of grassroots advocacy led to the development of the first-in-the-nation PFAS Fund, a $70 million federal-state partnership aimed at providing compensation for commercial farmers whose health, business, and land have been impacted by PFAS contamination—offering a potential roadmap for other states and Congress to adopt remediation efforts more broadly. (See Daily News here.) Beyond Pesticides has also engaged in litigation efforts on potentially contaminated products, as we filed a lawsuit against The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company and GreenTechnologies, LLC last fall for allegedly misleading consumers on the hazardous nature of their fertilizer products, which contain sewage sludge (often referred to as biosolids). (See Daily News here.)

For more information and context on the potential for compost as both a threat and an ally to organic food systems, see its dedicated Daily News section here.

Call to Action

Federal law on pesticides and organic farming only goes so far as the public is willing to engage in the process and prove that it is of broader public interest. The value of U.S. federal organic law, as defined by the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), is that there is a requirement to host biannual NOSB public meetings to hear from the public on a suite of various issues.

Beyond Pesticides has developed and actively maintains the Keeping Organic Strong resource hub, a one-stop shop for you to learn about changes in organic regulations, see the Fall 2025 issues, and review our written comments for all issues that will be raised before the NOSB and five associated subcommittees. The Fall National Organic Standards Board meeting will be held both in person in Omaha, Nebraska, and virtually, via live-stream from November 4, 2025, to November 6, 2025. The deadline for written comments on the Fall 2025 issues is 11:59 pm EDT on October 8, 2025, and the Public Comment Webinars will be held on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm EDT.

There is currently an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the integrity of national organic standards, as the National Organic Standards Board convenes to discuss key issues and allowed materials in organic agriculture. The public can see a discussion of issues before the board and submit comments (using Beyond Pesticides’ positions) by October 8. To submit comments, please click HERE. For more background, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page. 

You can also take action here by contacting your members of Congress to co-sponsor and support organic bills that have recently been introduced in the first year of the 119^th Session of Congress.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source: Science of The Total Environment

(Beyond Pesticides, September 24, 2025) A novel study of chronic toxicity of the neonicotinoid insecticide thiamethoxam to honey bees (Apis mellifera), published in Insects, finds sublethal effects that threaten the survival of bee larvae and the health of bee colonies. “We evaluated the effects of thiamethoxam on the entire larval development cycle of reproductive bees and conducted a comparative analysis, demonstrating that thiamethoxam significantly alters ecdysone [a hormone that controls molting in insects] and juvenile hormone titers [hormones for insect growth] in both queen and drone larvae, impairing metamorphosis and reproductive development,” the authors state.

Risk assessments and scientific literature focus primarily on honey bee workers, rarely including how pesticides can impact queen and drone bees that are necessary for stable colonies. In focusing on this data gap, the researchers reveal that the survival rate of bee larvae decreases gradually with increasing doses of thiamethoxam, adding to the wide body of science on pesticide-related threats to honey bee health. (See Beyond Pesticides’ What the Science Shows on Biodiversity page for more information, as well as Daily News coverage on risk assessments here, here, and here.)

Honey bees provide crucial ecosystem services as pollinating insects and play a vital role in maintaining biodiversity. “In healthy colonies, the reproductive success of the queen and the genetic contribution of drones are essential for long-term survival, directly affecting brood production, genetic diversity, and environmental adaptability,” the researchers note.

This study assesses effects on reproductive bees (queens and drones) with exposure to thiamethoxam for key developmental and physiological parameters, including survival, pupation rate (ratio of immature insects that successfully develop into pupae, the stage between larva and adult), eclosion rate (the speed or proportion of insects that emerge from their pupal cases to become adults), hormone titers, and detoxification enzyme activities. “Our finding reveals that thiamethoxam exerts sublethal effects on larvae, significantly impairing the fitness of reproductive bees,” the authors explain. “Specifically, exposure altered juvenile hormone III, ecdysone titer, and acetylcholinesterase activity [enzyme activity necessary for nervous system and cognitive functioning] in reproductive larvae, with these effects showing a negative correlation with pesticide concentration.”

Pollinators and Pesticides

The delicate balance seen in nature, with proper ecosystem functioning, relies on rich biodiversity. Insects, such as honey bees, are particularly crucial for pollination, which many plants depend on for survival and reproduction. The role of pollinators in global crop yields and biodiversity in natural ecosystems is threatened by environmental contaminants.

Research in the early 2000s documented the phenomenon of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), which is “characterized by the abrupt and widespread disappearance of worker bees from a colony, resulting in hives inhabited solely by the queen and immature brood, while honey and pollen stores remain intact and unplundered.” As the researchers describe: “This syndrome typically results in the eventual collapse of the colony. Declining honey bee populations and CCD are spreading globally, raising concerns about food supply shortages and diminishing biodiversity in ecosystems.” (See study here.)

The role of hazardous chemicals in CCD is widely documented in scientific literature, with research highlighting the multifactorial stressors that impact bees, including climate change, parasite infestations, pathogenic infections, inadequate nutrition, and pesticide exposure. (Learn about how pesticides exacerbate effects of parasitic Varroa mites in Daily News articles here and here.)

Study Methodology and Results

With research on thiamethoxam and bees mainly focused on worker bees, gatherers in particular, this study offers valuable insight into impacts on drones and queens that contribute to the stable reproduction of bee colonies. The quality of bee colonies is determined by the reproductive bees (drones and queens) as the mated drones transfer semen to queens. “As a result, elements that affect drone fecundity will also have an immediate impact on the colony’s offspring,” the authors point out. They continue, “Although a drone’s lifespan is short and its function is simple, the drone holds significant value in bee breeding because of its unique genetic structure.”

To investigate the sublethal effects of thiamethoxam on the reproductive bees, the researchers added three concentrations of the compound alongside fresh royal jelly (a substance produced by worker bees as a food source for queen bees and larvae) and supplied it to larvae obtained from honey bee colonies. To determine the dosages for the study, additional research was utilized, where levels of thiamethoxam in nectar, pollen, and plant secretions range from 1 to 100 mg/kg (equivalent to 1,000 to 100,000 μg/L), to provide environmentally relevant concentrations.

Within the study, the low, medium, and high concentrations of 3 μg/L, 25 μg/L, and 2300 μg/L all fall well below the highest values referenced above. After exposure, statistical analyses of survival rate data, larval enzyme activity, hormone titer, larval mortality, pupation rate, eclosion rate, and pupal weight and length were performed and analyzed.

The results reveal sublethal effects of thiamethoxam on the overall survival of queen and drone honey bee larvae that lead to chronic impacts impacting development into adulthood. All concentrations significantly reduce the total survival rate of queen bee larvae. However, in drones, only the highest concentration results in a significant reduction in the overall survival rate of larvae. At this dosage, pupation rates of drones also significantly decrease.

Exposure to thiamethoxam at the medium and high concentrations leads to pronounced detrimental effects on pupal development. In the queen bees, they significantly reduce pupal weight. Drone pupae at these levels also exhibit a significant decrease in pupal length, indicating impacts of thiamethoxam on growth and morphogenesis during pupal development. In drones, all three concentrations significantly lower pupal weight, “suggesting that even low thiamethoxam concentrations could negatively affect nutrient accumulation or metabolic processes during development,” the researchers explain.

At the high level, both emergence and eclosion rates significantly decline when compared to the control group. Enzyme activity, particularly in those related to oxidative stress and detoxification, is impacted, with both drone and queen larvae experiencing dose-dependent decreases. The hormones related to insect development and growth also exhibit dose-dependent effects in all treatments.

“We showed that the exposure of the reproductive bee larvae to thiamethoxam may influence the survival rate, pupation rate, eclosion rate, hormone titer, and enzyme activity when present in the field,” the authors summarize. They continue: “Pesticide exposure resulted in the spreading of poor-quality semen and affected the offspring, although the physical integrity of the drone was maintained. If the physiology and detoxification enzyme system of queens is strongly impacted and jeopardizes their survival, the mating success rate might be compromised and generate a shortage of healthy workers in congregation areas, which would be highly detrimental to the species.”

The findings of this study demonstrate how thiamethoxam adversely affects the growth and development of reproductive bees, thereby threatening colony stability and success. “Collectively, these interactions form a vicious cycle: pesticide-induced stress perturbs detoxification and neuroendocrine functions, which in turn exacerbate metabolic deficits and ultimately lead to behavioral abnormalities, reduced longevity, and colony decline,” the researchers conclude.

Previous Research

There are a large number of studies highlighting the effects of neonicotinoids on honey bees, as well as other species of bees. Many studies highlight the impacts of various chemicals within the class of neonicotinoids on the learning and foraging of honey bees that impair colony fitness, while additional studies specifically involving thiamethoxam report effects on visual learning, altered decision times, and increased abnormal behaviors. (See examples of scientific literature here and here.)

One experiment in a colony feeding study of honey bees demonstrates how thiamethoxam exerts significant sublethal effects on larval development. As the current study authors note: “Their experimental findings indicate that chronic exposure to environmentally relevant concentrations of thiamethoxam severely impairs larval viability and leads to a marked reduction in adult emergence rates, particularly in queen-rearing colonies. Our current findings on chronic toxicity in reproductive bees corroborate and extend these observations, revealing that elevated thiamethoxam concentrations induce statistically significant reductions in emergence success for both queen and drone.”

Previous Daily News coverage further highlights risks from neonicotinoid exposure that extend to other species, including humans. See Study Adds to Findings of Neonic Insecticides’ Threat to Soil Communities; Ground Beetles at Risk for an analysis of a study conducted in Pennsylvania and published in Environmental Entomology that reveals threats to nontarget organisms from neonicotinoid insecticide exposure. Neonicotinoid Exposure Threatens Fish Health, Highlighting Cascading Effects to Humans as Consumers reports on a study in Environmental Pollutants and Bioavailability that finds genotoxicity, oxidative stress, and changes in tissue structure, among other threats to organ function and overall fish health, from thiamethoxam exposure that can lead to impacts throughout the entire food web.

Organic Solution

Sublethal effects from thiamethoxam to drones and queens, as documented in the current study, threaten their essential role in the life cycle of a honey bee colony. To mitigate these effects, as well as numerous others to pollinators and other insects, Beyond Pesticides urges the widespread adoption of organic agriculture and land management. Not only does this holistic solution remove the use of petrochemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, including but not limited to neonicotinoid insecticides, that threaten honey bees, but it also protects and enhances biodiversity and mitigates both the climate change and public health crises we are currently experiencing.

