[X] CLOSEMAIN MENU

  • Archives

  • Categories

    • air pollution (8)
    • Announcements (597)
    • Antibiotic Resistance (38)
    • Antimicrobial (17)
    • Aquaculture (30)
    • Aquatic Organisms (33)
    • Bats (7)
    • Beneficials (51)
    • Biofuels (6)
    • Biological Control (32)
    • Biomonitoring (37)
    • Birds (25)
    • btomsfiolone (1)
    • Bug Bombs (2)
    • Canada (10)
    • Cannabis (29)
    • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (9)
    • Chemical Mixtures (2)
    • Children (107)
    • Children/Schools (240)
    • cicadas (1)
    • Climate (30)
    • Climate Change (84)
    • Clover (1)
    • compost (5)
    • Congress (15)
    • contamination (149)
    • deethylatrazine (1)
    • Disinfectants & Sanitizers (18)
    • Drift (12)
    • Drinking Water (13)
    • Ecosystem Services (11)
    • Emergency Exemption (3)
    • Environmental Justice (161)
    • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (498)
    • Events (87)
    • Farm Bill (18)
    • Farmworkers (188)
    • Forestry (5)
    • Fracking (4)
    • Fungal Resistance (6)
    • Fungicides (24)
    • Goats (2)
    • Golf (15)
    • Greenhouse (1)
    • Groundwater (13)
    • Health care (32)
    • Herbicides (32)
    • Holidays (37)
    • Household Use (9)
    • Indigenous People (6)
    • Indoor Air Quality (5)
    • Infectious Disease (4)
    • Integrated and Organic Pest Management (68)
    • Invasive Species (35)
    • Label Claims (49)
    • Lawns/Landscapes (245)
    • Litigation (340)
    • Livestock (9)
    • men’s health (1)
    • metabolic syndrome (2)
    • Metabolites (3)
    • Microbiata (20)
    • Microbiome (26)
    • molluscicide (1)
    • Nanosilver (2)
    • Nanotechnology (54)
    • National Politics (388)
    • Native Americans (3)
    • Occupational Health (14)
    • Oceans (9)
    • Office of Inspector General (2)
    • perennial crops (1)
    • Pesticide Drift (160)
    • Pesticide Efficacy (8)
    • Pesticide Mixtures (6)
    • Pesticide Regulation (770)
    • Pesticide Residues (180)
    • Pets (36)
    • Plant Incorporated Protectants (1)
    • Plastic (5)
    • Poisoning (18)
    • Preemption (41)
    • President-elect Transition (2)
    • Repellent (4)
    • Resistance (117)
    • Rights-of-Way (1)
    • Rodenticide (33)
    • Seasonal (2)
    • Seeds (6)
    • soil health (12)
    • Superfund (3)
    • synergistic effects (18)
    • Synthetic Pyrethroids (16)
    • Synthetic Turf (3)
    • Take Action (581)
    • Textile/Apparel/Fashion Industry (1)
    • Toxic Waste (11)
    • Volatile Organic Compounds (1)
    • Wildlife/Endangered Sp. (454)
    • Women’s Health (25)
    • Wood Preservatives (34)
    • World Health Organization (10)
    • Year in Review (2)
  • Most Viewed Posts

Daily News Blog

07
Nov

Pesticide-Intensive Agricultural Practices Lead to Elevated Childhood Cancer Rates in Brazil

(Beyond Pesticides, November 7, 2023) Two decades after the introduction of genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant crops and the consequential exponential growth in weed killers, Brazil is seeing an increase in childhood cancer. This is the conclusion reached in a comprehensive study spanning 15 years (2004-2019), “Agriculture Intensification and Childhood Cancer in Brazil,†published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in October. For the past 20 years, soybean herbicides have been killing and sickening children in the Cerrado and Amazon regions–where soybean cultivation is concentrated. The study reveals a link between an increase in soy cultivation and a spike in cases of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), the most common cancer affecting children, among indirectly exposed populations. Researchers identify pesticide-contaminated drinking water as the driving force behind the increased cancer rates occurring downstream from soybean sites. 

In 2003, Brazil legalized its first official genetically modified (GM) crop, welcoming the era of GM soybeans and sparking a radical transformation in its agricultural landscape–for better or worse. The introduction of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready soybean seed promised farmers an efficient and herbicide-resistant alternative to traditional crops. A significant shift occurred in the areas dedicated to soy cultivation in the Cerrado region, tripling from five million hectares in 2000 to 15 million hectares in 2019. In the Amazon, the increase was even more staggering, experiencing a 20-fold surge from 0.25 million hectares to five million hectares. With this expansion came an intensive application of pesticides. Brazil’s pesticide use per hectare soared to rates 2.3 times higher than the United States and three times higher than China. 

The research findings identify that a 10-percentage-point increase in soy cultivation area is associated with an additional 0.40 deaths out of 10,000 due to ALL for children 5 years of age and lower and an additional 0.21 deaths of children 10 years of age and lower per 10,000 population. The study finds “a strong and persistent relationship between the arrival of high-intensity agriculture in a region and adverse human health outcomes,†even after controlling for confounding factors. 

The study observes that having a pediatric oncology center within a day’s drive—defined as 100 km or less—dramatically lessens fatal outcomes. This is a glaring commentary on the vast inequality in health care access, particularly in countries still navigating the initial stages of agricultural development. These are often low-income and middle-income nations wrestling with instability, and the findings highlight a concerning disparity and lack of urgency for action.

The apathy toward the absence of access to safe environments, decent working conditions, and health care is starkly visible in what some have referred to as the double standards prevalent in global pesticide laws. Pesticides, deemed too toxic for use in the European Union, are freely exported around the globe and find a ready market in many countries that do not disclose product ingredients and warnings or regulatory restrictions in place that might reduce hazards. Similarly, those harmed by pesticides may not have access to health care. 

This discovery is highly relevant, especially for other emerging agrarian nations. Brazil has become a kind of prototype that agrochemical corporations, economists, and policymakers frequently reference.

Brazil’s metamorphosis into a large agricultural force has garnered attention and praise from economists and policymakers alike. The country’s economy witnessed a surge of over 40 percent between 2000 and 2010, largely attributed to the booming manufacturing sector. This transformation, with Brazil as a model, has been used to exemplify the potential of agrochemicals in boosting global food security.

Economists have highlighted the introduction of GM soy as a pivotal moment. It did not just boost agricultural productivity but also set off a chain reaction across the entire economy. Herbicide-resistant seeds, it was argued, would help Brazil move from an agricultural to a more industrial economy with higher incomes and more spending. Farmers no longer would have to engage in tedious field tilling, allowing farm laborers to find work in other areas and contributing to urban growth.

However, while Brazil is often showcased as a model of success, the study offers a cautionary perspective. It notes, “The combination of restricted oversight, limited healthcare access, a rapidly evolving agricultural production system, and a new chemical technology provides a cautionary tale to regions in similar stages of agricultural intensification.”

While many economists laude Brazil’s growth, not only are the health consequences becoming increasingly evident, but so are the environmental consequences of this rapid industrialization. The Amazon has been facing a series of catastrophic fires and deforestation incidents. The agricultural expansion that came with soybeans also resulted in forest clearing on an immense scale.

As agricultural intensification takes place, droughts are compounding the problem, leading to a noticeable drying of the Amazon River. The extended dry seasons over the past few decades have been taking a toll, making trees less resilient and severely affecting the region’s biodiversity. This drying and deforestation have repercussions beyond habitat destruction. In tropical rainforests like the Amazon, the nutrient-rich biomass is crucial for maintaining ecological balance. When this biomass is removed, the tropical soil—poor in nutrients—is unable to sustain life, leading to irreversible damage. 

So, while Brazil may be lauded for its economic leaps, the study prompts a critical reassessment. It emphasizes the need for careful consideration of development strategies, urging a nuanced approach that does not solely focus on economic gains, but also weighs the health and well-being of the population.

This story of Brazil is a call for a global rethinking of development models, urging a shift toward practices that are equitable, sustainable, and healthy. Any system that treats the lives of children as collateral is not one that should serve as a global archetype. As we rethink our approach to development models, the indiscriminate use of pesticides should be critically examined and left behind, along with other discriminatory practices like double standards for banned pesticides. Visit the Beyond Pesticides website for more information on how you can support and get involved with better practices for all of our futures. Eating with a Conscience explains why it is important to express your concerns with your purchasing power, protecting not only yourself but the workers and communities in which your food is grown.

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

Sources: Agricultural intensification and childhood cancer in Brazil; How a Genetically Modified Soybean Helped Modernize an Economy

Share

06
Nov

Sports World Rejects Synthetic Turf, Favors Natural Grass as Organic Offers Safe Alternative

(Beyond Pesticides, November 6, 2023) Communities discussing synthetic versus natural turf are faced with a number of issues that go to safety, environmental health, and cost. The chemicals used to manage synthetic turf for bacteria, mold, and fungus raise serious health issues and represent a threat that does not exist in organic land management. When all the synthetic turf issues are considered, including chemical use, maintenance, heat effects, water contamination and treatment, playability and safety, organic grass turf offers an approach that checks all the critical boxes for protecting health and the environment at a competitive price.

Hazards of synthetic (artificial) turf made news this fall following injuries to New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rogers and Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, among others. Following safety concern, the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) issued a  call to end the use of synthetic turf and a return to natural turf. The FIFA World Cup soccer association requires a grass playing field. The players are not the only ones demanding grass fields. Fans of singer-songwriter Taylor Swift came out in full force in favor of the switch after the injury to Ms. Swift’s rumored boyfriend Travis Kelce.

Beyond sports injuries, concerns about environmental and health hazards are emerging as communities and school boards discuss the fields used for school and community sports.  This debate is taking place as communities are increasingly shifting the management of their playing fields and parks to organic practices, eliminating toxic pesticides and fertilizers, building soil biology to cycle nutrients naturally, increasing resiliency of turf, and decreasing water use.

Tell your Mayor* and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to make the switch to organic grass turf.

[*Our database may not include your Mayor through our one-click action. However, you may use our proposed language for sending a letter to your Mayor. Please cut-and-paste the text provided HERE and send in an email to your local Mayor’s office.]

Although manufacturers and advocates of artificial turf (who have created confusion by redefining “turf†to mean synthetic turf) tout its benefits, claiming improved safety and reduced environmental impact, among others, the facts contradict these claims.

Synthetic turf also causes injuries to high school athletes.

A groundbreaking study, The dark side of artificial greening: Plastic turfs as widespread pollutants of aquatic environments, has unearthed some disturbing revelations on the use of artificial turf. This comprehensive study, prominently featured in the Environmental Pollution (June 2023) journal, has cast a spotlight on the dire consequences of plastic fibers from artificial turf, which are wreaking havoc on marine ecosystems.

River transport and stormwater runoff can carry plastics and microplastics into waterways. Once they make their way into the water, these fibers pose a menacing threat to marine life, leading to a host of health issues and, tragically, even mortality. The fibers also accumulate in sediments, compromising the overall health of aquatic ecosystems. The study authors indicate that plastic fields require enhanced waste management practices to staunch the plastic fibers from entering aquatic habitats.

A builder of sports facilities, American Athletic, states, “Beyond surface cleaning, the artificial turf should be sanitized weekly or monthly to protect the players’ and coaches’ health. This disinfection requires special solvents, cleansers, and anti-microbial products to remove invisible particles and bacterial growth. You should strive to sanitize the field after every game and throughout the school day if it’s used for physical education classes.â€

Artificial fields can cost over $1 million for field installation, drainage system, and additional costs for water treatment for an approximately 10-year lifespan, not including the game-day and ongoing maintenance costs. Manufacturers also recommend watering the synthetic fields during hot weather because of the heat generated by the artificial material. Studies record maximum surface temperatures on synthetic fields during hot, sunny conditions averaging from 140° F to 170° F, while natural grass is rarely recorded to be above 100° F.

Organic management practices build soil health, cycle nutrients naturally, enhance turf resiliency, reduce water use, and do not use petrochemical pesticides or fertilizers. The organic alternative is central to a community’s discussion about its residents’ commitment to both the elimination of practices and products that are petrochemical-based and the ability of organically managed soils to draw down (sequester) atmospheric carbon, which contributes to mitigating global warming and erratic temperatures.

Sign up to be a Parks Advocate today to encourage your community to transition to organic land management. Plan on attending Session 3 of the National Forum, Transformative Community-Based Change from the Ground Up: Managing Parks and Playing Fields with Organic Practices and Policies, on November 29, 2023, at 2:00 pm Eastern. Speaker and registration information HERE. This session is for all who want beautiful landscapes, parks, and playing fields without the reliance on petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers. The subject matter is cross-cutting and will inform people concerned about their health and community health, elected officials (from town, city, county, regional, state to school boards) interested in effecting movement away from toxic chemical reliance, and land managers and landscapers who work in parks and on playing fields and other landscapes.

Tell your Mayor* and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to make the switch to organic grass turf.

[*Our database may not include your Mayor through our one-click action. However, you may use our proposed language for sending a letter to your Mayor. Please cut-and-paste the text provided HERE and send in an email to your local Mayor’s office.]

Letter to mayor:

Following injuries to Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rogers, and others, the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) is calling for a return to natural turf. The same issue arises with regard to playing fields for school and community sports. Besides the issue of safety for players, artificial turf is a source of environmental pollution that is difficult to mitigate.

Although manufacturers of artificial turf tout supposed benefits, claiming improved safety and reduced environmental impact, among others, there are reasons to believe otherwise. Although manufacturers and advocates of artificial turf tout its benefits, claiming improved safety and reduced environmental impact, among others, the facts contradict these claims.

Injuries to high profile professional football players have prompted the NFLPA to urge the NFL to follow the lead of the FIFA World Cup soccer championship, which requires a grass playing field.

Synthetic turf also causes injuries to young athletes.

A groundbreaking study, The dark side of artificial greening: Plastic turfs as widespread pollutants of aquatic environments, has unearthed some disturbing revelations on the use of artificial turf, which has become a pervasive fixture on sports fields and playgrounds. This comprehensive study, prominently featured in the Environmental Pollution (June 2023) journal, has cast a spotlight on the dire consequences of plastic fibers from artificial turf, which are wreaking havoc on marine ecosystems.

River transport and stormwater runoff can carry plastics and microplastics into waterways. Once they make their way into the water, these fibers pose a menacing threat to marine life, leading to a host of health issues and, tragically, even mortality. The fibers also accumulate in sediments, compromising the overall health of aquatic ecosystems. Immediate intervention is needed to tackle artificial turf pollution, including enhanced waste management practices to staunch the plastic fibers from entering aquatic habitats.

Communities discussing synthetic versus natural turf are faced with issues that go to safety, environmental health, and cost. The chemicals used to manage synthetic turf for bacteria, mold, and fungus raise serious health issues and represent a threat that does not exist in organic land management. A builder of sports facilities, American Athletic, states, “Beyond surface cleaning, the artificial turf should be sanitized weekly or monthly to protect the players’ and coaches’ health. This disinfection requires special solvents, cleansers, and anti-microbial products to remove invisible particles and bacterial growth. You should strive to sanitize the field after every game and throughout the school day if it’s used for physical education classes.â€

Artificial fields can cost over $1 million for both the field installation, drainage system, and any additional costs for water treatment for an approximately ten-year lifespan, not including the game-day and ongoing maintenance costs. Manufacturers also recommend watering the synthetic fields during hot weather because of the heat generated by the artificial material. Studies record maximum surface temperatures on synthetic fields during hot, sunny conditions averaging from 140° F to 170° F, while natural grass is rarely recorded to be above 100° F.

When all the synthetic turf issues are considered, including chemical use, maintenance, heat effects, water contamination and treatment, playability and safety, organic grass turf offers an improvement in every way. Organic management practices build soil health, cycle nutrients naturally, enhance turf resiliency, reduce water use, and do not use petrochemical pesticides or fertilizers.

Please ensure that our community’s playing fields are made of natural grass maintained organically.

Thank you.

Letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell

I support the request of the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) or a return to natural turf on playing fields. Besides the issue of safety for players, artificial turf is a source of environmental pollution that is difficult to mitigate.

Although manufacturers of artificial turf tout supposed benefits, claiming improved safety and reduced environmental impact, among others, there are reasons to believe otherwise. Although manufacturers and advocates of artificial turf tout its benefits, claiming improved safety and reduced environmental impact, among others, the facts contradict these claims.

Injuries to high profile professional football players have prompted the NFLPA to urge the NFL to follow the lead of the FIFA World Cup soccer association, which requires a grass playing field.

A groundbreaking study, The dark side of artificial greening: Plastic turfs as widespread pollutants of aquatic environments, has unearthed some disturbing revelations on the use of artificial turf, which has become a pervasive fixture on sports fields and playgrounds. This comprehensive study, prominently featured in the Environmental Pollution (June 2023) journal, has cast a spotlight on the dire consequences of plastic fibers from artificial turf, which are wreaking havoc on marine ecosystems.

River transport and stormwater runoff can carry plastics and microplastics into waterways. Once they make their way into the water, these fibers pose a menacing threat to marine life, leading to a host of health issues and, tragically, even mortality. The fibers also accumulate in sediments, compromising the overall health of aquatic ecosystems. The authors of the study call for immediate intervention to tackle artificial turf pollution. The study authors indicate that plastic fields require enhanced waste management practices to staunch the plastic fibers from entering aquatic habitats.

Artificial fields can cost over $1 million for both the field installation, drainage system, and any additional costs for water treatment for an approximately ten-year lifespan, not including the game-day and ongoing maintenance costs. Manufacturers also recommend watering the synthetic fields during hot weather because of the heat generated by the artificial material. Studies record maximum surface temperatures on synthetic fields during hot, sunny conditions averaging from 140° F to 170° F, while natural grass is rarely recorded to be above 100° F.

The chemicals used to manage synthetic turf for bacteria, mold, and fungus raise serious health issues and represent a threat that does not exist in organic land management. A builder of sports facilities, American Athletic, states, “Beyond surface cleaning, the artificial turf should be sanitized weekly or monthly to protect the players’ and coaches’ health. This disinfection requires special solvents, cleansers, and anti-microbial products to remove invisible particles and bacterial growth. You should strive to sanitize the field after every game and throughout the school day if it’s used for physical education classes.â€

When all the synthetic turf issues are considered, including chemical use, maintenance, heat effects, water contamination and treatment, playability and safety, organic grass turf offers an approach that checks all the critical boxes for protecting health and the environment at a competitive price. Organic management practices build soil health, cycle nutrients naturally, enhance turf resiliency, reduce water use, and do not use petrochemical pesticides or fertilizers. While FIFA guidelines for grass turf do not mandate organic management, they provide a standard for construction and maintenance to which organic practices can be applied.

Therefore, I request that you require NFL playing fields to be grass turf that is transitioned to organic management.

Thank you.

Share

03
Nov

States Step In to Restrict Bee-Toxic Pesticides, California the Latest in Absence of EPA Action

(Beyond Pesticides, November 3, 2023) California joined 10 other states that have laws partially restricting use of bee-toxic neonicotinoid (neonic) insecticides with the enactment of CA AB 363 into law in October, 2023.  California’s new law will ban over-the-counter sales of lawn and garden neonics by 2025, limiting their use to licensed pesticide applicators. The legislation gives the state’s Department of Pesticide Regulation (CA EPA) until June 30, 2029 to take broader action on neonics, if it determines restrictions are necessary. CA 363 will take neonics out of the hands of homeowners, while allowing lawn care companies to continue use. The California law falls short of the strongest state laws in Nevada, New Jersey, and Maine that eliminate all outdoor (nonagricultural) uses of these chemicals, even by lawn care companies. In June, 2023 Nevada became the third state to ban lawn and garden uses of neonics, while Colorado prohibited homeowner use of land and garden neonic products, similar to laws in Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont.  Minnesota recently banned neonic use on state lands and granted its home-rule subdivisions the authority to ban “pollinator-lethal pesticides†(those with bee warning labels) under its state law preempting local authority to restrict pesticides. All of these state-level restrictions pale in comparison to the robust protections currently implemented in the European Union (EU), where the EU has banned neonicotinoid pesticide use on all outdoor areas, allowing use only in enclosed greenhouses. 

