(Beyond Pesticides, October 21, 2008) On October 17, 2008, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) announced that the state will be taking action to address the risks posed by total release foggers, also known as “bug bombs,” in the wake of a new federal report detailing hazards and injuries related to the product. DEC will move to classify foggers as a restricted-use product in New York State, meaning that only licensed pesticide applicators, rather than the general public, will be able to obtain them. DEC also says it will explore the need to further limit fogger use and encourage the adoption of better pest management strategies. Total release foggers have caused numerous explosions and acute illnesses due to pesticide exposure. According to a report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there were 123 cases of bug bomb-related illness or injury in New York State (58 in New York City alone) from 2001-06. Information on New York’s incidents are part of a larger study published October 17, 2008 in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, which illuminates the hazards of total release foggers using data from several states. The most commonly reported acute health […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 17, 2008) A study published in the September 15 issue of Environmental Science & Technology has found pyrethroid contamination in 100 percent of urban streams sampled. Synthetic Pyrethroids are one of the most widely used consumer pesticides, but recently they have been scrutinized for their resultant health and environmental effects. California is currently reevaluating certain pyrethroid-containing pesticides as a result of increasingly conclusive research. Entitled “Statewide Investigation of the Role of Pyrethroid Pesticides in Sediment Toxicity in California’s Urban Waterways,” the research included California’s most urbanized regions, as well as the less developed North Coast and Lake Tahoe areas. Thirty creeks in eight regions were selected from 90 screened sites, and bioassays were conducted at two temperatures, 23 and 15 degrees Celsius. Researchers found 25 samples to be toxic at the higher temperature and all 30 at the lower, which is where pyrethroids are more toxic. “Bifenthrin was the pyrethroid of greatest toxicological concern, occurring in all 30 samples,” wrote the team, and the Los Angeles, Central Valley, and San Diego regions showed the most severe contamination. The sampling included analysis for 8 pyrethroids, 30 organochlorine pesticides, and piperonyl butoxide, which helps to make pyrethroids toxic at […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 9, 2008) The Center for Food Safety challenged today U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) new proposed regulations for the oversight of growing genetically engineered (GE) crops, some of which contain insecticides and many of which are herbicide tolerant. It is the Center’s view that while stricter regulation of growing and field testing GE crops is needed, the USDA proposal fails to fully protect the public’s safety or the environment. The Center contends that these proposed regulations may set in motion a process that would put many GE crops completely beyond the bounds of regulation, and outside the safety net designed to protect the American public. Among the many concerns about genetically engineered foods is the impact they may have on insect and weed resistance to pesticides. Crops engineered to contain the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) threaten the long-term efficacy of Bt, which is an approved insecticide in organic farming. Crops engineered to be herbicide tolerant, such as Roundup Ready soy, contribute to the increased use of toxic herbicides, leading to resistance. “The USDA has missed a golden opportunity to improve its oversight of genetically engineered crops,” said Bill Freese, Science Policy Analyst for the Center for […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 8, 2008) In May, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) abruptly halted its program that tracks pesticide usage in fruits, vegetables and field crops, only to have the U.S. Senate in July put the program back in the 2009 Senate budget bill. USDA cited the $8 million program expense as the reaon for the reports’ demise, however the move left scientists, public advocates and even industry groups surprised and concerned about carrying out their work without this information. The Agricultural Chemical Usage Reports, launched in 1990 and administered by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), issues pesticide usage data on crops, having been initiated in response to public concerns over the contamination of apples by the pesticide Alar.The information was also widely used by universities and food industry researchers to help farmers monitor and reduce the amount of pesticides they use. “We looked at the budget and said, “We can’t do everything we have been doing, and what are we going to get rid of?” said Mark Miller of NASS. However, a coalition of public interest groups which included Beyond Pesticides, NRDC, the Center for Food Safety, and the Union of Concerned Scientists argued that the Agricultural […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 6, 2008) University of Pittsburgh researchers have found that the commonly used insecticide malathion can decimate tadpole populations by altering their food chain. The study, published in the October 1 edition of Ecological Applications, finds that gradual amounts of malathion that were too small to directly kill developing leopard frog tadpoles instead sparked a biological chain of events that deprived them of their primary food source. As a result, nearly half the tadpoles in the experiment did not reach maturity and would have died in nature. The results build on a nine-year effort to investigate whether there is a link between pesticides and the global decline in amphibians, which are considered an environmental indicator species because of their sensitivity to pollutants. According to the researchers, their deaths may foreshadow the poisoning of other less environmentally-sensitivespecies, including humans. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), malathion is the most commonly used insecticide in U.S. agriculture and the third most commonly used insecticide in the U.S. home and garden sector. It has been detected in the wetlands where frogs and other amphibians live. The researchers created simulated ponds from 300-gallon outdoor tanks containing wood frog and leopard frog […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 3, 2008) Activists and individuals concerned about misleading claims on pesticide labeling scored a victory on Wednesday when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew its draft notice on label statements regarding cause marketing and third-party endorsements. After a two-year process of EPA proposals and public comment periods, the agency has determined that such label statements do nothing to promote “consumer understanding” of the risks and applications of pesticide products, and will not be encouraging further submissions. In its notice, EPA writes, “The Agency agrees that cause marketing claims and third-party endorsements as outlined in the draft PR Notice generally would not contribute meaningfully to improving protection of human health and the environment. The addition of such statements is not likely to enhance users’ ability to understand the labeling required to inform the user about how to use the product safely and effectively. In fact, the addition of such statements could interfere with that goal. In addition, EPA recognizes that its resources are limited and should be targeted towards activities that will enhance the level of protection of human health and environment from pesticides.” In 2006, The Clorox Company submitted an application to EPA to add cause marketing […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 12, 2008) Widespread use of nanoscale silver will challenge regulatory agencies to balance important potential benefits against the possibility of significant environmental risk, highlighting the need to identify research priorities concerning this emerging technology, according to a new report released this week by the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN). However, existing information about the impact of silver on the environment offers a starting point for some assessments of nanosilver, the report argues. The issue of assessing the risks posed by nanoscale silver was highlighted after the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) San Francisco office earlier this year imposed a landmark fine of over $200,000 on a California company selling computer keyboards and mouses coated with nanosilver. EPA issued the fine on the grounds that the products should have been registered under federal pesticide law because of the company’s germ-killing claims. In May, a coalition of groups also petitioned that EPA regulate nano products as pesticides. Similar fines have not been imposed since, but the action is increasing attention on the potential risks posed by nanoscale silver and oversight of nanotechnology as a whole. There currently are more than 200 manufacturer-identified nanosilver products on the market and contained in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 10, 2008) Following the report released by the National Marine Fisheries Service that identified 37 pesticides that pose risks to salmon and steelhead, Oregon state officials are moving ahead to set new safety benchmarks for seven pesticides of priority concern. A team from the Oregon Water Quality Pesticide Management Program identified seven priority hazardous pesticides: azinphos-methyl, chlorpyrifos, dacthal, diazinon, endosulfan, simazine and ethoprop, based on water-quality monitoring in five Oregon watersheds, including the Pudding River near Salem, as well as the Clackamas, Yamhill, Hood and Walla Walla watersheds. Three pesticides, azinphos-methyl, diazinon and chlorpyrifos have been detected at concentrations that exceed federal aquatic criteria in the Clackamas River Basin (See report here). Chlorpyrifos was detected at maximum levels more than twice the federal standard. The National Marine Fisheries Service report on the ecological damage associated with pesticide use reveals “overwhelming evidence” to suggest that 37 pesticides, including these seven, increase the chance of extinction for protected salmon and steelhead. The state is now turning to its own team of experts to set stringent benchmarks based on existing research on these chemicals of concern. Generally the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with developing water quality standards […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 3, 2008) On September 1, new rules that set harmonized maximum reside levels (MRLs) for pesticides went into force in the European Union (EU), despite opposition from environmental groups that claim the new rules expose consumers to unacceptable levels of contamination. This new regulation, Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, is the result of a considerable joint effort by the European Commission, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the Member States, and aims to revise and simplify standards pertaining to pesticide residues and, according to officials, helps to strengthen food safety across Europe. The new MRLs aim to remove the confusion associated with dealing with 27 lists of national MRLs. Previously, different MRLs could apply to the same pesticide for the same crop in different member states, which led to confusion, especially in cases where food residues exceeding defined MRLs in one member state were acceptable in another. Traders of produce will now be able to do business smoothly as the confusion surrounding various MRLs is eliminated. The regulation covers approximately 1100 pesticides and lists MRLs for about 315 agricultural products. The MRLs also apply to processed products. “The new rules apply the principle that food produced or […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 