For more information on the direct impacts of organic practices on pollinators, see Study Adds to Wide Body of Science Highlighting Benefits of Organic for Insect Biodiversity. Additional health and environmental benefits are available here and here.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Li, M.-J. et al. (2025) Systemic Assessment of Chronic Toxicity of Thiamethoxam on Honeybees (Apis mellifera), Insects. Available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/16/9/936.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 23, 2025) A study published in European Journal of Agronomy, based on a 16-year, long-term experiment (LTE), finds that organic crops (cotton production with wheat and soybean rotations) in tropical climates are competitive with chemical-intensive (conventional) systems when evaluating systems’ resilience (to weather and insect resistance), input costs, and profitability. One of the underlying assumptions of continuous pesticide use is that they will continue to serve as effective weapons in the never-ending war against insects, weeds, and fungal diseases that threaten the economic viability and sustainability of the farming operations. While organic systems faced reduced yields due to pest pressures from pink bollworm infestations, their relative decline was much smaller than that of the chemical-intensive operations. This study’s findings indicate that a different direction is not only possible, but necessary, for the long-term financial viability of farms. Farmers understand that the health of the soil is a compounding investment that will help or hurt you depending on the actions taken yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

The authors state in the study introduction that the long-term study is critical when studying organic productivity and profitability because short-term studies fail to capture. “Critical variables like soil health, pest dynamics, and nutrient cycling often change slowly and can have cumulative effects over the long term,” the authors note.

The authors note that the study does not explore in detail the adverse impact of chemical-intensive farming on water, biodiversity, and climate, and the costs associated with these “externalities.” The authors write: “It is important to note that this study focuses on farm-gate transactions and does not account for the broader environmental and social externalities associated with each production system. A true cost accounting framework, which incorporates the internalization of these externalities – deemed crucial for achieving the sustainability of agri-food systems (Sandhu, 2021, Sandhu et al., 2019) – would likely alter the perceived balance of productivity and profitability between organic and conventional production systems.” See the previous Daily News, Study Shows Value of Organic Practices in Lowering Environmental Impact of Agriculture, which addresses the benefits of organic land management as a public good.

Background and Methodology

This study was conducted in Madhya Pradesh, India, a climate known for roughly 1,200 millimeters (or 47 inches) of annual rainfall, largely in the monsoon season (June to September). This tropical environment was selected because of the gap in research on LTEs in tropical farmland “managed by smallholders with limited resources who face economic challenges, including price volatility and crop failure.” Many pesticide products and genetically engineered seeds (in this study, for Bt incorporated plants) are marketed in tropical regions to farmers who disproportionately face the effects of environmentally induced illness, biodiversity loss, and the climate crisis, despite the opportunity with organic practices to move away from the very petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers associated with these threats.

The study followed a 16-year rotational crop cycle between 2007 and 2022. The experimental design of the plots was randomized with four systems: BIOORG (organic according to European Union and U.S. standards), BIODYN (biodynamic standards that run stricter than organic certification), CON (conventional without the use of Bt Cotton, using local practices alongside synthetic inputs), and CONBtC (conventional with the Bt cotton and synthetic inputs). Each treatment was replicated four times for posterity and data gathering reassurances. The management practices for CON and ConBtC include synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, as well as fertilizer inputs aligned with regional recommendations. The organic system practices included pest management (botanicals and biological methods) and nutrient augmentation (farmyard manure, compost, and green manures), consisting of no synthetic inputs in accordance with organic principles. The rotational cycle moved in the following chronological order: Corn, soybeans, wheat (with a second wheat or chickpea rotated in after a set number of years). The cotton varieties were non-Bt hybrids for CON and organic systems, and it was a Bt hybrid for CONBtC.

In terms of data collection, the yields were measured annually for each crop and harvested from central subplots to avoid potential spillage and subsequent potential data distortion. The production costs were recorded and largely based on local market prices. The profitability was generally calculated as gross revenue subtracted from the variable costs, with the market premiums of organic products assumed after the standard 3-year conversion period.

This study was published in partnership with Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Bern University of Applied Sciences (Switzerland), and the organic farming research and advocacy group bioRe Association (India). The researchers disclosed that funding for this study was provided by the Coop Sustainability Fund, as well as additional support from the Biovision Foundation for Ecological Development, the Liechtenstein Development Service (LED), and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). The authors declared that “the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.”

Results

The main findings of this study in terms of performance of organic systems can be broken down into three main categories: crop yields, production (input and labor) costs, and gross margins (profitability).

Crop Yields

1. Organic cotton was more stable during pink bollworm outbreaks relative to the other three farming models in terms of conventional options. Additionally, organic cotton was not as competitive relative to conventional yields (although yields were sometimes comparable in non-Bt conventional plots).
2. Organic soybeans yielded on average 102%  of chemical-intensive yields, which researchers note as an intrinsic benefit of biological nitrogen fixation, permitting organic soybeans to thrive without synthetic fertilizer in this system.
3. Organic wheat generally underperformed compared to chemical-intensive alternatives (77-80% of conventional yields), with the critical limiting factor being the slow release of nutrients and nitrogen deficiency post-cotton harvest. A follow-up experiment could intercrop leguminous plants, grasses, and/or other natural nitrogen fixers for one season before planting the wheat crops to see if there is a positive difference in yields.
4. The diversification of chickpeas as the second rotation instead of wheat reduced potential risk and strengthened the profitability of the organic system as a whole.
   

   Production Costs

1. Organic soybeans were found to have 28% less production costs compared to chemical-intensive counterparts due to no need for synthetic fertilizers or pesticides.
2. Organic cotton was cost-competitive in earlier cycles due to lower input costs; however, labor and input costs increased in later cycles, making it less competitive than chemical-intensive plots.
3. Organic wheat had 6% lower production costs than conventional wheat; however, the reduced yields in the researchers’ experimental design negate these gains.

   Profitability

   1. A combination of wheat and chickpea intercropped on shared plots could help compensate for challenges with the former’s yield challenges.
   2. The profitability of organic soybeans is greater than chemical-intensive farming because of the significant reduction in production costs.
   3. Organic wheat and cotton margins fall below chemical-intensive counterparts.
   
   Previous Research

The U.S. is currently the fourth largest cotton producer (domestic and export) and the largest cotton exporter in the world, accounting for 30% of all cotton produced, valued at $5.7 billion (2021). The farm value of U.S. organic cotton is $35.55 million (2021). There are 83 certified organic cotton farms in the United States compared to roughly 7,724 non-organic farms (2022). According to the Organic Trade Association, organic cotton comprises approximately 0.95% of global cotton production. Despite its small size, there are viable organic alternatives to the chemical-intensive status quo, even for commodities like cotton, which face significant pest pressures regardless of the land management system.

There are efforts to increase organic certified cotton production. In August 2024, the Center for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CABI) earned the 2024 Innovators Award from The Better Cotton Initiative (Better Cotton) for its leadership in developing capacity and expansion of organic standards and practices in the Pakistani cotton sector, according to a press release by Better Cotton. Given the millions of pounds of some of the most toxic chemicals used to produce cotton, and Pakistan being an exporter of $3.5 billion worth of cotton (2021), including $240 million to the U.S. (2022), cotton production is a worldwide contamination problem. (See Daily News here.)

While eliminating the toxic pesticides, organic cotton processing is still reliant on the toxic hydrogen chloride to delint cotton seeds before planting. Under the banner of “continuous improvement,” Beyond Pesticides has called for more urgency in supporting research on alternatives that are more compatible with organic principles. “It is our understanding, from conversations with a representative of the Texas Organic Cotton Marketing Cooperative, that organic cotton growers in the U.S. currently do not have a lot of choice about how their seed is prepared for planting,” says Terry Shistar, Ph.D., Board of Directors at Beyond Pesticides. See Beyond Pesticides’ full NOSB comments on relisting hydrogen chloride to support organic cotton growers and the call for less toxic alternatives.

A significant barrier to accessing or maintaining organic transition for aspiring, transitioning, and existing organic farmers is the lack of trained experts in organic production at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), including other agricultural support grants, initiatives, and programs including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) (administered by Natural Resources Conservation Service), and crop insurance (administered by Risk Management Agency).

Crop insurance serves as an important example of the deficiency in assistance. “Many of the farmers who had diversified operations did not purchase crop insurance and expressed little to no interest in doing so in the future,” according to the survey of 34 individual farmers and organic advocates interviewed for a study conducted by researchers at New York University (NYU). For the handful of farmers who did participate in insurance, they were disappointed in the benefits. “A key recommendation from this study is the creation of specialized, highly trained crop insurance and conservation agents with expertise in organic farming systems to facilitate the application process and program use for conservation programs and crop insurance,” according to the researchers. 

Call to Action

The future of organic depends on the public’s willingness to advocate for its continued success and growth through public comments. It becomes more challenging for elected officials to ignore the broad support for organic farming, land management, and unrestricted access to toxic-free spaces and products on the open market when people, businesses, farms, and communities speak up.

You can demand change by signing up here to become an advocate for the Parks for a Sustainable Future Program. Organic is not just a food label, but a set of criteria and practices codified in federal law and enforced by USDA that can be applied to other forms of land and pest management, including public green spaces. See here for one of our newest pilot projects in partnership with the City of Excelsior, Minnesota, written in Environment+Energy Leader. You can also contact your U.S. Representative and Senators to cosponsor relevant legislation, including Organic Science and Research Investment (OSRI) Act, S.1385, the New Producer Economic Security Act, S.1237, (previously Increasing Land, Security, and Opportunities (LASO) Act, H.R.3955, in 2023-24), the newly-introduced Organic Imports Verification Act (OIVA), S.1398, and Local Farmers Feeding our Communities Act, (H.R.4782).

There is currently an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the integrity of national organic standards, as the National Organic Standards Board convenes to discuss key issues and allowed materials in organic agriculture. The public can see a discussion of issues before the board and submit comments (using Beyond Pesticides’ positions) by October 8. To submit comments, please click HERE. For more background, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides. 

Source: European Journal of Agronomy

(Beyond Pesticides, September 22, 2025) Comments are due by 11:59 pm ET on October 8, 2025!

When the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meets twice a year, it is an opportunity for the public to weigh in on the integrity of organic standards, a process referred to among stakeholders as “continuous improvement.” There are major issues before the board at the upcoming October remote public hearing and in-person in November.

As a means of taking on the challenges of health threats, biodiversity collapse, and the climate emergency, the review and updating of organic standards requires the public’s involvement in the current public comment period—to keep organic strong and continually improving.  

The Fall National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting is scheduled for November 4 – 6, 2025. The public meeting of the NOSB is preceded by an opportunity for public comments in writing and via online webinars on October 28 and 30, 2025, from 12 pm to 5 pm ET, that concern how organic food is produced. ℹ️ A draft meeting agenda is available here; a more detailed document with proposals and discussion documents is available here.

• Sign up for a 3-minute oral public comment timeslot by Wednesday, October 8! Remember, sign-ups fill up fast! 
• Written comments must be submitted through Regulations.gov by 11:59 pm ET on Wednesday, October 8, but please get them in as early as possible!
• Links to the virtual comment webinars and the public meeting will be posted on this webpage soon after the comment deadline.

