(Beyond Pesticides, March 26, 2026) A review of pesticide exposure from a family member working in agriculture (“take-home” residues) finds that pesticide levels in the home are elevated between 2.6- and 3.7-times. This and other nonoccupational exposure data from homes are drawn from the Agricultural Health Study (AHS), a National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) prospective study of cancer and other health outcomes in a cohort of licensed pesticide applicators and their spouses from Iowa and North Carolina. Between 1993 and 1997, with follow-up between 1999 and 2021, AHS tracks occupational and nonoccupational exposure and subsequent health effects from pesticide exposure. The current study, published in Environmental Advances, reexamines a quantitative analysis on nontarget, “active-ingredient-specific” exposure to pesticides from multiple pathways—applying new criteria to AHS spousal exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos and the herbicide atrazine. The three pesticide exposure pathways include take-home, agricultural drift, and residential use. Building on a 2019 study, researchers consider data from additional studies published between 2019 and 2024, “providing support that all three pathways contribute to pesticide exposure.” More importantly, the updated estimates of nontarget exposure to chlorpyrifos and atrazine are overall strengthened by the incorporation of new data, highlighting the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 24, 2026) Published in Environmental Pollution, study results in the floriculture region of Ecuador find detections of neonicotinoid insecticides (NNI) and the herbicide atrazine in drinking and irrigation water. The biomonitoring data reported in an earlier journal article in the same region found a total of 23 compounds used as herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, their associated metabolites (breakdown products), which include organophosphates, pyrethroids, and neonicotinoids. (See Daily News here.) Researchers from the University of Iowa, University of California, San Diego State University, and Universidad de San Francisco in Quito, Ecuador, determined that 1 in 5 households (20.5%) have detectable levels of one or more neonicotinoids in drinking water samples surrounding floricultural agricultural operations. This builds on previous research underscoring the nontarget pesticidal effects in communities near agricultural operations where the chemicals drift through the air and move into soil and water. Methodology and Results The authors report that, “This study focused on household tap water in proximity to floricultural plantations and in the ESPINA [Secondary Exposures to Pesticides among Children and Adolescents] participants’ homes with a range of NNI and total pesticides in urinary metabolite samples of the children.” They continue: “Participant households in the water study were […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 23, 2026) After President Trump invoked the Defense Production Act of 1950 and issued an Executive Order (EO), Promoting the National Defense by Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Elemental Phosphorus and Glyphosate-Based Herbicides, U.S. Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME) stood up to say “no.” They introduced the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act (HR 7601) to undo the February 18 Executive Order, which is now being supported by a campaign to urge Congressional Representatives to cosponsor the bill.  With the EO’s declaration that contains no supporting documentation or findings, the U.S. government is granting Bayer/Monsanto immunity from lawsuits for adverse health effects or damage associated with the production, transportation, use, and disposal of the weed killer glyphosate. The executive order proclaims: “There is no direct one-for-one chemical alternative to glyphosate-based herbicides. Lack of access to glyphosate-based herbicides would critically jeopardize agricultural productivity, adding pressure to the domestic food system, and may result in a transition of cropland to other uses due to low productivity.  Given the profit margins growers currently face, any major restrictions in access to glyphosate-based herbicides would result in economic losses for growers and make it untenable for them to meet growing food and feed demands.” […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 20, 2026) Biopesticides represent a kind of Utopian destination in the landscape of agricultural sustainability. If only they could ensure planetary harmony. A review of botanical biopesticides in the March 11 issue of Toxics raises important questions that require scrutiny and review under the pesticide registration process and when used in organic systems under the Organic Foods Production Act. The term biopesticide can be misleading, and any replacements for synthetic pesticides cannot be taken only on faith. As Beyond Pesticides has noted previously, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) definition of biopesticides—“derived from such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals”—is broad, vague, and used differently by different interests. EPA regulates biopesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) in three categories: Substances that interfere with