29, 2008) It was seen as a positive development when EPA this summer announced that, “Through recent settlements with four Puerto Rico farms, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is sending a message to farm owners that protecting their workers must be their first priority.” That is tough talk from an agency that has long been criticized for its abysmal record of instituting and enforcing even the most basic human health protections from pesticides for those who are responsible for planting and harvesting much of the nation’s food. And it turns attention to the larger question of whether the enforcement system that EPA has in place is adequate. This case started in October 2007 when EPA filed a complaint against four Puerto Rico farms for being in violation of the worker protection standard (WPS) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Under the settlement, each farm has agreed to pay a civil penalty, and to display information on pesticide applications, information on pesticide safety and emergency medical care, as well as to provide decontamination supplies for workers and handlers, personal protective equipment, and pesticide safety training for workers and handlers. The farms have agreed to […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 27, 2008) Citing the possibility of lower crop yields and higher food prices, government ministers in the United Kingdom are planning to step up pressure on the European Parliament in opposition to plans to ban the most hazardous pesticides, amounting to three quarters of the pesticides used by farmers in the European Union. Environmental campaigners, like the UK Pesticides Campaign, are adamant that a crackdown on the use of pesticides is needed to protect public health and believe that the new measures must not be watered down by industry lobbying. Officials from the U.K. Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) believe that the ban would remove important pesticides from the market. Those arguing against the proposal say it could prevent the use of certain fungicides and result in substantially lower wheat yields, postulating a 30 percent reduction from current levels. DEFRA officials claim that the ban would have “significant adverse impact on crop protection, but secure no significant health benefits for consumers.” British Farming Minister Lord Rooker is adamant that fungicides should not be banned before alternatives are approved and is urging other European countries to block the measure. The controversy centers on the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 22, 2008) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is accepting comments on letters sent from the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) requesting that EPA revoke all tolerances for the toxic pesticide endosulfan. In addition, EPA is accepting information on endosulfan residues on commodities consumed by Alaskan natives. PANNA’s August 12 letter stated: “We are particularly concerned about the effects of endosulfan on prenatal and child development. Peer-reviewed science demonstrates that endosulfan is both an endocrine disruptor and a neurotoxicant.” The letter followed up on a February 2008 petition signed by 13,300 people across the country, a legal petition filed by the National Resources Defense Council that same month, three letters sent to the Agency on May 19, 2008 signed by 111 nonprofit environmental groups, 55 scientists, and 5 coalitions of Indigenous groups and tribes, and a lawsuit filed on behalf of PAN, environmental and farmworker groups on July 24. “Endosulfan poses a threat to the health of children in the U.S.,” the letter concluded. “This antiquated DDT-era organochlorine has already been phased out of agriculture in the European Union and at least 20 other countries. It is high time for the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 14, 2008) The first report released by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as a result of a lawsuit (NCAP et al. v. NMFS, No. 07-1791 RSL) settlement reveal “overwhelming evidence” to suggest that the pesticides chlorpyrifos, malathion, and diazinon increase the chance of extinction for protected salmon and steelhead. The report on the three pesticides and their effects on threatened fish is the first in what is expected to be a four year review process of 37 pesticides. “These are pesticides that EPA [the Environmental Protection Agency] has swept under the rug for years. These are three that stood out as the nastiest of the (pesticides) that are still in widespread use,” said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney for Earthjustice who represented the plaintiff, Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP). The 377-page report is clear in its conclusion that current use patterns of these three toxic pesticides threaten the salmon and steelhead protected by the Endangered Species Act, but it does not delineate the next steps to reduce the risk. A report on mitigation measures, which could include restrictions or bans, is expected in the next few months. The timing of the report coincides with other […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 7, 2008) In a move antithetical to the precautionary principle, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to extend the tolerance exemptions on certain inert ingredients in pesticides until further studies on their possible health effects have been performed. A decision in 2006 announced that tolerance exemptions on the listed inerts would be revoked as of August, 2008. However, pesticide producers put pressure on the agency to extend this deadline, and the agency complied, extending the date to August 2009. Environmental and public health organizations advocate for stricter controls and more transparency regarding inert ingredients. Because inerts are not “active” ingredients, they do not have to appear on label and are considered proprietary information on the part of the manufacturers. However, their supposed inactivity or inertness belies the fact that these ingredients