The NOSB is responsible for guiding the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in its administration of the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), including the materials (substances) allowed to be used in organic production and handling. The role of the NOSB is especially important as we depend on organic production to protect our ecosystem, mitigate climate change, and enhance our health. 

The NOSB plays an important role in bringing the views of organic producers and consumers to bear on USDA, which is not always in sync with the principles and values that have built the organic market. There are many important issues on the NOSB agenda this Fall. We also encourage you to use the Beyond Pesticides organic webpage and comment on as many issues as you can. ℹ️ For a complete discussion, see the Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2025 issues page.

Beyond Pesticides has identified many key issues that are before the board. Four of these issues, and Beyond Pesticides’ positions, include the following:

1. Keep synthetic “compostables” out of organic compost. 
   Please support the proposal of the Crops Subcommittee (CS) to keep synthetic compostable materials out of organic compost. Compost from plant and animal materials is of fundamental importance to organic practices. Composting is one way that organic growers meet the requirement in law to “foster soil fertility, primarily through the management of the organic content of the soil through proper tillage, crop rotation, and manuring.” The integrity of organic production must be maintained by preserving the integrity of compost. Contaminants in broadly defined “compost feedstocks” cannot be predicted, but history suggests that more persistent toxic pollutants will be found. The NOSB must maintain control over synthetic materials allowed in organic production, as required by the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Research continues to raise alarms about the hazards associated with the use of plastic, including the microplastic particles that are distributed in alarming amounts throughout the environment and taken up by organisms, including humans. Only synthetic materials that are specifically added to the National List through the prescribed process should be allowed in compost destined to be an input into organic production. The NOSB should reopen the workplan item on contaminated inputs that is currently on hold.
   
   
2. Keep synthetic hormones out of organic milk production.
   Oxytocin is available as a synthetic hormone and currently allowed in organic dairy. A vague annotation has resulted in some producers using it inappropriately for milk letdown. Oxytocin is a hormone and, even if rarely used, it leaves organic dairy farmers open to valid criticism that they can still use hormones. For this reason, the two largest organic milk buyers in the U.S. did not support it remaining on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances. Alternative treatments are available. The NOSB should allow oxytocin to sunset or be removed from the National List. If it remains on the National List, the NOSB should adopt the recommended annotation, “use in post parturition therapeutic applications within 3 days after birth. It may not be administered to increase an animal’s milk production or for milk letdown.”
   
   
3. Eliminate the blanket allowance of “inert ingredients.” 
   Despite repeated recommendations from the NOSB, the National Organic Program at USDA has not moved to evaluate individual “inert” ingredients, which may be more toxic than active ingredients allowed in organic production and make up the largest part of pesticide products. The NOSB should delist them unless individually reviewed under the National List review standards.
   
   
4. Ensure that online organic consumers have full information.
   The law requires that organic products are labeled with the organic seal, ingredients, and identification of the certifier. This labeling is not always visible to online consumers. The NOP must require full labels to be provided in online sales platforms. 

📣  The public can sign up and access the site to leave a message for the NOSB by clicking here to go to the Action page! Please feel free to “copy and paste” Beyond Pesticides’ comments, or parts of the comments, when submitting.

For more information on organic, see Beyond Pesticides’ organic agriculture webpage.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 19, 2025) In Water Science and Engineering, a study investigating the occurrence and distribution of agricultural pesticides in a river–lake system of the Taihu Lake Basin in China through surface runoff finds adverse effects on nontarget organisms that threaten ecological security. In evaluating the risks to aquatic organisms, the researchers highlight how pesticide residues in surface water and sediments jeopardize the entire food web, as risks are present throughout multiple trophic levels (positions in the food chain).

The results show that in surface waters, the fungicide carbendazim is the dominant pollutant with 23.66% of the contamination. Within the sediment samples, the fungicide tebuconazole is the primary contributor at 28.57%. Overall, fungicides are the main type of pesticide present in the tested river water and sediments. These compounds account for 76.86% and 85.10% of contamination, respectively. The authors also note that pesticide concentrations in both water and sediments in the rivers increase while moving downstream.

“Ecological risk assessment revealed high mixed risks to algae, daphnia [water fleas], and fish, with risk levels rising along with trophic levels of aquatic organisms,” the researchers state. They continue, “[C]ertain pesticides posed high risks to algae even at low concentrations, indicating more targeted toxicity for lower trophic organisms.” This is concerning, as pesticide residues from agricultural areas around the world enter aquatic environments through surface runoff, atmospheric deposition, rainfall, and other pathways. These chemicals then pose a risk to aquatic organisms and entire ecosystems, as they create toxic health effects and destabilize ecosystem functioning.

As the study notes, China is among the largest producers and consumers of pesticides worldwide, with previous research finding the country applying pesticides at rates 1.5-4.0 times higher per hectare than the global average. Studying river–lake systems, which are interconnected ecosystems where rivers connect to lakes, allowing for the transport, transformation, and storage of water, nutrients, and sediment, highlights how hydrological conditions in these bodies of water can affect the levels of pesticides that then expose aquatic organisms.

In summarizing the need for this research, the authors say, “While many studies have examined the storage characteristics of pesticides in surface water, research on the transport dynamics of pesticides in rivers and lakes remains insufficient, limiting accurate assessment of pesticide exposure scenarios and ecological risks.”

Study Methodology and Results

The researchers established 23 sites throughout Gehu Lake, Taihu Lake, and the rivers connecting them, taking water and sediment samples to analyze. In performing chromatographic and mass spectrometric analyses, the study was able to identify pesticide residues present and perform ecological risk assessments.

In the surface waters, a total of 34 pesticides are detected, with fifteen pesticides, including the fungicides carbendazim and hexaconazole, in 100% of samples. Twenty-five of the pesticides have detection rates above 50%. Within the sediment samples, a total of 20 pesticides are detected. Notably, pesticide pollution is more severe in the sediments of Gehu Lake, followed by the connecting rivers and then Taihu Lake. The levels within the sediment reveal carbendazim and tebuconazole in 100% of samples, while the fungicides prometryn, hexaconazole, and propiconazole are detected above 90%. Fungicides are the most detected contaminants in both the water and sediment samples.

“Pesticide contamination in rivers within the river–lake system intensified downstream, with average total concentrations increasing by 33%,” the authors write. They continue: “Notably, the concentrations of key pollutants carbendazim and hexaconazole increased by 19% and 65%, respectively. Propiconazole, isocarbofos [insecticide], and ten other pesticides exhibited concentration increases exceeding 50%. In river sediments, carbendazim concentrations increased by over 80% in downstream sediments, while prometryn levels rose more than fourfold. These results highlight the critical role of rivers as conduits for pollutant transport to the lakes and water exchange in the river–lake system.”

In terms of risks to aquatic organisms, the study finds propiconazole, carbendazim, phorate sulfone (metabolite of the organophosphate insecticide phorate), and forchlorfenuron (synthetic plant growth regulator) all pose high ecological risks to algae. The researchers note that, “Chronic exposure to such pesticides can alter algal community composition, destabilizing the foundational food webs of aquatic ecosystems and threatening biodiversity.”

In daphnia, tebuconazole and carbendazim constitute the highest calculated ecological risk, jointly accounting for over 80%, and represent the risks to aquatic invertebrate populations from pesticide exposure. In determining the ecological risk values in fish, the data show that tebuconazole poses a consistently high risk at all sampling sites, contributing 69.34% to the overall risk. Imidacloprid (neonicotinoid insecticide), carbendazim, hexaconazole, propiconazole, and tetraconazole also present high risks at more than 60% of the sampling sites.

Overall, the ecological risks of pesticides to aquatic organisms increase throughout the trophic levels. “Tebuconazole, identified as the primary pollutant in both surface water and sediments, contribute[s] to ecological risks across three trophic levels in the descending order of fish (69.37%), daphnia (17.55%), and algae (0.12%), indicating strong bioconcentration potential of pesticides in aquatic organisms,” the researchers state.

Previous Research

Scientific literature cited within the current study adds to a wide body of science connecting pesticide exposure to deleterious impacts on nontarget organisms. Results include:

• Exposure of Oryzias latipes to the herbicide atrazine “induces transgenerational genetic abnormalities such as hermaphroditism and organ feminization.” (See study here.)
• A study finds that the insecticide parathion-methyl inhibits photosynthesis and impairs cyanobacterial growth.
• “Glyphosate [herbicide] has been shown to destabilize aquatic plant community structure, and metolachlor [herbicide] exposure leads to reduced aquatic population richness and biodiversity loss.” (See here, here, and here.)
• Tebuconazole is toxic to daphnia, significantly inhibiting their reproduction, and “exhibits cumulative toxicity, potentially accumulating in fish via the food chain and causing liver toxicity.” (See research here and here.)
• Carbendazim induces heritable DNA damage in daphnia populations.
• Fenbuconazole (fungicide) and metolachlor exposure in fish causes developmental toxicity and hepatotoxicity. (See here, here, and here.)

Resources and Daily News coverage from Beyond Pesticides on waterway contamination highlights how water is being polluted at unprecedented rates, with pesticides, industrial chemicals, nutrients, metals, and other contaminants. Environmental and health advocates say it is essential that these pesticide contaminants not invade waterways and drinking water. Improper oversight and lax enforcement mean that many of these pesticides do, in fact, continue to contaminate the environment. (See the Pesticides and You article entitled Poisoned Waterways here and additional Daily News articles here, here, here, and here.)

Take Action

To prevent the deleterious health effects to aquatic organisms from pesticide exposure, as outlined here, as well as the broader impacts on biodiversity, human health, and the environment, a widespread transition to organic agriculture and land management is necessary. (See more on the health and environmental benefits of organic practices here and here.)

Help support the organic solution by buying organic products (on a budget!), growing your own organic food, becoming a Parks Advocate with the Parks for a Sustainable Future program, and taking action with Action of the Week.

For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ previous action: >> Tell your U.S. Representative and Senators to ensure that agencies reaffirm U.S. commitment to restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of all the nation’s protected water resources.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Qin, Y. et al. (2025) Occurrence and ecological risk of typical pesticides in a river–lake system, Water Science and Engineering. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674237025000833.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 18, 2025) Published in Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, a study of earthworms (Eisenia fetida) evaluates the toxicity of environmentally relevant levels of three fluorinated pesticides (fluxapyroxad, fluopyram, and bixafen) through a 56-day soil exposure experiment. The dose- and time-dependent results reveal that effects on growth and reproduction occur at elevated concentrations, with weight loss and reduced offspring occurring from energy depletion and reproductive organ damage. Other implications escalate with concentration as well, including antioxidant system failure and DNA damage. As the authors summarize, “These findings highlight the mechanisms of fluorine-containing pesticide toxicity in earthworms, emphasizing their potential to disrupt soil ecosystems.”