mating, such as insect sex pheromones, as well as various scented plant extracts that attract insect pests to traps; Microbial pesticides consisting of a microorganism (e.g., a bacterium, fungus, virus, or protozoan) as the active ingredient; and Plant-Incorporated-Protectants (PIPs), pesticidal substances that plants are genetically engineered to produce. The review by Sandra Petrovic, PhD, and Andreja Leskovac, PhD, of the University of Belgrade, highlights the need not to […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 18, 2026) Researchers in Germany and Brazil investigated the biodiversity of agricultural landscapes in organic and non-organic areas in “bee hotels,” finding that there is a positive correlation between organically managed fields and numerous indicators of improved pollinator health, including an “increase in bee abundance, species richness, and diversity.” This study, published in Global Ecology and Conservation, builds on the breadth of existing research in recent years that underscores the adverse public health and biodiversity effects associated with a food system that is drenched in synthetic chemicals, as well as additional evidence of the ecological and economic benefits of organic agriculture. Methodology and Results Research for this study “was conducted at 17 sites in the southern part of Germany, Baden-Württemberg, including eight conventional and nine organic farming systems.” Researchers for this study are based at the Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics at Ulm University in Germany and the Laboratory for Bee Studies at the Federal University of Maranhão in São Luís, Maranhão in Brazil. The authors signed a “declaration of competing interest,” stipulating that “that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 16, 2026) On the brink of the first genetically engineered (GE) wheat to be introduced into the U.S. market, after the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved it in August, 2024, groups are calling on Congress to instruct USDA to prohibit HB4 wheat and instruct EPA to prohibit the use of glufosinate herbicides on wheat. The herbicide on which the crop is dependent, glufosinate, is a highly toxic herbicide banned in the European Union because of its links to reproductive and developmental harm. The drought- and herbicide-tolerant wheat, known as HB4 GMO wheat, follows a long line of genetically engineered crops that have been allowed to be grown in the U.S., with Roundup ReadyTM (glyphosate-tolerant) soybeans being among the first crops allowed in 1996. While the introduction of this technology promised to reduce pesticide use (herbicides are included under the definition of pesticide), the exact opposite occurred, with the skyrocketing of herbicide use. (See Daily News review of a study by Charles Benbrook, PhD, “Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S.—the first sixteen years.”) The extraordinary increase in herbicide use associated with GE crops has been accompanied by an escalating increase in weed resistance […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2026) The Monsanto Company, founded in 1901 and acquired by the multinational corporation Bayer AG in 2018, submitted its opening brief to the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) last month, seeking liability immunity from lawsuits filed by product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards. The question before SCOTUS is: “Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., preempts a state-law failure-to-warn claim concerning a pesticide registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where EPA has determined that a particular warning is not required and the warning cannot be added to a product label without EPA approval.” If successful, the Court would be overturning (reversing) its 2005 decision in Bates v. Dow Agrosciences, 544 U.S. 431, which upheld EPA and state registration of pesticides as a floor of protection, without releasing manufacturers of the responsibility to warn for potential harm that is not required by EPA. Pesticide manufacturers propose the text for their product labels and EPA ensures compliance with its minimum requirements, which does not preclude them from disclosing potential adverse effects they know of or should have known. The Missouri case before the Supreme Court, Durnell v. Monsanto, on the cancer causing effects of the weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM) resulted in a jury verdict (in 2023) of $1.25 million and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements may amount to over $10 billion in liability if […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 9, 2026) Policy and toxicology are slated to collide as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers allowing the use of a PFAS pesticide by invoking an emergency waiver process in federal pesticide law. If authorized, EPA’s decision will permit the use of an unregistered pesticide under an emergency waiver provision—in this case an emergency caused by weed resistance to weed killers (herbicides) on the market. EPA is accepting public comments until March 16, 11:59pm EDT. Beyond Pesticides is urging the public to object to EPA approval by writing to EPA and Congress stating that herbicide resistance is not an emergency and PFAS chemicals must not be broadcast in the environment.  