Advocates view as positive the 11 states acting on neonics and asserting their authority in the absence of action by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but see the legislative action as falling short, given the escalating and devastating health, biodiversity, and climate crises that are linked to neonicotinoids and other petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers. Evaluating individual hazardous pesticides has been dubbed a process of the “whack-a-mole.†Professor and author David Goulson, PhD, who studies the enormity of the pollinator and biodiversity crisis, recently spoke at Beyond Pesticides’ September National Forum Series, and urged a rejection of this “whack a mole†approach in favor of a systemic change to stop all pesticide and synthetic chemical use. The solution, he said, can be found in a systems approach like organic land management; it is effective and will safeguard pollinators, food production, wildlife, water quality, and the environment, while reducing risks to human health.

Beyond Pesticides advocates for the transition from chemical dependency to organic land management in food production, and in parks, playing fields, and all recreational and public spaces. “We urge elected officials nationwide to see the looming biodiversity collapse as reason for broader action to eliminate petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers with organic systems that are effective and cost competitive,†said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. “Each ban or partial regulation of a particular pesticide, each bit of research demonstrating harms — these represent small, incremental advances on a pesticide problem that is vast in scope and requires a shift to organic,†says Mr. Feldman.

Neonics more toxic than DDT

Dr. Goulson, author of Silent Earth: Averting the Insect Apocalypse (2021), spoke to the role of toxic neonics during Beyond Pesticides’ National Forum Series on September 14, 2023. He said, “One of the properties of neonicotinoids is that they are phenomenally toxic… you certainly heard of DDT. Imidacloprid … is much, much more toxic than other insecticides that went before. It takes just four nanograms per billion of a gram to kill a bee compared to DDT,†making imidacloprid and this new generation of insecticides about 7,000 times more poisonous to a honey bee than DDT. “That means that a teaspoon of imidacloprid would be enough to kill one and a quarter billion honey bees. So the fact that we are applying hundreds of tons of these chemicals to the landscape is quite concerning.â€

Treated seeds loophole remains (CA 1042 and NY Birds and Bees Protection Act)

California Governor Gavin Newsom declined to sign into law AB 1042, which could have made a modest step toward addressing the neonic-treated seeds loophole that allows neonic-coated seed to go unregulated by either EPA or state regulatory agencies, despite proven deadly effects and well documented harm to biodiversity, human health, and widespread contamination of groundwater and surface waters. The New York State Assembly passed a similar bill (A03226), the Birds and Bees Protection Act, that awaits NY Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature. The NY bill would ban neonicotinoid use on outdoor ornamental plants and turf, with a general exemption for agriculture, except for treated seeds. The coated seed provision of the act would be suspended if the Commissioner of Agriculture determines that neonic-free seeds are not commercially available. With chemical companies controlling the seed market, the effectiveness of this provision remains to be seen. A phaseout of treated seeds would incentive and help grow the neonic-free seed market. The bill would leave the most widely used neonicotinoid, imidacloprid, as well as thiamethoxam or acetamiprid, on the market until July 1, 2025.

Meanwhile, the intensive use of neonics as seed treatments continues despite a stark lack of efficacy. EPA itself (in 2014) reported that “seed treatments with neonicotinoid insecticides provide little or no overall benefit in controlling insects or improving yield or quality in soybean production.†(See the detailed EPA letter on the underlying research here.) Research in 2019, as reported by Beyond Pesticides, found that neonic-treated soybeans provide negligible benefits to farmers in terms of yield and overall economic benefit. EPA ought, in its neonic registrations and re-registrations, to evaluate whether pesticide compounds — especially those with such demonstrated harms as neonics cause—are necessary and effective before introducing them into the environment or allowing their continued deployment.

Minnesota took a small step regulating pesticide-treated seeds, including neonicotinoid coated seeds, and their disposal, after treated seeds were used in ethanol production, creating toxic waste with disastrous consequences. Because of a regulatory loophole, EPA does not monitor or otherwise regulate treated seed use and disposal. In the absence of any federal regulation, Minnesota laws HF1317/ SF1339  will now direct state officials to develop rules and consumer guidelines for the proper use and disposal of “waste†pesticide-treated seeds.

Because the use of neonics is widespread, from agriculture to parks, playing fields, to lawns, public exposure is dramatically high. As reported in January, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cites half the U.S. population encountering at least one type of neonic daily, with children ages three to five having the highest exposure risk. Health impacts of exposure to neonics can include neurotoxicity, reproductive anomalies, hepatic and renal damage, and an increase in gene expression linked to hormone-dependent breast cancer… mounting evidence over the past years shows that chronic exposure to sublethal (low) levels of pesticides can cause neurotoxic effects or exacerbate preexisting chemical damage to the nervous system. The impacts of pesticides on the nervous system, including the brain, are hazardous, especially for chronically exposed individuals (e.g., farmworkers) or during critical windows of vulnerability and development (e.g., childhood, pregnancy).

Pollinator losses have broad implications for reducing the global production of nuts, fruits, and vegetables by 3-5%, and this loss of healthy, nutrient-dense food is resulting in over 425,000 excess deaths each year, according to research published in December 2022 in Environmental Health Perspectives. According to researchers, “Today’s estimated health impacts of insufficient pollination would be comparable to other major global risk factors: those attributable to substance use disorders, interpersonal violence, or prostate cancer.â€

The availability of nontoxic alternative materials and practices, as are used in organic management, raises questions about EPA’s determination that neonic use is “reasonable†for registered crops under federal pesticide law, given competitive productivity and profitability without it. Beyond Pesticides advocates for organic land and agriculture management as precautionary approach to pest prevention and management. Buying, growing, and supporting organic can help eliminate the extensive use of pesticides in the environment and from your diet. For more information on why organic is the right choice for consumers and the farmworkers who grow our food, see Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture.

You can eliminate neonics and all toxic pesticides used in your community by working with Beyond Pesticides and it Parks for a Sustainable Future program. See also Tools for Change. For nuts-and-bolts information on strategy and implementation of organic land management, attend Beyond Pesticides National Forum Series session 3 online on November 29, 2023 at 2pm Eastern—Transformative Community-Based Change from the Ground Up: Managing Parks and Playing Fields with Organic Practices and Policies.

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

Sources: Neonicotinoid insecticides: Failing to come to grips with a predictable environmental disaster, American Bird Conservancy, June 2023; Environmental Health Perspectives; States Make Way for Pesticide Reform; EPA Report on Neonics Proves US Has ‘Five-Alarm Fire’ on Its Hands, Green Groups Say; Thinking Holistically When Making Land Management Decisions

Share

02
Nov

Childhood Leukemia Linked to Pesticides Used in Vineyards

(Beyond Pesticides, November 1, 2023) A study published in Environmental Health Perspective finds the risk of acute childhood leukemia (AL), specifically acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), slightly increases with exposure to pesticides (i.e., insecticides and herbicides) from uses on vines, a crop subject to intensive pesticide use. Within 1 kilometer [km] of vineyards, the risk of ALL among children increases in areas with a higher density of vines. Although medical advancements in disease survival are more common nowadays, childhood AL remains the secondary cause of child mortality following physical injury. Furthermore, childhood leukemia survivors can suffer from chronic or long-term health complications that may be life-threatening.

The etiology or cause of childhood AL involves the interaction of multiple components, including lifestyle and genetics; emerging evidence indicates that environmental contaminants (e.g., pesticides, air pollution, solvents, diet, etc.) play a role in disease. Pesticide contamination is widespread in all ecosystems, and chemical compounds can accumulate in human tissues, resulting in chronic health effects. Children are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of pesticide exposure as their developing bodies cannot adequately combat exposure effects. Already, studies find low levels of pesticide exposure during pregnancy or childhood cause adverse health effects, from metabolic disorders to mental and physical disabilities. Moreover, several studies demonstrate an association between environmental or occupational pesticide exposure and the risk of childhood cancer, specifically focusing on leukemia.

Acute leukemia is the most common type of childhood cancer, accounting for one of three cancer cases in children ages 0 to 14. Although the disease is rare, incidents have been steadily increasing among adolescents over the last 30 years. Therefore, studies like these highlight the importance of understanding how pesticide use can increase the risk of latent diseases (e.g., cancers) among vulnerable populations, such as children/infants/fetuses.

Using national registry-based GEOCAP study data, researchers evaluate acute leukemia cases of children under 15 years who received the diagnosis between 2006 and 2013. Land use maps provided geographical information indicating the proximity of children living near vineyards (200 meters (m), 500m, 1000m) and the density of vines within the 1000m area. To estimate the odds ratios for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and myeloid (AML) subtypes, the study employed a logistic regression model, with sensitivity analyses considering geocoding uncertainty, the density of other crops, and potential demographic and environmental confounders. Of the children with AL, about 10 percent were viable for the study, residing within 1000m of vineyards. Although proximity to vines has little association with AL, the density of vines within the area is associated with ALL. Thus, the results suggest that pesticide use is more prevalent among dense areas of vines regardless of proximity to vines. For instance, if a child lives 200m from vines in a less vine-dense area, they will experience less risk of AL compared to a child living 1000m from vines in a heavily vine-dense area. 

Environmental contaminants like pesticides are ubiquitous in the environment, with 90 percent of Americans having at least one pesticide compound in their body. This bodily contamination affects human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age. Many studies indicate prenatal and early-life exposure to environmental toxicants increases disease susceptibility. The scientific connection between pesticides and associated cancer risks is nothing new. Several studies link pesticide use and residues to various cancers, with 66 percent related to environmental factors, especially in occupations of high chemical use. In addition to the robust link between agricultural practices and pesticide-related illnesses, over 63 percent of commonly used lawn pesticides and 70 percent of commonly used school pesticides have links to cancer. U.S. National Institutes of Health’s National Cancer Institute also finds many cancer-causing substances are endocrine disruptors. Globally, cancer is one of the leading causes of death, with over 8 million people succumbing to the disease every year. The International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) predicts new cancer cases to rise 67.4% by 2030.

This study is one of the few nationwide GIS-based studies assessing childhood leukemia risk among individuals living near grape vines used for viticulture, addressing the question of AL risk among children living close to viticultural areas in France for the first time. However, previous studies find that maternal exposure to pesticides during gestation results in a more elevated leukemia risk for children than childhood (postnatal) exposure. Whether pesticide exposure is occupational or mixed, parental exposure to pesticides has the highest association with AL risk, including paternal (father) exposure. Exposure to pesticides during pregnancy increases the risk of developing AL and ALL. Infant leukemia incidents depend on maternal pesticide exposure during pregnancy, with a higher risk for acute lymphoblastic and the highest risk for infant acute myeloid leukemia.

Although pesticide products are subject to an extensive toxicological assessment before registration, current regulatory guideline studies fail to assess genotoxicity and carcinogenicity in utero that induces infant leukemia incidents. For instance, studies have long demonstrated that childhood and in-utero exposure to the U.S.-banned insecticide DDT increases the risk of developing breast cancer later in life. Moreover, a 2021 study finds previous maternal exposure to the chemical compound during pregnancy can increase the risk of breast cancer and cardiometabolic disorders (e.g., heart disease, obesity, diabetes) up to three successive generations. Even household cleaners, many of which are pesticides, can increase nephroblastoma (kidney cancer) and brain tumor risk in children. Children are more susceptible to the toxic effect of pesticide exposure as their endocrine and metabolic systems cannot adequately detoxify and excrete chemical compounds. Moreover, pesticides can hinder childhood development, making children more vulnerable to acute health effects like asthma/respiratory issues, gut dysbiosis, cardiovascular diseases, and other physical and mental birth abnormalities. Therefore, it is essential to understand how external stimuli—like environmental pollution from pesticides—can drive cancer development to avoid exposure and lessen potential cancer risks.

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. Hence, studies concerning pesticides and cancer help future epidemiologic research understand the underlying mechanisms that cause the disease. There is a severe deficiency in understanding the etiology of pesticide-induced diseases, including predictable lag time between chemical exposure, health impacts, and epidemiologic data. Therefore, advocates maintain that lawmakers and regulators should take a more precautionary approach before introducing these chemicals into the environment. With far too many diseases in the U.S. associated with pesticide exposure, eliminating pesticide use is critical to safeguarding public health and addressing cost burdens for local communities. Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD) is a vital resource for additional scientific literature that documents elevated cancer rates and other chronic diseases and illnesses among people exposed to pesticides. This database supports the clear need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on pesticide exposure’s multiple harms, see PIDD pages on leukemia and other cancers, birth/fetal defects, endocrine disruption, and other diseases.

One way to reduce human and environmental contamination from pesticides is by buying, growing, and supporting organic land management. Organic agriculture has many health and environmental benefits, which curtail the need for chemical-intensive agricultural practices. Numerous studies find that pesticide metabolites in urine drop considerably when switching to an all-organic diet. Furthermore, given the wide availability of non-pesticidal alternative strategies, families and agricultural industry workers can apply these methods to promote a safe and healthy environment, especially among chemically vulnerable individuals. For more information on how organic is the right choice for consumers and the farmworkers that grow our food, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture.

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

Source: Environmental Health Perspective 

Share

01
Nov

NFL Players Association Calls for Stadiums to End Synthetic Turf Use

(Beyond Pesticides, November 1, 2023) As communities consider maintenance and renovation of their playing fields, it is not uncommon for synthetic (or artificial) turf to come up as an alternative to natural grass. Promoters of synthetic turf argue that it provides a solution to climate change, reduces water use and maintenance costs, and allows for year-round play. But is this true? Is synthetic turf an environmentally responsible alternative to its organic grass counterpart? An established and growing body of scientific evidence is demonstrating environmental and health risks with synthetic turf. In addition, there is growing concern for the safety of those playing on artificial grass, which has led to a call from the National Football League’s (NFL) Players Association to utilize natural grass on all 30 NFL stadiums after New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers suffered a season-ending Achilles tear in September and Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce’s mid-game ankle injury.

Synthetic turf playing fields are reliant on polluting plastic (can contain perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances-PFAS) and toxic pesticides for managing bacteria, mold and fungus, create contaminated water runoff, and cover over the natural environment, which is critical to preserving health and biodiversity, and averting climate disasters. Artificial fields can cost over $1 million for both the field installation, drainage system, and any additional costs for water treatment for an approximately ten-year lifespan, not including the game-day and ongoing maintenance costs. Manufacturers also recommend watering the synthetic field during the hottest time period because of the heat generated by the artificial material. The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) writes on synthetic turf: “[T]he high surface-level temperatures recorded on these fields compared to natural turf have been well-documented. Since grass leaves release water vapor (or transpire) and the evaporation of that water vapor leads to cooling, grass fields rarely get above 100° F. [Synthetic] Turf fields, in comparison, regularly rise well above 100° F. Penn State University’s Center for Sports Surface Research conducted studies comparing surface temperatures of synthetic turfs composed of various fiber and infill colors/materials and found that the maximum surface temperatures during hot, sunny conditions averaged from 140° F to 170° F. The high surface-level temperatures on synthetic fields can lead to dehydration, burns and blisters if exposed skin comes into contact with the hot surface, as well as heat stroke.†Restricted play is advised when temperatures exceed 80° F.

Synthetic turf is widespread across the United States. According to a multi-federal-agency presentation, there were 12,000-13,000 synthetic turf fields in the U.S. in 2019, with 1,200 – 1,500 new installations each year. Based on estimates, the global artificial turf market was valued at $8.1 billion in 2021, and it is expected to reach over $12 billion by 2027. Many of these fields have recycled tire crumb rubber, and a small fraction use coconut-based alternatives. According to Dan Bond, the president and CEO of the Synthetic Turf Council, “Over 90 percent of those fields have crumb rubber infill, and the other infills — the coconut, the EPDM, the virgin rubber, thermoplastics — are 1 to 2 percent.” Mr. Bond elaborated in an article by Athletic Business, “It’s a very small market share. It’s growing, but it certainly is not going to overtake crumb rubber in five years.” Typically produced from discarded tires, crumb rubber has been shown to contain carcinogens and heavy metals.

A groundbreaking study, The dark side of artificial greening: Plastic turfs as widespread pollutants of aquatic environments, has unearthed some disturbing revelations on the use of artificial turf, which has become a pervasive fixture on sports fields and playgrounds. This comprehensive study, prominently featured in the Environmental Pollution (June 2023) journal, has cast a spotlight on the dire consequences of plastic fibers from artificial turf, which are wreaking havoc on marine ecosystems.

The study has uncovered multiple entry points, such as river transport and stormwater runoff, where plastics and microplastics can enter watersheds. Once they make their way into the water, these fibers pose a menacing threat to marine life, leading to a host of health issues and, tragically, even mortality. These fibers also accumulate in sediments, compromising the overall health of aquatic ecosystems.

The authors of the study call for immediate intervention to tackle artificial turf pollution. The study authors indicate that plastic fields require enhanced waste management practices to staunch the plastic fibers from entering aquatic habitats. The results of this study serve as a call to policymakers, sports organizations, and the general public.

Communities discussing synthetic versus natural turf are faced with a number of issues that go to safety, environmental health, and cost. The chemicals used to manage synthetic turf for bacteria, mold, and fungus raise serious health issues and represent a threat that does not exist in organic land management. A builder of sports facilities, American Athletic, states, “Beyond surface cleaning, the artificial turf should be sanitized weekly or monthly to protect the players’ and coaches’ health. This disinfection requires special solvents, cleansers, and anti-microbial products to remove invisible particles and bacterial growth. You should strive to sanitize the field after every game and throughout the school day if it’s used for physical education classes.â€

When all the synthetic turf issues are considered, including chemical use, maintenance, heat effects, water contamination and treatment, playability and safety, organic turf offers an approach that checks all the critical boxes for protecting health and the environment at a competitive price. Organic management practices build soil health, cycle nutrients naturally, enhance turf resiliency, reduce water use, and do not use petrochemical pesticides or fertilizers. The organic alternative is central to a community’s discussion about its residents commitment to both the elimination of practices and products that are petrochemical-based and the ability of organically managed soils to draw down (sequester) atmospheric carbon, which contributes to mitigating global warming and erratic temperatures.

Learn more about how easy it is to create non-plastic and organic turf care. Prevent plastics from entering your local community with toxic and unsafe astroturf and artificial grass. Sign up to be a Parks Advocate today to encourage your community to transition to organic land management. Plan on attending Session 3 of the National Forum, Transformative Community-Based Change from the Ground Up: Managing Parks and Playing Fields with Organic Practices and Policies, on November 29, 2023, at 2:00 pm Eastern. Speaker and registration information HERE. This session is for all who want beautiful landscapes, parks, and playing fields without the reliance on petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers. The subject matter is cross-cutting and will inform people concerned about their health and community health, elected officials (from town, city, county, regional, state to school boards) interested in effecting movement away from toxic chemical reliance, and land managers and landscapers who work in parks and on playing fields and other landscapes.

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

Source: The dark side of artificial greening: Plastic turfs as widespread pollutants of aquatic environments

Share

31
Oct

Hidden Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Indoor Air Cause Adverse Effects

(Beyond Pesticides, October 31, 2023) With cooler weather setting in and people heading indoors and closing windows, the issue of COVID-19 transmission escalates, as do concerns about toxic chemicals filling the indoor ambient air. As a recent segment of 60 Minutes (October 29, 2023) stresses, COVID-19 spreads elevated public concern and understanding about the importance of ventilation, filtration, and air exchange to indoor air quality. Unfortunately, the concerns about indoor air are not limited to COVID-19 as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) invade most spaces where people live and work. These invisible toxic substances can be found in common household products, furniture, mattresses, and more, including pesticides in and around the house. Recognizing the risks associated with VOCs and the potentially hazardous off-gassing process is crucial for protecting public health. 