Fluorine-containing pesticides are widely used in agriculture, yet the chronic effects on soil and soil organisms are not fully considered in regulatory review. Research comparing the similarities and differences in the impacts on nontarget organisms from fluorinated pesticides is lacking, with the current study beginning to address the urgent need to close this gap.

“Data indicate that among more than 100 newly developed pesticides, fluorine-containing pesticides constitute nearly half, making them a focal point in the development of the global pesticide industry,” the researchers state. As representatives of the fluorinated pesticides class, particularly succinate dehydrogenase inhibitors (SDHIs), this study focuses on the fluorinated pesticides fluxapyroxad, fluopyram, and bixafen.

SDHIs are “the third largest class of fungicides followed by methoxyacrylates and triazoles,” with long residual periods in the soil, and “can interfere with the electron transport chain of complex II in the mitochondrial acid cycle, thereby inhibiting mitochondrial function, preventing energy production, halting pathogen growth, and ultimately causing the death of the pathogen.” As earthworms can act as bioindicators of soil health, impacts on these organisms from SDHIs give insight into wider implications for soil ecosystems and ecosystem functioning.

As covered in Daily News, the definition of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals” due to their persistence, continues to be debated in regulatory agencies, with many scientists arguing that certain types of chemicals in this vast group are not accurately captured in risk assessments such as those that fall into the broad category of fluorine-containing pesticides. Recent research, documented in a literature review in Environmental Science & Technology, highlights the importance of a universal, cohesive definition of PFAS that incorporates all fluorinated compounds and would include the three pesticides in the current study.

Beyond Pesticides’ recent comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding a new active fungicidal ingredient fluoxapiprolin, a fluorinated compound, highlight how fluorine-containing pesticides are often resistant to degradation, are linked to endocrine disruption, and may be more likely to be immunotoxic than other types of active ingredients, but are not properly researched as a requirement of registration. (See additional information in the comments here.)

Study Methodology and Results

The earthworms from each test group were analyzed after exposure times of 7, 14, 21, and 28 days. By exposing earthworms to different concentrations and exposure times of fluxapyroxad, fluopyram, and bixafen, the authors’ aims were to:

1. Assess the effects on the body weight and reproduction of earthworms;
2. Evaluate the effects on enzymatic biomarkers;
3. Investigate the pathological effects on the epidermis, intestine, and seminal vesicle tissues of earthworms; and
4. Comprehensively analyze and compare the toxicity of the three fluorine-containing pesticides to earthworms in soil ecosystems.

Studying effects on earthworm growth and reproduction is accomplished by measuring changes in body weight and offspring numbers. The results show that “medium and high concentrations progressively suppressed growth, with stronger inhibition observed at higher exposure levels,” with changes in energy metabolism. The decreased weight is attributed to impaired feeding activity, metabolic function, and energy storage capacity. Medium and high concentrations also show dose-dependent suppression of offspring production, suggesting that these three fungicides may directly damage reproductive tissues or disrupt associated physiological processes.

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are important for complex biological processes essential for maintaining homeostasis within organisms. A balance of ROS generation and elimination is needed for proper functioning, but exposure to environmental contaminants can disrupt the ROS balance in earthworm metabolic processes. Studies show that elevated ROS levels damage cellular components, including DNA, lipids, and proteins. Within the current study, a concentration-dependent ROS increase from day 7 to 14 is observed, demonstrating that fluxapyroxad, fluopyram, and bixafen exposure induces substantial ROS generation in earthworms that can cause oxidative stress.

When assessing levels of a biomarker used for evaluating contaminant-induced oxidative DNA damage, 8-OHdG, the study finds “levels in all treatment groups consistently exceeded control values throughout the fluxapyroxad exposure period, exhibiting dose-dependent elevation with increasing concentrations,” the authors explain. They continue, “Similar concentration-response patterns were observed for fluopyram and bixafen treatments, collectively indicating the capacity of these fungicides to induce oxidative DNA damage in earthworms.”

As mentioned, these three fluorinated pesticides are known as succinate dehydrogenase inhibitors (SDHIs). To further investigate how specific enzymatic targets operate in earthworms, this study analyzes the activity of succinate dehydrogenase, which the researchers describe as “an important mitochondrial enzyme that releases electrons into the mitochondrial electron transport chain, thereby promoting energy production.” The results show changes in succinate dehydrogenase activity upon exposure throughout the entire experiment, with notably lower levels in the highest concentration treatment group.

“[T]o evaluate the effects of fluxapyroxad, fluopyram and bixafen on digestive function and reproductive functions, we also examined the histopathological changes in intestinal tissue and seminal vesicle tissues,” the authors note. As a result, damage to midgut tissues and seminal vesicle tissues is observed, which may affect the production of germ cells and reproductive behavior and can explain the decreased rate of reproduction.

Biomarker responses following exposure, particularly for antioxidant enzymes such as SOD, CAT, and GST, suggest that fluxapyroxad, fluopyram, and bixafen impact adenosine phosphate production and mitochondrial function, which can lead to cell necrosis or apoptosis (cell death).

Previous Research

Additional scientific literature, cited within the current Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology study, highlights the effects of SDHI fungicides and fluorinated pesticides, as well as impacts specifically in earthworms, which adds to the wide body of science on pesticide-induced harm. Results include:

• Fluopyram impacts aquatic organisms by inducing developmental abnormalities in zebrafish embryos and exhibiting strong toxicity toward Daphnia magna and algae. (See studies here, here, and here.)
• Both fluxapyroxad and sulfoxaflor “induce oxidative stress responses in earthworms, causing tissue and DNA damage, while regulating gene expression and the activity of key enzymes such as succinate dehydrogenase.” (See here and here.)
• In zebrafish, fluxapyroxad interferes with embryogenesis by triggering oxidative stress.
• “Bixafen not only impairs hepatic and pancreatic functions in zebrafish but also shows high toxicity to Daphnia magna—chronic exposure to low concentrations reduces offspring production by 62% and decreases body size by 38% in water fleas.” (See studies here and here.)
• Earthworms chronically exposed to low doses of fluxapyroxad exhibit significant changes in biomarkers of oxidative stress and DNA damage, as well as suppression of biomarkers associated with neurotoxicity and other enzymes, which suggests “that fluxapyroxad exposure has adverse effects on oxidative damage, genotoxicity, and neurotoxicity, and the toxicities intensify with increasing concentration and duration of exposure.” (See study here.)
• Pesticide toxicity in earthworms is evident across multiple physiological and functional dimensions, including growth and reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity and behavioral deficits, cytotoxicity that triggers immune and metabolic dysfunction (see here and here), and genotoxicity involving DNA strand breaks.
• “[P]esticides (e.g., deltamethrin, imidacloprid, chlorpyrifos) directly impair [earthworm] population sustainability by suppressing weight gain, disrupting germ cell integrity (e.g., sperm nuclear condensation, DNA fragmentation), and reducing cocoon production and hatching rates.” (See studies here, here, and here.)
• Oxidative stress in earthworms occurs as a result of excessive reactive oxygen species (ROS) accumulation driven by pesticide exposure, culminating in apoptosis (cell death) and tissue necrosis. (See here, here, and here.)

As Beyond Pesticides covered in the Daily News post entitled “Adding to Wide Body of Science, Study Finds Pesticide Residues Threaten Health of Soil Microbiome,” research shows a correlation between pesticide residue risks and soil ecological security and human health, revealing response characteristics of soil microbial communities under pesticide stress. (See more Daily News articles on soil health and the soil microbiome here and here.)

Organic Solution

To mitigate these threats to soil health and the soil microbiome, organic agriculture and land management offer a holistic solution. As shared in a Pesticides and You article, Thinking Holistically When Making Land Management Decisions, microbial communities in the soil and on plants contribute to plant growth and health. Soil communities include bacteria, fungi, earthworms, and other invertebrates that break down organic matter and make nutrients available to plants. Soil health is at the foundation of organic practices, which protect these soil organisms and the ecosystem services they provide.   

A decrease in soil microbial diversity reduces ecosystem functioning, with impacts on ecosystem services from decomposition of organic matter to nutrient cycling and carbon fixation. Chemical-intensive agriculture contributes to the loss of ecosystem services, while organic methods promote high soil diversit,y which allows for more efficient ecosystem functioning.

For more information, see Daily News Study Shows Value of Soil Microbiome, Nurtured in Organic Farming, Harmed by Chemical-Intensive Ag; Study Affirms that Organic Farming Improves Soil Health, Microbial Life, and Pathogen Resistance; and Literature Review Compares Increased Soil Benefits of Regenerative Organic to Chemical-Intensive Practices.     

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Shan, D. et al. (2025) Insights into the chronic toxicity and mechanisms of fluorine-containing pesticides on earthworms, Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1382668925001863.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 17, 2025) A study in Environmental Science & Technology finds additive effects of a synthetic pyrethroid insecticide (cypermethrin) and two fungicides (azoxystrobin and prochloraz) on biological control, biomass of major invertebrate trophic groups (position in food web), and soil ecosystem processes in arable systems (land suitable for growing crops). The study authors further highlight the failure of pesticide regulations to consider elaborate trophic interactions and pesticide mixtures, as well as additive and synergistic effects within their assessments, calling attention to the complexity of real-world exposures and the lack of research to fully understand the implications of chemical use for agricultural and land management purposes.

“Arable systems have a high dependence on diverse natural biota to support pest control, soil bioturbation, and nutrient recycling,” the researchers write. These communities rely on a balance of organisms within various trophic levels in order to function and provide vital ecosystem services. Disruptions caused by environmental contaminants, such as pesticides to nontarget organisms, impact entire ecosystems and overall biodiversity. As the authors state, current risk assessments underestimate the real-world risks of petrochemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers that, despite a wide body of science connecting exposure to deleterious health and environmental effects, are still not fully understood.

There are complex interactions of chemical mixtures that occur as a result of the ”chemical soup” present in the environment, with underlying mechanisms that are incompletely comprehended. Rather than relying on a precautionary approach to protect health and the environment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) utilizes unenforceable mitigation strategies to “reduce risks” and allows registrations based on insufficient scientific research. The risk assessment incorporates the assumption of 100% compliance with mitigation measures. (See more on the precautionary principle here, here, and here, as well as EPA failures here and here.)

Background and Relevance

The use of pesticides has grown exponentially since World War II, with many wartime chemicals transitioning to the consumer market, including the organochlorines (e.g., DDT) and organophosphates (e.g., malathion, chlorpyrifos). “The potential nontarget effects on biodiversity from these pesticides have required the development of regulatory procedures to mitigate risk,” the authors explain. They continue: “However, there is increasing concern that these fail to adequately capture the real-world consequences. Part of this failing relates to a focus during the regulatory process on single active ingredients, an emphasis on a restricted number of established model species (e.g., nontarget arthropods like honeybees, earthworms, springtails, and enchytraeids) from which risk is inferred and the lack of continuous instruction on the timing and dose of pesticide application.”