The pesticide that is being requested for use is a new not yet registered, herbicide tetflupyrolimet (TFP), which is a PFAS chemical according to the definition of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The fact that the chemical is not registered by EPA means that it has not been reviewed in accordance with all the safety assessments reviewed under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The states applying for the exemptions under Section 18 of FIFRA—Missouri and Arkansas—claim that there is an emergency requiring the use of TFP because […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2026) The Farm Bill—the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567—reported out of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday strips environmental and public health protections from pesticides, reversing over 90 years of environmental laws adopted by Congress to protect farmers, consumers, and the environment that stretch back to the first Farm Bill in 1933. The Committee rejected the Protect Our Health Amendment, sponsored by Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME), which would have ensured that the final bill maintain three core safeguards in current law: (i) Judicial review of chemical manufacturers‘ failure to warn about pesticide hazards; (ii) Democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use; and, (iii) Local site-specific action to ensure protection—the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides under numerous environmental statutes. All Republicans and one Democrat (Rep. Adam Gray, D-CA) on the Committee blocked the Pingree amendment. The Agriculture Committee bill adversely affects a wide range of social and conservation issues, including the protection of family farms, food security, environmental and public health, local and state authority, and judicial review, according to a cross-section of groups representing these interests. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2026) Does humanity want to live in a world without birds? This may seem like an extreme question, but a new study in Science concludes that, without changes in human behavior, just such a world may be on the horizon. This would be a tragedy of colossal proportions, not only for the ecosystem services birds provide, but for the meaning of human life and a healthy biosphere. The oldest human-made image of a bird is 40,000 years old. The new study, by Czech environmental scientist François Leroy, PhD, and two colleagues from The Ohio State University, measured local population abundances of 261 North American bird species between 1987 and 2021. They also measured the speeds at which the species’ populations rose or fell. The study was based on data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey, a program of the U.S. Geological Survey in coordination with the Canadian Wildlife Service. This survey involves direct observations of bird populations along roadsides during breeding season. The program was created in the mid-20th century in response to the severe mortalities associated with the use of DDT, highlighted by Rachel Carson in her seminal 1962 work, Silent Spring. In the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 5, 2026) In a deep analysis of public records, U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), a nonprofit newsroom and public health research group, discloses significant financial ties between Bayer-Monsanto, lobbying firms, and the second Trump Administration, raising concerns about basic safeguards to curb corporate influence over federal policymakers. The USRTK tracker and report, “Tracing Bayer’s ties to power in Trump’s Washington,” (see more) finds that there have been significant lobbying investments by the multinational pesticide corporation just in the past year, including:  “At least $9.19 million on federal lobbying in [2025]”;   “16 key administration officials with ties to Bayer’s lobbying or legal network. Bayer and its lobbyists have access to people in power at the White House, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency and even those in high level positions closest to Trump”;  “45 people registered to lobby for Bayer under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and at least 13 outside lobby firms – seven of which are now among the highest-paid firms in D.C”; and,  “More than 30 senior officials at lobby firms retained by Bayer have direct ties to Trump, having worked in one or both of his administrations or political campaigns.”  