VOCs are a group of chemicals that can easily vaporize into the air at room temperature. These compounds are found in many everyday items, including furniture, cleaning products, pesticides, cosmetics, and even air fresheners. Some household products, particularly pesticides, can introduce their own set of risks in addition to the risks they pose due to their VOC content. VOCs can range from harmless to harmful, and their presence can have a significant impact on indoor air quality. VOCs encompass a wide range of chemicals, including formaldehyde, polyurethane foam, phthalates, acetone, and benzene. 

VOC ingredients in pesticide products are typically withheld from product labels, hidden under the general category of “inerts†or “other†in the ingredients panel. Manufacturers claim the ingredients to be proprietary and are not required to be disclosed to the consumer under federal pesticide law because the companies argue that they are not in the product formulation to attack the target pest. However, the undisclosed pesticide ingredients may cause adverse biological or chemical activity. This issue has sparked controversy, as advocates have unsuccessfully attempted to change U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policy under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, which regulates pesticides in the United States. 

While VOC exposure is not a new issue, there is a renewed sense of urgency to improve indoor air quality following notable studies by Joe Allen, PhD, of Harvard University, and Linsey Marr, PhD, of Virginia Polytechnic Institute, which have highlighted the pivotal role of subpar indoor air ventilation systems in increasing the spread of COVID-19. Namely, the studies found that the aerosolized particles containing the virus were able to spread throughout indoor rooms and increase infection rates without proper air exchange rates. In a demonstration by Dr. Marr, she visualized how exhaled breath traveled in all directions in a room with stagnant air flow, leading to the increased airborne transmission of COVID and other airborne illnesses. Then, she showed how exhaled breath traveled upwards in a uniform path inside a properly ventilated room, showing how the risk of spread decreases significantly under these conditions.

These findings are significant in the context of harmful VOCs in indoor spaces. As most indoor spaces meet bare minimum requirements of air circulation and refresh rates, places like living spaces and school classrooms are especially susceptible to locking in and spreading harmful VOCs and illnesses alike. 

Poor ventilation indoors can exacerbate symptoms of VOC Exposure. Short-term exposure symptoms include headaches, dizziness, nausea, and irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat. Prolonged exposure to harmful VOCs can result in more severe health problems, including damage to the kidney, liver, and central nervous system. Some VOCs are classified as carcinogens, increasing the risk of conditions like lung cancer.

These effects are exacerbated by a process called off-gassing, which is of critical concern when it comes to VOCs and furniture. It refers to the process by which materials containing VOCs release these chemicals into the air over time. Off-gassing is particularly prevalent in new furniture, as the VOCs have not yet been released, leading to higher emission rates.

The primary sources of off-gassing in homes are plywood and wood furniture (which often contain formaldehyde), electronic devices, mattresses, carpets, couches, paint, and construction materials found in newly built homes. Plywood and wood furniture are especially significant contributors to off-gassing because they are highly porous, absorbing substantial amounts of VOCs. This high porosity results in a prolonged release of these harmful compounds into the indoor environment, making them notable culprits in diminishing indoor air quality.

The off-gassing process is especially concerning, given EPA has expressed concerns about VOCs due to their potential health impacts. According to information on the EPA’s website, a study called the “Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM) Study,” which was completed in 1985, discovered that approximately a dozen common organic pollutants were 2 to 5 times more concentrated inside homes compared to outdoor environments. This held true regardless of whether the homes were situated in rural or highly industrial areas. The TEAM studies also revealed that when people use products containing organic chemicals, they can expose themselves and others to high levels of pollutants. Even after the activity is finished, these elevated concentrations can persist in the air. The New York State Department of Health also addresses this issue in its publication titled “Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Commonly Used Products.”

The widespread presence of these harmful chemicals in furniture and other household goods can be traced back to California’s old flame retardant regulations. In 1975, California implemented a regulation requiring all upholstered furniture in the state to contain flame-retardant chemicals. As California was a substantial market, manufacturers opted to adopt these standards for furniture sold nationwide, which led to the pervasive use of these toxic chemicals.

The chemicals used in flame retardants have been linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, neurobehavioral function issues, and adverse effects on fetal development. Eventually, this regulation was revised under the California flammability standard, SB 1019, passed in 2014, which allowed furniture manufacturers to cease using harmful flame retardant chemicals in polyurethane foam, offering a safer option for consumers. Furniture manufactured after January 1, 2015, is less likely to contain these harmful flame retardants, while products purchased between 1975 and 2014 may expose families to these toxic chemicals.

However, other harmful VOCs are still present in furniture and other household items. Newborns and infants are especially vulnerable to the effects of the resulting off-gassing, as their developing bodies are more sensitive to environmental toxins. Mattresses and baby items can emit harmful VOCs, potentially affecting the health and well-being of children. Parents should exercise caution when choosing products for their nurseries and opt for those labeled with Greenguard certifications, which indicate low or no levels of hazardous VOCs.

Despite the well-documented adverse effects of certain VOCs that permeate household products, EPA refrains from implementing regulations concerning these chemicals within the home. This is in stark contrast to their oversight of outdoor air quality, where VOCs are regulated. EPA maintains that its jurisdiction does not extend to indoor air quality and it regulates only under section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act (Act), while states have plans approved by the agency.

EPA explicitly notes that “[E]ven if we had the authority to regulate indoor air quality, it would be difficult to regulate household (or other) products because we have no authority to collect information on the chemical content of products in the marketplace (nor does any Federal Agency).â€

In fact, EPA has a history of approving harmful aerosol air sanitizer pesticides for use against COVID-19 and other bacteria and viruses. In October 2022, the EPA approved 32 varieties of a new pesticide for air sanitizers. The formulation contained 14% dipropylene glycol, with the other 86% of the formulation not specified. This action, while intended to decrease pathogens in indoor air, failed to do so by not taking into account that disinfectants and sanitizers emit VOCs and negatively affect the immune system, thus reducing resistance to disease. Instead of exercising jurisdiction over improving indoor air ventilation, the EPA turned to harmful pesticides once again, putting people with preexisting conditions, the elderly, and children at elevated risk from exposure. 

Therefore, given the lack of protective action from government agencies, it is crucial to make informed choices and protect your family. Consider these steps when shopping for furniture and household items:

  1. Check Labels: With pressed-wood products, look for furniture items that meet ultra-low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) or no added formaldehyde (NAF) standards. Products labeled as “Zero VOC†and “Low VOC” are also safer choices.
  2. Look for organic furniture and mattresses that are certified free from VOCs and flame retardants. With mattresses, check if materials meet the Global Organic Textile Standard.
  3. Increase Ventilation: Proper ventilation can help reduce indoor air pollution. Ensure your living space is well-ventilated, particularly when introducing new furniture or items.
  4. Filter Your Air: Air purifiers with activated carbon filters can help remove VOCs from the air, improving indoor air quality.
  5. Choose Safer Alternatives: When possible, opt for solid wood furniture, used furniture that has had time to air out, and electronic devices with low VOC emissions.

If you discover that you own products containing harmful VOCs or flame retardants and wish to dispose of them responsibly, consider disposing of them at hazardous waste facilities or contacting manufacturers. Some manufacturers offer take-back programs for their products, which can be an environmentally responsible way to dispose of old items.

With increased awareness, informed consumer choices, and the proper disposal of harmful products, individuals can reduce their exposure to these toxins, creating safer and healthier living environments for themselves and their families. The power to protect well-being begins with understanding the hidden dangers within one’s own home.

For more information on harmful toxins in the home and to stay updated on other toxic chemicals and pesticides, please visit the Beyond Pesticides website. 

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

Source: EWG, What Are VOCs?

Share

30
Oct

Despite a Beetle’s History of Resistance to Insecticides, EPA Is Pushing Genetically Engineered Pesticide

(Beyond Pesticides, October 30, 2023) TAKE ACTION. It is said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. And so it goes with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to register a new genetically engineered pesticide for the Colorado Potato Beetle (CPB); this time with a pesticide that has not been fully evaluated for its adverse effects to people and the environment. [Submit a public comment before comment period ends today, October 30, 2023.]

Chemical-intensive agriculture has failed to control CPB since resistance to DDT was identified in 1952 and has continued with every family of pesticides since then. CPB has been dubbed the billion-dollar-bug because of the investment in failed attempts of chemical manufacturers to control the insect, the profits generated by chemical companies despite this failure, and the resulting losses for chemical-intensive farmers—not to mention government expenditures for the registration of chemicals that have short efficacy, pollution costs associated with chemical production and use, and lost ecosystem services. But, EPA is at it again, registering a new novel pesticide active ingredient, Ledprona, which raises the stakes on potential harm. The only winners in this ongoing failure are the chemical manufacturers that continue to reap huge economic benefits from the sale of their highly toxic pesticides. Meanwhile, according to research published in Molecular Biology and Evolution (2022) and hundreds of other scientific articles over the years, “This is the case with insect “super-pests,†which repeatedly evolve insecticide resistance even as they are faced with completely novel insecticides, thus perpetuating the arms race that defines the pesticide treadmill.†And yet, EPA is still at it, despite the success of alternative strategies with organic management systems.

Take Action: Tell EPA not to register Ledprona without complete data supporting its safety.

While researchers and the chemical industry keep trying to develop new “silver-bullet†chemicals for controlling CPB, EPA has ignored methods of agricultural management that work without reliance on toxic chemicals. Advocates say that this newest proposed pesticide exemplifies the worst of EPA’s pesticide registration program, governed by its Office of Pesticide Programs, because there are alternative methods and the risks of Ledprona have not been found to be “reasonableâ€â€”even under a weak federal pesticide law, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

The University of Minnesota Extension, in its publication “Organic management recommendations for Colorado potato beetle,†describes the range of methods that are integrated into an organic systems approach not reliant on pesticides. It includes crop rotation, early maturing varieties, mulching systems and habitat for natural enemies like ladybugs and parasitic wasps, trapping, and a naturally occurring soil bacterium.

FIFRA requires that EPA register a pesticide only if it determines that the pesticide “will perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.†EPA admits that it is basing its proposed registration decision solely on data the registrant GreenLight Biosciences submitted to fulfill requirements for its prior application for an experimental use permit (EUP), without any additional data. However, there are far fewer data requirements for approval of an EUP than are required for a full registration.

Ledprona’s use of RNAi makes it unique and unlike any other insecticide sprayed on fields. The use of new technology makes it especially imperative to examine all required data for any potential unintended consequences. Since these novel pesticides may be applied by plane, EPA must thoroughly assess the real-world impacts of pesticide drift. This technology, which penetrates plant tissues and leaves traces in the soil, can cause widespread indiscriminate poisoning—as has been seen with bees, butterflies, birds, and the larger catastrophic decline of insect populations, called the “insect apocalypse.†The effects, especially on threatened and endangered species like the American burying beetle, Hungerford’s crawling water beetle, the Northeastern beach tiger beetle, and the Puritan tiger beetle, must be evaluated. These species are found near potato production areas close to where the Experimental Trials were being conducted and could be direct casualties of this new biopesticide.

In addition, researchers from the U.S. and Switzerland have published findings, a beginning assessment of how the use of this new category of pesticides—RNAi, delivered in double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) molecules—might impact soils and nontarget microorganisms in the soil. The coauthors (Kimberly M. Parker, PhD, et al.) note that, “The ecological risk assessment of these emerging pesticides necessitates an understanding of the fate of dsRNA molecules in receiving environments, among which agricultural soils are most important.†Their research has continued, finding that “Due to the ability of DOM (dissolved organic matter) to both bind and suppress the enzymatic degradation of RNA, RNA biodegradation may be slowed in environmental systems with high DOM concentrations, which may increase its persistence.â€

Beyond Pesticides is advising the public to Tell EPA not to register Ledprona without complete data supporting its safety.

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

Sources. Molecular Biology and Evolution (2022), Science Daily, EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0271.

Share

27
Oct

EPA To Allow Genetically-Based Pesticides, Incomplete Testing, and Documented Adverse Effects

(Beyond Pesticides, October 27, 2023) In a typical move, EPA proposes to greenlight a type of genetic engineering to solve a problem created by the industrial paradigm for pest control, i.e. vast acreages of monoculture treated with millions of tons of toxic pesticides leading to rapid resistance among crop pests. In this case EPA wants to approve using a nucleic acid—double-stranded RNA (dsRNA)–called “interfering RNA,†or RNAi—to silence a gene crucial to the survival of the Colorado Potato Beetle (CPB), the scourge of potato farmers around the world. But EPA has skipped over important steps in its decision-making process and rushed to judgment.

Like chemical pesticides, genetically-based pesticides are regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). In 2020, Massachusetts-based GreenLight Biosciences applied for registration of its RNAi active ingredient, Ledprona, and its end-use product, Calantha. The company executive heading the effort is an alumnus of Monsanto and several other major chemical companies. Last May EPA granted GreenLight an Experimental Use Permit (EUP) authorizing field studies in states that produce tons of potatoes. A mere five months later, EPA announced its decision to approve the registration based almost entirely on incomplete EUP data and giving the public very little time to comment.

Formally titled “Colorado Potato Beetle (CPB)-specific recombinant double-stranded interfering Oligonucleotide GS2 Leptinotarsa decemlineata,†Ledprona disrupts an RNA process inside cells to block expression of a particular CPB gene. This prevents the gene from specifying an important protein. When a CPB ingests Ledprona on a potato leaf, the RNAi nucleotide spreads into the cells of the beetle’s gut. The cells die, which shortly kills the beetle.

Unfortunately, dsRNA molecules may wander from their intended targets. Inside a cell, the long dsRNA strand gets clipped into small pieces called siRNAs (“small interfering RNAsâ€), whose configuration may also align with many other sections of a genome and affect nontarget genes, with entirely different effects. One experiment with interfering RNA found complete matches in 17 percent of off-target sequences. Neither EPA nor Greenlight has addressed this risk.

According to EPA’s Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA), Greenlight intends Calantha to be applied in ground spray, aerial spray (via airplane) and in irrigation water—in other words, very broadly, and in a manner that will inevitably entail some spray drift.

The Center for Food Safety (CFS) prepared a blistering comment to EPA noting the agency’s extreme disregard for both known biological processes and the unknowns of losing a novel piece of cellular machinery into the wild. According to the CFS, the EUP field trials granted to Greenlight remain incomplete and will not expire until April 30, 2025, yet EPA admits that its approval of Ledprona and Calantha relies solely on data Greenlight submitted with its application for the EUP–whose data requirements are considerably lower than those for new use approvals. FIFRA requires, for example, data on toxicity to fish, birds, and plants. GreenLight has not provided that data so far.

EPA assumes that only organisms that resemble the CPB might be susceptible to Ledprona’s interference with their cellular machinery, yet dismisses even that possibility. The agency’s ERA states that “there is a reasonable expectation of no discernible effects to occur to any non-coleopteran nontarget organisms exposed to Ledprona…EPA analysis also examined the 19 federally listed threatened and endangered (‘listed’) coleopteran species and determined that no exposure is expected for 15 of the 19 federally listed threatened and endangered (‘listed’) coleopteran species from a section 3 registration of Calantha containing Ledprona.†(The CPB belongs to the order Coleoptera, along with 400,000 other beetle species known to science. Many coleopterans provide beneficial services.)

Additionally, EPA says, “Physiological barriers are present within vertebrate species that prevent the dsRNA such as Ledprona from reaching and penetrating the gut in vertebrate species.†Given the unpredictable alignments of the small interfering RNAs in a genome, this too is an iffy assumption. The CFS comment notes that, although EPA has not provided any information to the public about Ledprona’s nucleotide length, that data is an important factor in assessing the product’s potential toxicity. EPA has designated the dsRNA in Ledprona as “non-coding,†which it takes to mean that it would not function in a human body, but, in fact, nobody knows whether or how many such “long, non-coding RNAs†function in many species. What is known, according to CFS, is that human innate immune systems respond to such sequences, which often come from viruses or from the body’s own damaged cells, with inflammation.

We can expect more pesticide products to be based on genetic processes such as RNAi’s regulation of gene expression as farmers and chemical companies get more desperate with each passing report of pests’ ability to evade pesticides. It is unsurprising that the CPB is an early target because it is notorious for its rapid development of resistance. Currently it is resistant to more than 50 pesticides.

In the long run CPB will win. It is already ahead. In 2021, a research team, three of whom are employed by Monsanto, found that CPB “can develop high levels of resistance against insecticidal dsRNA†when the dsRNA is applied to leaves. The study also found that the dsRNA affected more than one gene. Various analyses of CPB’s response to a range of doses led the scientists to conclude that, after a few generations, resistance to dsRNA reached 11,100 times that of the founding generation of beetles. The researchers attributed CPB’s virtuosic ability to resist pesticides partly to the beetle’s highly flexible and transposable genetic elements. This indicates that creating precise and effective products using genetics is fraught with risks. A plain hydrocarbon molecule is understood vastly better than the interplay of the trillions of genes in the world.

Pesticide resistance was first noted in 1914, but the industry still fails to recognize that it cannot bet against the house. To cope with the inevitable triumph of natural selection, pesticide manufacturers are promoting the use of dsRNA products in combination with traditional pesticides, with the idea that their mechanisms of action will alternate and prevent pests from adapting. Combining pesticides with RNA interference can be framed as part of “integrated pest management,†although as a 2018 review in Science noted, the notion that “such combinations will slow [the development of] resistance is theoretically controversial and lacks empirical support.â€

Beyond Pesticides chronicled in 2019 the promotion of interfering dsRNA technologies by pesticide companies despite the recognition that their effects on nontarget organisms cannot be predicted.

“With the allowance of gene-manipulating RNAi pesticides, EPA is repeating a pattern of allowing uncertainty that has historically resulted in serious unexpected and uncontrolled hazards, despite the availability of organic practices and products that are currently available,†said Beyond Pesticides’ executive director, Jay Feldman. Mr. Feldman continued: “The agency has failed to fully evaluate the fate of genetic material and its degradation products on nontarget species and the likely potential for indiscriminate poisoning. We are calling for a moratorium on RNAi pesticides until these questions can be fully answered.â€

The deadline for public comment on the registration of Ledprona and Calantha has been extended to October 30. Visit here for information about submitting comments and suggested sample wording.

An expert at another federal agency once observed that it is not a good idea to rely on “a conclusion drawn from a consensus†rather than from empirical evidence when making important decisions. In this case, EPA has done exactly that, mistaking suppositions for facts. EPA’s decision rests on a foundation of uncertain assumptions, many of which are implicit in EPA’s evaluation rather than explicitly enumerated, and whose reliability EPA did not examine.

>>Click here to Take Action and tell EPA not to register genetically engineered pesticides without complete data! Please take action by Monday, October 30, 2023 at 11:59 PM Eastern.

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

Sources:
EPA Opens Public Comment Period on Proposal to Register Novel Pesticide Technology for Potato Crops
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-opens-public-comment-period-proposal-register-novel-pesticide-technology-potato

Environmental Risk Assessment for a FIFRA Section 3 Registration of the New Product GS2 Formulation (Calantha) Containing Ledprona
https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0271-0006

Human Health Risk Assessment, Review of Product Characterization and Manufacturing Process for the New end-use product, CalanthaHuman Health Risk Assessment, Review of Product Characterization and Manufacturing Process for the New end-use product, Calantha
https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0271-0005

Share

26
Oct

Neurodevelopmental Disorders Studied as an Environmental Justice Concern

(Beyond Pesticides, October 26, 2023) The increasing prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) in the United States has raised concerns about the impact of toxic exposures on child development. A comprehensive review by Devon Payne-Sturges, PhD, and colleagues in Environmental Health Perspectives analyzes the literature about disparities in NDDs in vulnerable and marginalized populations. The review investigates over 200 studies and reveals that fewer than half of these studies actually examine disparities, and most fail to provide a rationale for their assessments. The authors also offer practical suggestions for improving future research, including better methods for characterizing race and socioeconomic status and interpreting effect modification in environmental epidemiologic studies of health disparities.