The use of a limited group of model species, in particular, is concerning as they “fail to capture how differential species sensitivity propagates through trophic interactions to affect wider system-level processes,” the researchers emphasize. (See more information in Daily News coverage on varying sensitivity between species and risk assessment deficiencies here and here.)

The pesticides included in the experiment are cypermethrin, a synthetic pyrethroid insecticide, and two fungicides, azoxystrobin and prochloraz, which documentation shows cause health and environmental effects ranging from toxicity to aquatic organisms and bees to neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption, and oxidative stress.

Study Methodology and Results

The study, performed in an open growing area in Southern England, uses arable communities of pests (aphids and weevils), predators (e.g., beetles, spiders, and mites), and soil biota (including mites and earthworms) to assess interactions between cypermethrin, azoxystrobin, and prochloraz as well as within trophic interactions as a result of exposure to these active ingredients. “This study is intended to provide new insights into the risks posed by pesticide synergisms within the context of trophically complex communities critical to the support of agricultural ecosystem services,” the authors summarize.

They continue: “In this study, we use a model arable mesocosm [controlled, semi-natural experimental ecosystem] approach to test the interacting effects of a widely used pyrethroid cypermethrin in combination with an azole fungicide prochloraz that has an established biochemical mechanism resulting in synergisms. We also tested the effects of the strobilurin fungicide azoxystrobin, for which there is little evidence for synergisms with pyrethroids.”

The results reveal that despite previous research supporting cypermethrin and prochloraz having increased interactions, cypermethrin and azoxystrobin have a greater than additive effect. “The synergism between cypermethrin and prochloraz was relatively small compared to that between cypermethrin and azoxystrobin,” the researchers state. “However, the synergism between cypermethrin and prochloraz was expected due to the inhibition of the cytochrome P450 monooxygenases,” which are proteins essential for metabolism.

The study analyzes the effects of the three pesticides individually and in pairwise combinations to establish how “key aspects of arable farming systems, including aphid pest control by ladybirds, biomass of key trophic levels, overall community food web structure, and soil organic matter recycling” is impacted following exposure. The methodology includes a description of the 35 mesocosms containing blended loam topsoil with organic matter and a seeded soil surface with a mixture of organic powdered oats and dried yeast flakes to provide resources for soil microfauna.

Two months before the application of the pesticides, field beans were transplanted into the soil, and then a sequential addition of arthropod communities began to build up the trophic levels of detritivores (animals that feed on dead organic matter), herbivore pests, and predators. In total, the experiment includes seven treatments ranging from the control (no pesticides) to each active ingredient individually and in pairs.

Assessments following pesticide applications incorporate arthropod sampling and soil sampling, with an assessment of decomposition rates of the breakdown of organic matter by soil macrofauna. Trophic links are also estimated using the WebBuilder function of its statistical package “to predict trophic interactions between the terrestrial and soil arthropod communities for each mesocosm.” These links are based on observed and established species feeding relationships within the mesocosm.

Within the experiment, the arable crop mesocosm system records show 30 taxonomic units (including species, genus, and order classifications), representing a total of 317,064 individuals from the trophic levels of detritivores, herbivores, and predators over the 4-week sampling period. Impacts on the organisms throughout the experiment show:

• Ladybird abundance responds significantly to the interaction between pesticide treatments and sample week, with the lowest numbers recorded with exposure to cypermethrin.
• Predator biomass experiences a significant interaction between pesticide treatment and sample week, suggesting implications for single or acute exposure versus continued exposure.
• “[T]here was in general greater evidence for impacts of all three types of pesticides, with the use of cypermethrin either alone or with the fungicides having negative effects that decreased predator biomass over time. The use of either fungicide alone or in combination also appeared to have net negative effects on predator biomass.” Detritivore biomass declines over time are also noted.
• Within the predator food web architecture, there is a trend for reduced node richness with cypermethrin (alone and in combination with azoxystrobin).
• Additional “changes in the architecture of predatory trophic interactions did show evidence for synergistic effects between cypermethrin and the fungicides.”
• There is a collapse in connectance (measure of network complexity), which represents the proportion of trophic links and is associated with system stability and robustness, which can impact biodiversity and its associated ecosystem processes. (See studies here and here.)
• Nutrient pathways and overall diversity in tropic interactions are affected by all three pesticides, implying “that these critical food webs have reduced functionality, with an equivalent reduction in this metric seen where communities suffer from overexploitation or invasive species.” The results suggest the diversity of nutrient pathways is additive with pesticide exposure.

The authors note that while the data highlights trophic level impacts with all three pesticides, and unexpected additive effects that are highest between cypermethrin and azoxystrobin, “more subtle effects may be occurring, resulting from sublethal behavioral changes (e.g., activity) that may affect their ability to impact soil ecosystem processes.” (See research here and here.) While mesocosms are able to act as an experimental model to study environmental changes under controlled conditions and offer insight, such as for complex interactions between trophic levels, they are inherently artificial and not representative of all factors within natural ecosystems that need to be considered.

Regulatory Deficiencies

As the researchers emphasize throughout the study, agricultural systems apply a wide range of pesticides, which are approved for use through regulatory processes that do not realistically consider all possible combinations and potential interactions between active ingredients. As a result of this, risks to health and the environment are often underestimated, as there is a potential for additive, or even greater than additive (synergistic), effects with pesticide mixtures. (See studies here, here, here, and here.)

The authors describe that, “Such synergistic risks can occur where pesticide active ingredients affect either: 1) the bioavailability of one or more compounds, e.g., by changing its half-life or altering interactions with organic matter to affect sorption; 2) toxicokinetics that change uptake and transport to target sites, e.g., via inhibition of transport proteins, competition for binding sites, metabolism, and/or excretion; or 3) toxicodynamics that change interactions with target sites or affect a species ability to combat the effects of exposure.” (See here, here, and here.)

There is significant potential for synergistic impacts on nontarget organisms, including those providing ecosystem services like pollination, natural pest control, and soil health benefits. However, regulatory assessments do not typically evaluate possible synergistic interactions, as well as the true impacts on community structure, which are highly complex, when exposed to pesticide mixtures.

“We have shown that while insecticide use has arguably predictable consequences for most invertebrates, it is only when consideration is given to complex measures of trophic interactions between species that synergistic risks between pyrethroids and strobilurin fungicides were identified,” the researchers conclude. They continue: “Yet, the current emphasis of pesticide regulatory approaches remains on a limited number of model species while rarely considering how changes in wider community composition can impact complex species interactions. Such interactions have implications for system resilience and ecosystem processes.”

Previous Research on Arthropods

Daily News coverage entitled “Cultivating with Natural Predators Gets Farmers Off the Pesticide Treadmill, According to Study” highlights how many of the pesticides used against insects, including neonicotinoid seed treatments, also kill other beneficial arthropods, as well as other soil invertebrates important to cycling nutrients naturally. The study finds arthropod predators suffer sharp declines in fields applied with pesticides and where seeds have been treated with neonicotinoids, as well as how slug damage can be reduced when natural slug predators are encouraged, allowing farmers to avoid the endless cycle of pesticide dependency, pest resistance, genetically engineered crops, and synthetic fertilizers.

Prior research in Germany, summarized in the Daily News, Study Shows Drastic Loss of Arthropods in German Grasslands and Forests, shows a steep decline of arthropod (insect and spider) populations in grasslands and forests, which adds to the growing body of evidence documenting the ongoing “insect apocalypse.” As noted, it is clear, based on the scientific literature, that the use of pesticides in industrial agriculture is greatly contributing to the rapid decline of insect populations, which then causes cascading impacts throughout the food web, such as with birds and other wildlife.

Support for the Organic Solution

A myriad of studies highlight the importance of insect biodiversity for ecosystem functioning, which is protected through organic land management practices. One study finds uncultivated field margins contain almost twice as many beneficial insects as cropped areas around farm fields, according to research published in the Journal of Insect Science. The study notes that these predators and parasitoids overwinter in diverse vegetation and can provide farmers an important jump start on spring pest problems instead of relying on toxic pesticides.

Another study also promotes the value of natural predators, highlighting how bats are crucial in suppressing pest arthropods in agroecosystems and contribute vitally to sustainable agriculture. (Read more in the Daily News here.) Additional coverage this year of a study in Conservation Genetics, entitled “Organic farming fosters arthropod diversity of specific insect guilds – evidence from metabarcoding,” showcases the negative effect of chemical-intensive, conventional farm management on insect populations when compared to organically managed meadows.

Visit Beyond Pesticides’ What the Science Shows on Biodiversity page for more research on how population declines are linked to pesticide exposure. As an alternative to these harmful chemicals, Beyond Pesticides advocates for the elimination of all petrochemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers that are insufficiently studied and regulated, putting all organisms, including humans, at risk.

The widespread adoption of organic practices can mitigate these risks by protecting and enhancing biodiversity, safeguarding public health, and mitigating climate change. Learn more about the health and environmental benefits of the organic solution here and here and take action to advance organic, sustainable, and regenerative practices and policies.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source:

Woodcock, B. et al. (2025) Synergistic Pesticide Effects on Complex Arthropod Trophic Interactions in Arable Systems, Environmental Science & Technology. Available at: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5c04611.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 16, 2025) As reported in the Daily News on August 28, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it “will hold a public webinar [today], September 16, 2025, at 2:00 PM ET to provide information on the ecological runoff/erosion and spray drift mitigation measures that can be used to protect endangered species from pesticides.” This follows closely behind an earlier announcement of a newly released Pesticide App for Label Mitigations (PALM) mobile tool to assist in implementing these mitigation measures. Despite boasting that the PALM tool is a “one-stop shop” for farmers to use EPA’s mitigation menu, which the agency claims helps to protect nontarget species, environmental critics say that self-directed mitigation without a rigorous reporting and enforcement apparatus fails to meet the level of protection that is necessary under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

As Beyond Pesticides has often reported, mitigation measures are not enforced through recordkeeping, inspections, and certification, and require no accountability from farmers and pesticide applicators. At the same time, EPA assumes compliance with mitigation measures as the basis for meeting statutory standards of reasonable risk from harmful chemicals, despite documented health and environmental harm. As a Daily News article earlier this year points out, living amid chemical pollution creates the need for immediate mitigation measures in an attempt to manage exposure. Mitigation measures, however, are often found to be lacking because of ongoing risks that may be reduced, but not eliminated, despite the availability of nontoxic practices that current policies do not require.