The report points out that the four main trade and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 2, 2026) In advance of deliberations on the Farm Bill tomorrow, March 3, in the Agriculture Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, opposition to the GOP-proposed legislation has been widely expressed by farm, environmental, consumer, and social justice organizations. The bill, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567, is a dramatic departure from previous Farm Bills going back to the first one in 1933, which began a process of integrated policy to address family farmers’ sustainability, land conservation, energy, climate, and food security. Discarding the traditional bipartisan process used to draft the Farm Bill, the Republican leadership has instead proposed a measure that has garnered across-the-board disapproval, except from those representing the vested interests of chemical companies and agribusiness. In order to uphold fundamental protections from pesticides for farmers, consumers, and the environment, a campaign has emerged to urge U.S. Representatives to support Rep. Pingree’s Protect Our Health Amendment (removes Sections 10205-10207), move to strike Sections 10201-10204 and 102011, and support the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act provisions. Without a comprehensive overhaul, this campaign is urging a vote against the Farm Bill. Central to the GOP Farm Bill, released by the chair of the U.S. House Agriculture […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2026) Researchers at Prairie View A&M University in Texas published in the journal Sustainability a study of organic agricultural systems from 1960 to 2021, concluding that “the outlook for U.S. organic fruit and vegetables is encouraging, supported by expanding consumer demand, government support, and improved conditions for international trade.” While delivering upbeat findings, including health benefits, the study identifies tremendous obstacles to entry into organic farming, including the limited support for alternative pest management and pest control systems in the United States in recent modern history, compared to the assistance provided for highly subsidized, petrochemical-dependent agricultural practices. Public health and environmental advocates continue to advocate for a wholesale transition to organic pest management, including calls for U.S. Representatives and Senators to cosponsor the Opportunities in Organic Act! Study Methodology, Background, and Findings The authors of this literature review arrived at the following conclusions on research trends for human health and environmental impacts of organic systems (for further analysis, the numbers below list citations from their report): “[O]rganic food has been documented to have higher antioxidant capacity, acidity, and phosphorus as well as lower levels of cadmium, pesticides, and other chemicals (18–22). Additionally, organic practices increase the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 25, 2026) Residues of the weed killer glyphosate, which has been classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, have been routinely found in food products, and a recent state survey in Florida confirmed previous findings. The findings are well within the legal standards for allowable residues. So, why is the Trump administration, in invoking the Defense Production Act of 1950 by Executive Order and its immunity-from-lawsuits provision for glyphosate manufacturers, concerned about glyphosate residues in food and other nondietary exposure? Could it have something to do with the over $10 billion in jury verdicts and settlements on glyphosate exposure against the manufacturer Bayer/Monsanto, with tens of thousands of cases pending, and the robust independent, peer-reviewed scientific findings that link glyphosate to non-Hodgkin lymphoma and a host of other adverse health effects? Nothing in the President’s executive order appears to meet the intent of the statute and its stated purpose to protect “the ability of the domestic industrial base to supply materials and services for the national defense and to prepare for and respond to military conflicts, natural or man-caused disasters, or acts of terrorism within the United States . . .” Without […]

(Beyond Pesticides. February 24, 2026) Leukemia is the leading contributor to the clear rise in childhood cancer cases over the last few decades, and the general association of pesticide exposures with childhood leukemia is firmly established. Now, a new study is the first to assess the effect of pesticide exposures on the survival of children with leukemia. The study found a statistically significant link between residential rodenticide exposure and a higher risk in children of death from acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), with about 10% of the exposed children dying within five years of diagnosis. Crucially, pre- and post-natal periods were the most critical exposure windows—and the intervals when residents were most likely to use rodenticides. With proper treatment, about 80% of children diagnosed after age one with ALL can survive. The study, by University of California, Berkeley epidemiologist Seema Desai and colleagues at several other California state universities, used data from the California Childhood Leukemia Study (CCLS), an ongoing population-based case-control study identifying genetic and environmental risks for the range of leukemias occurring in children. Beyond Pesticides covered a 2009 study using the CCLS that found elevated risk of ALL in children living near agricultural pesticide applications, along with a […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 23, 2026) Amid polarization in the U.S. Congress, key legal protections from pesticides will be revoked with passage of the GOP Farm Bill being debated March 3 in the House Agriculture Committee, despite a growing body of science that shows farmers, consumers, and the environment are facing escalating health and safety threats. In this context, grassroots efforts are underway asking Congressional representative to advocate