Associate Professor Devon Payne-Sturges, PhD, at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Health, one of the lead authors of the study and a former policy specialist at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said, “FDA and EPA can act now—not later—to protect families from neurotoxic chemicals in consumer products and in the environment.â€

Tanya Khemet Taiwo, PhD, the other lead author and assistant professor at Bastyr University in Seattle said, “We need more stringent environmental standards to address pollution that is disproportionately impacting low-income communities and communities of color, but it’s just as important that we find a way to improve the unjust systems and social policies that create harmful conditions in the first place.â€

Given the disproportionate toxic burden in the U.S., children from marginalized groups and low-income families are more likely to face a variety of harmful exposures that can negatively affect childhood development. These disparities are linked to neurodevelopmental disorders. NDDs are defined as conditions related to the functioning of the nervous system and the brain, including: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, learning difficulties, intellectual disability (cognitive impairment), conduct disorders, cerebral palsy, and challenges related to vision and hearing.

Among the 218 studies written between 1974 and 2022 that were investigated by Dr. Payne-Stuges et al., the following patterns emerged:

  • Black and Hispanic children have higher exposure to organophosphate pesticides, commonly used in agriculture.
  • Black and Hispanic mothers have elevated levels of phthalates, chemicals found in food packaging, personal care products, and other environmental sources.
  • Low-income and Black children have more significant lead exposures compared to their higher-income and white counterparts.
  • Communities of color and low-income neighborhoods experience a disproportionate exposure to air pollution.
  • Babies residing in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods exposed to air pollution during their first year of life are at a higher risk of being diagnosed with autism compared to those in more affluent areas.

Environmental justice scholars have connected the unequal and disproportionate toxic exposures to discriminatory policies and practices, including racial residential segregation. Despite decades of executive orders addressing environmental justice, the recognition of unequal pollution distribution in historically marginalized communities has recently gained federal research funding through the Justice40 Initiative and other policies. However, there has been a history of commitments that have not played out, as envisioned by its supporters. A U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) report, Environmental Justice: Federal Efforts Need Better Planning, Coordination, and Methods to Assess Progress (2019), found, “Most of the 16 agencies that are members of the interagency working group on environmental justice—created by Executive Order 12898 in 1994—reported taking some actions to identify and address environmental justice issues, such as creating data tools, developing policies or guidance, and building community capacity through small grants and training.†However, GAO concluded that “…few agencies have measures or methods for assessing progress, and the working group has not provided guidance to help agencies with such assessments.â€Â 

Beyond Pesticides issued an action in 2021 that points to a generation of EPA neglect of farmworker children’s exposure to the neurotoxic insecticide chlorpyrifos. The pesticide and the family of organophosphates, of which it is a part, targets the nervous system in humans. EPA had negotiated a withdrawal from the market of all residential uses of chlorpyrifos in 2000 because of the neurotoxic effect on children, but left the agricultural uses on the market, with a few exceptions. This left farmworker children exposed to chemical drift in their communities and schools, while EPA took no action for nearly two decades. Children are particularly at risk because they take in greater amounts of pesticides relative to their body weight than adults, and their developing organ systems are typically more sensitive to toxic exposures. The agency finally negotiated a withdrawal of agricultural uses in 2022.

The Payne-Sturges et al. review emphasizes the potential shortcomings of relying solely on models of “effect modification†to assess health disparities because it often addresses only one aspect of the problem. Many studies in the review focus on lead and air pollution exposures, which often affect under-resourced communities housing marginalized populations. These communities may face multiple hazardous exposures from sources like high-traffic roads, industrial facilities, deteriorating municipal infrastructure, and substandard housing. Such conditions can have cumulative effects, and historical and continued segregation contributes to repeated toxic exposures. Despite this, most studies in the review assessed these exposures independently.

The review highlights that children continually exposed to known neurotoxic substances often experience delayed diagnoses and barriers to necessary services. Moreover, cognitive impairments and poor academic achievement can exacerbate economic hardship. Consequently, measures of neurodevelopmental delay and impairment might be more effective in assessing the impact on underserved groups.

While many environmental studies consider socio-demographic factors tied to health disparities like race, income, education, and other sociodemographic factors, there is a recent shift toward evaluating NDD factors in collecting data. Yet, solely looking at individual race and ethnicity might not capture the full extent of structural racism. According to the authors, looking at area-based indicators of structural racism, such as unemployment rates, rental percentages, segregation metrics, and police activity frequency, could improve our understanding of racial disparities.

The authors of the study consider the complex paradigms and racist structures underlying the toxic disparities. They note that greater diversity in research teams and collaboration with community members with firsthand experience is vital. The authors stress the importance of stakeholder engagement in interventions and addressing the structural barriers contributing to environmental health disparities. The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is cited as a potential tool to protect children from hazardous exposures and reduce community exposure through regulation and public health practices.

The review aligns with a history of awareness of the disproportionate exposure to neurotoxic chemicals experienced by children of color and those from low-income families. Ultimately, this research aims to reduce the burden of hazardous exposures on children’s health and promote more equitable protection against neurotoxic chemicals.

You can make a change by eliminating neurotoxic pesticides on your property and working toward the passage of organic land care policies in your community. To get started, see Beyond Pesticides’ Tools for Change webpage. Beyond Pesticides will continue to monitor progress on inequities related to pesticides, agriculture, farmworker well-being, and the health of BIPOC communities in the U.S. For current reporting on matters related to environmental justice, see Beyond Pesticides’ Daily News Blog EJ archives.

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

Source: Disparities in Toxic Chemical Exposures and Associated Neurodevelopmental Outcomes: A Scoping Review and Systematic Evidence Map of the Epidemiological Literature, Sweeping UMD Review Finds Deep Disparities in Childhood Exposure to Neurotoxins

Share

25
Oct

Study Further Strengthens Link Between Common Insecticide Class and Psychiatric Disorders

(Beyond Pesticides, October 25, 2023) A study published in Environmental Pollution finds farming and organophosphate (OP) pesticide exposure are risk factors for depression, with pesticide poisoning being a risk factor for suicidal behavior. Additionally, psychiatric disorder prognosis affects men more than women, with depression and suicidal outcomes more common among pesticide-exposed males. Age also affected depression and suicidal consequences, with elevated rates among older farmers.

Research on pesticide-induced diseases commonly investigates pesticide exposure concerning the development of various physical illnesses. However, previous studies show that occupational (work-related) risks of developing depression are high in agriculture, where pesticide use is widespread. Acute exposure to chemicals, including organophosphate, organochlorine, triazine, and carbamate pesticides, tends to put farmers at elevated risk. More study is needed on pesticide exposure and similar psychological (psychiatric) effects in the general population.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), depression affects 322 million people globally, with the number of diagnosed patients increasing by 18.4% from 2005 to 2015. Although the etiology of depression—and many other psychiatric disorders—is often genetic, studies suggest that other etiological factors, like pesticide exposure, play a role in depression incidents. Poor mental health has a tangible influence on physical health (e.g., depression and cardiovascular disease); therefore, the combination of pesticide exposure and mental illness worsens the adverse effects on human health.

To investigate the link between chronic occupational exposure to pesticides and depression, anxiety, and suicide-related outcomes in farmers, researchers performed a systematic review to find related studies. The review found 57 total studies meeting the criteria for the investigation: 29 on depression, 12 on suicide, and 14 on pesticide poisoning or self-poisoning and death. Overall, the studies demonstrate a similar pattern; there is an increase in the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among pesticide-exposed farmers and an increase in depression in the general population. Individuals who experience past pesticide exposure have an increased risk of depression or other mood disorders comparable with those chronically exposed to pesticides. The more severe and frequent the pesticide poisoning event, the more likely the exposed individual displays depressive symptoms. Concerning the locality of pesticide exposure, individuals working or residing in areas devoted to chemical-intensive practices like agriculture (e.g., farms) display higher suicide rates, with the highest rates among farmers. Thus, the study “suggests more attention to the farmer’s mental health and more detailed studies on occupational exposure to the mixture of these compounds.â€

For over two decades, research concerning pesticide exposure and psychiatric disorders, such as depression, focused on occupational hazards, especially for farmworkers. Exposure to agricultural pesticides puts farmers at a six times greater risk of exhibiting depressive symptoms, including chronic anxiety, irritability, restlessness, and sadness. Specifically, exposure to organochlorines (OCPs) and fumigants (gaseous pesticides) heightens an individual’s risk of depression by 90% and 80%, respectively. Organochlorines are chemicals of concern as they can induce a myriad of health problems, including reproductive dysfunction, endocrine disruption, cancer, and fetal defects. Although most organochlorine pesticides have been withdrawn from the U.S. market, these chemicals can still expose individuals to volatile concentrations as they are highly persistent in the environment. However, OCPs are far from the only class of pesticide involved in increased risk of developing mental disorders. Linear models reveal tobacco farmers using organophosphate pesticides have a higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders.

Although individuals suffering from occupational pesticide exposure face a disproportionate risk of developing depression, pesticide exposure from nearby agricultural fields threatens residential (nonoccupational) human health. Previous studies find that populations living near farms are more likely to have high depressive symptoms. Similarly, a 2019 study found that teens and adolescents living in agricultural areas, where organophosphate exposure is prevalent, are at higher risk of depression. Uniquely, gender (female), physical health, and age (young adult) indicate the likelihood of having depressive symptoms, with the most adverse effects in women, those in poor physical health, and children under 14. 

Pesticides have long been linked to various mental health issues, with this study highlighting specific impacts OPs have on behavioral and cognitive function, indicating the prominent neurotoxic impacts of chemical exposure. Organophosphates are a family of insecticides derived from World War II nerve agents. They are cholinesterase inhibitors, meaning they bind irreversibly to the active site of an essential enzyme for standard nerve impulse transmission, acetylcholine esterase (AchE), inactivating the enzyme. Like this review, past research finds that organophosphates have significant associations with depressive symptom development, including disturbing normal nerve impulses. So, scientists can analyze information to determine if the lack of normal nerve impulses contributes to non-pesticide-induced depression. Additionally, pesticide poisoning can lead to neurotoxicity via low serotonin levels and cholinergic changes, further exacerbated by oxidative stress and neuronal cell death. A decrease in AChE activity has links to higher depression scores observed in individuals with increased suicide risk.

A study published in the WHO Bulletin finds that people storing organophosphate pesticides in their homes are more likely to have suicidal thoughts as the exposure rate is higher. The study finds an association between suicidal thoughts and ease of household pesticide accessibility. Geographic areas with more frequent home storage of pesticides have higher rates of suicidal thoughts than the general population. WHO scientists recognize pesticide self-poisoning as one of the most significant global methods of suicide, as increases in pesticide toxicity make them potentially lethal substances. Robert Stewart, PhD, a researcher for the WHO Bulletin, stated that “Organophosphate pesticides are widely used around the world. They are particularly lethal chemicals in overdose and cause many suicides worldwide.â€

Suicide is a public health crisis, and this research highlights the significance of researching potential mental health detriments resulting from pesticide exposure, especially as society tends to rank mental health risks second to physical health. Therefore, understanding the mental health implications associated with chemical-intensive agriculture and pest management can help identify the various physiological mechanisms attributed to psychiatric disorders. Advocates support the call to enact a toxic pesticide ban, with a 

Despite the urgings of public health scientists and professionals, organophosphate insecticides continue to be used in the United States. This and other studies indicate that farmers and those in agricultural communities are at disproportional risk of mental health problems due to pesticide use, in addition to the myriad of neurodevelopmental, reproductive, respiratory, and other health problems individuals risk from exposure to organophosphates. Through our Pesticide Induced Diseases Database (PIDD), Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent studies related to pesticide exposure. For more information on the multiple harms of pesticides, see PIDD pages on brain and nervous system disorders, endocrine disruption, cancer, and other diseases.

Additionally, buying, growing, and supporting organic can help eliminate the extensive use of pesticides in the environment. Organic contributes to a system that respects the natural environment and stops exposure to toxic pesticides. Still, it also reduces demand for toxic pesticides in areas where farmer suicides are alarmingly high. Coupled with evidence from past studies that link pesticide exposure to suicidal ideations and depression, even in developed countries, this research strongly supports a ban on toxic pesticides in favor of organic practices. Our choices encourage the protection of the people who help put food on our table daily by purchasing organic products. For more information on how organic is the right choice for consumers and the farmworkers that grow our food, see the Beyond Pesticides’ webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture. 

Lastly, suicide is the tenth leading cause of death among adults (3rd for adolescents) in the U.S., with more than 34,000 individuals succumbing to the disease annually. Suicidal thoughts and behaviors are dangerous and harmful and are therefore considered a psychiatric emergency. An individual experiencing these thoughts should seek immediate assistance from a health or mental health care provider. If you or someone you know is in an emergency, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255) or 911 immediately.

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

Source:  Environmental Pollution

 

 

 

Share

24
Oct

Depleted Soils and Petrochemical Fertilizers Destabilize Africa and Globe

(Beyond Pesticides, October 24, 2023) Sub-Saharan Africa, often celebrated for its rich cultural diversity and stunning landscapes, is also home to a growing crisis beneath its surface – the depletion of its ancient soils. These soils–some of the oldest in the world–have undergone long periods of weathering and erosion, leading to severe nutrient deficiencies. Potassium, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus, vital for crop growth, are notably absent from these soils. Due to this and a dependency on synthetic fertilizers, along with an absence of soil and water conservation programs and other complex issues stemming from poor infrastructure, pervasive government instability, and colonialism, African soils have a markedly decreased ability to sustain high-yielding food crops. As a result, restoring soil health through the nurturing of microbial activity and the natural cycling of nutrients is identified as the number-one priority to improve agricultural productivity and ensure food sovereignty.

While it might seem that African farmers could turn to organic or chemical fertilizers to address soil nutrient deficiencies, the reality is quite different. The high costs associated with these fertilizers make them largely inaccessible to most African farmers. Even though the average fertilizer application rate In Sub-Saharan Africa is 22 kilograms per hectare, significantly lower than the global average of 146 kilograms per hectare, the costs of even this limited fertilizer application are continually rising. A key factor contributing to these soaring costs is that the components required to make fertilizers are priced in U.S. dollars. This means that fluctuations in the value of the U.S. dollar impact the affordability of fertilizers in other countries. Consequently, African farmers rarely have the means to access the essential nutrients their soils require.

Moreover, over the past several years, the cost issues associated with fertilizer production and importation have been exacerbated. It began with the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted the supply chain and raised transportation costs for fertilizer ingredients, making it less affordable for African farmers. The situation worsened with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which disrupted shipments of critical components for fertilizer production. The resulting sanctions against major gas-producing nations–including Russia–have caused energy prices to rise. For fertilizer production, this meant increased costs associated with the energy-intensive Haber-Bosch process, which produces synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.

Likewise, potash–a crucial source of potassium for fertilizers–was also affected by international conflicts. Belarus, a major supplier of potash, faced restrictions on its sales due to the Russia-Ukraine war. Additionally, Lithuanian restrictions against Belarus’s potash transport have further disrupted the availability of potassium, an essential nutrient for plant growth. 

African farmers deeply feel the consequences of these global disruptions. Fertilizer prices more than doubled, leaving them unable to afford the essential nutrients that are deficient in their soil. They are now faced with the grim reality of harvesting fewer or no crops at all, compounded by the impacts of climate change, from floods to locust invasions, decimating the already precarious crops they manage to grow.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s plight is part of a broader global crisis. The soaring prices and disruption in the fertilizer market have repercussions far beyond the African continent. Farmers in developed countries have benefitted from subsidies that cover the cost of natural gas and diesel fuel needed for farming, affording to plant more and purchase more fertilizer. This widening global disparity in access to fertilizers threatens food security on a massive scale.

With 220 million of the world’s 800 million undernourished people residing in Sub-Saharan Africa, fixing African soils is one of the most pressing issues. As the population in the region is set to double by 2050, there is an urgency for new solutions to alleviate the current situation while pacifying the worsening effects of climate change.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s soils require organic matter to enrich the soil, promote nutrient availability, and support microbial activity. However, many farmers struggle to afford or access sufficient crop residue, compost, or animal manure.

In the face of financial hardship, some farmers have explored methods to enhance soil productivity without relying on fertilizers, a strategy with potential, though not an immediate solution to the food insecurity challenge. Transitioning to organic fertilizers may improve ecological sustainability, but it can take years for crops to reach the yields achieved with synthetic counterparts in depleted soils. While reducing synthetic fertilizer dependency is a promising long-term approach, it is essential to recognize that the immediate needs of millions of people struggling with food scarcity cannot be ignored during the transition to healthy soils.

Some successful methods that do not require synthetic fertilizer usage have fallen under a concept known as “perenniation.†This approach involves growing perennial plants like trees, shrubs, and legumes alongside food crops. These perennial plants provide carbon and nitrogen to the soil, aiding in retaining water, reducing erosion, and improving crop yields. Additionally, they can reduce the need for chemical fertilizers and fight off pests.

For example, over 30,000 farmers in East Africa have utilized a “push-pull system,” planting specific perennial plants among corn fields. These plants suppress insect pests and weeds, mitigate erosion, produce animal feed, and reduce the need for fertilizers. 

The utilization of biofertilizers is another promising avenue. Biofertilizers contain helpful microorganisms like bacteria and fungi to aid and improve nutrient availability in soil. Instead of entirely relying on synthetic nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, certain bacteria can undergo processes that make these nutrients available to plants. For example, nitrogen-fixing bacteria like Bradyrhizobium, Azotobacter, and Rhizobium convert atmospheric nitrogen into a form that plants can utilize.

Phosphate-solubilizing bacteria like Pseudomonas, Bacillus, and Rhizobium work by solubilizing phosphate present in the soil but not in a plant-usable form. They enhance the availability of phosphorus to plants. As for potassium, certain microorganisms, including Bacillus and Paenibacillus, are known to release potassium from minerals in the soil, making it more accessible to plants.

These methods may also offer a practical alternative for farmers lacking soil analysis and fertilizer application training. A significant percentage of African farmers struggle to assess their soil conditions accurately due to a lack of training and resources associated with soil testing. Without this understanding, applying fertilizers can have potentially harmful consequences. Many experts argue that adding nutrients to the soil without a prior understanding of its existing composition and the specific needs of the crops is risky. It can disrupt soil chemistry, including pH levels, and harm biodiversity. 

Moreover, the self-sufficiency and farmer sovereignty these natural solutions provide are not only a benefit but a necessity moving forward. The region’s dependence on external sources for food and fertilizer makes it highly vulnerable to global conflicts, like the Russian-Ukrainian war, and volatile international markets. Self-sustaining agriculture bolsters food security and enhances resilience in the face of economic and political instability worldwide.

Therefore, adopting a gradual shift away from synthetic fertilizers would be the pragmatic path forward in Africa and beyond. The harms of synthetic fertilizers are being felt beyond Africa due to the many adverse environmental impacts. Synthetic nitrogen production alone accounts for approximately 1% of all human-made carbon dioxide emissions. It is widely acknowledged that synthetic fertilizers are often overused, contributing to environmental challenges.

For more information on how you can take individual action to address these environmental concerns related to synthetic fertilizers, please visit the Beyond Pesticides website, which provides a list of fertilizers compatible with organic landscape management.

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

Source: The New York Times, Fertilizer Shortage is Spreading Desperate Hunger

Share

23
Oct

Don’t Get Comfortable: Government Shutdown Exacerbates Food Safety Threats

(Beyond Pesticides, October 23, 2023) As the immediate threat of a government shutdown has temporarily subsided, concerns are mounting over the potential threats to food safety in the United States if the government shuts down in mid-November. Experts are warning that a shutdown could jeopardize critical food safety inspections and oversight. A partial government shutdown in 2019 disrupted federal oversight of food monitoring for various pathogens and pesticides, as labs were shuttered, with agency employees furloughed. See Beyond Pesticide’s reporting about food safety risks during the last government shutdown. However, it should be noted that residues of pesticides in food continue to raise concerns about safety of food grown in chemical-intensive (conventional) farming operations.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) contingency plans dictate that the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) continue its regulatory inspection of meat, poultry, and egg products, as mandated by law. However, it is important to note that the FSIS will operate with a reduced workforce, with a portion of employees deemed “essential personnel” for food safety operations.

Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which includes the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is also preparing for a potential shutdown. According to HHS’s contingency plans, the agency expects to furlough about 42% of its workforce, or approximately 35,000 staff, with exemptions given to those involved in activities already funded or deemed necessary for the safety of human life or protection of property.

Despite these measures, experts are expressing concerns about the potential impact on food safety. FDA, responsible for regulating approximately 80 percent of the U.S. food supply, may be hindered in its ability to conduct proactive inspections and respond effectively to foodborne illness outbreaks.

Former FDA Deputy Commissioner Frank Yiannas has cautioned that government shutdowns can pose significant risks to food safety. During the 2018-19 shutdown, essential government services allowed the FDA to address foodborne outbreaks, but it hampered the agency’s ability to carry out essential proactive inspections. Mr. Yiannas elaborated on how shutdowns impact the agency’s operations. He noted that during that time, the classification of “essential government services” enabled the FDA to respond to foodborne outbreaks but prohibited the agency from conducting proactive inspections. Mr. Yiannas said during an interview with Politico, “While we worked hard to try to expand the definition of ‘essential services’ last time to include the inspection of high-risk food facilities, the reality is another shutdown would be extremely disruptive and it would result in a ripple throughout the food system ranging from inspections, food testing, interactions with other regulators, and the necessary interactions and consultation with the food industry at large.â€

As the funding deadline approaches, the fate of U.S. food safety remains uncertain, with stakeholders and experts closely monitoring developments in Congress and their potential impact on the nation’s food supply chain. 

The Farm Bill is one major point of contention and stalled negotiations say lead to a shutdown. Many conservatives are saying, “we need to put farms back into the Farm Bill.” However, this shortened “Farm Bill” name leaves out the “food security” history in the bill. The American Farm Bureau is starting to make this rebranding change, by calling it the (Food and) Farm Bill. In 2018, the Farm Bill was called the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018. Originally, as part of the New Deal in 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Agricultural Adjustment Act and it was later called the Soil Conservation Act (1935), the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (1936), and the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act (1973). Importantly, in 1985, the name was changed to The Food Security Act, which incentivized wetland preservation and prevention of soil erosion. Despite the various names of the Omnibus bill, it was never just a “farm bill,” and over the past several decades, food stamps and SNAP benefits have been integral to the food security of the US and its “Farm Bill.”

However, that is not the end of the story. Under the best of circumstances, the safety of the food supply is under threat of contamination from chemical-intensive practices. 

The complete Pesticide Data Program (PDP) database for 2020 yielded the following results: (Background on the program is available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/pdp.)

  • more than 99% of tested samples tested had pesticide residues below the established EPA tolerances; 30% had no detectable residue
  • .49% (47 samples) showed residues exceeding established tolerances; of these, 74.5% (35) were domestic, 23.4% (11) were imported, and 2.1% (1) was of unknown origin
  • residues with no established tolerance were found in 3.2% (303) of the 9,600 samples; of these, 65.7% (199) were domestic, 33% (100) were imported, and 1.3% (4) were of unknown origin

Organic produce was included in the PDP sampling. In 2020, 7.4% (706) of the tested samples were organic; nearly all organic samples were “zero detects,†but very small numbers of organic items sampled had detectable residues. This contamination can happen in a number of ways, including pesticide drift from conventional to organic fields, migration through soil or water, or infrequently, misrepresentation of treated produce as “organic.†(See more.)

FDA reported in August, 2022 that over half of all food samples tested by the FDA contain the residues of at least one pesticide, and one in ten samples have levels that violate legal limits established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These findings, published by FDA this month in its 2020 Pesticide Residue Monitoring Report, are simply par for the course for government regulators, as FDA indicates the 2020 results “were consistent with recent years.â€

Out of 2,078 samples tested, 316 were domestic and 1,762 were from imported food. Of the 316 domestic food samples, 59.2% contained the residue of at least one pesticide, and 3.2% were in violation of EPA pesticide tolerances. Import samples totaled 1,762, of which over 50% contained at least one pesticide residue, and 11.6% were in violation. In general, samples of food imported to the U.S. from other countries appeared to pose a greater risk of containing pesticide residue. Countries documenting the highest number of import violations included Mexico, India, and Pakistan. Among the over 2,000 samples tested, 185 different pesticide residues were detected. (See more.) According to internal FDA communications, granola, cereal, and wheat crackers all contain “a fair amount†of glyphosate, the herbicide in Monsanto’s popular Roundup, linked to cancer by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). FDA did not test for glyphosate at the time that The Guardian uncovered the information. FDA’s website states, “Of the 879 corn, soybean, milk, and egg assignment samples tested for glyphosate and glufosinate, approximately 59% of the corn and soy samples tested positive for residues of glyphosate and/or glufosinate, but all were below the tolerance levels set by the U.S. EPA.†With the history of controversy on glyphosate and EPA’s failure to limit its uses, advocates have called into question the allowable level in food and through nondietary exposure. (Background articles on glyphosate hazards are from here.)

However, while reporting on the dangerous pesticides present in U.S. food has become routine for FDA, more and more Americans are rejecting regular exposure to unnecessary toxics in their food by going organic with their food choices, planting their own pesticide-free gardens, and encouraging their elected officials to embrace safer, sustainable land care policies.  

If you are concerned about the kinds of pesticides could be in your food, how conventional food is grown, and its adverse impact on the ecosystem and farmworkers, you can utilize Beyond Pesticides’ Eating with a Conscience database. The organization evaluates the impact of toxic chemicals allowed for use on individual fruits and vegetables grown domestically and internationally.

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

Source: Food stamps, free lunch, airplane inspections: What’s hit when the government shuts down

Share

20
Oct

Take Action Today: Tell EPA To End Pesticide Dependency, Endangered Species Plan Is Inadequate

(Beyond Pesticides, October 20, 2023) Comments are due October 22. This action requires use of Regulations.gov. See instructions and proposed comment language that can be copy and pasted by clicking HERE.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) plan to “protect†endangered species, its Draft Herbicide Strategy Framework, continues a legacy of failed risk assessment and mitigation measures that do not meet the moment of looming biodiversity collapse. This is a critical time for the agency to embrace real fundamental change in how it regulates pesticides, recognizing that land management strategies, including in agriculture, exist that are no longer reliant on pesticides. This is not a time to tinker with strategies that EPA admits fall short.

Recognizing that its Pesticide Program has failed to meet its obligation to protect endangered species from registered pesticides, EPA has come up with a strategy to redefine its responsibilities to protect endangered species in its pesticide registration and registration review program. According to EPA, “The proposed Strategy is structured to provide flexibility to growers to choose mitigations that work best for their situation. Additionally, the draft Strategy may require more or less mitigation for growers/pesticide applicators depending on their location.â€

Understandably, EPA has taken this approach, finding it virtually impossible to meet the statutory obligations of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)—given the fact that the agency itself admits, “EPA’s Pesticide Program has been unable to keep pace with its ESA workload, resulting not only in inadequate protections for listed species but also successful litigation against the Agency.†And, “Even if EPA completed this work for all of the pesticides that are currently subject to court decisions and/or ongoing litigation, that work would take until the 2040s, and even then, would represent only 5% of EPA’s ESA obligations.â€

This action requires use of Regulations.gov. Click on this link. Then write your comments or copy and paste from this post. See copy and paste language. Comments are due October 22.

EPA starts with the position that farmers must use toxic chemicals, an assumption that clouds and undermines the regulatory process and keeps farmers on the pesticide treadmill. EPA says, “Without certain pesticide products, farmers could have trouble growing crops that feed Americans and public health agencies could lack the tools needed to combat insect-borne diseases.†Not true. Organic farmers are not reliant on these pesticides.

EPA recognizes that it needs to fundamentally change. But to EPA, the “fundamental change†means risk mitigation measures that have failed miserably over its history—drift mitigation being one of many key failures. In fact, the fundamental change that is needed is change of agricultural practices that have kept farmers dependent on chemical-intensive practices. Fundamental change requires EPA in every pesticide registration and registration review to ask whether there are practices that can eliminate the harm, not reduce risk with high degrees of uncertainty.

The planet faces an existential biodiversity crisis, with a rising number of species on the brink of extinction. The goal of ESA is to address the broader issue of biodiversity loss by protecting habitats of species most at risk, or, as stated in ESA, to “Provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions set forth. . .†in the law.

On the contrary, EPA’s language about its proposed changes includes phrases like “draft Strategy may require more or less mitigation for growers/pesticide applicators depending on their location.†That is not a plan to avoid biodiversity collapse.

Pesticide use is a major cause of declining biodiversity, which is manifested in extinctions, endangered species, and species vulnerable to environmental disturbances—including climate change, habitat fragmentation, and toxic chemicals. If EPA is serious about protecting biodiversity, it must look first to the ways it has created the crisis in the first place.

Yet EPA admits the limitations of its own proposal, saying, “The scope of this document is limited to spray drift, aqueous runoff, and runoff of sediment-bound residues (erosion).†Moreover, EPA fails to recognize that the agency does not have toxicological data for key endpoints or health outcomes like endocrine disruption, an effect that can wipe out a species by undermining its ability to reproduce.

Pesticides are a major contributor to the loss of insect biomass and diversity known as the “insect apocalypse,†posing a threat to life on Earth. EPA’s registration of insecticides has always endangered insects, but herbicides destroy the food and habitat of insects. Similarly, pesticides threaten food webs in aquatic and marine environments.

Pesticides threaten frogs and other amphibians in a way that demonstrates the potential to warp the growth and reproduction of all animals. Agricultural intensification, in particular pesticide and fertilizer use, is the leading factor driving declines in bird populations.

Industrial agriculture eliminates habitat—either through outright destruction or through toxic contamination. In much of the U.S., agricultural fields are bare for half the year and support a single plant species for the other half. As opposed to industrial agriculture, organic producers are required to conserve—protect and increase—biodiversity.

In other words, a major reason that species are endangered is that EPA has registered pesticides that harm them. If EPA is to really protect endangered species, it must eliminate the use of toxic pesticides and encourage organic production.

This action requires use of Regulations.gov. Click on this link. Then write your comments or copy and paste from this post. See copy and paste language. Comments are due October 22.

Thank you for your commitment to creating a world free of toxic pesticides!

Share

19
Oct

U.N. Special Rapporteur on Toxics and Human Rights and Environmental Justice Historian to Speak at Forum, October 24

(Beyond Pesticides, October 19, 2023) The second session of the 40th National Forum, Forging a Future with Nature, will focus on environmental justice and offer a unique conversation with the United Nations Rapporteur on Toxics and Human Rights and an environmental justice history professional. Both celebrated speakers have studied and written about the long-standing social, economic, and health problems related to pesticides and disproportionate harm to people of color. The Forum will take place at 2:00 pm EDT on Tuesday, October 24, 2023. (See free registration information HERE.)  

Beyond Pesticides brings together this Forum session with the inspiration of the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who wrote in Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963), “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.†Sixty years later, people of color—in the U.S. and around the world—still struggle with those same inequities that impose disproportionate risks interwoven in the fabric of economic and social systems in the United States and worldwide.

The Forum takes place in the context of widespread toxic chemical exposure throughout communities and all strata of society, but with the recognition that there is disproportionate harm in society to people of color from high-risk occupational exposures (e.g., farmworkers, landscapers, chemical manufacturing), chemical manufacturers’ emissions in fenceline communities, pesticide drift in agricultural communities, and toxic exposure to essential workers, and those with preexisting and multigenerational illness. 

Speakers

Marcos Orellana, PhD
Marcos Orellana, PhD, the Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights, addressed the toxic legacy of severely contaminated indigenous sites at the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (1992), saying, “Highly hazardous pesticides sprayed by the agro-industrial complex and irresponsible Governments. . . .reflect the alienation between humanity and nature.â€Â  Dr. Orellana draws attention to the fact that “toxins are a form of violence against the land and its people,†contrary to the “human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment,†which serves as a guiding principle for the United Nations Human Rights Council. Dr. Orellana’s engagement around the world captures critical truths that are challenges across the globe, such as his statement after a visit to South Africa in September. Dr. Orellana said, “The term ‘environmental racism’ describes institutionalized discrimination based on race or colour. . . Overcoming it will require significant additional efforts, including structural, legislative, economic, and environmental changes.â€Â Â 

Jayson Maurice Porter, PhD
Dr. Porter wrote in Agrochemicals, Environmental Racism, and Environmental Justice in U.S. History (2022), “Robert Bullard defines environmental racism as any policy or practice that unequally affects or disadvantages individuals, groups or communities based on their race. Vann Newkirk II adds that environmental racism is the opposite of environmental justice and often ignores or belittles input from the affected communities of color.†In “Cotton, Whiteness, and Poisons†(Environmental Humanities, Nov. 2022), coauthor Dr. Porter writes about a U.S. history of “labor exploitation conditioned by racist ideologies†underpinning plantation agriculture. In recognition that dependency on pesticides and fertilizers undermines the economic stability of small farmers, the authors write, “At the Tuskegee Institute’s agricultural experiment station, George Washington Carver recognized that commercial fertilizers were a key source of debt for Black farmers and tenants. He encouraged composting and the use of organic fertilizers found on the farm, writing that ‘many thousands of dollars are being spent every year here in the South for fertilizers that profit the user very little, while Nature’s choicest fertilizer is going to waste.’â€Â 

For more information, click here to access the speakers’ bios and to access resources for the second session of the Forum, including a link to Beyond Pesticides’ coverage of a report by Dr. Porter, “Highlighting the Connection Environmental Racism and the Agricultural Industry Through History.â€

In the U.S., environmental justice has been embraced by the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council and the Justice 40 Initiative, addressing challenges aligned with climate change, legacy pollution, clean water, and wastewater infrastructure. In addition, EPA established a new Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights last year, tasked with “elevating equity concerns to higher levels within the agency.â€Â 

Beyond Pesticides’ 42-year history exemplifies educating activists, educators, policymakers, and the general public on the environmental and equity problems associated with dependency on petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers—it is the role of the National Forum Series to magnify voices with the knowledge and agency to advance solutions—or alternative strategies—in the form of changes in practices and policies. Having witnessed attempts to establish risk reduction measures that allow continued and disproportionate harm, Beyond Pesticides through its program advances the elimination of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers by 2032 and a shift to organic management of land and the built environment. Beyond Pesticides’ community-based programs show these toxic materials are not necessary for productivity, profitability, and quality of life.

During the first Forum seminar on September 14, internationally renowned researcher and author David Goulson, PhD, professor of biology at the University of Sussex, described the vital role of nature in our collective survival—contributing to the web of life that sustains the rich diversity needed for a healthy planet—while countering the myth of pesticide use as unnecessary in our gardens and urban spaces. André Leu, DSc, the international director of Regeneration International, in turn, offered a strategy by articulating the need for clearly defined and enforceable regenerative, organic land management systems that are critical to meet the challenges of our time, lest we fall victim to empty words and promises that do not advance the urgent changes our livable future requires. Check out the powerfully thought-provoking recording of Dave Goulson, PhD, and André Leu, DSc., now available on the Beyond Pesticides website!

A future supported by the natural environment depends on our collective involvement in decisions in our homes, communities, states, and at the federal level to ensure that we are taking the steps necessary to protect against existential threats to health, biodiversity, and climate. You are part of the solution—Join the conversation and register TODAY!

Click HERE to register for the 40th National Forum, Forging a Future with Nature, on October 24, 2:00-4:00 pm EDT. Sign up here to receive a Zoom link, if you have not already signed up!

Registration is Complimentary: Donations are requested, but not required. Your registration includes access to all three seminars for the fall!

Reach, Influence, Support—We thank our members, supporters, and the following companies for sponsoring Beyond Pesticides’ 40th National Forum Series to bring agents of change—scientists, policymakers, educators, practitioners, advocates, and activists—to elevate the threats and alternative strategies urgently needed to address environmental decline and collapse. 

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

Share

18
Oct

Organophosphate Pesticides and the Link to Respiratory, Metabolic, and Heart Disease

(Beyond Pesticides, October 18, 2023) A meta-analysis published in Toxics finds an association between exposure to organophosphate pesticides (OPs) and respiratory diseases and diabetes mellitus (DM). Specifically, wheezing and asthma are the most common respiratory manifestations of OP exposure, while fluctuation in weight and fat/glucose levels are the most common metabolically related manifestations. Organophosphorus pesticides have a wide range of biological uses—from insecticides to flame retardants—that make these chemicals ubiquitous, significantly contributing to ecosystem contamination. Thus, OP compounds have a global distribution, with evaporation and precipitation facilitating long-range atmospheric transport, deposition, and bioaccumulation of hazardous chemicals in the environment. Many studies show OPs are highly toxic, and residues are consistently present in human and animal urine, blood, tissues, and milk. Considering 90 percent of Americans have at least one pesticide compound in their body, primarily stemming from dietary exposure, including food and drinking water, advocates maintain that current restrictions on their use must adequately detect and assess total chemical contaminants. 

This study investigated the effects and possible mechanisms involved in adverse health outcomes associated with OP exposure. Reviewing studies from Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, OVID, and the Cochrane Library, researchers systematically searched for articles on OP exposure and respiratory, DM, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes until 2022. After filtering through relevant analyses, 19 remaining observational studies examined the associations between OP exposure and respiratory diseases, DM, and CVD among the general population or occupational populations. There is also a significant association between OP exposure and DM. However, the study finds little association between OP exposure and CVD, which is not concurrent with other CVD and OP exposure pattern results.

Organophosphate insecticide use is widespread, while industry promotes the chemicals as having greater efficiency and lesser environmental persistence. However, OPs originate from the same compounds as World War II nerve agents, producing adverse effects on the nervous system, endocrine disruption, reproductive dysfunction, fetal defects, neurotoxic damage, and kidney/liver damage. Chemical exposure can cause a buildup of acetylcholine (a chemical neurotransmitter responsible for brain and muscle function), leading to acute impacts, such as uncontrolled, rapid twitching of some muscles, paralyzed breathing, convulsions, and, in extreme cases, death. Compromised nerve impulse transmission can have broad systemic impacts on the function of multiple body systems. In addition to being highly toxic to terrestrial and aquatic organisms, human exposure to organophosphates can induce endocrine disruption, reproductive dysfunction, fetal defects, neurotoxic damage, and kidney/liver damage. Exposure can increase vulnerability to deadly diseases, including COVID-19. Moreover, OPs are one of the leading causes of intentional poisoning globally, as pesticide toxicity makes them potentially lethal substances.

With the aggregate risk standards of pesticides with a common mechanism of toxicity under the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been forced to remove from the market residential uses of organophosphate pesticides in order to retain agricultural uses. For example, while the residential use of chlorpyrifos was first taken off the market in 1990, it was not until 2022 that agricultural uses were removed following findings of adverse impacts on children’s brains and court action. Although most OP uses in the U.S. are now agricultural, toxicity experts recommend banning all OPs for agricultural use. EPA and World Health Organization (WHO) consider over 40 OPs that are moderately or highly hazardous to human health. EPA classifies some commonly used OPs like malathion, a popular mosquito control, and tetrachlorvinphos, a common flea and tick killer in pet collars and shampoos, as probable carcinogens. Despite this designation and other notorious toxicological concerns, OPs remain in use across the globe.

Despite the lack of studies in this review providing a link between OPs and CVD, studies outside of this review, in fact, find a link between metabolic-mediated CVD. Overall, OP compounds are immunotoxicants (toxic to the immune system), causing injury and alterations to various cells within the body. Additionally, these compounds lower antibody concentration and reduce autoimmune response to stimuli. The review finds current OPs, including chlorpyrifos and malathion, induce oxidative stress, DNA, and cellular damage in the cardiovascular system. Moreover, OPs can disrupt the homeostasis of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory responses of cytokine proteins responsible for immune protection. Thus, exposure can increase vulnerability to deadly diseases, including cardiovascular disease.