The root cause of these issues is the failure of EPA to adequately assess the lack of pesticide essentiality and pesticide hazards in the face of unprecedented chronic illness diagnoses, biodiversity collapse (pollinators, birds, and butterflies alone), and the climate crisis. In partnership with farmers, community organizers, public health professionals, and some policymakers, the adoption of land management and food supply chain systems rooted in organic principles and criteria are documented to be more protective by addressing threats to health, biodiversity, and climate by eliminating petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers.

The latest updates to the mitigation menu and PALM tool that EPA has implemented “incorporates information from the Ecological Mitigation Support Document to Support Endangered Species Strategies Version 2.0 (published in April 2025), as well as the Insecticide Strategy and Herbicide Strategy.” Beyond Pesticides’ comments on both strategies can be seen here and here. A previous Daily News post, titled EPA Draft Herbicide Strategy Update Further Weakens Plan to Protect Endangered Species, further describes how EPA strategies are weakening aspects of the agency’s efforts to “protect” endangered species from herbicide use. (See additional coverage on ESA and mitigation measures here, here, here, and here.)

The update to the Herbicide Draft Strategy, specifically, outlines three types of modifications, including “simplifying” its approach, increasing growers’ “flexibility” when applying mitigation measures, and reducing the mitigation measures required in certain situations. By reducing the stringency of the Strategy, advocates are again questioning EPA’s compliance with legal requirements under ESA or protecting endangered species and their habitats in the midst of an unprecedented rate of global extinction. This strategy was finalized in August 2024.

The latest mitigation menu update, as of April 2025, includes additional measures associated with the final Insecticide Strategy. As EPA states: “The mitigation menu does not impose any requirements or restrictions on pesticide use. Rather, pesticide users would access the mitigation menu website only to inform what mitigation measures could be used to achieve the level of mitigation that is required on pesticide labeling.” There is no reporting required to document that these actions were performed. EPA continues to say, “Pesticide users remain responsible for ensuring that all pesticide labeling requirements are met.”

EPA will provide an overview of the changes to the mitigation menu, as well as explain how to navigate the calculation resources, such as the PALM tool, and how these will “improve flexibility for pesticide users by providing options that work best for their situation,” at the webinar today, September 16, 2025. Registration is available here.

In relying on online resources that “assist applicators in determining what mitigation options are available to them, including the spray drift and runoff calculators” and newly released PALM tool, EPA shifts the burden on to farmers and pesticide applicators to properly review product labels and any proposed mitigation measures, identify what is needed for their specific situation, and then implement the measures appropriately, all without the need to report those actions to the agency.

EPA says mitigation tracking is “at the field or farm level” and not required to be submitted to the agency. If working with a technical specialist or conservation program, “Verification can be done through the conservation program and provided to the program enrollee. Verification is not required to be submitted to EPA.” This hands-off approach highlights what environmental advocates identify as a regulatory deficiency within EPA’s program that does not meet the standards of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and ESA, which require compliance with specific enforceable use restrictions that have been delineated on pesticide product labels.

As stated, the current mitigation process does not properly ensure that choosing from a menu of protective measures will meet a protective standard that is recorded and enforced, thus requiring accountability of applicators. Additionally, the mitigations outlined on EPA’s mitigation menu website are reported by users who participated in a test to be cumbersome to navigate, without assurances that the agency will teach, implement, or enforce the new system. The new point system is intended to establish sufficient mitigation to allow pesticide use. However, the expectation of accurate calculations for mitigation measures is placed on applicators who may not be fully versed in math or English. The users in the test identified technological problems with the website, while also commenting on the complexities involved in the process.

On this topic of mitigation, Beyond Pesticides, in Daily News EPA “Mitigation Menu” Called Complex, Raising Doubts about Required Endangered Species Protection, points to advocates of organic agriculture who argue that instead of spending millions of dollars and many years creating mitigation programs that are unenforceable and ineffective, EPA should spend the same amount of time and money supporting farmers in the transition to organic agriculture and in exiting the toxic pesticide treadmill.

Even if the mitigation menu was easier to navigate, these proposed mitigation measures would only lessen the chance of harmful impacts of pesticide use and, more concerning, are entirely voluntary. Beyond Pesticides maintains that practices to eliminate the need for pesticides must be emphasized because so many pest problems are a function of faulty management practices, which cannot be solved with pesticide use. Instead, EPA assumes the need for pesticide dependency, even though the scientific literature and empirical evidence may say otherwise.

Organic agriculture is a viable, productive alternative to the current regulatory system that assumes the need for pesticides due to chemical dependency. Despite this, the marketplace has responded to consumer demand, which has helped build a market valued at over $70 billion in the U.S. and over $230 billion globally. The global organic market is projected to grow to $564 billion by 2030. (See here and here.) Widely adopted organic agriculture and land management is the holistic solution that is necessary to offer the proper protections EPA is required to provide.

Recent studies, as covered in the Daily News, show how organic practices enhance soil health, increase crop and nutritional quality even with weather uncertainty, and can outcompete chemical-intensive fields, as well as provide health benefits with an organic diet. Learn more about the health and environmental benefits of organic here and here.

Sign up now to get our Action of the Week and Weekly News Updates delivered right to your inbox and have your voice heard on governmental actions that are harmful to the environment and public and worker health, increase overall pesticide use, or undermine the advancement of organic, sustainable, and regenerative practices and policies.

Beyond Pesticides has issued an Action to: Tell Congress To Stand Up for Health and the Environment.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (August 14, 2025). EPA Releases New Mobile Tool to Help Farmers Implement Recommended Ecological Pesticide Mitigation Measures. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-releases-new-mobile-tool-help-farmers-implement-recommended-ecological-pesticide.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (August 20, 2025). Register for EPA’s Webinar on Mitigation Measures to Protect Endangered Species from Pesticides. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/register-epas-webinar-mitigation-measures-protect-endangered-species-pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 15, 2025) With residues of the widely used weed killer glyphosate (Roundupᵀᴹ) in the food supply long documented, scientific attention has turned to the synergistic effects of the weedkiller— a magnified effect greater than the individual chemical effects added together. The authors of an article in World’s Poultry Science Journal write, “The synergistic toxic effects of commercial glyphosate formulations and their bioaccumulation in animal tissues are often overlooked in current safety assessments.” Following up on a previous action, Beyond Pesticides is telling Congress and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the agency must consider the effects of pesticides in the context in which they are used and promote the organic alternative. 

Glyphosate residues in animal feed, as well as in water and through other exposure routes from food generally and residential areas, pose risks to both animal and human health, as these residues can bioaccumulate. As previously examined by Beyond Pesticides, the effects of pesticides are not limited to the crops to which they are applied. Synergistic effects of multiple chemical exposures are the rule, rather than the exception.  

With poultry, the herbicide enters the production system through residues in genetically engineered feed. An earlier article in Scientific Reports concludes that glyphosate’s (GLP) “widespread application on feed crops leaves residues in the feed,” while residues are “found to be common in conventional eggs acquired from grocery stores.” In analyzing the biochemical, toxicological, and ecological impacts of glyphosate on poultry, particularly chickens, the authors find a wide body of evidence linking glyphosate and its metabolite (breakdown product) aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) to debilitating hazards that extend beyond mortality. These sublethal effects include disruption of the gut microbiome and gastrointestinal disease; decreased productivity and diminished reproductive health; hepatic and kidney toxicity; growth and developmental impacts, including teratogenicity and embryotoxicity; endocrine disruption and oxidative stress; and impaired immune functions. 

Glyphosate residues in animal feed, as well as in water and through other exposure routes from food generally and residential areas, pose risks to both animal and human health, as these residues can bioaccumulate. With a high reliance on corn and soybeans in the diets of poultry, genetically modified (GM) crops are a significant source of exposure for these animals. The ubiquitous nature of glyphosate residues throughout the environment and within organisms is a result of the widespread application of this toxic chemical in forestry, agriculture, landscaping, and gardening. Over 750 herbicides contain glyphosate as the active ingredient, and it also plays a large role in the production of GM crops, “with approximately 80% of GM crops bred specifically for GLP tolerance.”

Although the effects of glyphosate alone, as have long been documented in the scientific literature, range from negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment to food safety risks and human health implications, the true impacts can only be seen when looking at the whole agroecosystem. EPA’s regulatory processes ignore factors that enhance the toxicity of these already harmful chemicals, such as synergy, mixtures, and “inert” ingredients. “Current safety evaluations mostly concentrate on glyphosate in isolation, overlooking the synergistic toxic effects of commercial formulations and their capacity for bioaccumulation in adipose tissues,” the review’s authors point out.

Fortunately, adopting a systems approach to analyzing risks also reveals the systemic solution—regenerative organic production and land management—that is both successful and a suitable standard of comparison. The only way to truly protect humans, as well as pollinators, insects, birds, and other species, and the biosphere as a whole, is to stop the use of pesticides completely. Converting the world’s agricultural systems to organic would have a tremendous positive impact on threatened populations. 

Letter to U.S. Congress
Recent research on glyphosate demonstrates how people are multiply exposed as the pesticide moves through the food chain. A scientific review in World’s Poultry Science Journal highlights the adverse health effects on avian species from exposure to the widely used weed killer glyphosate throughout poultry production. The herbicide enters poultry production through residues in genetically engineered feed. An earlier article in Scientific Reports concludes that glyphosate’s “widespread application on feed crops leaves residues in the feed,” while residues are “found to be common in conventional eggs acquired from grocery stores.” In analyzing the biochemical, toxicological, and ecological impacts of glyphosate on poultry, particularly chickens, the authors find a wide body of evidence linking glyphosate and its metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) to debilitating hazards that extend beyond mortality. These sublethal effects include disruption of the gut microbiome and gastrointestinal disease; decreased productivity and diminished reproductive health; hepatic and kidney toxicity; growth and developmental impacts, including teratogenicity and embryotoxicity; endocrine disruption and oxidative stress; and impaired immune functions.

Glyphosate residues in animal feed, as well as in water and through other exposures from food generally and residential areas, pose risks to both animal and human health, as these residues can bioaccumulate. The GM corn and soybeans in the diets of poultry are a significant source of exposure for these animals. The ubiquitous nature of glyphosate residues throughout the environment and within organisms is a result of the widespread application of this toxic chemical in forestry, agriculture, landscaping, and gardening. Over 750 herbicides contain glyphosate as the active ingredient.

Although the effects of glyphosate alone, as have long been documented in the scientific literature, range from negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment to food safety risks and human health implications, the true impacts can only be seen when looking at the whole environment. EPA’s regulatory processes ignore factors that enhance the toxicity of these already harmful chemicals, such as synergy, mixtures, and “inert” ingredients. “Current safety evaluations mostly concentrate on glyphosate in isolation, overlooking the synergistic toxic effects of commercial formulations and their capacity for bioaccumulation in adipose tissues,” the review’s authors point out.