for the removal of Farm Bill, Title X, Subtitle C, Part 1, which contains attacks on foundational protections from pesticides for farmers, consumers, and the environment—and vote against the Farm Bill if those provisions are not removed. As provisions in the GOP Farm Bill (Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567) that slash protections from pesticides go to a vote in the Agriculture Committee, health and environmental advocates are calling for committee members to remove the weakening section—Section X, Subtitle C, Part 1, on “Regulatory Reform.” At a time when documented adverse effects from pesticide exposure are skyrocketing and sustainable practices have become widely available, the bill is being characterized as a wish-list for the chemical industry. Recent studies demonstrating connections between prenatal and postnatal exposure to pesticides and severe consequences […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 20, 2026) As pesticides’ adverse effects on human and ecosystem health stack up in the scientific literature, health and environmental groups are focused on striking an entire section of the Republican Farm Bill that will eliminate protections, which have been written into law for generations. The section is Section X, Subtitle C, Part 1 on “Regulatory Reform.” Threatened are policies intended to protect against the diseases and illnesses touching families and communities, including brain and nervous system disorders, birth abnormalities, cancer, developmental and learning disorders, immune and endocrine disruption, reproductive dysfunction, among others. Wildlife, including mammals, bees and other pollinators, fish and other aquatic organisms, birds, and the biota within soil, are adversely affected with reproductive, neurological, endocrine-disruptive, and developmental anomalies, and cancers. (See Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database.) With the urgent threat of a markup of the legislation scheduled to begin on March 3, attention shifted to a newly released Executive Order (EO) that could provide blanket legal protection for the manufacturer of the weed killer glyphosate, Bayer/Monsanto. By activating the Defense Production Act of 1950 and its immunity from lawsuits provision for glyphosate manufacturers, the administration could mandate production of glyphosate as a “national security” concern and provide […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 17, 2026) The Ranking Member of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), issued a swift rebuke to the GOP 2026 Farm Bill text unveiled last Friday, saying it would be “’very difficult, if not impossible’ for her to back a GOP-led farm bill because it contains ‘poison pills’ and doesn’t do enough to aid struggling farmers,” according to Politico. She did not specifically point to the key controversial provisions that eliminate three core safeguards that are seen as critical to the health of farmers, consumers and the environment—judicial review of chemical manufacturers’ failure to warn about pesticide hazards, the democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use, and local site-specific action to ensure the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides. Beyond Pesticides responded with a nationwide action to Tell members of the U.S. House of Representatives to stop provisions in the Farm Bill that shield chemical companies from liability for the harm caused by their products, intrude on local communities’ democratic right to restrict pesticides, and eliminate pesticide restrictions governing clean water, environmental impacts, and endangered species; with a request to support […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 16, 2026) The chair of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, in releasing the Republican 2026 Farm Bill draft last Friday afternoon, is challenging three core safeguards that are seen as critical to the health of farmers, consumers and the environment—judicial review of chemical manufacturers’ failure to warn about pesticide hazards, the democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use, and local site-specific action to ensure the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides. The draft Farm bill language in three separate sections: (i) prohibits lawsuits by farmers and consumers harmed by pesticides for which manufacturers failed to provide complete safety warnings (Section 10205); (ii) takes away the authority of local governments to protect residents and the local environment from pesticide use (Section 10206), and; (iii) repeals requirements in numerous federal statutes to protect against local pesticide contamination that could affect waterways, drinking water, federal projects, endangered species, migratory birds, and toxic waste (Section 10207). Beyond Pesticides responded with a nationwide action to Tell members of the U.S. House of Representatives to stop provisions in the Farm Bill that shield chemical companies from liability for the harm caused […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 12, 2026) Editor’s Note. This is a piece about improving risk assessments and a proposal that could offer a more realistic characterization of the harm associated with the complexities of pesticide exposure. Beyond Pesticides notes that risk assessment