Concerning diabetes, the study suggests OPs could cause an excessive increase in body weight, impaired leptin (the protein that alerts the brain when there is enough fat stored, playing a role in body weight regulation) production, and fat and glucose dysregulation–all common precursors for diabetes, obesity, and other metabolic disorders. Additionally, the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) by OPs could also mediate insulin resistance.

This review highlights respiratory diseases as one of OP exposure’s most prominent adverse outcomes. The respiratory system is essential to human survival, regulating gas exchange (oxygen-carbon dioxide) in the body to balance acid and base tissue cells for normal function. However, OPs like chlorpyrifos, malathion, and diazinon can heavily influence the respiratory system as studies link pesticide use and residue to various respiratory illnesses. The compromise of nerve impulse transmission can have broad systemic impacts on the function of multiple body systems. Damage to the respiratory system can cause many issues—from asthma and bronchitis to oxidative stress that triggers the development of extra-respiratory, systemic manifestations like rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular disease. However, as this review demonstrates, the respiratory system is far from the only bodily system affected by chemical exposure. Furthermore, underlying medical conditions (i.e., heart/kidney disease, diabetes, cancer, high blood pressure, obesity, etc.) heighten risks associated with severe illness from disease. Therefore, the rise in respiratory infections and organophosphate use over the last three decades is highly concerning, especially as research fails to identify an exact cause for the increase in respiratory disease cases.

Replacing dietary exposure to food grown in chemical-intensive agriculture with organic consistently reduces pesticide levels in one’s body. Preventive practices like organic can eliminate exposure to toxic metabolic disrupting pesticides. There is an indication that maintaining lower levels of conventional, synthetic pesticides is likely to reduce the risk of developing chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes. In addition to positive impacts on the human microbiome, organically grown food (i.e., milk, meat, strawberries, tomatoes, and a range of other foods) contain a much more diverse bacterial community than their chemically grown counterparts.

Organic agriculture represents a safer, healthier approach to crop production that does not necessitate toxic pesticide use. Beyond Pesticides encourages farmers to embrace and consumers to support regenerative organic practices. A complement to buying organic is contacting various organic farming organizations to learn more about what you can do. Understanding the risk of pesticide exposure in disease development is essential since these chemicals can cause disproportionate health effects on individuals working in occupations like firefighters, farmworkers, and landscapers. With too many diseases in the U.S. associated with pesticide exposure, reducing pesticide use is critical to safeguarding public health and addressing cost burdens for local communities. Policies should enforce stricter pesticide regulations and increase research on the long-term impacts of pesticide exposure. Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent health studies on pesticide exposure through our Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). This database supports the clear need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on the multiple harms of pesticide exposure, see PIDD pages on asthma/respiratory effects,  cardiovascular disease,  diabetes, obesity, and other diseases.

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

Source: Toxics

Share

17
Oct

Paris’s Worrying Bed Bug Surge Linked to Insecticide-Resistance

(Beyond Pesticides, October 17, 2023) In the past month, Paris, France has witnessed a surge in bed bug populations. From public transportation to hotels, hostels, and movie theatres, bed bugs are posing a threat to the city’s two million residents and potentially a broader global population as the infestation spreads.  

This resurgence of bed bugs in Paris is not unique. For centuries, these pests have been both adaptable and persistent, presenting an enduring challenge to pest control. However, the current surge in bed bug infestations is not merely a revival of a longstanding problem; it is a complex issue intertwined with the development of resistance to insecticides, mainly through a mechanism known as knockdown resistance. This mechanism, along with three other main resistance mechanisms, has enabled these insects to defy chemical-intensive control methods 

Knockdown resistance is a significant factor contributing to the resistance exhibited by bed bugs to insecticides, especially pyrethroids. The mechanism plays a central role in countering the action of these insecticides, which target the nervous system of bed bugs, causing paralysis and eventual death. Knockdown resistance provides the genetic adaptation that provides bed bug populations with resistance to insecticides. It inhibits the effectiveness of certain insecticides. Bed bugs with the mutation have a genetic advantage that allows them to survive exposure to these chemicals. 

Insecticide has been utilized to quell bed bug populations for over a century, with DDT initially used to combat these pests before the 1950s. By 1956, the effectiveness of DDT in controlling bed bug populations began to diminish, as the insects developed resistance to the once-potent chemical. The repetitive exposure of bed bugs to DDT led to the survival of bed bugs with genetic mutations that allowed them to survive DDT exposure, giving rise to newer generations with the same mutations.  

The banning of DDT in 1972 compelled the United States to turn to organophosphates and, more recently, the commonly used pyrethroids–synthetic insecticides widely used for residential pests. However, there was an unforeseen consequence of DDT resistance: bed bugs with DDT resistance demonstrated resistance to other pesticides, including pyrethroids, even if they had never encountered pyrethroids. This phenomenon, known as cross-resistance, paved the way for a global resurgence of bed bugs and posed challenges for pest control worldwide.  

Knockdown resistance is linked to the voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSC) within a bed bug’s nervous system. These channels serve as conduits for transmitting electrical signals, enabling nerve cells to communicate and control the bug’s movements. Knockdown resistance arises from mutations within the VGSC gene.  

Scientists have identified three specific mutations in the common bed bug, Cimex lectularius: V419L, L925I, and 1936F. In modifying the function of sodium channels, these mutations make the insect less responsive to the effects of pyrethroid insecticides. As a result, the nerve cells of resistant bed bugs can continue to function despite exposure to these chemicals.  

Research has revealed that knockdown resistance is prevalent in bed bug populations, particularly those closely linked to human environments. Most bed bug populations associated with human environments exhibit the L925I mutation, which equips them with resistance to pyrethroids.  

This widespread distribution of knockdown resistance raises concerns about the continued use and efficacy of pyrethroids in treating infestations. Bed bugs with knockdown mutations possess the capacity to withstand exposure to insecticides, reducing the effectiveness of these treatments. As a result, infestations persist, inflicting discomfort, economic burdens, and health concerns upon those affected.  

Moreover, the insecticide resistance exhibited by bed bugs extends into other classes of insecticides. The developing resistance of bed bugs to neonicotinoid insecticides raises similar questions about chemical-dependent control strategies for infestations. Research has found that neonicotinoids, once thought by the pest control industry to be the silver bullet solution for bed bug infestations, are losing their efficacy as bed bugs from different regions are becoming resistant to them.  

In a study led by Alvaro Romero, PhD, and Troy Anderson, PhD, bed bugs collected from homes in Cincinnati and Michigan were exposed to four different neonicotinoids: acetamiprid, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam. The study also tested these neonicotinoids on bed bugs that had never been exposed to insecticides.  

They found that bed bugs previously exposed to neonicotinoids show higher levels of resistance to these insecticides. This resistance was elevated when compared to the levels of resistance exhibited by the bed bugs that had never been exposed to the neonicotinoids. It took over a thousand times more acetamiprid to kill half of the bed bug population with prior exposure to neonicotinoids, as opposed to the population that had never been exposed to neonicotinoids. This means the bed bugs in the Michigan and Cincinnati study proved to be hundreds or even thousands of times more resistant to neonicotinoids compared to the lab control group.  

As insecticide usage continues in response to growing issues of invasive species migration and insect infestations, the infestation problem will only grow worse. The situation in Paris is just one example of what is to come if pesticide dependency continues. The best method for handling infestations is by skipping the chemicals and following a defined integrated pest management system that prioritizes ecologically balanced solutions, and only allows organic-compatible products.  

Beyond Pesticides is committed to providing organic pest management solutions—including treatments for bed bugs–that hold health and environment central. If you find yourself dealing with a bed bug infestation, please visit the Beyond Pesticides webpage to access the ManageSafe Database, which offers the least-toxic control of pests. Also see our Bed Bug webpage, Bed Bugs in Public Housing guide, and other resources. 

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

Source: Ohio State University, Insecticide Resistance Research 

Share

16
Oct

EPA Rejects Petition Seeking Review of Complete Ingredients in Pesticide Products

(Beyond Pesticides, October 16, 2023) After six years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally responded to a citizen petition requesting that the agency evaluate complete formulations of pesticide products, not just the ingredients the manufacturer claims attack the target pest (so-called “active†ingredients). EPA’s response: No. Nowhere in EPA’s denial of the need for a more robust toxicological analysis is the problem more evident than in its refusal to require analyses of the so-called “inert ingredients†or “adjuvants†included in various formulations of pesticide products. The citizen petition [see more background] was followed by a lawsuit for the same purpose in 2022.

Inerts and formulants are substances that enhance the distribution or adhesion of the active ingredient; adjuvants enhance the effectiveness of the active ingredient. These terms suggest that those chemicals have no effect on anything in the area where the pesticide is applied—a wildly inaccurate implication. At least as early as 1987, EPA had recognized that some inerts and adjuvants were “of toxicological concern,†yet it still requires very few toxicological tests of whole-formula pesticides or their purportedly inactive components.

EPA responded to the petition as follows: “[T]he Agency appropriately assesses, as part of its review, the impacts to human health and the environment, including potential impacts from pesticide products and tank mixes, and why the additional testing that the petition sought would not in general provide a better picture of the risks of a pesticide product. As a result, EPA is denying the request to amend the regulatory testing requirements.†The agency, in its announcement, cites a full response but the links provided do not disclose it.

Despite EPA’s description of the adequacy of its pesticide product reviews, analysts have pointed to examples of the deficient full product formulation analyses, exemplifying the failure to protect pollinators and the inadequacy of the  agency’s review of products containing the glyphosate weed killer product Roundup. Glyphosate—the globally distributed herbicide widely used around homes, gardens, schoolyards, and throughout communities—has been declared “a probable human carcinogen†by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, while declared exactly the opposite—“unlikely to be a human carcinogenâ€â€”by EPA. Glyphosate entered the market in 1974, when EPA was in its infancy. Its use exploded over the next 40 years and is now marketed in hundreds of formulations including many adjuvants and inert ingredients. Toxicologists assumed that, because glyphosate affects plants by a metabolic pathway not found in animals, animals would be perfectly safe when exposed to it. Subsequent research showed that this is not true.

At no time have EPA or the original manufacturer of glyphosate, Monsanto (now Bayer AG)  found it necessary to investigate the effects of the “inerts,†or the combined effects of “active ingredients†and inerts used in glyphosate products such as Roundup. The 2017 CFS petition  requested EPA to “require testing and data on the actual pesticide formulations and mixtures in regulating pesticide use, and to consider the effects of actual pesticide formulations and mixtures on endangered and threatened species.†The petition used glyphosate and its additives as a case study. Again, EPA’s most recent announcement says it will do nothing in response to the petition, and presumably the 2022 lawsuit.

In a comment supporting the petition, Beyond Pesticides pointed out that because of its refusal to require appropriate testing and consider the real world in which pesticides act, “EPA may have no knowledge of the effect of pesticide products, as commonly applied, on chronic toxicity, mutagenicity, developmental toxicity and reproduction, or subchronic oral toxicity, inhalation toxicity, and neurotoxicity, when registering pesticide products.â€

The 2022, the CFS suit against EPA, joined by Californians for Pesticide Reform (CPR), Center for Environmental Health (CEH), and Pesticide Action Network of North America (PANNA), states, “Over half of so-called inert ingredients approved by the EPA for use in pesticide formulations are considered hazardous air and water pollutants of at least moderate risk. In fact, inert ingredients can be more toxic than active ingredients to non-target species.†Their complaint cites EPA’s statement that “inert†does not mean non-toxic.â€

In parallel with pressing for inclusion of whole formulations and inerts in its evaluation of pesticides, the lawsuit also alleges that EPA has failed in its obligation to protect endangered species from pesticides. When EPA issued an interim decision in 2020, Beyond Pesticides, Rural Coalition, Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas, Farmworker Association of Florida, and CFS petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for review on the grounds that EPA’s conclusion that glyphosate posed no human health risk was premature. At the time, Beyond Pesticides executive director Jay Feldman noted that “EPA failed to consider if Roundup disrupts the balance of nature and ecosystem health, critical to the survival of a vast number of organisms on which life depends–from beneficial insects, such as parasitoid wasps, lacewings, ladybugs, and endangered bumblebees, monarch butterflies, to fish, small mammals, and amphibians.â€

A separate petition by the Natural Resources Defense Council attacked EPA’s failure to abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Numerous industry groups representing growers of cotton, corn sorghum, and sugar beets, the American Farm Bureau and golf course managers filed as intervenors. Finally, in June 2022, a three-judge panel of Ninth Circuit judges came down on the side of all the petitioners. It said EPA’s reasoning as to glyphosate and cancer was “inconsistent,†and that the EPA had violated ESA. The court ordered EPA to complete its registration review, including revisiting the cancer and ESA issues, by October 2022.

From the Ninth Circuit opinion: “According to EPA’s conclusion in the Cancer Paper, glyphosate is ‘not likely’ to be carcinogenic to humans because animal-tumor and genotoxicity studies showed no reason for concern. But this conclusion is in tension with parts of the agency’s own analysis and with the guidelines it purports to follow†(emphasis added). The court saw what any reasonable person can see: That EPA suffers from severe cognitive dissonance. There is no reasonable explanation for this internal conflict but political interference, which has been documented to occur in glyphosate registration as early as 1976, and repeatedly since. Beyond Pesticides has covered this governmental and industry malfeasance here, here, and here.

EPA also issued a biological evaluation of glyphosate’s effects on endangered species in 2021. This document admits outright that 93 percent of all endangered animal and plant species and 96 percent of their critical habitats are likely to be adversely affected by glyphosate exposure. For each category of species—mammals, plants, fish, invertebrates, etc.–a large majority of species met the “likely to adversely affect†threshold. EPA listed no species in any category that would likely experience zero effect.

Given EPA’s failures, there is insufficient data about nontarget effects and the actions of inert and adjuvant ingredients in pesticides. Two California scientists—Caroline Cox, formerly with the Center for Environmental Health, and Michael Zeiss, formerly with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation—conducted a case study in 2022 on an adjuvant called a-(p-nonylphenyl)-x-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (APNOHO). They found that the chemical is included in more than 150 adjuvant products in California and identified as inert in a further 650 pesticides nationally. EPA does not register inerts, but California classes them as pesticides and identifies APNOHO as the most-used pesticide in the state. The California study found that the number of acres treated with APNOHO in California doubled in 20 years, reaching over 10 million acres in 2020. The authors also observed that EPA considers inerts “confidential business information,†which makes it difficult for the public and researchers to learn about them.

The European Union has identified APNOHO as an endocrine disrupter (ED), but EPA has not formally evaluated its ED properties. The California researchers found studies back to 1993 clearly demonstrating APNOHO’s ED activity, and a 2000 lab study showed APNOHO causing estrogen-responsive breast cancer cells to proliferate. It may be a more potent ED than methoxychlor and vinclozolin, two notorious active pesticide ingredients. Environmental studies of APNOHO have demonstrated APNOHO’s severe toxicity to fish and aquatic invertebrates.

This case study of one of hundreds of adjuvants and inerts illustrates the urgency of EPA’s failure to require their testing, yet there is no evidence EPA has seen the light. To add insult to a growing mountain of insults, EPA issued an outrageous letter to CFS on September 28. Despite all the intervening court rulings, its own misgivings about inerts and adjuvants, and its own biological evaluation under the ESA, EPA denied CFS et al’s 2017 petition to revise the agency’s testing protocols to include the chemicals that are mixed with the technical-grade active ingredients. EPA claims “the additional testing that the petition seeks would not in general provide a better picture of the risks of a pesticide product…the acute and chronic toxicity data EPA currently receives are sufficient for evaluating the potential risk from the registered use of a pesticide product.†EPA proposes some ineffectual steps, such as requiring more reporting of adverse incidents, rather than reaching for the root of the problem.

Conservation and environmental groups have not given up. In a press release, CFS lead attorney on the case Sylvia Wu promises that CFS would be “rigorously exploring and pursuing all next steps to protect communities and the environment.” EPA apparently sees no limit to its refusal to obey U.S. laws, which means more rounds of litigation while the agency delays.

“This failure on EPA’s part is yet another compelling reason to shift society away from dependency on toxic pesticides and to organic land management,†says Mr. Feldman.

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

Source: 2017 Citizen Petition; 2022-10-12-CFS complaint; EPA-Petition-Denial-CFS-9.28.23; Regulations.gov

 

 

Share

13
Oct

Urgent Action—Will Congress Defend Communities’ Right to Protect Public Health and the Environment?

(Beyond Pesticides, October 13, 2023) Will the chemical industry and pesticide-dependent service industry (e.g., conventional landscaping industry) trample democratic rights and force the allowance of pesticide use against the will of communities across the U.S.? The answer is unequivocally yes, they are trying. In fact, the industries’ campaign is now playing out in the U.S. Congress, as members deliberate on the next Farm Bill. Members of Congress who advocate the pesticide lobby’s anti-democratic position are telling constituents that they do not support their right to restrict pesticides more stringently than the federal government.

Please urge your U.S. Representative to sign the Congressional “Dear Colleague†Letter and uphold the right of local governments and states to restrict pesticides. Time sensitive: Please take action today (Friday, October 13, 2023) or as soon as possible. Thank you!

Advocates are clearly telling members of Congress that the long-held federal-state balance of local, state, and federal authority will be broken if the federal government steps in to deny localities the authority to control pesticide use more stringently than federal law. The history is clear. The U.S. Supreme Court in Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Mortier (1991) found, “[The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act] FIFRA nowhere seeks to establish an affirmative permit scheme for the actual use of pesticides,†and the law “does not equate registration and labeling requirements with a general approval to apply pesticides throughout the Nation without regard to regional and local factors, like climate, population, geography and water supply.†The law envisions local authority to restrict pesticides, with the federal law being a floor not a ceiling. FIFRA affirms the local democratic process to protect health and the environment, similar to local laws on recycling, dog waste, and zoning, affirming local policy powers. 

Members of Congress are now circulating a “Dear Colleague†letter opposing federal preemption of local authority on pesticide use. The Congressional letter emphasizes the importance of preserving the rights of state, county, and local governments to protect their communities and enact policies that align with local needs. The letter argues that curtailing these powers will undermine public safety and jeopardize environmental and public health standards. 

FIFRA grants the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to regulate pesticides in the U.S. Congress established FIFRA as a federal baseline (floor) for pesticide policies, allowing state and local governments to implement additional standards and restrictions tailored to their communities’ unique requirements and concerns. 

Many states and numerous municipalities have already enacted laws and ordinances aimed at pesticide safety, such as restricting pesticide use near sensitive areas like schools and parks, safeguarding drinking water supplies, and providing consumers with information to make informed decisions about pesticide use. Many of these measures also equip farmworkers with the knowledge and tools to reduce occupational risks associated with pesticides. 

The lawmakers who penned the “Dear Colleague†letter express deep concern over legislative proposals that seek to limit state and local adoption of pesticide restrictions. They argue that these proposals challenge the longstanding balance of federal, state, and local authority established by FIFRA. Moreover, these initiatives run counter to decades of precedent and Supreme Court rulings that uphold the right of democratically elected local governments to address their community’s specific needs. 

It is of note that there are local conditions (ecosystems, health issues such as cancer clusters, elevated childhood asthma, or determinations of acceptable harm/risk/uncertainty) that local governments/jurisdictions, closest to the ground and the issues, are equipped to address. The lawmakers who signed the letter call on their colleagues in Congress to reject any pesticide policy riders that would diminish local authority and compromise the ability of Congress to pass bipartisan legislation. They emphasize the importance of maintaining a robust system of checks and balances that allows local governments to respond to the unique challenges and needs of their communities. 

Federal preemption in the context of pesticide legislation in the Farm Bill would mean a federal ban on local pesticide restrictions (often called a ban on bans), whereas currently local authority is a state question. Preemption language in the Farm Bill would mean the federal government can override (supersede) the authority of individual states to regulate their local areas, as long as those states meet the minimum standards set by the federal government (i.e., the EPA-approved label on the pesticide). Generally, the federal government will set a floor (in this case FIFRA) of basic rules to protect everyone in the country, and then states can choose to allow stricter rules at the local level, similar requirements related to recycling, zoning, dog waste, smoking, and water treatment. However, with federal pesticide preemption, the federal government is taking away the state’s ability to decide whether its local areas can have stricter rules than the state itself.  

The preemption issue strikes at the fundamental relationship between the federal government and the states. It is about whether the federal government can stop states from allowing their local areas to have stricter pesticide regulations.

Urge your U.S. Representative to sign the Congressional “Dear Colleague†Letter and uphold the right of local governments and states to restrict pesticides. Time sensitive: Please take action today (Friday, October 13, 2023) or as soon as possible. 

The targets for this Action are the U.S. House of Representatives.  

Thank you for your active participation and engagement!

Letter to U.S. Representative Requesting Sign-On 

I am writing to ask you to sign on to a “Dear Colleague†letter in opposition to any efforts to limit longstanding state and local authority to protect people, animals, and the environment by regulating pesticides. As Congress considers legislation related to agriculture, including the reauthorization of the Farm Bill and Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bills, I urge you to ensure that state, county, and local governments retain the right to protect their communities and set policies that best suit local needs. 

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) establishes the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to oversee the registration, distribution, sale, and use of pesticides in the United States. Congress has long considered FIFRA to set a federal floor for pesticide policy, and under FIFRA, state, county, and local governments possess authority to enact supplementary standards. The majority of states – as well as hundreds of towns and cities – have adopted laws and ordinances related to pesticide safety. These include laws to restrict pesticide use near schools, parks, and playgrounds, protect drinking water supplies and wildlife, provide consumers with adequate information to make informed decisions about use and exposure, and equip workers with information and tools to minimize occupational risk. 

We are deeply concerned that legislative proposals to curtail state and local input regarding pesticide policy are contrary to FIFRA’s longstanding balance of federal, state, and local authority. These proposals seek to overturn decades of precedent and Supreme Court rulings that allow for democratically elected local governments to address the specific needs of their communities. State and local governments are often best positioned to respond quickly to emerging risks within their communities, and proposals to weaken their ability to respond could have a significant impact on public safety. Preemption of state and local authority could result in an immediate removal of protections for communities across the country, with the potential to limit accountability for manufacturers who fail to adequately warn consumers about the hazards posed by certain high-risk pesticides. 

As the House continues its work in the 118th Congress, we urge you to reject any and all harmful pesticide policy riders that would both diminish local authority and compromise Congress’ ability to deliver bipartisan legislation for the American people. Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

Please use this Congressional Sign on via QUILL to join on the “Dear College Letter.†(This link only will work for members of Congress).

Thank you letter to co-signers of “Dear Colleague†letter 

Current signers: McGovern*, Mace*, Blumenauer*, Adams, Barragán, Beyer, Bonamici, Bowman, Troy Carter, Cartwright, Casar, Casten, Castor, Castro, Chu, Clarke, Cohen, Connolly, Crockett, DeSaulnier, Dingell, Escobar, Frankel, Chuy García, Robert Garcia, Sylvia Garcia, Grijalva, Gottheimer, Hayes, Hoyle, Huffman, Jeff Jackson, Jackson Lee, Jacobs, Jayapal, Hank Johnson, Khanna, Barbara Lee, Leger Fernandez, Lieu, Lofgren, Lynch, McClellan, McCollum, Meng, Mfume, Moulton, Mullin, Nadler, Neguse, Norcross, Norton, Ocasio-Cortez, Pappas, Payne, Pettersen, Pingree, Porter, Pressley, Quigley, Ramirez, Raskin, Ross, Ruiz, Ruppersberger, Sánchez, Schakowsky, Schneider, Stansbury, Swalwell, Thanedar, Titus, Tlaib, Tokuda, Trone, Vargas, Velázquez, Waters, Watson Coleman, Wexton, Nikema Williams, Frederica Wilson.

I am writing to thank you for signing on to a “Dear Colleague†letter in opposition to any efforts to limit longstanding state and local authority to protect people, animals, and the environment by regulating pesticides. As Congress considers legislation related to agriculture, including the reauthorization of the Farm Bill and Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bills, I appreciate your efforts to ensure that state, county, and local governments retain the right to protect their communities and set policies that best suit local needs. 

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) establishes the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to oversee the registration, distribution, sale, and use of pesticides in the United States. Congress has long considered FIFRA to set a federal floor for pesticide policy, and under FIFRA, state, county, and local governments possess authority to enact supplementary standards. The majority of states – as well as hundreds of towns and cities – have adopted laws and ordinances related to pesticide safety. These include laws to restrict pesticide use near schools, parks, and playgrounds, protect drinking water supplies and wildlife, provide consumers with adequate information to make informed decisions about use and exposure, and equip workers with information and tools to minimize occupational risk. 

We are deeply concerned that legislative proposals to curtail state and local input regarding pesticide policy are contrary to FIFRA’s longstanding balance of federal, state, and local authority. These proposals seek to overturn decades of precedent and Supreme Court rulings that allow for democratically elected local governments to address the specific needs of their communities. State and local governments are often best positioned to respond quickly to emerging risks within their communities, and proposals to weaken their ability to respond could have a significant impact on public safety. Preemption of state and local authority could result in an immediate removal of protections for communities across the country, with the potential to limit accountability for manufacturers who fail to adequately warn consumers about the hazards posed by certain high-risk pesticides. 

As the House continues its work in the 118th Congress, we urge you to reject any and all harmful pesticide policy riders that would both diminish local authority and compromise Congress’ ability to deliver bipartisan legislation for the American people. Thank you for considering this request and I appreciate your work on this. 

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

Share

12
Oct

Breast Cancer Awareness Month: Study Finds New Chemicals Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

(Beyond Pesticides, October 12, 2023) A new study published in Environment International finds novel environmental chemicals (i.e., piperidine insecticide, 2,4-dinitrophenol, benzo[a]carbazole, and a benzoate derivative) involved in developing breast cancer through various inflammation pathways. These new potential factors contribute to breast cancer and highlight the importance of employing epidemiological biomonitoring like exposome (total exposure from birth to death) to discover mechanisms involved in disease development that are otherwise overlooked. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), breast cancer is a disease that causes breast cells to grow out of control, with the type of breast cancer depending on the cells themselves. Several studies and reports, including U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data, identify hundreds of chemicals as influential factors (either promoting or initiating) associated with breast cancer risk.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women, accounting for 12 percent of all new annual cancer cases worldwide and causing the second most cancer-related deaths in the United States. Past studies suggest genetic inheritance factors influence breast cancer occurrence. However, genetic factors only play a minor role in the incidence of breast cancer, while exposure to external environmental factors (e.g., chemical exposure) appears to play a more notable role. One in ten women will receive a breast cancer diagnosis, and genetics can only account for five to ten percent of cases. There are grave concerns over exposure to endocrine (hormone) disrupting chemicals and pollutants that cause adverse health effects. Therefore, studies like these highlight the need to investigate how first-generation pesticide exposure can impact future generational health to prevent adverse health outcomes, especially during sensitive developmental periods (i.e., in utero, infancy/childhood). 

This study employs omics scale (cell constituents) biomonitoring to determine associations with a disease, also known as “exposome epidemiology.†The goal is to investigate potential new environmental factors influencing breast cancer risk. Using nontargeted, high-resolution mass spectrometry, researchers test the association between pregnancy cohorts from the Child Health and Development Studies (CHDS) and breast cancer incidence from the California Cancer Registry. The research evaluates second and third-trimester samples from the CHDS database to analyze environmental chemicals involved in the development of breast cancer among 182 women and 384 randomly selected women who did not develop breast cancer. Researchers distinguish environmental chemicals using the Toxin and Toxin-Target Database to determine chemical signals with the highest association in breast cancer cases. Researchers employ the exposome epidemiology analysis to establish a framework that identifies suspected chemicals. The study results find that exposure to environmental chemicals during the second and third trimesters exacerbates inflammation pathways associated with breast cancer, including linoleate, arachidonic acid, and prostaglandins. These chemicals include an N-substituted piperidine insecticide, 2,4-dinitrophenol, benzo[a]carbazole, and a benzoate derivative linked to glycan and amino sugar metabolism.

Inheritance of health issues spanning generations relating to hereditary influence is a familiar phenomenon. However, this study demonstrates multigenerational/transgenerational health problems from chemical exposure, a non-genetic factor. Epigenetic changes occur through environmental factors that alter gene expression that can impact multiple future generations. Considering two-thirds of all breast cancer incidences are related to factors outside of heritable gene mutations (e.g., BRCA1 and BRCA2), chemical exposure can explain the increasing rates of breast cancer. Many studies have long shown that childhood and in-utero exposure to environmental chemicals increases the risk of developing breast cancer later in life. According to multiple studies, glyphosate exposure has adverse multigenerational effects, causing negligible observable effects on pregnant rodents but severe effects on the two subsequent generations. Recent research from the Silent Spring Institute links 28 different EPA-registered pesticides with the development of mammary gland tumors in animal studies. Many of these chemicals are endocrine disruptors and thus have implications for breast cancer risk. Household cleaners, mainly pesticides, contain endocrine-disrupting chemicals that increase breast cancer risk. Furthermore, long-term exposure to organophosphate (OP) pesticides increases adverse health and cancer risk, specifically among women. Since DDT/DDE residues, current-use pesticides, and other chemical pollutants contaminate the environment, exposure to these chemical mixtures can synergize to increase toxicity and disease effects.

Pregnancy provides the most appropriate timeframe to study potential disease development, especially for the initiation, progression, and susceptibility to breast cancer. Past studies note later age pregnancy is a significant breast cancer risk factor, which is considerable given birth rates have increased six-fold for women ages 35–39. Thus, the study calls for a “more detailed understanding of the respective contributions and interactions must be a priority to learn how to mitigate risk for this population group of higher risk women.â€

The exposome epidemiology approach that this study uses is essential as it assumes “chemical exposures which increase cancer risk can occur decades before breast cancer occurrence, that these exposures are detectable and at higher abundance in serum decades before breast cancer detection, and that network analyses of HRM [high-resolution metabolomics] data are sufficient to detect these exposures and link them to biologic responses.†Considering research over the past 50 years lacks development of a strategy to prevent breast cancer, using the exposome approach can allow analysis to more readily identify chemical carcinogens and the pathways involved in disease development.

Past research demonstrates the mechanism by which cancer can develop after pesticides enter the bloodstream. In 2013, an experimental study showed that pesticide exposure produces volatile reactive oxygen species (ROS) that cause potential DNA and cell damage that propagates cancer development. Additionally, pesticides can increase cancer risk through alternate mechanisms, including genotoxicity (gene damage), epigenetics (gene expression), immunotoxicity, tumors, and endocrine disruption. Accordingly, this study advocates for the integration of omics scale biomonitoring (exposome epidemiology) with these other risk factors to enhance prediction and intervention strategies, subsequently decreasing the disease burden. Therefore, it is essential to understand how external stimuli—like environmental pollution from pesticides—can drive breast cancer development, as female health risks need urgent concerns.

Prevention of the causes of breast cancer, not just awareness, is critical to solving this disease. In 1985, Imperial Chemical Industries and the American Cancer Society declared October “Breast Cancer Awareness Month†as part of a campaign to promote mammograms for the early detection of breast cancer. Unfortunately, most people are all too aware of breast cancer. Detection and treatment of cancers do not prevent the problem.

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. Much pesticide use and exposure are associated with cancer effects. Studies concerning pesticides and cancer help future epidemiological research understand the underlying mechanisms that cause cancer. Although the link between agricultural practices and pesticide-related illnesses is stark, over 63 percent of commonly used lawn pesticides and 70 percent of commonly used school pesticides have links to cancer. Advocates argue that global leaders must fully understand the cause of pesticide-induced diseases before the chemicals enter the environment. Policy reform and practices that eliminate toxic pesticide use can end the uncertainty surrounding potential harm. For more information on the multiple health effects associated with pesticides, see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database pages on breast cancer, endocrine disruption, and other diseases. This database supports the need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency.

Moreover, proper prevention practices, like buying, growing, and supporting organics, can eliminate exposure to toxic pesticides. Organic agriculture has many health and environmental benefits that curtail the need for chemical-intensive agricultural practices. Regenerative organic agriculture nurtures soil health through organic carbon sequestration, preventing pests and generating a higher return than chemical-intensive agriculture. For more information on how the organic choice is the right choice, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture. 

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

Source: Environment International

Share

11
Oct

Rachel Carson Conservation Park Faces Controversy Over Toxic Herbicide Spraying

(Beyond Pesticides, October 11, 2023) Rachel Carson Conservation Park, a 650-acre conservation area in Montgomery County, Maryland, named in honor of the renowned scientist and author Rachel Carson, is now at the center of a controversy surrounding the use of toxic herbicides. Ms. Carson played a pivotal role in raising awareness about the harmful ecosystem and human health effects of pesticides that led to the banning of DDT. Environmentalists and concerned citizens have raised alarm over the recent spraying of “invasive weeds†with Garlon 3A, a powerful herbicide, within the park’s boundaries.

Concern about pesticide use in Montgomery County is complicated by competing jurisdictions and restrictions within the county, and highlights the stark difference between nontoxic organic practices and pesticide-dependent Integrated Pest Management. (See more below on Montgomery County land management policy for local parks.) According to the Montgomery County website: “Montgomery County Parks [Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission or M-NCPPC] are a State agency. M-NCPPC operates under an integrated pest management plan (IPM). Montgomery Parks manages all playgrounds, community gardens and common lawn areas within local parks without the use of pesticides. In 2016, Montgomery Parks designated ten pesticide-free parks. In September 2019, the program expanded to 45 pesticide-free parks. They post advance notification of pesticide applications on their website.â€Â For a full list of pesticide applications in Montgomery County Parks, visit the county website.

Ms. Carson, the author of the groundbreaking book Silent Spring, is celebrated for her tireless efforts in advocating for the protection of the environment and wildlife. Her work empowered an awareness of “complex biological communities against which [pesticides] have been blindly hurled,†sparking a global awakening to the dangers of chemical pollutants. Her words are particularly poignant and predictive given the United Nation’s (UN) warning of biodiversity collapse and the findings of the UN’s Conference of the Parties (December 2022) to the Convention on Biological Diversity: “Despite ongoing efforts, biodiversity is deteriorating worldwide, and this decline is projected to worsen with business-as-usual. The loss of biodiversity comes at a great cost for human well-being and the global economy.â€Â In the context of what was known when her book was published in 1962, Ms. Carson stressed the importance of adopting alternatives, noting, “We must make wider use of alternative methods that are now known, and we must devote our ingenuity and resources to developing others.â€

The controversy surrounding the use of Garlon 3A in Rachel Carson Conservation Park prompts reflection on Rachel Carson’s enduring legacy about the adverse consequences of chemical pollutants on the environment and the need for alternatives. Ms. Carson’s seminal work cautioned against indiscriminate attempts to manipulate nature, a message that remains as urgent today amid contemporary environmental challenges as it did over half a century ago. Her enduring legacy endorses the melodious chorus of birds in the treetops and the constructive endeavors on the ground below, perpetuated by countless individuals who have drawn inspiration from her words and actions.

Jenny Kay, PhD, a scientist at the Silent Spring Institute who researches carcinogenicity and toxicology, told Beyond Pesticides, “It’s unfortunate and ironic that pesticides are being applied to the grounds at the Rachel Carson Conservation Park, named in honor of the pioneer of the environmental movement who first raised the alarm about the indiscriminate spraying of pesticides and their potential effects on human health and wildlife. Even more ironic, they have chosen a pesticide, triclopyr, that causes mammary tumors in animals and could increase the risk of breast cancer, the very disease that ended Carson’s life before she could see the revolution she started.”

The use of Garlon 3A within the boundaries of Rachel Carson Conservation Park has ignited controversy among environmentalists, park enthusiasts, and local residents. Concerned citizens argue that the application of a toxic herbicide within a park bearing Rachel Carson’s name is contradictory to her environmental ideals and legacy. Sarah Campbell, a community member who frequents the park said, “Rachel Carson taught me about the dangers of pesticides to people, plants, and animals. I hike Rachel Carson Conservation Park regularly with my dog and was upset to learn they are not pesticide-free! How can Montgomery County name a park after her and spray it with the pesticide she fought to ban?â€

Even though it has independent authority, M-NCPPC’s use of pesticides runs contrary to the spirit, intent, and letter of a 2015 county law, passed by the Montgomery Council, to ban toxic pesticides on public and private land and advance organic practices within its jurisdiction, recognizing the hazards pesticides and the efficacy of alternatives. However, the policy and practices of the state agency, with overlapping park authority with the county, are at odds with the efforts of the council to prioritize organic practices. At the time of the council vote, Council President George Leventhal said, “Today’s action is another step in the ongoing effort to make Montgomery County the healthiest, safest county in the country,†He continued, “Countless studies have linked pesticides to a wide range of health conditions in children and adults and, since the bill was introduced one year ago, I have received hundreds of reports from constituents of children and pets experiencing adverse effects from the application of pesticides.†(See Mr. Leventhal’s talk to Beyond Pesticides’ 2016 National Forum.) 

Akayla Bracey, the science and regulatory manager at Beyond Pesticides said, “Garlon 3A is a potent herbicide used to control and eliminate unwanted vegetation, including invasive plants and weeds. However, its application has raised concerns due to potential risks and dangers associated with its use. Garlon 3A contains triclopyr, a chemical compound known for its several environmental and health risks, including tumors in mammals.†Other impacts include:

  • Impact on Non-Target Species: Garlon 3A is not selective in its action and can harm non-target plant species. The USDA says “Triclopyr is toxic to many broadleaf plants. Even very small amounts of spray may injure some plants.†This collateral damage can disrupt local ecosystems and negatively impact wildlife by reducing food sources and habitat.
  • Residue and Runoff: The herbicide can leave residues in soil and water, posing a threat to aquatic life and potentially contaminating water sources. Runoff can carry the chemical into streams and rivers, affecting downstream ecosystems. The USDA notes that triclopyr has been shown to be “slightly toxic to fish†and has “48-hour contact toxicity to bees.â€
  • Health Concerns: Exposure to triclopyr may result in adverse health effects for humans, including skin and eye irritation, respiratory issues, and, in extreme cases, more severe health problems. Public health advocates stress the importance of minimizing human exposure.
  • Persistence: Triclopyr can persist in the environment for extended periods, increasing the likelihood of long-term ecological and health impacts. The half-life (the time required for a chemical to be reduced by natural processes to one-half its original amount) for triclopyr in soils has been reported from 75 to 81 days.

M-NCPPC’s website explains the use of Garlon 3A in response to “invasive species,” which are frequently cited as the justification for dispersing toxic pesticides into the environment. This assertion of an environmental benefit, used to justify the use of these chemicals, often carries a sense of urgency and indisputable benefit. However, the use of toxic pesticides in response to the “invasive” species problem can, in reality, exacerbate ecological imbalances and hinder the adoption of more sustainable, long-term solutions that protect human health and the environment.

Advocates for environmental conservation and park-goers are urging M-NCPPC to follow the lead of the Montgomery County Council and add Rachel Carson Conservation Park to the list of over 45 pesticide-free parks in Montgomery County. There is a lot more at Lawns and Landscapes on the Beyond Pesticides’ website. For more information about becoming an advocate for organic parks, see Parks for a Sustainable Future and Tools for Change. See Beyond Pesticides model local policy for public and private property.

TAKE ACTION: In addition to priming your own lawns, and landscapes, tell your mayor or county executive to transition your public parks and lands to organic management practices!

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

Source: Meeting the “Invasive Species†Challenge

Share

10
Oct

Insecticide-Resistant Mosquito Sets Africa’s Malaria Fight Back to Square One

(Beyond Pesticides, October 10, 2023) In recent years, the effects of climate change have become more frequent and more severe, from extreme weather events to rising sea levels. But perhaps one of the most insidious consequences of a warming planet is the way it influences the spread of diseases, often hitting marginalized communities the hardest. This is no more evident than in the case of malaria, where the disease transmission through the Anopheles stephensi mosquito serves as a dire warning of the challenges caused by a changing climate. As this deadly vector of disease expands its territory, it is clear that pesticide-intensive approaches are poorly equipped to cope with the threat as insect resistance to chemical controls steadily grows. 

Native to South Asia, the Anopheles stephensi mosquito has been on a relentless journey, crossing continents from the Arabian Peninsula to East Africa and deeper into the African continent. The mosquito’s ability to quickly adapt to new environments, bolstered by shifting climate patterns, illustrates how global warming affects disease vectors. Matthew Thomas, PhD, emphasizes, “Anopheles stephensi has higher thermal tolerance and a capacity to transmit at higher temperatures than Anopheles gambiae [another malaria-spreading mosquito]. This is significant when considering climate change and the invasion of this species into Africa, potentially altering the dynamics and distribution of malaria.” 

While scientists have not yet pinpointed the exact cause of An. stephensi’s migration across Arabia and Africa, climate change cannot be ruled out. The mosquito’s tolerance for heat strongly suggests that a changing climate may be entirely or partly responsible for its expansion. 

The consequences of An. stephensi’s migration are nothing short of catastrophic, arriving at a time when malaria was on the verge of eradication in Africa. In 2012, Djibouti, a nation on the brink of declaring malaria eliminated, reported just 27 cases. However, with the mosquito’s invasion, cases increased exponentially. By 2020, Djibouti faced over 70,000 reported cases, primarily concentrated in the capital, Djibouti city. 

The rapid spread of this mosquito can be attributed to its unique characteristics not found in other African Anopheles species. While most mosquitoes become problematic during rainy and wet seasons, typically residing in rural areas and natural water sources, An. stephensi thrives year-round. Its preference for artificial water containers, such as cisterns, water containers, and wells, enables it to breed continuously despite seasonal fluctuations. This allows for adaptability to even urban environments—something unheard of in other African mosquito species–and human-made water reservoirs, which poses a significant challenge to malaria control efforts. 

An. stephensi is also unique in that it is not merely a carrier of one malaria parasite; it transmits two malaria-causing parasites–Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax —increasing its potency and likelihood of spreading disease. Unlike most mosquitoes that feed at night when preventive measures like bed nets are effective, An. stephensi feeds during the day. This behavioral shift renders traditional prevention strategies less effective, placing communities at an elevated risk of malaria transmission. 

Perhaps one of the most significant concerns is the insecticide resistance exhibited by these mosquitoes. A study has revealed that “pyrethroid resistance is now widespread in most malaria-endemic countries, threatening the efficacy of standard long-lasting insecticide nets treated with pyrethroids alone.” 

The same pyrethroids have been employed to tackle mosquito-related public health concerns since 1977. Half a century later, the efficacy of this class of insecticide has dwindled, with insecticide-resistant mosquitos present and wreaking havoc across the globe.  

The production and application of these insecticides are intrinsically linked to fossil fuels, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. The irony of this cycle cannot be ignored–the very pesticides intended to combat disease vectors contribute to the environmental factors propelling malaria’s spread. 

This resurgence of malaria serves as a stark reminder of the urgent need to reevaluate the reliance on pesticides. The methods employed to combat malaria might inadvertently be worsening the crisis. For public health advocates, this serves as a wake-up call, compelling the world to reassess strategies in the face of climate change. 

This situation is fundamentally an environmental justice issue. The resurgence of malaria predominantly affects developing countries that lack the infrastructure to support the health care needs during urban malaria outbreaks. For so long, malaria has primarily affected rural communities. As urban areas become increasingly susceptible to malaria due to climate change, countless lives will be lost due to the almost nonexistent malaria identification and treatment know-how. In fact, a study estimated 126 million additional people in urban areas would be at risk of malaria because of the An. stephensi mosquito. Moreover, the efforts of under-resourced nations to eradicate malaria and other life-threatening diseases are being undermined by the actions of those manufacturing petrochemical pesticides, exacerbating climate change and the migration of invasive species. 

The impact of a single invasive vector species has already resulted in millions of illnesses and death. The world must take action to address the harm caused by climate change and regain control before more dangerous invasive species further affect vulnerable populations. Beyond Pesticides is committed to providing ecological and just solutions to pest problems. Our Mosquito Management and Insect-Borne Diseases guide offers alternative mosquito control options that are better for public health and the environment. Exploring and supporting such alternatives is crucial in a world threatened by dire climate catastrophes. Please visit the Beyond Pesticides webpage to learn about more alternatives to pesticides.  

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

Source: New York Times, An Invasive Mosquito Threatens 

Share

09
Oct

On Indigenous Peoples Day, Highlighting Indigenous Knowledge To Address the Biodiversity Crisis

(Beyond Pesticides, October 9, 2023) On this Indigenous Peoples’ Day, the world turns its attention to the invaluable wisdom that Indigenous communities possess, highlighting their crucial role in addressing the global biodiversity crisis.  While facing disproportionate harm from unjust policies and practices that pollute, Indigenous communities are gaining federal and international recognition as key players in preserving the planet’s ecological balance. 

Many Indigenous communities have a profound connection to, and unique relationship with its land, carrying with them ancestral wisdom that has sustained their ecosystems for generations. Indigenous knowledge, passed down through centuries, emphasizes the intricate relationships between species, the balance of ecosystems, and the importance of coexistence with nature. This knowledge has allowed Indigenous Peoples to thrive sustainably for millennia. 

In the face of the growing biodiversity and climate crises, Indigenous wisdom and traditional insights are a part of the solution. During the 2022 White House Tribal Nations Summit, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) unveiled historic guidance for federal departments and agencies regarding Indigenous Knowledge. This guidance, accompanied by an implementation memorandum, acknowledges the importance of valuing and adopting Indigenous Knowledge into federal decisionmaking to enhance scientific and policy decisions. “As the original stewards of the natural environment, Tribes and Indigenous communities have expertise critical to finding solutions to the climate crisis and protecting our nation’s ecosystems,â€â€¯said CEQ Chair Brenda Mallory. “The guidance released today will help ensure that their voices are included across the Federal Government for the collective benefit of our communities and the planet.â€Â 

Examples of traditional knowledge being used to improve biodiversity include: 

  • Traditional knowledge is being utilized to improve biodiversity in the largest dam removal project in U.S. history, along the California-Oregon border. The Klamath River restoration and dam removal project is collaborating with the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, the Karuk Tribe, the Yurok Tribe, and other Native American tribes to plant and monitor nearly 17 billion seeds to recreate the pre-dam ecosystem. Upon completion, this project will open more than 400 miles of river for threatened species and contribute to a diverse native ecosystem. 

  • Scientists are partnering with tribes to study traditional practices that improve biodiversity in ecosystems. One study was conducted on black oaks with interviews and workshops involving tribal members with ancestral knowledge of black oak burning practices. The study revealed opportunities to reintroduce low-intensity fires, along with thinning, to restore black oak stands that are conducive to acorn gathering. The findings also highlighted examples of overcoming challenges in restoring the socioecological benefits of black oak ecosystems for indigenous tribes.  

For more examples of tribes that are having positive environmental impacts, visit this Smithsonian website. To learn about international examples of indigenous knowledge to improve biodiversity, see this video.  

Encroachment on Indigenous lands, the expansion of extractive industries, and shifting climate patterns have threatened the delicate balance that many Indigenous Peoples maintain with nature. The global biodiversity crisis mirrors these interdependent systemic issues as species extinction, habitat degradation, and ecosystem imbalances become more urgent. Recognizing the importance of Indigenous knowledge remains an essential first step, and President Biden’s proclamation on Indigenous Peoples’ Day in 2022 underscored the significance of respecting Indigenous sovereignty and incorporating Indigenous voices into government decisions. As President Biden said, “On Indigenous Peoples’ Day, we honor the sovereignty, resilience, and immense contributions that Native Americans have made to the world; and we recommit to upholding our solemn trust and treaty responsibilities to Tribal Nations, strengthening our Nation-to-Nation ties. . . [T]oday, they remain some of our greatest environmental stewards.†For more information on the proclamation, read Beyond Pesticide’s reporting here. Such recognition from the U.S. government signifies an awareness of the critical role Indigenous Peoples play in the conservation of biodiversity. 

  • The restoration of the Elwha River by the Lower Elwha Tribe, featured in the image above, serves as a shining example of how Indigenous and scientific partnerships can contribute to environmental restoration and conservation. The project began after the removal of two large hydropower stations. 

  • Kawerak, an Indigenous organization in western Alaska, issued a call for knowledge sovereignty and the indigenization of knowledge. Their concerns center on how research, research funding, and research prioritization have historically excluded Indigenous and local communities. The organization laid out a practical plan for repositioning research agendas to be more inclusive and respectful of Indigenous and local perspectives. 

Biodiversity is a global problem that requires international collaborations and diverse perspectives. The Indigenous Peoples’ Alliance of the Archipelago (AMAN), an independent organization representing over 2,500 Indigenous communities and approximately 20 million individual members across Indonesia, estimates that the nation is home to 50 to 70 million Indigenous individuals within its 250 million population. AMAN has played a pivotal role in advocating for Indigenous rights and knowledge. Despite legal recognition of Indigenous rights in the Indonesian Constitution, there have been challenges in fully implementing the Indigenous Peoples Law, which remains a bill in Parliament—leaving Indigenous communities vulnerable to land grabs and discriminatory regulations. 

Some of the challenges in utilizing traditional knowledge reflect broader issues of land rights. Indigenous communities frequently experience marginalization and discrimination within national legal systems, exacerbating their vulnerability to violence and mistreatment. When Indigenous Peoples lack human rights, it is not only unjust and inhumane, but it also undermines resource management and conservation practices that help sustain a livable world for all. Land return, also known as land reparations, land restitution, or land repatriation, refers to the process of recognizing land theft, the loss of lives, and the devastation of cultures.  
 
In alignment with environmental justice as a human rights issue, Marcos Orellana, PhD, Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights and National Forum Series speaker, emphasized the legacy of severely contaminated sites on indigenous lands at the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in 2022. From pesticide drift to exposure through contaminated waterways, “the list of toxic exposures on indigenous peoples is long,†despite the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169. Dr. Orellana further noted that “toxics are a form of violence against the land and its people.â€Â 

There is growing evidence of the role of Indigenous knowledge at the international level, yet despite this recognition, roadblocks remain that prevent genuine collaboration with Western science for effective conservation and resource management. One such challenge discussed in the opinion piece “Science Must Embrace Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge To Solve Our Biodiversity Crisis,†is the  “gatekeeper” problem, when a few individuals become the sole experts on a particular community or issue, potentially drowning out the diverse knowledge streams and grounded perspectives of Indigenous and traditional communities. 

Chief Edwin Ogar of the Ekuri Initiative, ICCA Consortium Honorary Member Gretta Pecl, and Council Member Tero Mustonen,  the opinion piece authors, explain that it is crucial to shift the link between policy and research away from simplistic, one-size-fits-all solutions and slogans and toward the needs on the ground. This includes investing in training and learning from past successes and failures.  

As the United States commemorates Indigenous Peoples’ Day, it is a moment to celebrate the resilience and wisdom of Indigenous communities. Their traditional knowledge offers solutions to the biodiversity crisis, emphasizing the importance of preserving sovereign Indigenous lands and communities—working collectively to protect and preserve the planet’s rich tapestry of life for future generations. 

Take Action today! >>Tell EPA to begin meaningful dialogue with tribes in order to learn how pesticide use can be avoided by adopting indigenous practices. Tell EPA that when needs can be met without using pesticides, such use causes “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.â€

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

Source: Science Must Embrace Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge to Solve Our Biodiversity Crisis 

Share

05
Oct

Pittsburgh-Area Pesticide Poisoning: InTown Suites Residents Return After Rat Poison Incident

(Beyond Pesticides, October 5, 2023)  Residents of a Pittsburgh, PA-area extended-stay hotel were evacuated due to a contamination and poisoning incident caused by rat poison. The chemical involved in the incident has not yet been revealed, but officials say the rat poison, when exposed to water, releases the highly toxic phosphine gas. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the gas is known to cause a range of symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, diarrhea, thirst, muscle pain, difficulty breathing, and the accumulation of fluid in the lungs. Higher exposures and prolonged exposure to phosphine can result in more severe health consequences.

EPA has found that phosphine gas causes: Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure to phosphine may cause headaches, dizziness, fatigue, drowsiness, burning substernal pain, nausea, vomiting, cough, labored breathing, chest tightness, pulmonary irritation, pulmonary edema, and tremors in humans.  Convulsions may ensue after an apparent recovery.  Chronic (long-term) occupational exposure of workers to phosphine may cause inflammation of the nasal cavity and throat, weakness, dizziness, nausea, gastrointestinal, cardiorespiratory, and central nervous system symptomology, jaundice, liver effects, and increased bone density.

Deputy Police Chief Brian Kohlhepp of Ross Township explained to multiple media outlets that the hotel used rat bait traps around the exterior of the building. According to reports, the traps became saturated with rainwater and released a dangerous gas that poses risks to human health.

The incident, which occurred on September 25, resulted in seven individuals being rushed to the hospital, with an additional four receiving immediate treatment at the scene for exposure to the rodenticide. Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) teams, local policy, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responded to the emergency.

This incident exemplifies the serious limitations of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture restrictions (so-called risk mitigation measures) of hazardous pesticides, according to Beyond Pesticides. While EPA and the state lead agency (Agriculture Department) apparently recognize the hazardous nature of the rodenticide, it has been registered by EPA and the state for widespread use. This incident reflects the failure of the restrictions in place and the inability of EPA to fully control against adverse effects once released in the environment.

In the case of phosphine, when used as a fumigant, EPA issued the following restriction, which permitted the poisoning incident and evacuation:

Fumigant Management Plans must be written before all applications of phosphine products, including all burrowing pest fumigations. A Fumigant Management Plan is a written description of the steps designed to plan for a safe, legal, and effective fumigation. The certified applicator and owner of the property to be fumigated must characterize the area to be treated and include all safety requirements in the plan before application.

The Pennsylvania incident serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers associated with pesticide usage and the potential for harm once pesticides are authorized by EPA to be marketed. Beyond Pesticides emphasizes the importance of using nontoxic alternatives for rodent control and encourages families with small children to consider proactive measures, such as sealing gaps around doors, installing door sweeps, and caulking openings around pipes, wires, and vents. The event also sheds light on a much broader and concerning issue that extends beyond the borders of Ross Township – the widespread presence of pesticides in U.S. rivers and streams.

Beyond the immediate exposure, pesticide use results in nontarget exposure, as pesticides move off the target site. The Pittsburgh area has had more than its fair share of chemical spills, with the US Steel Tower leak in April and the nearby East Palestine train derailment in February. Advocates are raising questions about the connection between pesticides, toxic spills, and water quality. A 2020 report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), part of the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project, revealed alarming statistics regarding pesticide contamination in the nation’s waterways. The report indicated that nearly 90 percent of water samples collected from rivers and streams across the United States contained at least five or more different pesticides. This data underscores the extent of pesticide pollution in our aquatic ecosystems.

Pesticide contamination in waterways is not a new issue. A USGS analysis dating back to 1998 already revealed the presence of pesticides in all U.S. waterways, with at least one pesticide detectable. The USGS acknowledges that thousands of tons of pesticides enter rivers and streams from both agricultural and nonagricultural sources, contributing to the contamination of essential drinking water sources, including surface water and groundwater.

What makes this problem even more concerning is the potential for different pesticides to interact synergistically when mixed together. This means that the combined effect of multiple pesticides can be more severe than the sum of their individual effects. As a result, aquatic ecosystems, including fish and other wildlife, are at risk of suffering detrimental impacts due to the presence of these pesticide mixtures.

Recent research by Robert Hunt Sprinkle, M.D. and Ph.D., and Devon C Payne-Sturges Ph.D., catalogs the history of neglect in addressing toxic mixtures and their impacts on wildlife and humans. These authors discuss how exposures to toxicants can occur individually, cumulatively, collectively, and synergistically. Moreover, they discuss the disproportionate harms that are felt in disadvantaged communities.

Beyond Pesticides is calling for the elimination of toxic petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers to protect waterways and reduce pesticide contamination in drinking water. Organic and regenerative farming practices are sustainable alternatives that conserve water, reduce runoff, and eliminate toxic chemicals. Rodent control is one important aspect of reaching Beyond Pesticide’s goal of eliminating pesticides by 2032. For more information about the risks of rodenticides, go to www.beyondpesticides.org/rodenticides and learn about safer alternatives to pesticides at www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/managesafe/overview. 

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

Source: Pittsburgh-Area Hotel Rat Poison-Related Evacuation

Share
  • Archives

  • Categories

    • air pollution (8)
    • Announcements (597)
    • Antibiotic Resistance (38)
    • Antimicrobial (17)
    • Aquaculture (30)
    • Aquatic Organisms (33)
    • Bats (7)
    • Beneficials (51)
    • Biofuels (6)
    • Biological Control (32)
    • Biomonitoring (37)
    • Birds (25)
    • btomsfiolone (1)
    • Bug Bombs (2)
    • Canada (10)
    • Cannabis (29)
    • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (9)
    • Chemical Mixtures (2)
    • Children (107)
    • Children/Schools (240)
    • cicadas (1)
    • Climate (30)
    • Climate Change (84)
    • Clover (1)
    • compost (5)
    • Congress (15)
    • contamination (149)
    • deethylatrazine (1)
    • Disinfectants & Sanitizers (18)
    • Drift (12)
    • Drinking Water (13)
    • Ecosystem Services (11)
    • Emergency Exemption (3)
    • Environmental Justice (161)
    • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (498)
    • Events (87)
    • Farm Bill (18)
    • Farmworkers (188)
    • Forestry (5)
    • Fracking (4)
    • Fungal Resistance (6)
    • Fungicides (24)
    • Goats (2)
    • Golf (15)
    • Greenhouse (1)
    • Groundwater (13)
    • Health care (32)
    • Herbicides (32)
    • Holidays (37)
    • Household Use (9)
    • Indigenous People (6)
    • Indoor Air Quality (5)
    • Infectious Disease (4)
    • Integrated and Organic Pest Management (68)
    • Invasive Species (35)
    • Label Claims (49)
    • Lawns/Landscapes (245)
    • Litigation (340)
    • Livestock (9)
    • men’s health (1)
    • metabolic syndrome (2)
    • Metabolites (3)
    • Microbiata (20)
    • Microbiome (26)
    • molluscicide (1)
    • Nanosilver (2)
    • Nanotechnology (54)
    • National Politics (388)
    • Native Americans (3)
    • Occupational Health (14)
    • Oceans (9)
    • Office of Inspector General (2)
    • perennial crops (1)
    • Pesticide Drift (160)
    • Pesticide Efficacy (8)
    • Pesticide Mixtures (6)
    • Pesticide Regulation (770)
    • Pesticide Residues (180)
    • Pets (36)
    • Plant Incorporated Protectants (1)
    • Plastic (5)
    • Poisoning (18)
    • Preemption (41)
    • President-elect Transition (2)
    • Repellent (4)
    • Resistance (117)
    • Rights-of-Way (1)
    • Rodenticide (33)
    • Seasonal (2)
    • Seeds (6)
    • soil health (12)
    • Superfund (3)
    • synergistic effects (18)
    • Synthetic Pyrethroids (16)
    • Synthetic Turf (3)
    • Take Action (581)
    • Textile/Apparel/Fashion Industry (1)
    • Toxic Waste (11)
    • Volatile Organic Compounds (1)
    • Wildlife/Endangered Sp. (454)
    • Women’s Health (25)
    • Wood Preservatives (34)
    • World Health Organization (10)
    • Year in Review (2)
  • Most Viewed Posts