Other studies highlight the need for a broader overhaul of EPA’s current risk assessment process. A November 2023 European study published in Nature challenges “the current assumption of pesticide regulation—that chemicals that individually pass laboratory tests and semifield trials are considered environmentally benign.”

Since interactions and synergism are the rule, pesticides cannot be evaluated based on single-chemical, single-species tests. They must be evaluated in context—that is, the system of chemical-dependent management must itself be questioned. Fortunately, adopting a systems approach to analyzing risks also reveals the systemic solution—regenerative organic production and land management—that is both successful and a suitable standard of comparison. The only way to truly protect humans, as well as pollinators, insects, birds, and other species, and the biosphere as a whole, is to stop the use of pesticides completely. Converting the world’s agricultural systems to organic would have a tremendous positive impact on threatened populations. 

EPA must consider effects of pesticides in the context in which they are used and with reference to the organic alternative.

Thank you.

Letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Recent research on glyphosate demonstrates how people are multiply exposed as the pesticide moves through the food chain. A scientific review in World’s Poultry Science Journal highlights the adverse health effects on avian species from exposure to the widely used weed killer glyphosate throughout poultry production. The herbicide enters poultry production through residues in genetically engineered feed. An earlier article in Scientific Reports concludes that glyphosate’s “widespread application on feed crops leaves residues in the feed,” while residues are “found to be common in conventional eggs acquired from grocery stores.” In analyzing the biochemical, toxicological, and ecological impacts of glyphosate on poultry, particularly chickens, the authors find a wide body of evidence linking glyphosate and its metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) to debilitating hazards that extend beyond mortality. These sublethal effects include disruption of the gut microbiome and gastrointestinal disease; decreased productivity and diminished reproductive health; hepatic and kidney toxicity; growth and developmental impacts, including teratogenicity and embryotoxicity; endocrine disruption and oxidative stress; and impaired immune functions.

Glyphosate residues in animal feed, as well as in water and through other exposures from food generally and residential areas, pose risks to both animal and human health, as these residues can bioaccumulate. The GM corn and soybeans in the diets of poultry are a significant source of exposure for these animals. The ubiquitous nature of glyphosate residues throughout the environment and within organisms is a result of the widespread application of this toxic chemical in forestry, agriculture, landscaping, and gardening. Over 750 herbicides contain glyphosate as the active ingredient.

Although the effects of glyphosate alone, as have long been documented in the scientific literature, range from negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment to food safety risks and human health implications, the true impacts can only be seen when looking at the whole environment. EPA’s regulatory processes ignore factors that enhance the toxicity of these already harmful chemicals, such as synergy, mixtures, and “inert” ingredients. “Current safety evaluations mostly concentrate on glyphosate in isolation, overlooking the synergistic toxic effects of commercial formulations and their capacity for bioaccumulation in adipose tissues,” the review’s authors point out.

Other studies highlight the need for a broader overhaul of EPA’s current risk assessment process. A November 2023 European study published in Nature challenges “the current assumption of pesticide regulation—that chemicals that individually pass laboratory tests and semifield trials are considered environmentally benign.”

Since interactions and synergism are the rule, pesticides cannot be evaluated based on single-chemical, single-species tests. They must be evaluated in context—that is, the system of chemical-dependent management must itself be questioned. Fortunately, adopting a systems approach to analyzing risks also reveals the systemic solution—regenerative organic production and land management—that is both successful and a suitable standard of comparison. The only way to truly protect humans, as well as pollinators, insects, birds, and other species, and the biosphere as a whole, is to stop the use of pesticides completely. Converting the world’s agricultural systems to organic would have a tremendous positive impact on threatened populations. 

EPA must consider effects of pesticides in the context in which they are used and with reference to the organic alternative.

Thank you.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 12, 2025) A team of Argentinian researchers conducted a study published in Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology of the combined effects of the herbicide glyphosate and the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin. The researchers observed significantly higher apoptosis in cells exposed to the mixtures than to the individual pesticides—a synergistic response. Apoptosis, also known as programmed cell death, is a standard way that tissues handle damaged cells to remove threats to their function.

The researchers sought to investigate the cellular toxicity of each chemical, individually and in combination, and assessed whether the effects of the mixture were additive or synergistic. Additive effects occur when two individual chemicals amplify the same sort of response, often because the chemicals have similar structures. Synergism can occur when chemicals have different mechanisms of action but work together to create more powerful effects.

Mixtures of pesticides are the least-studied area of research conducted for regulatory purposes. While regulators provide instructions to applicators regarding which pesticides can be applied together and combined in tank mixtures, there is no control over how pesticides travel through the environment once applied, as they flow through the air as spray drift, lodge in soils and water, and are incorporated into organisms via dermal, respiratory, and ingestion pathways. Herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides may affect different pests and have different mechanisms of action, but in combination, they can do even more profound damage to biological systems. Academic scientists are building up a body of research on pesticide mixtures that should trigger alarm – and action – in the regulatory community. See Beyond Pesticides’ archive on synergistic effects for more details.

Nor are chemicals’ harms necessarily confined to single organs or body systems. For example, Beyond Pesticides analyzed a review of reproductive health in August showing that pesticides and PFAS “disrupt the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis (HPG), impair ovarian function, and contribute to reproductive dysfunction through mechanisms such as oxidative stress, hormonal disruption, and epigenetic [gene expression or behavior] modifications,” according to the review authors. “This leads to menstrual irregularities, infertility, and pregnancy complications, as well as increases in the risk of reproductive system disorders such as endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and ovarian cancer.”

The effects of exposure to multiple pesticides are of dire significance for people in agricultural areas. The Midwest is a prime example. A recent report from Investigate Midwest details the consequences in southeastern Missouri. With the University of Missouri, the journalists analyze cancer rates and pesticide usage by county. Missouri, in general, has both very high pesticide use per square mile and very high cancer rates per 100,000 people. The investigators found that the state’s “bootheel” has the highest use of pesticides per square mile, and four of the bootheel counties have the highest cancer rates. Major crops are cotton, soybeans, and rice–crops grown in vast amounts with millions of pounds of pesticides. The investigators cited a study by Isain Zapata and colleagues, finding associations between pesticide use and leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, bladder, colon, lung, and pancreatic cancers; the strength of the associations was rivaled only by smoking. While specific pesticides were associated with specific cancers, neither the journalism investigation nor Zapata’s study attempted to determine the influence of combined exposures, highlighting the urgent need for more research.

The researchers studied the combined effects of cypermethrin and glyphosate because these pesticides are often applied to the same fields and both are found in soils, air, and water. There are some reports that in Argentina, the two pesticides are sometimes combined in tank mixtures or applied at the same time. Cypermethrin kills insects by interfering with neuron function and generating oxidative stress. It has also been found to increase numerous cellular biomarkers of DNA damage in at least three cell types. Glyphosate, the most-used pesticide in the world, is classified as a human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and is known to degrade kidney function, affect reproductive health, disrupt gut microbes, and more.

The authors wanted to see whether (and how) the cypermethrin-glyphosate mixture promotes cell death, and, if it damages but does not kill cells, how much it damages their genes. They used separate commercially available formulations of glyphosate and cypermethrin and formulated two mixtures with different ratios from scratch. They tested each formulation on a cell line called Hep-2, which is commonly used to study the effects of pesticides on the respiratory tract, and widely used in studies of viruses, cancer, pharmaceuticals, and genetic engineering.

A test of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity produced significant differences between control cells and all the treated groups – that is, treated groups showed a higher incidence of toxicity indicators like the occurrence of two nuclei, multiple micronuclei, and frequency of abnormal cell division. These types of aberrations are associated with apoptosis.

The researchers also point out that apoptosis is dose-dependent. At lower pesticide doses, cells’ genes may be damaged even though the cell does not die. This can result in long-term issues, including mutations and chromosomal breaks, which can in turn result in cancer.

Overall, the authors write, their study demonstrates “that agrochemical mixtures exert toxic effects on this cell line, and that in most cases, these effects are greater than expected for the individual substances alone.” This means that the old toxicological adage that “the dose makes the poison” is an inappropriate measure for assessing the effects of exposure to mixtures of pesticides. For mixtures, those effects are often more than the sum of their parts.

The fact that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) puts its stamp of approval on both glyphosate and cypermethrin and allows the use of these pesticides in combination identifies a serious deficiency. Both are known or suspected human carcinogens. Both harm insects (directly or indirectly), birds, fish, amphibians, aquatic invertebrates, humans, and likely many other organisms. The entire regulatory system is geared toward examining each chemical in isolation. But the real world is awash in uncontrolled combinations of chemicals. As mixtures are the least-studied form of pesticide exposure, those that are additive or synergistic likely represent the most urgent challenge posed by the real-world use of pesticides.

One of the foundational assumptions about synthetic pesticide use is that toxic chemicals can be controlled in the environment. After nearly a century of unbridled release of thousands of chemical compounds into the biosphere, there is abundant evidence that those chemicals move, combine, and degrade in unpredictable ways. They are not controllable in the ways that pesticide companies and regulators claim they are.

EPA continues to foster the massive glyphosate economy and refuses to acknowledge its harms, which are identified by international agencies and the independent peer-reviewed scientific literature. Regarding cypermethrin, egregiously, in its 2021 Interim Registration Review Decision, EPA “decided not to develop unique chemical-specific risk mitigation for the cypermethrins” and “concludes that the cypermethrins provide high benefits for controlling pests in indoor residential areas, outdoor urban areas, and in agricultural crop production…risks may remain to non-target organisms even after mitigation. Any remaining risks are outweighed by the benefits of the cypermethrins’ use” [emphasis added].