methodology, unless it is considered in the context of a rigorous alternatives assessment, begins with the mostly false assumption that petrochemical pesticides are needed (or are essential) to achieve cost-effective pest management, agricultural productivity and profitability, and quality of life, when, in fact, this is not the case. Therefore, improved risk calculations—as the article being reviewed here proposes—while important to characterizing the harm and the unknown adverse effects associated with pesticide use, still impose some level of harm deemed by the government to be acceptable. Even worse, the adverse effects of exposure cannot be fully characterized because of uncertainties or a lack of data on harmful endpoints, as is the case currently with endocrine-disrupting pesticides not fully evaluated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), or other regulatory bodies. These pesticides are known to induce cancer, reproductive harm, infertility, biodiversity decline, and other life-threatening, often multigenerational, effects. The authors do recognize the serious […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 11, 2026) The first U.S. jury trial on the weed killer paraquat against global chemical companies Syngenta Crop Protection, Chevron U.S.A., FMC Corporation, and their predecessors was scuttled last month due to a settlement on the eve of the case being heard in court. Settlements are commonly used by pesticide manufacturers seeking to avoid public disclosure of internal documents on chemical hazards and wrongdoing that could result from a public trial. In Mertens et al. v. Syngenta, Chevron, and FMC, the six plaintiffs suing three corporations allege that exposure to paraquat-based herbicide products contributed to their Parkinson’s Disease diagnosis. While the terms of the settlement have not yet been disclosed, Lawsuit Information Center states that the paraquat class action multidistrict litigation (MDL) includes 8,257 cases as of January 16, 2026. In 2021, multiple cases were settled for more than $187 million. Background on Mertens Complaint In their complaint, the plaintiffs point to five causes of action, including “strict products liability design defect” (Count 1), “strict products liability failure to warn” (Count 2), negligence (Count 3), breach of implied warranty of merchantability (Count 4), and punitive damages (Count 5). Count 1—Strict Products Liability Design Defect: In the first […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 9, 2026) Every year during the lead-up to Valentine’s Day, the story of pesticide-intensive practices in the flower industry is told. The hazards of pesticides used in flower production and their resulting residues are well-documented. At the same time, the benefits of flowers to one’s psychological well-being have been studied, with findings that suggest flowers are a positive stimulus for emotional well-being, beyond the beauty that they bring to a home, wedding, office, or hospital room. One scientific study shows that flowers perform a socio-emotional function, while a survey done by the American Society for Horticultural Science finds that, “Consumers consistently reported positive effects of cut flowers on mood, morale, and stress reduction.” People want to share this positivity through the giving of flowers, especially on Valentine’s Day. Despite these benefits, the few studies that have been conducted show elevated pesticide exposure for florists through inhalation and dermal absorption. Beyond Pesticides’ network, recognizing that flowers can be grown with organic practices, is asking EPA and Congress to eliminate pesticide use in flower production and resulting residues, while supporting the transition to organic management practices. Similar to food production, the organization says that health and the environment do not […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 6, 2026) The United States, under Donald Trump’s direction, has withdrawn from 66 international organizations, the most important for health being the United Nations’ World Health Organization (WHO) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. International organizations committed to the application of the best available science and policy development via consultation and consensus serve as a vital check against rampant personal and industry nest-feathering at the expense of global health. The Trump administration has removed this check while expanding his and his associates’ self-dealing and dismissing the critical interactions of crises such as climate change and synthetic chemicals. Although Trump announced this move on inauguration day last year, the completion of the process last week puts the stamp of finality on his total abandonment of public health. This in turn threatens the collapse of WHO—and even the U.N.—altogether, which has wide implications for agriculture, particularly pesticide policies, climate action (and inaction), and infectious disease monitoring, including vaccines and pandemic prevention. [See commentary: On Public and Environmental Health and Worldwide Collaboration.] Other U.N. environmental, health, and agricultural organizations on the list are groups focused on forest degradation, freshwater and oceans, mining, minerals, metals, and sustainable development, biodiversity, and ecosystem […]