frequently pose serious health risks of their own, and commonly make up the majority of the volume of a pesticide. One such example is that of the herbicide Roundup, for which the primary inert ingredient was found to be highly toxic to amphibians (for full story, read Daily News of September 12, 2005). The announcement in the Federal Register states, “EPA developed voluntary guidance describing […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 1, 2008) The Oregon Department of Agriculture has released the 2007 Pesticide Use Reporting System (PURS) annual report, summarizing data collected last year -making it the first report to include information from a mandatory electronic reporting of pesticide use statewide. The requirement to report online applies to anyone using a registered pesticide or pest control product in the course of business, for a government entity, or in a public place. The 2007 annual report also includes data from a household pesticide use survey. The release comes nine years after being authorized by the state legislature, due to debate over funding and scope of the report. The required reporting is also set to expire in 2009, requiring activists to lobby for continuation of the program. For 2007, there were 5,732 reporters who filed 284,984 reports of pesticide use into PURS. The reports identified 551 active ingredients used statewide last year. The most used active ingredient, by pounds, was the soil fumigant metam-sodium (42 percent of total pounds reported), which is often used before planting potatoes to kill most soil life. The next two most commonly used active ingredients were the herbicide glyphosate (9 percent), and copper naphthenate (7 […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 29, 2008) On July 28, 2008, a coalition of farmworker, public health, and environmental groups -including Beyond Pesticides- filed a lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to allow continued use of the toxic pesticide diazinon. “The lack of action on diazinon is yet another example of EPA’s failure to fully consider the risks to farmworkers, children, and the environment from pesticides,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. The lawsuit is part of the coalition’s multi-year campaign to protect children, farmworkers, and wildlife from the most dangerous pesticides and to reform EPA’s lackadaisical regulation of public and environmental health. The coalition has filed a series of lawsuits targeted at the worst poisons on the market: diazinon is near the top of that list. “EPA’s system for protecting the public from the dangers of pesticides like diazinon is broken,” said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney for Earthjustice, the public interest law firm that represents the coalition. “The agency should be protecting farmworkers and children, not the profits of pesticide manufacturers.” Diazinon is an organophosphate pesticide that originates from nerve gases the Nazis developed during World War II. Farmworkers who are exposed to diazinon can suffer muscle […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 28, 2008) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced a proposed decision that residues of carbofuran, a toxic pesticide that is used on a variety of crops, will no longer be allowed on food. This effectively means that carbofuran will have to be removed from the U.S. market, benefiting consumers and farmworkers, as well as birds, which are frequently poisoned by the deadly chemical. EPA has concluded that dietary, worker, and ecological risks are of concern for all uses of carbofuran. According to EPA’s website, all products containing carbofuran generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment and do not meet safety standards, and therefore are ineligible for reregistration. The agency says the notice, which is available now online, will be published in the Federal Register for a 60-day public comment period on July 30, 2008. “This is a huge victory for the environment. EPA is to be congratulated for taking such decisive action to eliminate the dangers posed by carbofuran,” said Dr. Michael Fry, American Bird Conservancy’s Director of Conservation Advocacy. “This decision is based on overwhelming scientific evidence and sends a clear signal to manufacturers that it doesn’t pay to fight the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 25, 2008) San Francisco, California —  On July 24, 2008,  a broad coalition of farmworker, public health, and environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to stop the continued use of a hazardous pesticide called endosulfan. The coalition is demanding action from EPA to protect children, farmworkers, and endangered species. Endosulfan is an organochlorine, part of the same family of chemicals as DDT, which EPA banned in 1972. Like other organochlorine pesticides, endosulfan is persistent in the environment and poisons humans and wildlife both in agricultural areas and in regions far from where it was applied. “This dangerous and antiquated pesticide should have been off the market years ago,” said Karl Tupper, a staff scientist with Pesticide Action Network. “The fact that EPA is still allowing the use of a chemical this harmful shows just how broken our regulatory system is.” Acute poisoning from endosulfan can cause headaches, nausea, vomiting, convulsions, and in extreme cases, unconsciousness and even death. Studies have linked endosulfan to smaller testicles, lower sperm production, and an increase in the risk of miscarriages. One glaring omission in the EPA’s decision is its failure to consider risks to children. A […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 24, 2008) Although the text of the Department of Labor’s proposal on workplace safety standards has not been made public, the Washington Post reports that the proposal will likely weaken an already inadequate risk assessment process, thus putting workers at an even greater risk of health effects from toxic chemical exposure. This proposal follows on the heels of news that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently lowered its value of a human life, which will make it easier to avoid environmental regulations. Peg Seminario, director of health and safety policy at the AFL-CIO, accused the Department of Labor of secrecy and said, “They are trying to essentially change the job safety and health laws and reduce required workplace protections through a midnight regulation.” According to the Post, changing the risk assessment process for workplace safety has become the priority for the Department of Labor. Undoubtedly, this prioritization came under pressure from industries, which claim that the risk assessment process overestimates worker risk. However, risk assessments, like those that the EPA employs in regulating pesticides, already allow for a 10-fold increase in risk of health effects for workers than they do for the general public. Risk assessments […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 21, 2008) Advocacy groups are encouraging California’s Senators to support Assemblywoman Fiona Ma’s bill (AB 977) that returns the ability to restrict pesticides to local jurisdictions. Currently, California and 40 other states have pesticide “preemption” laws that deny local authorities the right to pass pesticide restrictions that are more stringent than the state’s laws. Preemption laws are a result of intensive lobbying by the agrichemical industry, and groups in California and across the country believe the time has come to take back the democratic right for localities to adopt restrictions to protect environmental and public health. This authority enables local jurisdictions to respond to exposure scenarios that are not addressed by state law and address unique contamination or poisoning situations. California’s preemption law, passed in 1984, was the first of its kind in the nation and explicitly states that no local government “may prohibit or in any way attempt to regulate any matter relating to the registration, sale, transportation, or use of pesticides.” The state law nullified the first attempt at local pesticide regulation, which was a 1979 Mendocino County prohibition on aerial herbicide spraying that arose from an incident in which herbicide drifted almost three miles […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 14, 2008) According to calculations by the Associated Press (AP), the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “value of a statistical life” is $6.9 million in today’s dollars, a drop of nearly $1 million from just five years ago. The AP discovered the change after a review of cost-benefit analyses over more than a dozen years.According to the federal government, the statistical value of a human life is calculated in the following manner. Suppose a new pesticide regulation reduces the annual risk of dying from cancer by 0.00001. In a population of 100 million, the regulation is expected, in a statistical sense, to result in 1000 fewer deaths from that cancer risk each year. If each person in that population of 1 million is willing to pay 7 cents a year for the reduction in mortality risks, $7 million is said to be the value of a statistical life (VSL). While the $1 million devaluation of a statistical human life may seem like just another bureaucratic recalculation, it has serious consequences. The AP proposes the following example: a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 11, 2008) According to an internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) memorandum, a Supreme Court decision is undermining the agency’s ability to enforce the Clean Water Act (CWA). Two House Committee Chairmen have sent a letter to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson for more information regarding EPA’s enforcement efforts in the wake of the 2006 decision Rapanos et ux., et al. v. United States. The Rapanos decision was split 4-1-4 over the question of Federal protections for waters of the United States, including wetlands, under the Clean Water Act. In the letter, Chairman James L. Oberstar of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Chairman Henry A. Waxman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, explain that information has come to them indicating that enforcement of key clean water programs is faltering. The memo, obtained by Greenpeace and released by the Congressmen, was sent by EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Granta Y. Nakayama and cites enforcement problems created by the Rapanos case and the subsequent guidance. In the memorandum, Mr. Nakayama states, “Data collected from the regions shows that a significant portion of the CWA docket has been adversely affected.” The letter from Congressmen Waxman […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 8, 2008) In comments filed July 7, 2008 with the Environmental Protection Agency on its new risk assessment and evaluation of the widely used anti-bacterial chemical triclosan, found in a wide range of products including soaps, toothpastes and personal care products, plastics, paints and clothing, public interest health and environmental groups point to health effects, environmental contamination and wildlife impacts and call for consumer uses to be halted. The comments, submitted by Beyond Pesticides, Food and Water Watch, Greenpeace US, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and dozens of public health and environmental groups from the U.S. and Canada, urge the agency to use its authority to cancel the non-medical uses of the antibacterial chemical triclosan, widely found in consumer products and shown to threaten health and the environment. Triclosan and its degradation products bioaccumulate in humans, are widely found in the nations waterways, fish and other aquatic organisms, and because of triclosan’s proliferating uses, are linked to bacterial resistance, rendering triclosan and antibiotics ineffective for critical medical uses. The chemical and its degradates are also linked to endocrine disruption, cancer and dermal sensitization. “The nonmedical uses of triclosan are frivolous and dangerous, creating serious direct health […]