On September 8, Beyond Pesticides called on Congress to require EPA to recognize that pesticide exposures occur in the real world in the form of mixtures that often have synergistic effects. The organization’s analysis reviewed multiple lines of evidence, including that the neonicotinoid insecticide imidacloprid, along with infestation with a parasitic mite, synergistically increases honey bee deaths; plastics combined with petrochemical pesticides exacerbate health effects; the fungicide azoxystrobin, combined with natural fungal toxins, synergistically affects liver cancer cells. It is also noted that profound observers of nature and humanity, such as the poet John Donne and the naturalist John Muir, pointed out long ago that all life is interconnected; therefore, synergy is to be expected, not ignored. Here is a letter the public can send to Congress stressing the importance of acknowledging and studying the combined effects of pesticides, plastics, climate change, and other human-induced changes to the biosphere.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources:
Assessment of cell death and genotoxic potential of glyphosate and cypermethrin formulations, individually and in combination, in HEp-2 cells
Coalova et al.
Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 2025
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1382668925001905

The unseen harvest: Pesticides, cancer and rural Missouri’s health crisis
Alex Cox, Adeleine Halsey, Kyla Pehr and Savvy Sleevar
Investigate Midwest August 18, 2025
https://investigatemidwest.org/2025/08/18/the-unseen-harvest-pesticides-cancer-and-rural-missouris-health-crisis/

Scientific Studies Identify EPA Deficiency in Evaluating Safety of Toxic Chemical Interactions
Beyond Pesticides, September 8, 2025
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2025/09/scientific-studies-identify-epa-deficiency-in-evaluating-safety-of-toxic-chemical-interactions-calls-for-action/

Study Shows Importance of Testing Pesticide Mixtures to Determine Adverse Ecosystem Effects
Beyond Pesticides, June 6, 2024
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2024/06/study-shows-importance-of-testing-pesticide-mixtures-to-determine-adverse-ecosystem-effects/

Children’s Health Threatened as Rates of Pediatric Cancers are Linked to Agricultural Pesticide Mixtures
Beyond Pesticides, March 4, 2025
https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/category/statelocal/nebraska/

(Beyond Pesticides, September 11, 2025) A study published in Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment finds organic rice paddies in the Mediterranean region have greater ecosystem biodiversity, including increased presence of aquatic microorganisms and insects, than their chemical-intensive counterparts. While not a “cradle-to-grave” or holistic analysis of organic vs. chemical-intensive agriculture (see a similar example in previous Daily News here), the authors note that there is an increase in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe) associated with compost use, which replaces synthetic fertilizers. Typically, compost builds biological life in the soil and contributes to a drawing down (or sequestering) of atmospheric carbon. As EPA notes, “[C]omposting lowers greenhouse gases by improving carbon sequestration in the soil and by preventing methane emissions through aerobic decomposition, as methane-producing microbes are not active in the presence of oxygen.”

The transition to organically produced rice in the U.S. has come with challenges. One includes thorny debates over the inclusion of copper sulfate on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances, which establishes materials permitted for use in certified organic production under the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Under the law, USDA restricts copper sulfate in organic farming as follows: “For use as tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice production, use is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to levels which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent. For use as an algicide in aquatic rice systems and for tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice systems; use is not to exceed one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to those which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a time frame agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent.” (Reference: 7 CFR 205.601(a)(3), 205.601(e)(4), & 205.601(i))

Certifiers of organic are charged with evaluating the need for copper sulfate use and determining that other preventive means, including cultural practices, have been tried.

It should be noted that copper sulfate, like all allowed substances in organic, is subject to public review and comment on a five-year cycle and must be reviewed by the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and voted on to remain on the National List. In chemical-intensive agriculture, by contrast, copper sulfate is registered for use as a fungicide, algicide, a source of copper in animal nutrition, as fertilizer and herbicide, and for seed treatment. It is also used to kill slugs and snails in irrigation and municipal water treatment systems.

As biodiversity, public health, and other planetary boundaries strain under the weight of a fossil fuel and chemical-intensive global economy and society, organic advocates continue to call for the incorporation of climate resilience into organic agriculture with improved soil biology and water retention.

Background and Methodology

The study was conducted in Albufeira Natural Park (ANP), a wetland listed under the intergovernmental treaty Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance since it is considered “a key ecological and economic resource in the region.” There are four sampling sites—a water spring (on the edge of ANP and consisting of aquatic plants [macrophytes]), an organic rice field (manually seeded and fertilized with horse manure), and two chemical-intensive rice fields. The first chemical-intensive rice field, located in the northern area of ANP, was irrigated with reclaimed wastewater and used more pesticides due to issues with weeds, pest pressures, and a seed variety prone to fungal disease. The second chemical-intensive rice field is in the southern area, and it was irrigated with water from Albufera Lake. Researchers gathered three samples from each site throughout the 2021 cultivation cycle, with more specific information on the seeding dates, irrigation regimes, pesticide and fertilizer applications, and drying periods available to review in Section 2.1 of the Materials and Methods section.

The researchers emphasize the significance of this study, given that there has generally been minimal research “explor[ing] the long-term effects of pesticides and conventional rice farming practices—such as intermittent drainage or fertilization—on biodiversity in rice paddies.” In this vein, the researchers reference previous studies suggesting the benefits of organic rice farming (see here, here, and here), however these were all conducted in subtropical regions in Asia; Mediterranean rice paddies, meanwhile, have specific management practices that significantly affects the GHGe [greenhouse gas emissions] of rice production,  “such as post-harvest flooding patterns, straw management, and the type of wetlands previously present on reclaimed land.”

In terms of gathering data on aquatic organisms, researchers engaged in biological sampling and analysis for microbial communities (bacteria and archaea), zooplankton, macroinvertebrates, and emerging insects. Gathered through water and sediment using an EZNA soil DNA kit, researchers tested for phylogenetic diversity (which is considered a measure of biodiversity between species rather than just relying on a given species’ abundance or quantity). Only individuals from the microzooplankton group were gathered after the researchers identified them through a stereomicroscope, filtering samples through 5 liters of water through a zooplankton net. Macroinvertebrates were gathered through a net, preserved in 96 percent ethanol, and biomass measured after drying the samples and removing shells from the assessment. Emerging insects went through a similar sampling process, except that pyramid-shaped nets were used. To test GHG emissions (specifically carbon dioxide and methane), researchers used a tactic employed in previous wetland studies to gather sediment cores to assess the exchange of CO2 and CH4 gases between May and October 2021. More information on the statistical data analyses employed in this study is available for review in Section 2.5.

The authors are based at universities in the European Union, including the University of Alcala, IMDEA Water Institute, and University of Valencia. They declared that “they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.” The study received funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities, Agency of Research, and Recovery and Resilience Facility (which “finances reforms and investments in EU Member States made from the start of the pandemic in February 2020 until 31 December 2026).

Results

“The study….reveals that the structure of aquatic communities is heavily influenced by rice farming practices, with organic rice farming supporting a larger abundance of pollution-resistant zooplankton and a higher diversity and biomass of emerging insects,” says the authors. They continue: “However, organic rice farming was associated with the highest prevalence of fecal microorganisms and contributed more to greenhouse gas emissions during the rice cultivation period due to its manure fertilization regime.”

Key patterns that the authors note for the organic rice field are that it is characterized by higher biodiversity (particularly for insects), higher presence of fecal-associated microbial life (which the authors warn may be “indicating a potential risk of pathogen introduction through manure-based fertilization”), and higher GHGe overall from manure. “Higher insect emergence in the Organic Rice field provide[s] food to riparian arthropod predators, amphibians, and water birds, contributing to energy transfer between aquatic and terrestrial environments,” say the authors. When calculating GHGe, the authors do not consider the emissions associated with synthetic fertilizer production – they only measured the flux of methane and carbon dioxide from the sampling sites and assessed the difference in emissions and potential for carbon sequestration.

Meanwhile, the two chemical-intensive fields generally have low biodiversity, higher presence of aquatic life that are “pollution-tolerant,” and contain moderate-to-high GHGe depending on the water source for irrigation. It is important to note that daily methane emissions were highest in the first conventional rice field relative to all other sites. They also emphasize that “GHG emissions observed in this study are relatively low compared to those reported in other regions.” There are practices identified “to mitigate methane emissions, such as delaying winter flooding or removing straw after harvest to reduce methanogenesis and microbial decomposition, which are key contributors to elevated CH₄ and CO₂ fluxes, respectively.”

Previous Research

As this study lays out in its introduction, there is significant research on the impacts of rice production on ecosystem health and broader biodiversity.

A study published in 2022 in Communications Biology finds that ‘Weedy rice,’ a close relative of cultivated rice that invades rice fields and reduces yields, is rapidly developing herbicide resistance in critical rice growing areas throughout the United States. Researchers note that the root of the issue farmers face is a result of an agricultural approach that relies on a single, streamlined method of weed control. “Just like in the case of antibiotic resistance, the rise of resistance to this particular herbicide will be met with a new technology that relies on a new herbicide,” says study co-author Marshall Wedger, PhD. He continues: “New herbicide-resistant cultivars are already in development, so I expect this process to repeat.”(See Daily News here.) Similar issues have emerged with herbicide- and pesticide-resistance, including waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus), commodity crops like corn, and other “crops” like farm-raised fish and the sea lice pesticide emamectin. More specifically to rice production, a 2016 study published in Scientific Reports and produced by Japan’s National Institute for Environmental Studies found that the insecticide fipronil significantly reduces the population of adult dragonflies, more so than any other pesticide treatment. (See Daily News here.) This is also a potential public health crisis, as a Consumer Reports-published study in 2012 found “worrisome” levels of inorganic arsenic in rice products across organic and conventional products, challenging advocates to meet this moment of crisis and call for alternatives while also continuing to be critical. (See Daily News here.)

One of the more controversial inclusions to the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances is that of copper sulfate. As an antimicrobial and fungicide, its use is permitted in organic certified operations for food/feed crops, including orchard, row, field, and aquatic crops, flowering/non-flowering plants, and trees. Beyond Pesticides has continued to call for the sunset of this material, given the known associated adverse health and ecological effects. (See here for Beyond Pesticides’ comments to the National Organic Standards Board).

The authors of a 2024 case study in Canale D’Aiedda (Italy) published in Scientific Reports, conclude that, “[T]he results of monitoring and modeling activities revealed a chronic risk associated with the presence of Cu [copper] from November to April in several river reaches and acute risk associated to the presence of glyphosate in several reaches mainly in the wet season.”  According to the authors, “The most important factor influencing the chronic risk for Cu were the combination of two factors: the high surface runoff and the Cu applications. The most important factor influencing the glyphosate peaks of concentration is the streamflow.” The NOSB has previously discussed alternative growing systems that would eliminate the need for copper sulfate and made such alternatives a research priority. Copper sulfate is widely used in organic rice production to control algae and an invertebrate known as tadpole shrimp. Most of the world transplants rice seedlings into flooded paddies. Dryland rice production eliminates the need for control of tadpoles, which eat the rice seedlings in flooded fields. Ironically, tadpole shrimp are regarded as a biological control for algae. (See Daily News here.)

Call to Action

There is a concerted effort in Europe to advance what is being coined as Organic Climate Farming. As organic is increasingly understood to be a climate solution,  OrganicClimateNet last year launched an aggressive effort to build the base of organic farmers in the European Union (EU). (See Daily News here.) OrganicClimateNet defines organic climate farming as “an agricultural approach that integrates organic farming’s nature-based and circular principles with climate-conscious practices. This combination provides innovative and impactful solutions to the challenges posed by climate change.

You can take action today by leveraging and sharing Eating with a Conscience, which is a repository including dozens of non-organic fruits, vegetables, and food items to see which pesticides can be used in their production. There are specific sections on rice and wild rice that may be relevant; however, this tool was developed to help you evaluate the impacts on the environment and farmworkers of the toxic chemicals allowed for use on major food crops, grown domestically and internationally. 

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source: Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment