(Beyond Pesticides, November 1, 2013) Insecticides commonly used in homes and schools are associated with behavioral problems in children, according to a recent study by Canadian researchers. The study investigates exposure to pyrethroid pesticides, used in more than 3,500 products, including flea and tick controls, cockroach sprays, and head lice controls. The study, Urinary metabolites of organophosphates and pyrethroid pesticides and behavioral problems in Canadian children, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, raises serious concerns about the impact of pyrethroids, which are increasingly used as a replacement for organophosphates.

This study uses data from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007-2009), a nationally representative survey, so researchers are able to apply these findings to the entire population of Canadian children. In a previous study among U.S. children, researchers at the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) examined the metabolites of pyrethroids in children below the age of six. Similarly, they found pyrethroid insecticides in more than 70 percent of the samples, concluding that children had significantly higher metabolite concentrations than those of adolescents. Together these studies demonstrate that exposure is widespread, with real impacts to human health.

In the recent study, researchers analyzed organophosphate and pyrethroid metabolites in the urine of 770 Canadian children between the ages of 6 and 11. Each parent was also asked three questions about their use of indoor pesticides, pyrethroid pesticides, and outdoor pesticides within the last month. The study found, “significant associations of high scores on emotional symptoms with use of pesticides for pets/head lice, and for any use of pesticides (either indoor, outdoor, or pets/head lice), in the previous month (adjusted OR [odds ratio]  = 3.8 [elevated by 3.8 times]; 95% CI: 1.5, 9.5 and adjusted OR = 2.7; 95% CI: 1.5, 5.1, respectively).”  The study  authors continue,  “In addition, indoor use of pesticides in the previous month was significantly associated with elevated scores on conduct problems (adjusted OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 1.0, 10.5).”

Though only 14 percent of parents reported pesticide use in the last month, researchers Youssef Oulhote, M.Eng, PhD., and Maryse Bouchard, PhD., of Université de Montréal, found that 97 percent of children had traces of the pyrethroid metabolite cis-DCCA in their urine, while 91 percent of them had traces of at least one organophosphate metabolite. “This suggests that exposure events are common”¦[and that] although pyrethroids are assumed to degrade quickly by hydrolysis and photolysis, these processes might be considerably slowed indoors, thus leaving pesticides residues to linger and accumulate,” the study says.

The study concludes that with a tenfold increase in urinary levels of cis-DCCA, children are twice as likely to score high on parent-reported behavioral problems, including inattention and hyperactivity. Cis-DCCA and trans-DCCA, the breakdown products of pyrethroids are specifically traced to the pesticides permethrin, cypermethrin, and cyfluthrin.

Pesticide products containing synthetic pyrethroids are often described by pest control operators and community mosquito management bureaus as “safe as chrysanthemum flowers.” While pyrethroids are a synthetic version of an extract from the chrysanthemum plant, they are chemically engineered to be more toxic, take longer to break down, and are often formulated with synergists, increasing potency, and compromising the human body’s ability to detoxify the pesticide.

Pyrethroids are known irritants and can have a high acute toxicity depending on the specific formulation. Pyrethroids have also been connected to multiple symptoms of acute toxicity, asthma, incoordination, tremors, and convulsions. In addition to human health effects pyrethroids are also persistent in the environment and adversely impact non-target organisms. A recent study found that residents of New York City are more highly exposed to organophosphates and pyrethroid pesticides than the average American. Another 2008 survey found pyrethroid contamination in 100 percent of urban streams sampled in California.

Mounting research on the impacts of pesticides to human health present a clear need for least-toxic management of homes, which effectively prevents the infestation of unwanted insects without the use of synthetic chemicals. These techniques include exclusion, sanitation and maintenance practices, as well as mechanical and least-toxic controls (which include boric acid and diatomaceous earth). Based on range of successful pest prevention practices, use of these hazardous chemicals are unnecessary.

For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ factsheet, Common Pesticide Poison Homes and Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix.

Sources: Environmental Health News, Environmental Health Perspectives

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 31, 2013) Bats get a bad rap on Halloween with their image synonymous with blood-sucking vampires; however, the real scary thing about bats is that they are disappearing due to a myriad of threats, including pesticides, habitat destruction, and the horrible white-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease caused by the fungus Pseudogymnoascus (Geomyces) destructans. Researchers are reporting an even bleaker picture, finding very little evidence of what might stop the disease from spreading further and persisting indefinitely in bat caves. The new study, from researchers at the Illinois Natural History Survey at the University of Illinois, found that the fungus can make a meal out of just about any carbon source likely to be found in caves, said graduate student Daniel Raudabaugh, who led the research under the direction of survey mycologist Andrew Miller, Ph.D. The study, Nutritional Capability of and Substrate Suitability for Pseudogymnoascus destructans, the Causal Agent of Bat White-Nose Syndrome is published in PLOS One.

“It can basically live on any complex carbon source, which encompasses insects, undigested insect parts in guano, wood, dead fungi and cave fish,” Mr. Raudabaugh said. “We looked at all the different nitrogen sources and found that basically it can grow on all of them. It can grow over a very wide range of pH; it doesn’t have trouble in any pH unless it’s extremely acidic.”

In 2006, around the same time that honey bees started disappearing from their hives, a hibernating bat in a New York cave was discovered with a strange white fungus growing on its muzzle and wings. Since that first detection, WNS has spread across the United States. Like colony collapse disorder in honeybees, the direct cause of WNS is poorly understood. There has not been much research on role of pesticides in WNS, however there has been much research linking pesticides to immunosuppression in bats, which may make them more susceptible to WNS. An extensive article by William Quarles, Ph.D., was published this summer by The IPM Practitioner, which lays out much of the research that has been done on bats, pesticides and white nose syndrome.

Another study, “Bats at risk? Bat activity and insecticide residue analysis of food items in an apple orchard,” published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, shows that bats, due to their long life span and tendency to only have one offspring at a time, are particularly sensitive to reproductive effects from pesticides. The study details the health effects of bats foraging on insects in an apple orchard after it was sprayed with the insecticides fenoxycarb and chlorpyrifos. Researchers conclude that bats should be given greater consideration in risk-assessments for pesticide products. Not only can bats be exposed through their diet, but they can also encounter pesticides through drift and inhalation, as farmers often spray their fields at night to avoid harming honey bees.

Bats are a crucial indicator species, interacting with many elements of the ecosystem. They are one of the only nocturnal pollinators and the only nocturnal insect predator in the US, playing a key role both for plants and for farmers. Organic farmers in particular, are reliant on bat pollinators as a pest management tool: one brown bat can kill between 3000 and 7000 insects per night. A study published in 2011 in the journal Science estimated that bats provide $3.7 Billion to $53 Billion per year worth of pest control services to agricultural operations, and that number does not include pollination services.

According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), P. destructans has killed more than 5.5 million bats in the U.S. and Canada. The fungus thrives at low temperatures, and spreads to bats whose body temperature drops below 20 degrees Celsius (68 degrees Fahrenheit) when they are hibernating in infected caves. Previous research has shown that the fungus persists in caves even after the bats are gone.

“…(We) found that P. destructans can live perfectly happily off the remains of most organisms that co-inhabit the caves with the bats,” Dr. Miller said. “This means that whether the bats are there or not, it’s going to be in the caves for a very long time.”

Beyond Pesticides called on Congress back in 2011 to stop the spread of WNS, which has killed more than 5.7 to 6.7 million bats in North America. Bats with WNS exhibit uncharacteristic behavior during cold winter months, including flying outside in the day and clustering near the entrances of hibernacula. Bats have been found sick and dying in unprecedented numbers in and around caves and mines. In some caves 90% to 100% of hibernating bats succumb to the virus.

Beyond Pesticides will continue to advocate for pollinator species, including bats, to learn more about our work go to our Pollinator Protection website.

To learn more about the horrors of what would happen if bats disappear, see FWS’ Director’s Corner. For more information on bats  or white nose syndrome, go to Bat Conservation International   or WhiteNoseSyndrome.org.

Source: Science Daily

Infographic: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 30, 2013) Once again, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators is urging Farm Bill conference committee members to accept a provision that would eliminate what they call a redundant permitting requirement for pesticide users. H.R. 935: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2013 is similar to a previous piece of legislation that was passed in the U.S.  House of Representatives  in 2011 to eliminate the requirement that pesticide applicators obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) permits (known as National Pollutant Discharge Elimination  System (NPDES) permit)  for applications where pesticides could be discharged into water. A  bipartisan group of  Senators hope to use the Farm Bill to eliminate permitting requirement, continuing to believe the myth that permits burden farmers and applicators.

The Senate and House are now in a conference committee to work out the details of a new Farm Bill to reauthorize the current law. A dozen Senators, led by Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., have asked House and Senate negotiators to do away with the CWA regulation of pesticide discharges as they consider a compromise Farm Bill. Legislation eliminating the CWA permitting requirement last year passed the House, but the move to strip the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the permitting authority has had more of a rocky road in the Senate. Attempts to strip CWA protections have so far had strong opposition from several Senators, including Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who have warned about the risks of harsh chemicals polluting the nation’s waterways.

According to an Oct. 17 letter sent by Sen. Hagan and 11 Senators to leaders of the Senate Agriculture Committee urging their support of H.R. 935, the Senators write that the CWA permits for pesticide discharges in U.S. waterways “impose resource and liability burdens on thousands of small businesses, farms ”¦ in addition to exposure to citizen lawsuits.” The Senators believe that the permits are unnecessary and duplicative regulation that wastes taxpayer dollars and provides little to no environmental or public health benefits. The senators say that pesticide users already have to comply with under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

However, the CWA permits, which do not apply to agricultural pesticide applications, only affect a relatively small number of pesticide applications, and do not prevent applicators from using pesticides, especially for public health emergencies. The permits do require applicators to record their pesticide applications and monitor application sites for any adverse incidents, which must be reported. For many states the cost of the permit is as low as $25. The myth that the CWA permits for pesticide discharges near waterways are burdensome has not been substantiated. Read “Clearing up the Confusion Surrounding the New NPDES General Permit.”

Conversely, the potentially high cost of public health problems, environmental clean-up efforts, and irreversible ecological damage that can result from unchecked, indiscriminate pollution of waterways is being ignored by opponents of CWA regulation. The reality is that this permitting process encourages pesticide users to seek alternative approaches to pest management if their current methods are going to contaminate nearby sources of water. This is underscored by the recent federal report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) which finds that 83 percent of streams in agricultural and urban areas contain at least one aquatic community that was altered notably as a result of runoff from pesticides and contaminants. Previous USGS reports have documented pesticides and fertilizers in U.S. streams and drinking water. Herbicides like atrazine, metalachlor, and simizine are among those often found in surface waters of 186 rivers and streams sampled by USGS since the early 1990s, and are highly correlated with the presence of upstream wastewater sources or upstream agricultural and urban land use. Given this data and the vast knowledge that we have on organic, integrated pest management (IPM) and non-chemical solutions, H.R. 935 will be a disastrous step backwards.

Additionally, many believe that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and  Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) sufficiently regulates pesticide use near waterways, but this is not accurate, given the prevalence of surface and ground water contamination routinely detected in the nation’s streams, as well as numerous incidents of adverse ecological findings.  Furthermore, FIFRA and CWA have fundamentally different standards and methods in determining whether a pesticide will have unreasonable adverse effects on the environment and/or human health. CWA uses a health-based standard to protect waterways and requires permits when chemicals are directly deposited into rivers, lakes and streams, whereas FIFRA uses a highly generalized risk assessment that weighs risks versus benefits to allow a certain amount of pollution (i.e. risk) in exchange for controversial calculations of benefit and a threshold of harm that can vary upon EPA’s discretion and which does not consider the availability of safer alternatives.

H.R. 935, contained in the   current House version of the Farm Bill but not in the Senate’s, would reverse the 2009 ruling in National Cotton Council v. U.S. EPA, a federal appeals ruled that EPA must require new Clean Water Act permits, under the CWA’s National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES), from pesticide users who spray over water. This ruling overturned Bush administration policy that created exemptions from regulation for pesticides under the CWA and applied the less protective standards of the FIFRA. EPA began requiring the permits in fall 2011. Since the requirement was enacted in 2011, it has been under attack from industry and their allies in Congress. It began with H.R. 872: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, which passed through the Senate Agriculture Committee but never reached the Senate floor. Similar legislation was re-introduced by Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Mike Johanns (R-NE). Sen. Hagan was also behind a most recent attempt earlier this year to dismantle CWA permits with The Sensible Environmental Protection Act (S-EPA), which sought to clarify that Clean Water Act permits were not required for pesticide applications in or near water. This bill also asked EPA to report back to Congress on whether FIFRA can be improved to better protect human health and the environment from pesticide applications.

Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), both members of the Senate agriculture panel, joined the new call to use the Farm Bill to eliminate the requirement. Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.), James Risch (R-Idaho), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), David Vitter (R-La.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) also signed the letter. More than 160 organizations, including the American Farm Bureau Federation and National Corn Growers Association, this week also called on farm bill conferees to eliminate the requirement.

Waterways in the U.S. are increasingly imperiled from various agents, including agricultural and industrial discharges, nutrient loading (nitrogen and phosphorus), and biological agents such as pathogens. Pesticides discharged into our nation’s rivers, lakes and streams can harm or kill fish and amphibians. These toxicants have the potential to accumulate in the fish we eat and the water we drink. The spirit of the Clean Water Act is that every community in the United States has the right to enjoy fishable and swimmable bodies of water. Without the Clean Water Act, there are no common sense backstops requiring applicators to at least consider alternatives to spraying toxic pesticides directly into waterways.

Act Now! We can’t afford to lose these protections. Tell your Senators to oppose any efforts to undermine the Clean Water Act.

For more information, read our factsheet, Clearing up the Confusion Surrounding the New NPDES General Permit and visit our Threatened Waters page. To keep up to date on Congressional and government agency actions, sign-up for Beyond Pesticides’ action alerts.

(Beyond Pesticides, October 29, 2013) Early-life exposure to the herbicide atrazine makes frogs more susceptible to death from chytrid (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis), a fungal disease implicated in amphibian declines across the globe. The research, Early-life exposure to a herbicide has enduring effects on pathogen-induced mortality, published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B and led by University of South Florida (USF) biologist Jason Rohr, Ph.D, provides critical information for scientists hoping to stem the global demise of amphibian populations. “Understanding how stressors cause enduring health effects is important because these stressors might then be avoided or mitigated during formative developmental stages to prevent lasting increases in disease susceptibility,” Dr. Rohr explains.

Researchers exposed tadpoles to atrazine at levels found in the environment for a period of  six days during the animal’s development, in combination with exposure to chytrid fungus (linked to worldwide amphibian decline), resulted in increased mortality 46 days later. According to the study, “[E]arly-life exposure to atrazine altered growth and development, which resulted in exposure to chytrid at more susceptible developmental stages and sizes, and reduced tolerance of infection, elevating mortality risk at an equivalent fungal burden to frogs unexposed to atrazine. Moreover, there was no evidence of recovery from atrazine exposure.”

“These findings are important because they suggest that amphibians might need to be exposed only to atrazine briefly as larvae for atrazine to cause persistent increases in their risk of chytrid-induced mortality,” said Dr. Rohr. “Our findings suggest that reducing early-life exposure of amphibians to atrazine could reduce lasting increases in the risk of mortality from a disease associated with worldwide amphibian declines.”

This research is the latest linking global species declines to pesticide-induced stress. In fact, there are many striking similarities between this research and studies on the decline of pollinator populations. Recent studies linking neonicotinoid pesticides to honey bee declines also put an emphasis on the impacts these chemicals have on immune system functioning.  One study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Neonicotinoid clothianidin adversely affects insect immunity and promotes replication of a viral pathogen in honey bees, shows that exposure to neonicotinoid pesticides results in increased levels of a particular protein in bees that inhibit a key molecule involved in immune response, making the insects more susceptible to attack by harmful viruses. A study entitled Chronic sublethal stress causes bee colony failure, published in the journal Ecology Letters, found that low-level exposure to the pesticide imidacloprid at levels bees encounter in the field causes subtle impacts on individual bees that eventually cause colonies to collapse.

Although atrazine alone did not result in higher frog mortality rates, earlier findings from Dr. Rohr  consistently show the potential for the chemical to negatively affect frog biology by affecting their growth and immune and endocrine systems. A number of studies conducted   by Tyrone Hayes, Ph.D., of the University of California Berkeley reveal that even minute doses of atrazine can induce hermaphroditism in male frogs, in effect “chemically castrating” the population.  As discussed in Dr. Hayes’ article in Pesticides and You titled Protecting Life: From Research to Regulation, adapted from his speech at Beyond Pesticides’ 31^st National Pesticide Forum, this “chemical castration” is not limited to amphibians, but has been repeated in fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals by other researchers studying atrazine. However, Dr. Hayes’ important work is at risk due to government cutbacks, industry attacks, and exceedingly high fees from the UC Berkeley’s Office of Laboratory Animal Care. In response, Beyond Pesticides has established The Fund for Independent Science to support Dr. Hayes’ work. Donations can be pledged to help raise the funds necessary to keep this critical research going forward.

Apart from atrazine, a number of other agricultural chemicals adversely impact frog populations. A 2012 study entitled New effects of Roundup on amphibians: Predators reduce herbicide mortality; herbicides induce antipredator morphology by Rick Relyea, PhD reveals that the widely used herbicide Roundup causes stress that results in the same morphological changes in frogs that would occur if the frog were exposed to a predator. Research published earlier this year, Terrestrial pesticide exposure of amphibians: An underestimated cause of global decline?, shows that the commonly used fungicide Headline (pyraclostrobin) and Captan Omya (captan) caused 100% mortality in the frogs tested when the products were applied at rates recommended by the label. Researcher Carsten Brühl, Ph.D. at the University of Koblenz-Landau in Germany calls the results “alarming” with the potential for “large-scale effects” on amphibians.

In his talk, Dr. Hayes explains, “If I didn’t have the lab data and the field data, you would never guess why these frog populations were disappearing. You would think it was disease. But in fact, pesticides and other stressors are playing an incredible role in terms of determining how susceptible the animals are to disease”¦ Over 70% of all amphibian species are in decline. This is a group of animals that have been around since the days of the dinosaurs and we are losing species now faster than the dinosaurs disappeared from earth. This sixth mass extinction will be the first time that a mass extinction on earth will be caused by a single species.”

Dr. Rohr emphasizes prevention as an important way to interpret the results of this research and moderate amphibian declines. “Identifying which, when, and how stressors cause enduring effects on disease risk could facilitate disease prevention in wildlife and humans, an approach that is often more cost-effective and efficient than reactive medicine,” Dr. Rohr said.

Organic agriculture can play a role in reducing and eventually eliminating the load of synthetic pesticides in our environment, which, as evidenced, result in cascading complications to natural ecosystems and numerous externalities unable to be accounted for through the risk assessment process employed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory bodies. Support a healthy future for the planet and yourself by purchasing organic products whenever possible. For more information on amphibian declines and how to contribute to Dr. Hayes important work, see The Fund for Independent Science. See Beyond Pesticides’ program page for additional information on the benefits of organic agriculture.

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

Source: Science Daily

(Beyond Pesticides, October 28, 2013) Scientists at Washington State University (WSU), in a laboratory study,  determined that exposure to the insecticide DDT ””banned in the U.S. since 1972, but still used today in developing countries for malaria abatement programs””impacts multiple generations, ultimately contributing to obesity three generations down the line. The study, published in the journal BMC Medicine, provides the scientific community with new information on multi-generational impacts of pesticide exposure.

Lead researcher Michael Skinner, PhD., professor of biological sciences at WSU, and colleagues exposed pregnant rats to DDT to determine the long-term impacts to health across generations. The study, Ancestral dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) exposure promotes epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of obesity, finds that the first generation of rats’ offspring developed severe health problems, ranging from kidney disease, prostate disease, and ovary disease, to tumor development. Interestingly, by the third generation more than half of the rats have increased levels of weight gain and fat storage. In other words, the great grandchildren of the exposed rats are much more likely to be obese.

“Therefore, your ancestors’ environmental exposures may influence your disease development even though you have never had a direct exposure,” the study finds.

Previous studies have demonstrated that exposure to chemicals, including fungicides, dioxins, and other endocrine disruptors, can have severe health impacts on offspring. This study builds on a history of research showing that DDT can continue to impact health across generations. Evidence of multi-generational impacts from pesticide exposure is not isolated to laboratory animals. A 2007 scholarly review, entitled Pesticides, Sexual Development, Reproduction and Fertility: Current Perspective and Future Direction, written by Theo Colborn, PhD. and Lynn Carroll, PhD, pointed to studies linking the legacy chemical DDT to transgenerational health effects.

DDT is an organochlorine pesticide that was banned for most uses in the U.S. in 1972 due to its persistent and highly toxic nature. DDT was widely used to control mosquitoes for malaria abatement, as well as in agriculture. Despite the fact that DDT was banned in the U.S. more than 40 years ago, concentrations of this toxic chemical’s major metabolite, DDE, have remained alarmingly high in many ecosystems, including surface waters, the Arctic, and even U.S. national parks. A recent study found concentrations of DDE river otters of the Illinois River, at levels higher than those detected in otters only 20 years ago. This is because the chemicals DDT/DDE are considered persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are organic compounds that are resistant to environmental degradation through chemical, biological, and photolytic processes. Because of this, they have been observed to persist in the environment, are capable of long-range transport, bioaccumulate in human and animal tissue, and biomagnify in food chains.

Though DDT was proposed for elimination under the 2001 Stockholm Convention of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), it has continued to be used worldwide due in part to backing by the World Health Organization (WHO). In 2006, WHO issued a position statement promoting the use of indoor spray for malaria control, despite the fact that effective, least toxic mosquito control methods exist. Later, in 2009, UNEP and WHO announced a renewed international effort to combat malaria with an incremental reduction of the reliance on DDT. However, efforts to invest in real solutions are often derailed by those promoting DDT as a “silver bullet” for malaria prevention.

However, the adverse impacts to humans ””including cancer, reproductive disease, neurological disease, developmental problems, and now obesity”” paint a cautionary tale that long-banned pesticides continue to impact human health and the environment. While the study makes no conclusions about the risks posed to human health, Dr. Skinner commented to the LA Times that DDT advocates should take pause to consider the potential long-term impacts.

“Although the number of lives saved from malaria is significant, the long-term health and economic effects on survivors and subsequent generations also need to be considered,” the study concludes.

Source: LA Times

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 25, 2013) A report released by a Johns Hopkins University panel reached two disturbing conclusions this week: (1) the United States population is continuing to face unnecessary public health risks because of the use of antibiotics in livestock production, and (2) the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies are not likely to take meaningful action to address this risk.

The report, Industrial Food Animal Production in America: Examining the Impact of the Pew Commission’s Priority Recommendations, follows five years after the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production (PCIFAP) released its previous investigative report and recommendation to, among other actions, phase out and then ban nontherapeutic (or subtherapeutic) uses of antibiotics in industrial food animal production. The consequences of not following through on this recommendation would place the public at risk of increased pools of antibiotic-resistant superbugs.

These superbugs threaten at least 2 million people each year and at least 23,000 people die each year as a direct result of these infections.  Many more people die from other conditions that were complicated by an antibiotic-resistant infection.

Despite some congressional response  following the release of the 2008 Pew Commission report and a federal court order requiring FDA to begin the process of revoking approval for uses of penicillin and tetracycline to promote growth in livestock, the antibiotic resistance problem remains a serious health threat. This most recent assessment by Johns Hopkins University Center for a Livable Future (CLF) finds that not only does the public safety threat from increased antibiotic-resistant bacteria remain, but that the Administration and Congress have acted “regressively” in policymaking on industrial food animal system issues.

Robert S. Lawrence, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, which produced the report, explained in a press release on the report, “There has been an appalling lack of progress. The failure to act by the [U.S. Department of Agriculture] (USDA) and FDA, the lack of action or concern by the Congress, and continued intransigence of the animal agriculture industry have made all of our problems worse.”

The problem dates back to the 1950s, when the practice of feeding subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics to livestock began to take hold.   This practice has become chronic in the industrial-style livestock production systems.   The unsanitary conditions produced by packing excessive numbers of animals into an unnatural environment create the risk of infectious disease outbreaks that would be averted under living conditions appropriate to each species.  Livestock producers utilizing these practices, capitalize on the accelerated weight gain and improved feed conversion efficiencies associated with animals fed subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics.

The American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, and hundreds of other organizations have recommended that livestock producers be prohibited from using antibiotics for growth promotion if those antibiotics are also used in human medicine.

Unfortunately, it is no small problem. While the Johns Hopkins panel report notes that part of the problem lies in the failure of USDA and FDA in tracking and requesting data on agricultural and livestock antibiotic usage, the best FDA estimates show agriculture as accounting for 80 percent of antibiotic sales, the other 20 percent allocated to human, therapeutic consumption.

There is hope for concerned consumers and the federal government:  Organics.

Under the Organic Foods Production Act, (OFPA) certified USDA livestock producers cannot use growth promoters and hormones, whether implanted, ingested, or injected, including antibiotics.   Additionally, certified USDA Organic livestock producers cannot use subtherapeutic does of antibiotics, meaning they cannot administer low-dose antibiotic treatments that are not for the purpose of treating sick livestock.   The standards also require that producers maintain living conditions that prevent infectious diseases from becoming established and adversely impacting livestock health.  Because of these standards, the choice to buy and eat organic beef, pork, and chicken is one way to help fight against unnecessary antibiotic over-use, but also to remind regulators that a system is in place which allows for successful livestock production without the unnecessary and dangerous overuse of antibiotics.

Keeping Organic Strong

Beyond livestock production, organic farmers growing apples and pears are allowed to use the antibiotics streptomycin and tetracycline to control a fruit tree disease called fire blight. The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), the principle advisory body responsible for advising USDA on its organic certification program, has been increasingly reluctant to extend these allowances due to concerns about accelerated resistance in pathogenic organisms and the availability of effective cultural practices and biological treatments for managing fire blight. The NOSB has recommended extending the use of tetracycline and streptomycin to manage fire blight in pear and apple trees through October 2014. At its April 2013 meeting, the NOSB chose to keep the 2014 expiration date in place for tetracycline, in response to a petition seeking continued use from the Washington State Horticultural Association, California Pear Advisory Board, and U.S. Apple Association. At its April 2014 meeting, the Board will be considering a petition to allow continued use of streptomycin, filed by the above petitioners plus the Michigan Horticultural Association.

Through supporting organic agriculture and fighting for even stronger organic standards, consumers have the power to make change happen on this important issue as regulators sit idle. For more information on what you can do to advance organic agriculture, see Beyond Pesticides’  Keeping Organic Strong website, which provides a number of resources for people to participate in the organic review process alongside the NOSB.

Sources: Al Jazeera America, Center for a Liveable Future

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 24, 2013) A team of scientists in Italy believe they have found the molecular mechanism through which neonicotinoid pesticides adversely impacts the immune system of honey bees. The team’s experiments suggest that exposure to neonicotinoids results in increased levels of a particular protein in bees that inhibits a key molecule involved in the immune response, making the insects more susceptible to attack by harmful viruses. Though previous studies have indicated that exposure to minute amount of neurotoxic pesticides like neonicotinoids severely impair the immune systems of bees, making them more susceptible to pathogens, the underlying mechanism has was not yet been fully  understood. The study, Neonicotinoid clothianidin adversely affects insect immunity and promotes replication of a viral pathogen in honey bees, is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). This work is the latest of several studies to add weight to the urgency of repeated calls from U.S. beekeeper and environmental groups for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to  suspend the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, as the European Commission recently decided this past April.

Neonicotinoids, a class of insecticides that includes clothianidin and imidicloprid, are taken up by a plant’s vascular system and expressed through pollen, nectar, and gutation droplets from which bees forage and drink. They are particularly dangerous because, in addition to being acutely toxic in high doses, they also result in serious sublethal effects when insects are exposed to chronic low doses, as they are through pollen and water droplets laced with the chemical, as well as dust that is released into the air when coated seeds are planted with automated vacuum seed planters. These effects cause significant problems for the health of individual honey bees as well as the overall health of honey bee colonies. Effects include disruptions in bee mobility, navigation, feeding behavior, foraging activity, memory and learning, and overall hive activity.

Up until now, the causal link between insecticide exposure and immune alteration has been unclear. Francesco Pennacchio, Ph.D. of the University of Naples Federico II, and his colleagues identified a gene in insects similar to that found in other animals that is known to regulate the immune response. This gene codes for a leucine-rich repeat protein family, or LRR, which has been shown to suppress the activity of a key protein involved in immune signaling, called NF-κB. When the researchers exposed bees to sublethal doses of the neonicotinoid clothianidin, they saw a significant increase in the expression of the gene encoding the LRR protein, and a concomitant suppression of the NF-κB signaling pathway. These effects were not seen when bees were exposed to the organophosphate insecticide chlorpyriphos.

The team infected bees with a common pathogen, deformed wing virus (DWV), and exposed them to clothianidin and another neonicotinoid, imidacloprid, at concentrations similar to those that would be found in the field, The researcher found significantly increased replication of the virus, which was not seen either in untreated bees or those exposed to chlorpyriphos. While the virus is common in bees and usually remains inactive, it is  kept in check by the bees’ immune system. The data demonstrates that the two neonicotinoids actively promote DWV replication.

“The reported effect on immunity exerted by neonicotinoids will allow additional toxicological tests to be defined to assess if chronic exposure of bees to sub-lethal doses of agrochemicals can adversely affect their immune system and health conditions,” says team member Francesco Nazzi, Ph.D. of the University of Udine. “Moreover, our data indicate the possible occurrence in insects, as in vertebrates, of a neural modulation of the immune response. This sets the stage for future studies in this research area, and poses the question on how neurotoxic substances may affect the immune response.”

Since 2006, honey bees nationwide have suffered ongoing and rapid population declines, from hive abandonment and bee die-off in a phenomenon known as colony collapse disorder (CCD). These findings add a significant piece of information to the ongoing and discussion of the role of neonicotinoid pesticides’ link to CCD, and, according to researchers, this work has important implications for toxicology and risk assessment studies.

The scientists conclude: “The results we report clearly indicate the need for longer-term toxicity tests, aiming at assessing how the pathogen progression in honey bees is influenced by insecticide residues and by their cumulative effects, both on adults and larvae. A comprehensive and thorough assessment of insecticide impact on bees will significantly contribute to their conservation and to the development of more sustainable protocols of intensive agriculture.”

Take Action: Join Beyond Pesticides BEE Protective campaign

• Use our model resolution to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.
• Join us in asking Lowe’s and Home Depot and other leading garden centers to take action and stop the sale of neonicotinoids and plants treated with these chemicals.
• Tell your member of Congress to support the Save America’s Pollinators Act.  
• Sign the  Pesticide Free Zone Declaration and pledge to maintain your yard, park, garden or other green space as organically-managed and pollinator friendly.
• Use our model resolution to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.

An extensive overview of the major studies showing the effects of neonicotinoids on pollinator health can be found on Beyond Pesticides’ What the Science Shows webpage.

Source: Royal Society of Chemistry

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 23, 2013) Ball State University, Indiana has cancelled plans to spray herbicides on the lawns around its K-12 school after objections from parents worried that it would expose their children to toxic chemicals. The university planned to use Trimec 992, a 2,4-D product, but a petition started by parents helped to put a stop to the weedkiller.

The spraying was scheduled for last week, the start of the fall break at Burris Laboratory School, a separate K-12 school district overseen by Ball State University. School Principal Cathlene Darragh sent an email to Burris parents last Friday  explaining that  the school decided against the spraying. “We have received a great deal of feedback from parents and the community about possible weed and pest control for the school lawn that was scheduled for this weekend. We have worked with the facilities department to further evaluate the need to spray. Upon further consideration, we have decided to forgo the scheduled spraying.”

Parents mobilized after it became known that the school planned to spray Trimec 992, a 2,4-D product on school grounds. 2,4-D, a widely used herbicide in many ‘weed and feed’ lawn care products, is associated with many human and environmental health impacts. 2,4-D has been linked to cancer, reproductive effects, endocrine disruption, kidney and liver damage, is neurotoxic and toxic to beneficial insects (such as bees), birds, and fish. Additionally, scientific studies have confirmed significantly elevated rates of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma for farmers who use 2,4-D. For more on 2,4-D, see the Pesticde Gateway. In a similar incident, parents in Durango, Colorado created an uproar when they discovered a synthetic weed killer containing   2,4-D, dicamba, and mecoprop-p (MCCP) would be applied to the athletic fields before school games, which led to the city postponing all youth soccer games scheduled on treated fields and led to the adoption of community policy prohibiting such use.

Dave Ring, owner of The Downtown Farm Stand organic grocery store, and Michael Williamson, a parent and physician at IU Health Ball Memorial Hospital, led the charge against using the weed killer. A petition was started against the spraying that gathered more than 130 signatures as of last week. According to the petition, “spraying pesticides on the lawn of Burris School is unnecessary and puts young children at risk for exposure to toxins. Exposing children to pesticides is unnecessary because there are sustainable landscaping options that are safe for everyone.”

At first, Ball State University defended its use of Trimec 992, saying that it is used on campus lawns to maintain an aesthetically pleasing look, and spraying helps to maintain a good turf environment, preventing turf from becoming hard and causing injury. However, this is a popular myth, many turf managers believe. This myth maintains that dandelions and tufts of plants not taken care of with chemicals cause children to trip and injure themselves. However, these injury claims are not substantiated. The safety of a field is not dependent on whether there is a chemical-based maintenance program; any turf that has an irregular surface can lead to falls or twisted ankles. In fact, chemically-treated turf is generally harder and more compacted than turf not treated with chemicals because there are little to no soil organisms to aerate and break up the soil. Organically managed turf, however, is not only a viable alternative to one managed with pesticides, but can be just as aesthetically pleasing and cost-effective. Many communities and school districts are foregoing chemical management of their grounds for an organic system which does not rely on toxic inputs. See Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticides and Playing Fields.

Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix

Children face unique hazards from pesticide exposure. They take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults in the food they eat and air they breathe. Their developing organ systems often make them more sensitive to toxic exposure. The U.S. EPA, National Academy of Sciences, and American Public Health Association, among others, have voiced concerns about the danger that pesticides pose to children. The body of evidence in the scientific literature shows that pesticide exposure can adversely affect a child’s neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine system, even at low levels. Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics published a report, which concluded that, “Children encounter pesticides daily and have unique susceptibilities to their potential toxicity.”

Studies show children’s developing organs create “early windows of great vulnerability” during which exposure to pesticides can cause great damage. Earlier, the National Academy of Sciences reported that children are more susceptible to chemicals than adults, and estimates that 50% of lifetime pesticide exposure occurs during the first five years of life. Children ages 6-11 nationwide have significantly higher levels of pesticide residues in their bodies than all other age categories. Even at low levels, exposure to pesticides can cause serious adverse health effects. Additionally, scientific studies show that herbicides such as 2,4-D are tracked indoors from lawns where residues may remain for up to a year in carpets, dust, air and surfaces.

Pesticides on home lawns and in schools are significant pathways of childhood exposures. Of the 30 most commonly used lawn pesticides, 19 can cause cancer, 13 are linked to birth defects, 21 can affect reproduction and 15 are nervous system toxicants. Studies find that pesticides such as 2,4-D pass from mother to child through umbilical cord blood and breast milk. According to a 2004 study, young infants and toddlers exposed to herbicides within their first year of life are 4.5 times more likely to develop asthma by the age of five, and almost 2.5 times more likely when exposed to insecticides. In spite of this, many schools across the country continue to use toxic pesticides. A 2013 survey on pesticide use on public school grounds across the state of Maine found that 51% of schools surveyed spray pesticides, many of which have been linked to human health impacts, including kidney disease and links to non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.

On the other hand, many other school districts are turning away from managing grounds with toxic chemicals. Connecticut currently has a statewide prohibition on the use of toxic pesticides on school grounds. The state of New York also acted to protect children by passing the Child Safe Playing Field Act in 2010, which requires that all schools, preschools, and day care centers stop using pesticides on any playgrounds or playing field. In Boulder, CO, children led a rally to protest the approval of two pesticides on city parks.

Mr. Ring says he’s “very happy and grateful” to Ball State President Jo Ann Gora and her administration for being responsive to parents’ concerns. “Getting involved in your community does make a difference!”

You too can make a difference in your community. For information on how to manage your lawn without the use of harmful pesticides, see Beyond Pesticides’ Lawns and Landscapes webpage. The site also provides an online training, Organic Land Care Basic Training for Municipal Officials and Transitioning Landscapers, to assist in going pesticide-free.

For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ Children and Schools page. To see more scientific research on the effects of pesticides on human health, see our Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database.

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

Source: The Star Press

(Beyond Pesticides, October 22, 2013) Nearly a week after plant geneticists from the world’s largest agrichemical companies accepted the World Food Prize, an Associated Press (AP) investigation links the effect of their work to soaring pesticide use and resulting health problems.  According to the  AP, the advent of “no-till” farming methods in Argentina with the use of genetically engineered (GE) crops and companion pesticides has caused significant health impacts in farming towns abutting GE fields. Since the introduction of these practices in Argentina by agrichemical companies such as Monsanto, cancer rates have skyrocketed and the number of birth defects has quadrupled.

Argentina was an early adopter of GE technology in 1996, when it was billed as the silver bullet to solve world hunger with increased crop  productivity, and improved human and environmental health resulting from decreased pesticide use. The most widely used GE crops, such as Monsanto’s Roundup Ready line of corn and soybeans, allow farmers to apply the herbicide glyphosate during and after seed plantings in order to kill weeds without risk of the main crop dying off. Today, almost all the corn, soy, and cotton produced in the country are GE.

As the  AP reports, and researchers in the U.S. have corroborated, GE technology only decreases pesticide use for a short period of time. After the brief decline in Argentina, pesticide use soared from 9 million gallons in 1990 to 84 million gallons today as weed  resistance developed to glyphosate. In response, agrichemical companies have encouraged the use of more hazardous and toxic chemicals to kill weeds. Argentinian farmers are now mixing in and applying herbicides such as 2,4-D, a chlorophenoxy herbicide that made up half of Agent Orange, the chemical mixture used to defoliate forests and croplands in the Vietnam War. 2,4-D has also been linked to kidney/liver damage, neurotoxicity, and birth defects. Earlier this year the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) delayed the introduction of a new generation of GE crops resistant to 2,4-D.

GE crops’ current mainstay chemical glyphosate is also associated with a wide range of health effects. The  AP references a study performed by Argentine doctor Andres Carrasco, MD that found low doses of glyphosate can cause spinal defects in frogs and chickens in communities where farm chemicals are ubiquitous. A 2008 study links glyphosate exposure to a 2x increase in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. A review of the literature on glyphosate earlier this year by scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) found concerning evidence linking the chemical to inhibition of the cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are critical detoxifying agents in the human body.

“If it’s possible to reproduce this in a laboratory, surely what is happening in the field is much worse,” Dr. Carrasco said. “And if it’s much worse, and we suspect that it is, what we have to do is put this under a magnifying glass.”

Monsanto has disputed findings that  link glyphosate to adverse health effects. The company said in response to the  AP‘s questions that chemical safety tests should only be done on live animals, and that injecting embryos is “less reliable and less relevant for human risk assessments.” Dr. Carrasco’s study,  Monsanto said that the results of “are not surprising given their methodology and unrealistic exposure scenarios.” On the MIT study, Monsanto released a blog post decrying the research as “Another Bogus ”˜Study,’” which “fails to consider other hypothetical causes.”

“Glyphosate is even less toxic than the repellent you put on your children’s skin,” said Pablo Vaquero, Monsanto’s corporate affairs director in Buenos Aires. “That said, there has to be a responsible and good use of these products because in no way would you put repellent in the mouths of children and no environmental applicator should spray fields with a tractor or a crop-duster without taking into account the environmental conditions and threats that stem from the use of the product.”Children are uniquely susceptible to the impacts of pesticide exposure because they take in more of a chemical relative to their body weight and have developing organ systems. As a point of fact, children that eat a conventional diet are putting pesticides in their mouths. A 2008 study found that children that switch from a diet of conventional produce to an all organic diet dramatically reduce the levels of pesticide in their urine within five days. However, in the U.S., regulators at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently more than doubled the allowable levels of the herbicide glyphosate on certain food commodities.

The AP documented dozens of cases around Argentina where poisons are applied in ways unanticipated by regulatory science or specifically banned by existing law. “It is evident that real world applications of GE technology run contrary to the many benefits extolled by agrichemical corporations,” said Beyond Pesticides executive director Jay Feldman. The on-the-ground impacts of GE agriculture in Argentina paint a grim picture for the country’s farming communities.  A government funded study in Ituzaingo Annex, Argentina found that 80% of children surveyed carried traces of pesticide in their blood.

“We didn’t set out to find problems with agrochemicals. We went to see what was happening with the people,” said Damian Verzenassi, M.D of the Environment and Health program at the National University of Rosario’s medical school. Dr. Verzenassi’s epidemiological study in Argentina’s Santa Fe province found cancer rates two to four times higher than the national average, with particular focus on breast, prostate, and lung cancers. “It could be linked to agrochemicals,” he said. “They do all sorts of analysis for toxicity of the first ingredient, but they have never studied the interactions between all the chemicals they’re applying.” The synergistic effects of pesticide exposure compose one of the “big unknowns” in current risk assessment methodologies employed by regulators.

The AP’s report found villagers using empty pesticide containers to store drinking and bathing water. “They prepare the seeds and the poison in their houses. And it’s very common, not only in Avia Terai but in nearby towns, for people to keep water for their houses in empty agrochemical containers,” explained surveyor Katherina Pardo. “Since there’s no treated drinking water here, the people use these containers anyway. They are a very practical people.”

Aixa Cano, a shy 5-year-old, has hairy moles all over her body. Her neighbor, 2-year-old Camila Veron, was born with multiple organ problems and is severely disabled. Doctors told their mothers that agrochemicals may be to blame.

“They told me that the water made this happen because they spray a lot of poison here,” said Camila’s mother, Silvia Achaval. “People who say spraying poison has no effect, I don’t know what sense that has because here you have the proof,” she added, pointing at her daughter.

Across the globe, communities are feeling the brunt of chemical- intensive GE agriculture and beginning to fight back. Just last week,   Kauai, Hawaii, dubbed “ground zero” for pesticides and experimental GE technology by local activists, approved new restrictions for agrichemical corporations operating on the island. In Mexico, a judge issued an injunction on the planting and selling of GE seed throughout the country earlier this month.

The best way to stop the planting of genetically engineered crops  in the U.S. is to purchase foods that have the USDA certified organic seal. Organic agriculture has a profound role to play in reducing and eliminating the widespread poisoning seen in pesticide intensive GE agriculture. Without the use of highly toxic and persistent synthetic pesticides, organic farming is healthier for farmworkers, communities, and consumers. Under organic standards, genetically modified organisms and their byproducts are prohibited in food production. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ webpage on  organic agriculture.

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

Source and Image Credit (and to view additional photos): Associated Press

(Beyond Pesticides, October 21, 2013) A study conducted by Sussex University researchers has identified the garden plants most attractive to  pollinating insects. The study’s findings are important as pollinating insects are declining globally and are facing growing habitat losses. The study also gives vital scientific information to individuals and communities on plants that are most beneficial to pollinators. Although creating pollinator friendly habits is an important step to slowing pollinator population decline, environmental groups and activists are focused on addressing the underlying problem that leads to pollinator population loss: the continuous use of toxic pesticides.

The study, Quantifying variation among garden plants in attractiveness to bees and other flower-visiting insects, published in Functional Ecology,  collected data over two summers by counting flower-visiting pollinators on 32 popular garden plant varieties to determine which varieties are more attractive to pollinators. The study found that the most attractive flowers are 100 times more attractive than the least attractive flowers. According to the study, the most attractive flowers are borage, lavender, marjoram, and open-flower dahlias. Majoram was the best all-round flower, attracting honey bees, bumble bees, other bees, hover flies, and butterflies. While information on pollinator friendly flowers is widely available, this study was designed to, “put that advice on a firmer scientific footing, by gathering information about the actual number of insects visiting the flowers to collect nectar or pollen,” according to study co-author Francis Ratnieks, Ph.D., quoted in a BBC article.

The study’s findings have several interesting implications. First, planting pollinator friendly plants does not involve extra cost or gardening effort, or loss of aesthetic attractiveness, as these flowers are not more expensive or more time consuming to plant than non-pollinator friendly flowers. The study authors acknowledge that while  their sample of  32 plants is limited, the results should encourage further research to develop more scientific understanding of those  flowers most attractive to insect pollinators. This study can also help cities and towns plan which flower varieties to plant in parks and public spaces so they can increase biodiversity and support pollinators.

Beyond Pesticides recently released its own BEE Protective Habitat Guide, which provides information on creating native pollinator habitat in communities, eliminating bee-toxic chemicals, and other advocacy tools. This habitat guide is part of the BEE Protective campaign launched by Beyond Pesticides this past Earth Day. The grassroots campaign is part of a larger effort to protect bees from rapid declines spurred by Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) and other hazards associated with pesticides. The launch came one month after beekeepers, Center for Food Safety, Beyond Pesticides, and Pesticide Action Network North America filed a lawsuit against EPA calling for the suspension of certain neonicotinoid pesticides.

Pesticides, specifically neonicotinoids, have increasingly been linked to bee declines. These chemicals are used extensively in U.S. agriculture, especially as seed treatment for corn and soybeans. Agriculture is not the only concern however, as pesticide applications in home gardens, city parks, plant nurseries, and landscaping are also prime culprits in the proliferation of these harmful chemicals. The systemic residues of these  pesticides not only contaminate pollen, nectar, and the wider environment, but have repeatedly been identified as highly toxic to honey bees.

A recent example of neonicotinoids’ toxic effects on bees was the massive bee death in Wilsonville, Oregon. 50,000 bumblebees were found dead or dying in a shopping mall after dinotefuran, a neonicotinoid pesticide, was applied to nearby trees. After this incident the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) placed a temporary restriction on the use of pesticides with the active ingredient dinotefuran and the   Oregon State University Extension Service revised its publication, “How to Reduce Bee Poisonings from Pesticides”. The publication contains research and regulations pertaining to pesticides and bees and describes residual toxicity periods for several pesticides. Though this temporary restriction and revised guide are important steps that acknowledge the effects neonicotiniod pesticides have on pollinators, they should only be viewed as the initial steps towards a complete ban on neonicotinoid pesticides.

Take Action:  Beyond Pesticides’ BEE Protective campaign has all the educational tools you need to stand up for pollinators. Some specific ways you can help are:

• Join us    in asking Lowe’s and Home Depot  and other leading garden centers to take action and stop the sale of neonicotinoids and plants treated with these chemicals.
• Tell your member of Congress  to support the  Save America’s Pollinators Act.  
• Sign the    Pesticide Free Zone Declaration  and pledge to maintain your yard, park, garden or other green space as organically-managed and pollinator friendly.
• Use our  model resolution  to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.

For information on what you can do to keep the momentum going, see  www.BEEprotective.org.

Source: BBC

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 18, 2013) On October 10, a judge in Mexico issued an injunction against  the planting and selling of genetically engineered (GE) corn seed, effective immediately,  within the country’s borders. The decision comes nearly two years after the Mexican government temporarily rejected the expansion of GE corn testing, citing the need for more research. The decision prohibits agrichemical biotech companies, including Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer, Syngenta, PHI Mexico, and Dow AgroSciences, from planting or selling GE corn seed in Mexico, though imports of GE food will still be allowed.

This move follows the filing of a class action lawsuit on July  5 by farmers, beekeepers, environmentalists, and scientists, in total representing 53 citizens and 20 civil associations. “The action encompasses what we have been calling for over the past fifteen years: the protection of maize as the staple food of Mexicans and the preservation of our country, free of transgenic crops”¦” said Adelita San Vicente, representing seed interest group Fundación Semillas de Vida A.C.

The injunction was granted by Judge Jaime Eduardo Verdugo J. of the Twelfth District Court for Civil Matters of Mexico City, who cited “the risk of imminent harm to the environment” due to GE crops. The order requires Mexico’s Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca, y Alimentación) and Secretary of the Environment (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales) to immediately “suspend all activities involving the planting of transgenic corn in the country and end the granting of permission for experimental and pilot commercial plantings.”

According to Greenpeace Mexico, which has been heavily involved in the sustainable agriculture campaign and GE dialogue, the injunction is just the first step toward the definitive protection of the country’s biological diversity,  and full recognition of Mexicans’ right  to a healthy environment, safe food, and untainted corn as a cultural heritage.

The lawsuit is supported by scientific research, dating from 2001  and documenting the ongoing contamination of Mexico’s native corn varieties by transgenes from GE crops, including Monsanto’s Roundup ready varieties and the herbicide-resistant varieties marketed by DuPont Pioneer and Bayer CropScience.

With 53 percent of caloric intake and 22 percent of protein in the Mexican national diet coming from corn, the grain represents an important daily staple that is also inherently interwoven into the country’s cultural heritage. National campaigns, including “Sin Maiz, No Hay Paiz” (“Without Corn There is No Country”), have rallied against the introduction of GE corn into Mexico, raising debates about the need to safeguard national heritage, save native seeds, and protect environmental and human health.

The injunction against GE crops in Mexico is still a far cry from an outright ban. Further legal proceedings are now expected to follow, where all parties will enter into a legal arguments supported by  experts  who present supporting  evidence for and against genetically modified corn. For the moment, the injunction prohibits the planting of GE seeds, allowing the plaintiffs time to gather support for their case.

In the U.S., there have been several injunctions against GE crops that have temporarily stopped their planting. For example, in 2007, a U.S. District judge filed an injunction against the planting or sale of GE alfalfa until the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) conducted a legally required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Four years later, upon completing the EIS ””which determined unregulated GE alfalfa would contaminate natural alfalfa, cause the loss of U.S. export markets, dramatically increase pesticide use, and drive the rise of Roundup-resistant superweeds”” USDA announced plans to again deregulate GE alfalfa. In response, Beyond Pesticides along with other environmental and farming organizations filed a suit challenging the agency’s deregulation.  In 2012, a U.S. District Judge in San Francisco ruled that USDA’s decision to deregulate GE alfalfa was not unlawful.

The explosion of GE crops on the market has led to growing  pest  and  weed  resistance, which has resulted in  increased pesticide use. This treadmill threatens wildlife, particularly sensitive species. A  2012 study found the herbicide Roundup (glyphosate), which is sprayed on thousands of acres of Roundup Ready corn and soybeans, to induce morphological changes in three species of frogs. GE crop-induced herbicide applications are also indirectly affecting the health of beneficial species. Widespread applications of Roundup destroy sanctuary land and the plant species that support beneficial insects and other wildlife.

The best way to stop the planting of genetically engineered crops  in the U.S. is to purchase foods that have the USDA certified organic seal. Under organic certification standards, genetically modified organisms and their byproducts are prohibited from food production. For more information on this issue, see Beyond Pesticides’ webpage on  genetic engineering and see our  related Daily News  entries.

Sources: Environmental and Food Justice, Vía Orgánica, Animal Politico

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 17, 2013) Early yesterday morning, the Kauai County (Hawaii) Council ended a grueling 19-hour session by approving new protections from pesticides and genetically engineered (GE) crops in a 6 to 1 vote on Bill 2491. After enduring years of pesticide abuse from agrichemical giants Syngenta, Dow, DuPont Pioneer, and BASF, the residents of Kauai will finally receive simple protections they and future generations on the “Garden Isle” deserve. The legislation is a major victory for the local community, which engaged in numerous non-violent rallies and demonstrations urging the council to “Pass the Bill!”

Local leaders crafted Bill 2491 in response to public outcry from residents, many of whom live, work, or have children that go to school near agricultural fields leased by chemical corporations. “The people in my community have asked for help,” said Kauai County Councilmember Gary Hooser. “People are concerned.” Many in the community assert that the passage of Bill 2491 is only the beginning of local efforts to reign in excesses and abuses of agrichemical companies operating on the island.

While some of the more stringent measures in the bill were removed at a previous Committee meeting earlier this month, other aspects of the legislation were strengthened. Though a moratorium on the future planting of GE crops was nixed and regulations governing experimental pesticides were removed, pesticide disclosure was strengthened, requiring industry to submit weekly reports to nearby residents beginning  nine months after the passage of the legislation. Bill 2491 also requires pesticide companies to provide the county and public with an annual accounting of pesticide use, disclose the location of GE crops, and conduct an Environmental and Public Health Impact Study on the effects of the agrichemical industry. The bill restricts the application of all pesticides within 500 feet of schools and other medical facilities, and within 100 feet of any park, public roadway or shoreline that flows into the ocean. Violation of the law will carry significant penalties, with civil fines up to $25,000 a day per violation, and up to one year in jail.

Yesterday’s 19 hour Council session was the norm, rather than the exception, in the heated political wrangling surrounding Bill 2491. Agrichemical companies put significant pressure on the County Council, even explicitly threatening to sue the local government. After the passage of the bill, DuPont spokesman Josh St. Peters told Reuters, “We believe that the bill is not legally defensible and we continue to evaluate all of our business and legal options.” A group of attorneys on the island have disputed this assertion, writing in a statement, “We believe that Bill 2491 is sound, and the mere threat of a lawsuit by industry interests should not prevent the Council from taking action they believe is important to their community.” The Council voted not to disclose a legal opinion from the County Attorney for fear of damaging the county’s defense for the impending lawsuit.

Apart from legal threats, it is evident from the Council meetings that agrichemical companies were not interested in finding a compromise with local leaders. See here for Councilman Hooser’s attempts to find middle ground.

Pushback from Kauai’s mayor and intervention from the governor and state agriculture department also acted as roadblocks to final passage of the bill. These opponents  stressed the importance of working at the state level to solve the community’s concerns, but were widely seen by local activists as attempting to derail the legislation, or capitulate to the agrichemical companies. Governor Neil Abercrombie proposed voluntary pesticide disclosure and buffer zone guidelines, to which Councilmember Hooser responded, “Truthfully I have no confidence in the legislature or the state administration doing anything of significance that will have any near term tangible impacts on the activities and practices of these large agrochemical companies in our community.”  Due to a history of lax enforcement, local legislators  are distrustful of the state and its  responsiveness to  their community’s concerns.  A review of state records and interviews with local regulators conducted by the local Hawaiian news site Civil Beat earlier this year revealed that the state of Hawaii is not adequately tracking the level of pesticides in Kauai’s rivers, lakes, and streams as mandated under Environmental Protection Agency regulations and the Clean Water Act.

Kauai Mayor Carvalho pushed for and received a delay in the final vote last week, and objected to the bill’s passage last night due to his concerns about funding, county implementation, and future lawsuits. When a Councilmember who will soon be joining the Mayor’s staff   moved to delay, shouts of “Pass the Bill” from onlookers and strong words from other Councilmembers ultimately ended the debate. “Until you resign, your responsibility is to the people of Kauai,” said Councilmember Bynum, “and for you to say that next week that you have to work for the mayor and will have to implement this is highly impartial and unethical.”

Kauai County is part of a growing number of communities that are instituting safeguards to protect their residents from the harmful effects of pesticide exposure. Kauai now joins the City of Takoma Park, MD in enacting legislation that restricts the use of pesticides on private land. A number of state-level laws preempt individual localities from enacting any law stricter than the states. Communities subject to these state laws can pass ordinances to govern pesticide use on local government-owned lands, but are prevented from applying these important precautions to private property. As Kauai and Takoma Park show, these laws are unduly burdensome for the unique needs found in each community.

“To the seed companies, I want to make sure you understand that we have to envision the future for our island,” said Council Chair Jay Furfaro shortly before the vote on Bill 2491. “Your companies have your policies. But we need to envision Kauai in the future and this is a start for us.”

Beyond Pesticides believes that every community in the United States should have a right to self-determination when it comes to the chemicals that are applied in and around where they live, work and play. Read Beyond Pesticides testimony on Bill 2491 for additional information. If you’d like to become involved in a campaign in your community, send an email to [email protected], or call 202-543-5450.

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

Source: Reuters , Civil Beat
Image Source: pass2491

(Beyond Pesticides, October, 16 2013)   Researchers at the Illinois Department of Natural Resources and the University of Illinois Urbana—Champaign have found that organochlorine pesticides and other organochlorine compounds like polychlorinated biphenyls (PBCs) are still contaminating river otters in the state, even though these chemicals have been banned for decades. Surprisingly, the levels detected are the same or higher than those detected in otters 20 years ago, highlighting the need to understand the exposure of wildlife and humans to organochlorine compounds despite their ban.

In order to see what chemicals might be affecting otters, if any, the researchers examined the bodies of 23 river otters collected between 2009 and 2011. In the published study, River otters as biomonitors for organochlorine pesticides, PCBs, and PBDEs in Illinois,  scientists looked at liver concentrations of 20 organohalogenated compounds once used in agriculture and industry. The average concentrations of dieldrin, an insecticide that was used across the Midwest before being banned in 1987, actually exceeded those measured in river otters collected from 1984 to 1989. Liver concentrations of PCBs and DDE -a breakdown product of the banned DDT – were also similar to those in an earlier study showing that contamination has not decreased over the years. Concentrations of the organochlorine compounds in river otters ranged widely. One male had a concentration of PCBs in its liver of 3,450 parts per billion (ppb), while another had only 30 ppb. Dieldrin concentrations ranged from 14.4 to 534 ppb. The researchers note that since the otters were collected from counties all over Central Illinois, findings could indicate that some watersheds have a worse contamination problem than others. Male river otters had significantly higher concentrations of PCBs compared to females which can be attributed to differences in size between the sexes.

“We don’t know enough about how these contaminants behave synergistically,” Samantha Carpenter, wildlife technical assistant and team leader said, especially since “the cocktail of contaminants that we’re exposed to here in the Midwest differs from what humans and wildlife are exposed to in eastern or western North America.”

Organochlorine pesticides like dieldrin and DDT are extremely persistent in the environment, and have been routinely detected in sediment, waterways, aquatic wildlife and even people. A recent, similar study attributed to DDT the reproductive problems plaguing endangered condors in California, as a result of the birds’ feeding on contaminated sea lions. Despite the fact that DDT was banned in the U.S. 40 years ago, concentrations of this toxic chemical’s major metabolite, DDE, have remained alarmingly high in many ecosystems, including surface waters, the Arctic, and even U.S. national parks. DDT and other persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are resistant to environmental degradation through chemical, biological, and photolytic processes. Because of this, they have been observed to persist in the environment, are capable of long-range transport, bioaccumulate in human and animal tissue, and biomagnify in food chains. Animals with high fat/blubber content have been found to have higher levels of these compounds in their tissue since these compounds are very fat soluble. For instance, one study reported that marine mammals, like dolphins and seals, harbor high concentrations of hazardous chemicals in their brains, including DDT and PCBs.

Organochlorine compounds have also been linked to a number of adverse effects to human health, including birth defects,  breast cancer and autism. DDT has also been linked to Vitamin D deficiency, non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, and diabetes.

The comparatively high concentrations of dieldrin found in river otters in Illinois are consistent with findings of the National Water Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA), run by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), which reported the highest concentration of dieldrin in fish tissue from the Sangamon River in Illinois, according to the study. Guidelines for dieldrin concentrations in aquatic life were exceeded in 30 percent of the samples from this basin and every concentration of dieldrin detected in this basin was in the highest ten percent of the national NAWQA results. Unfortunately, even though dieldrin is still widely detected in waters and in fish and wildlife, there are currently no fish consumption guidelines  for dieldrin in Illinois. Some studies of dieldrin exposure have found links to cancer, Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s, and according to this study, dieldrin and PCBs can act as developmental neurtoxicants, which means that developing fetuses can be harmed at higher concentrations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  notes that the chemical decreases immune system function, may cause cancer and birth defects, increases infant mortality, and damages the kidney. Dieldrin can still be detected in certain parts of the Chesapeake Bay  and even in well water.

The important take home here, noted by the researchers, is that the findings from this study are significant as otters serve as local biomonitors for human health, since organochlorine compounds that bioaccumulate in river otters have also been detected in humans who consumed contaminated fish.  In addition, there exists need to study exactly how these contaminants interact with one another within the body.

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

Source: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Science World Report

(Beyond Pesticides, October 14, 2013) The ongoing government shutdown is having dramatic impacts on the organic agricultural community. On October 10, it was announced that the semiannual National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) meeting, scheduled in Louisville the week of October 21, has been canceled. During the NOSB’s semiannual meetings the board makes recommendations to the Secretary of Agriculture regarding materials on the National List of Allowed or Prohibited Substances in organic operations after considering input from the public. The meeting was to come on the heels of a recent U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announcement that the agency had changed the process for exempting synthetic materials. The shutdown has also affected the Farm Bill process that organic advocates are hoping will, in the least, restore organic programs from the 2008 Farm Bill. The shutdown has also raised several food safety questions about whether government can handle a recent salmonella outbreak.

The semiannual NOSB meeting, previously scheduled for the week of October 21, in Louisville, Kentucky, has been canceled.   An e-mail distributed October 1 by Miles McEvoy for the National Organic Program, stated the meeting would be canceled if a Congress did not reach an agreement on the budget by Thursday, October 10 at 5 p.m. EST. During this meeting, the NOSB was set to take on several very important issues that face the organic community, such as voting on the extended use of antibiotics in apple and pear production and the allowance of materials for use in aquaculture before regulations defining organic aquaculture systems are proposed.

This meeting cancellation comes on the heels of a  USDA September announcement that the agency has changed the process for exempting otherwise prohibited substances (such as synthetics) in food that carries the “organic” or “made with organic” label.  Under the new policy, an exempt material could be permitted indefinitely unless a two-thirds majority of the NOSB votes to remove an exempt (synthetic) substance from the list. This decision makes it easier to continue use of artificial ingredients and substances, undermining the integrity of the organic label.

Under the federal organic law and prior to the announcement, there was a controlled process for allowing the use of substances not normally permitted in organic production with findings of the substances’ essentiality and no adverse health and environmental effects. Additionally, the changes were effective September 17, only one day after the announcement, and no public comment period was provided for the changes to this policy, which has been in place since 2005.  Beyond Pesticides, along with Consumers Union, Food and Water Watch, and the Center for Food Safety released a joint statement criticizing this decision.

Leading up to the shutdown crisis, Congress also failed to pass a new Farm Bill after the most recent extension expired on September 30. Under the most recently lapsed Farm  Bill, which was a 10-month extension of the 2008 Farm  Bill, several key organic programs lost funding. Organic programs that were not included in the extension were the organic research and extension funding, the organic certification cost share, and an organic data collection system. Organic farmers argued that these programs were necessary in helping build organic agriculture into the multibillion dollar industry it is today and these supports come at dramatically lower level of funding than given to conventional growers.

This past May the Senate passed a bi-partisan Farm Bill. However, the House of Representatives failed to pass an initial version of their farm bill in June. The bill failed after 62 House Republicans opposed the bill because they believed it did not include a large enough cut to nutrition programs, or food stamps. The House than passed separate farm legislation and nutrition legislation and joined the two pieces together in late September. Conferees to resolve the difference between the House and Senate bill were just named recently however, it is unlikely substantial discussion will happen before the end of the shutdown. It will be important for organic advocates to demand that provisions that are only in the Senate version of the legislation that strengthen organic agriculture are not removed from the bill during the conference process.

Another effect of the current government shutdown is that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been slowed in its ability to respond to a recent salmonella outbreak that has been traced to three California poultry plants. The novel strain antibiotics-resistant salmonella has sickened at least 278 people nationwide with 42 percent of the sick people being hospitalized, double the normal rate for such an outbreak. Foster Farms, the producer of the chicken, is not recalling its product and the USDA will not close the three poultry plants implicated in the salmonella outbreak.

Estimates by the public health advocacy group Union of Concerned Scientists suggest that 70 percent of antibiotics used in the United States are devoted to the non-therapeutic treatment of cattle, swine and poultry, endangering human health by contributing to the rise of antibiotic-resistant infections. Currently, the strongest regulatory action in this country against the use of antibiotics for non-medical uses has been in organic agriculture. According to the  U.S. Department of Agriculture’s organic standards, producers of organic livestock cannot use antibiotics in any form, with the exception of limited emergency situations when they are needed to save an animal’s life, at which point it cannot not be sold, labeled, or represented as organically produced.

For more information on what you can do to advance organic agriculture, see Beyond Pesticides’  Keeping Organic Strong website, which provides a number of resources for people to participate in the organic review process alongside the NOSB.

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

Sources: Cornucopia Institute  , LA Times, Feedstuffs

(Beyond Pesticides, October 11, 2013) A group of mothers working to disclose donors of the No-on-522 campaign, which opposes genetically engineered (GE) labeling in Washington State, has been fined $10,000 plus attorney’s fees for bringing a suit against Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) for allegedly violating state campaign finance disclosure laws in Washington. Washington State’s Initiative 522, which is on the November ballot, will require the labeling by July 1, 2015 of genetically engineered  crops and processed foods. The grassroots group, Moms for Labeling, filed the suit against GMA and the No-on-522 campaign on September 17, asserting that GMA is falsely labeled as a top donor for the campaign, in order to conceal the identities of large out of state corporations who are against GE labeling. Last year, many of GMA members who contributed against labeling efforts in California prompted negative publicity and widespread consumer boycotts.

The lawsuit was initially dismissed on a technicality because the group ””newly formed and made up of a handful of moms”” violated state filing procedures by not waiting 55 days after giving notice of an action to sue. In dismissing the suit, the judge ruled that under the circumstances, only the state attorney general now has the authority to sue GMA for violating Washington’s Public Disclosure Act. “We need Attorney General Bob Ferguson to step in and defend the voters of Washington from out of state corporations that are ignoring our law:   The court said only he can do it,” Pam Johnson of Moms for Labeling told Seattle Pi.

Though that could have been the end of it, to add insult to injury the No-on-522 campaign counter-attacked using a state law that is designed to protect citizen groups from frivolous suits, also known as   Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP), by big companies. “Nothing like this has ever happened in Washington State, where a SLAPP suit statute has been used against citizens like this,” said Moms for Labeling lawyer, Knoll Lowney, according to  The Stranger. “The problem is, quite frankly, it’s really hard to know when corporations are abusing the legal process to intimidate activists. It can come in a lot of different forms. So when they write these SLAPP suit statutes, they’re pretty vague because they’re trying to encompass a wide variety of abuses by these corporations.”

The No-on-522 campaign has raised over $17.1 million so far. Monsanto has contributed a huge portion of funds (nearly $4.6 million back in September); however, GMA is the top donor at $7.2 million, which is $5 million more than it spent in California last year. GMA members include over 300 corporations, including Pepsico, Coca-Cola, Nestle, Heinz, Kraft, General Mills.

“I think it is outrageous that we are being accused of harassing big out of state corporations when really what we are trying to do as Moms for Labeling is, one, find out what is in the food we are putting on the table for our families, and two, (learn) who is paying for this campaign. It’s as simple as that,” Ms. Johnson told The Olympian.

GE labeling campaigns have drawn strong public support because consumers understand that they have a right-to-know the ingredients that are in their food. Though large companies have had short term success pouring money into state level campaigns, over time this strategy may help feed public opinion that these companies have something to hide. GE labeling activists started other legislative campaigns in states other than Washington and have won several high profile victories. In Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy signed House Bill 6527- An Act Concerning Genetically-Engineered Food. This bill will require GE ingredients to be labeled when similar legislation is passed by other states in the New England region with an aggregate population of 20 million. The Maine legislature also passed a similar law. Whole Foods Market announced in March that it would label GE ingredients sold in its stores, making it the first national chain to do so. Several other state legislatures have also introduced bills that would require GE ingredients to be labeled. In Minnesota H.F. 850 and S.F. 821 were introduced in February of 2013 and are still being considered by the legislature.   In Vermont the House of Representatives passed H.112, a GE labeling law, on May 10. The bill is expected to be taken up by the state Senate in January when the legislature reconvenes.

The labeling initiative comes at a critical time for the state’s agricultural economy, particularly the apple and salmon industry, which are threatened from GE counterparts currently being considered for deregulation. Aquabounty’s  GE Salmon,  which are designed to reach maturity faster than their wild counterparts, and GE apples that won’t brown could have dramatic impacts on the state’s agricultural economy. On a national level, the  St. Louis Pots-Dispatch  reported in 2012 on progress that multinational chemical corporations Dow AgroSciences, BASF, and Monsanto are making to bring multi-herbicide resistant varieties to market. Under separate arrangements with each company, Monsanto adds glyphosate resistance to seeds that are simultaneously engineered to resist other herbicides. In October 2012, Dow AgroSciences obtained a  global patent  on its Enlist Duo technology, which packages an herbicide containing  2, 4-D  and  glyphosate  with seeds engineered to tolerate both materials. Monsanto has also been partnering with BASF on  dicamba  and glyphosate tolerant crop varieties since 2009 with a focus on soybeans, cotton, and corn.

The explosion of GE crops on the market  has led to growing  pest  and  weed  resistance, which has resulted in  increased pesticide use. Increased pesticide use threatens wildlife, particularly sensitive species. A  2012 study found the herbicide Roundup, which is sprayed on thousands of acres of Roundup Ready corn and soybeans, to induce morphological changes in three species of frogs. GE crop-induced herbicide applications are also indirectly affecting the health of beneficial species. Widespread applications of Roundup destroy sanctuary land and the plant species that support beneficial insects and other wildlife.

The best way to avoid genetically engineered foods in the marketplace is to purchase foods that have the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) certified organic seal. Under organic certification standards, genetically modified organisms and their byproducts are prohibited. To learn more about organic agriculture, visit Beyond Pesticides’ Organic Agriculture, and Eating With a Conscious pages.

To support Washington State’s labeling efforts, get involved with the  Yes on 522  campaign, and see a list of businesses, organizations, elected officials and more who endorse 522. National GE labeling efforts are being spearheaded by the  Just Label It!  campaign.  For more information on GE foods and labeling issues, see Beyond Pesticides’  Genetic Engineering website.

Sources: The Olympian,  Organic Consumers Association, Seattle Pi  

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 10, 2013) A recent investigation into the death of thousands of bees last month in Minnesota revealed that fipronil, a widely used insecticide, was to blame.

In mid-September, three colonies of bees in Minneapolis were found twitching and dying on the ground. Local apiarist Mark Lucas paints a grim picture of the poisoning event, which he witnessed, recalling that bees inside the hive came “spilling out of the hive as if they were drunk.”

University of Minnesota Bee Lab, the University’s Bee Squad, and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) carried out the  investigation, taking samples from hives to confirm pesticide poisoning. Indeed, MDA tests found that all three of the affected hives tested positive for the presence of fipronil.

Although neonicotinoid pesticides such as clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and imidacloprid have been widely implicated in the phenomenon of colony collapse disorder (CCD), other pesticides are known to adversely affect honey bee health. Fipronil has also been heavily implicated in elevated bee toxicity and decline. Indeed, the European Union (EU) recently put forth a proposal to restrict the use of the pesticide in recognition of the high acute risks it poses to bees. The chemical is widely used for indoor and turf pest control in the U.S., incorporated in more than 50 pest-killing products, is highly toxic. Fipronil has been shown to reduce behavioral function and learning performances in honeybees.  A 2011 French study reported that newly emerged honey bees exposed to low doses of fipronil and thiacloprid succumbed more readily to the parasite Nosema ceranae compared to healthy bees,  supporting the hypothesis that the synergistic combination of parasitic infection and high pesticide exposures in beehives may contribute to colony decline. An extensive overview of the major studies showing the effects of pesticides on pollinator health can be found on Beyond Pesticides’ What the Science Shows  webpage.

The MDA’s report posited that the bee kill incident was likely started by a neighborhood individual who sprayed fipronil along the boundaries of a building and onto nearby flowers visited by bees. Once exposed, those bees flew back to their hives, inadvertently exposing the entire colony. It is unknown who exactly sprayed the pesticide, and the MDA report indicated that it will not investigate further into the identity of the applicator.

Pesticide-related bee-deaths have become a recurring story across the nation. In June 2013 an estimated 50,000 bumblebees were found dead or dying in a shopping mall in Wilsonville, Oregon due to a tree application of the neonicotinoid insecticide dinotefuran. Then in July 2013, 37 million honeybees were reported dead across a single farm in Ontario from the dust associated with planting neonic-treated corn seeds, prompting Health Canada to release new measures intended to protect bees from further exposure to neonicotinoids. That same month, the EU put forward a proposal to restrict the use of fipronil. This proposal came on the heels of an EU-wide decision to restrict the use of three pesticides that belong to the neonicotinoid family —  imidacloprid, clothianidin   and thiamethoxam, which will come into force on December 1, 2013.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has failed to act quickly to protect pollinators. In response to inaction, Beyond Pesticides, joined beekeepers, environmental and consumer groups in filing a lawsuit in Federal District Court against the EPA for its failure to protect pollinators from dangerous pesticides. The coalition seeks suspension of the registrations of insecticides -clothianidin and thiamethoxam- which have repeatedly been identified as highly toxic to honey bees, clear causes of major bee kills and significant contributors to the devastating ongoing mortality of bees known as colony collapse disorder (CCD).  The suit challenges EPA’s oversight of these bee-killing pesticides, as well as the agency’s practice of “conditional registration” and labeling deficiencies.

With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other beneficial species for pollination, the decline of these important species demands swift action. The mounting scientific evidence, along with unprecedented annual colony losses at 30 to 90 percent this year, demonstrates the impacts that these pesticides are having on these fragile beings.

Take Action: Beyond Pesticides’ BEE Protective campaign has all the educational tools you need to stand up for pollinators. Some specific ways you can help are:

• Join us  in asking Lowe’s and Home Depot and other leading garden centers to take action and stop the sale of neonicotinoids and plants treated with these chemicals.
• Tell your member of Congress to support the Save America’s Pollinators Act.  
• Sign the  Pesticide Free Zone Declaration and pledge to maintain your yard, park, garden or other green space as organically-managed and pollinator friendly.
• Use our model resolution to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.

Source: Minnesota Daily
Photo Source: Minnesota Daily
All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, October 9, 2013) California Governor Jerry Brown has signed Assembly Bill 304, a bill designed to protect people from harmful pesticides identified as Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). The bill will require the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to develop mitigation measures for the use of harmful pesticides that vaporize and drift from application sites. California, a major user of pesticidefumigants, has tried to tackle to prevalence of pesticide drift in the state, and is one of few states that monitor air-borne pesticides.

AB 304: “Pesticides: toxic air contaminant: control measures” introduced by Assembly member Das G. Williams (D-Santa Barbara), gives the DPR two years to reduce the effects of harmful air toxins once the department determines that additional mitigation measures are necessary. Fumigants are some of the most dangerous pesticides on the market and include the controversial methyl iodide. They are applied in large quantities, vaporize easily, drift away and expose nearby farmworkers and other community members to harm, with health effects linked to headaches, vomiting, severe lung irritation, and neurological effects. Some fumigants are linked to cancer, reduced fertility, birth defects and higher rates of miscarriage.

“Californians have a right to breathe clean air, and not worry if it will make them or their families sick,” said Anne Katten of the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation. “Pesticide exposure can cause serious immediate and long-term health impacts ””from asthma attacks to cancer. By setting a timeline for adopting controls, this law will reduce pesticide exposure and help people across the state, especially farmworkers and others living near agricultural fields ””to breathe a little more safely.”

According to DPR, California’s Toxic Air Contaminant Act creates the statutory framework for the evaluation and control of chemicals as toxic air contaminants (TACs). DPR must determine the levels of human exposure in the environment and estimate the potential human health risk from those exposures. DPR must also determine and implement the appropriate degree of control measures for the pesticide. The agency conducts air monitoring studies for pesticides that are candidate toxic air contaminants, as well as for pesticides that are designated as toxic air contaminants. See Framework here. In general, two types of monitoring are conducted: ambient monitoring in selected communities, to measure concentrations over several weeks or months, and application-site monitoring in the immediate vicinity of specific pesticide applications to measure concentrations over several hours or days.

California has one of the highest use rates of fumigants in the country. To tackle farmers’ reliance on fumigants, a plan was created by the Nonfumigant Strawberry Production Working Group (the strawberry sector is heavily reliant on fumigants) to develop non-fumigant management strategies. However, even as the working group acknowledged the health and environmental risks posed by the continued use of fumigants, the plan remained conservative in its recommendations, concluding that, “Even with full commitment to implement this action plan, the strawberry industry will need to continue its use of fumigants for years to remain viable in California,” even though growing strawberries organically without the use of fumigants has been shown to be effective.

Recently, the state published its air monitoring report, which found detections of the highly toxic pesticide chlorpyrifos in nearly 30% of air tests conducted in three high risk communities surrounded by intensive agriculture.  Low residues of other pesticides were detected in the majority of the samples collected. The communities in this monitoring study were selected from a list of 226 communities in the state based on pesticide use on surrounding farmland and demographics, including the percentage of children, the elderly and farm workers in the local population. However, critics of the state pesticide air monitoring efforts say that DPR’s sampling is not representative of real agricultural exposures, i.e., during and after pesticide application.

A 2010 PAN report  revealed that fumigant pesticides, like chloropicrin, contaminated half of the 57 air samples collected, with average levels of exposure over the 19-day period at 23 to 151 times higher than acceptable cancer risks. Earlier this year, DPR proposed restrictions on the use of chloropicrin, commonly applied to strawberries, peppers, tomatoes, raspberries, and blackberries. The proposed rule would not only increase buffer zones around application sites, but also restrict application acreage, impose notification requirements, enhance emergency preparedness requirements, and prolong the time that chloropicrin-applied fields must remain covered.

Farmers, farmworkers, their families and those living in close proximity to agricultural fields face disproportionate pesticide risks, especially volatile fumigants. These fumigants can quickly move from fields to nearby homes and communities, many occupied by farmworkers. An average of 57.6 out of every 100,000 agricultural workers experience acute pesticide poisoning, illness or injury each year, the same order of magnitude as the annual incidence rate of breast cancer in the United States. The federal government estimates that there are 10,000-20,000 acute pesticide poisonings among workers in the agricultural industry annually, a figure that likely understates the actual number of acute poisonings.

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

Source: Noozhawk, Santa Barbara

(Beyond Pesticides, October 8, 2013) Stress brought about by chronic exposure to sublethal levels of neonicotinoid pesticides causes bee colony failure, according to a new study published in the journal Ecology Letters. Scientists at Royal Holloway University of London have determined that low-level exposure to the pesticide imidacloprid at levels bees encounter in the field causes subtle impacts on individual bees that eventually cause colonies to collapse. This breakthrough study underlines repeated U.S. beekeeper and environmental group calls  for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to  suspend the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, as the European Commission recently decided this past April.

Since 2006, honey bees and other pollinators in the U.S. and throughout the world have incurred ongoing and rapid population declines from hive abandonment and bee die-off in a phenomenon known as colony collapse disorder (CCD). Studies continue to link a class of systemic pesticides called neonicotinoids to the CCD phenomenon and pollinator decline in general. While scientists have cited multiple chemical and other factors that contribute to degrading bee health, until now no study has shown the internal mechanism within bee colonies that causes collapse. By focusing on chronic sublethal stressors, Royal Holloway researchers have addressed the complexities that  contribute to colony losses.

In the study, scientists focus on colony level dynamics and the impact of pesticides on birth and death rates within bee colonies. Based on a biological phenomenon called the Allee effect, which attributes a positive correlation between population size or density and the mean individual fitness of a species or population, researchers found that two bee colonies exposed to the same stressors can have very different fates. In other words, a bee colony’s resiliency and survival can be significantly impacted by stressors at earlier points in the colony’s life cycle. Chronic stressors (over several weeks) such as pesticides, not excluding disease, parasites, and habitat loss, can result in feedback on the birth and death rates of the colony, and eventually cause collapse. Lead author John Bryden, Ph.D, explains, “Exposing bees to pesticides is a bit like adding more and more weight on someone’s shoulders. A person can keep walking normally under a bit of weight, but when it gets too much — they collapse. Similarly, bee colonies can keep growing when bees aren’t too stressed, but if stress levels get too high the colony will eventually fail.”

Numerous studies have examined the impacts of pesticides on bees at the colony level. A USDA funded study published in July 2013 found that exposure to the vast array of chemical combinations found in honey bee hives can weaken bee’s immune systems and make them more susceptible to parasites and other pathogens. Studies published in March 2013 found that neonicotinoid pesticides impact bee’s learning and memory, making it more difficult for bees to forage and find food. While it’s certain that numerous stressors are acting upon bees, as evidenced by a recent study linking exhaust fumes to impairment of bee’s ability to find food, the evidence continues to implicate pesticides as critical components of the CCD phenomenon. In fact, before the neonicotinoid pesticide clothianidin was allowed on to the market, an internal EPA document cited the agency’s honey bee colony level field study as inadequate. The agency registered the pesticide “conditionally,” despite concerns about its impact on domestic honey bees and other pollinators.

In response, Beyond Pesticides has worked with allies, including beekeepers and environmental groups, to force EPA expedite a response to the pollinator crisis through legal petitions and declare the pesticide clothianidin an “imminent hazard” to honey bees. After EPA rebuffed the legal petition, the coalition filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court against the agency for its failure to adequately protect pollinators. The lawsuit seeks the suspension of the registrations of the neonicotiniods clothianidin and thiamethoxam, which have repeatedly been identified as highly toxic to honey bees, the clear cause of major bee kills, and a significant contributor to the devastating ongoing mortality of bees. The suit challenges EPA’s oversight of bee-killing pesticides, as well as the agency’s practice of “conditional registration” and labeling deficiencies.

As co-author of the Royal Holloway study, Nigel Raine, Ph.D explains, “Pesticides can have a detrimental effect on bees at levels used in the field. Our research will provide important evidence for policymakers. The way we test pesticides, the way we assess their impact on bees, and the way we manage pesticides can all be improved.” With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other beneficial species for pollination, the decline of pollinators requires swift action. In the absence long overdue protections, Beyond Pesticides is promoting a multi-faceted strategy that focuses on a precautionary approach to our pollinator crisis.

Join Beyond Pesticides BEE Protective campaign:

• Use our model resolution to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.
• Join us in asking Lowe’s and Home Depot and other leading garden centers to take action and stop the sale of neonicotinoids and plants treated with these chemicals.
• Tell your member of Congress to support the Save America’s Pollinators Act.  
• Sign the  Pesticide Free Zone Declaration and pledge to maintain your yard, park, garden or other green space as organically-managed and pollinator friendly.
• Use our model resolution to transform your community and raise awareness about pollinator health.

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

Source: Royal Holloway University Press Release, Ecology Letters

(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2013) A controversial agriculture bill that would bar counties in Oregon from regulating genetically engineered (GE) crops has passed in the state legislature to the dismay of many organic and environmental groups. Senate Bill 863 also includes an emergency clause, which would allow the bill to go into effect immediately, precluding opponents from referring the bill to voters.

The Oregon Senate passed S.B. 863 17-12 last week after three-days of a special session to debate a controversial five-bill package. S.B. 863 declares that “regulation of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed and vegetable seed and products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed and vegetable seed be reserved to the state, thereby preempting   local governments from adopting any of their own GE policies.” The bill precludes efforts in Benton and Lane counties to restrict GE agriculture, but excludes Jackson County, which already has a GE ban up for vote. This GE bill is part of a package of five bills aimed at giving schools more money, freezing college tuition, and reining in escalating costs of the public pension system.

Environmental groups and local food activists are upset that the provision sailed through the state’s legislature. According to the Center for Food Safety (CFS), the Oregon bill was pushed at the behest of out-of-state chemical companies, and is a model bill from the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), previously introduced in other states. In addition, introduction of this bill is particularly troubling given the recent findings of GE contamination of wheat fields in the state, which has led to the filing of several lawsuits against agrichemical giant, Monsanto. Given that Oregon ranks 5th in the nation for its number of organic farms, with more than 444 certified farms operating on over 156,000 acres as of 2010, according to CFS, GE threats to a thriving organic industry in the state should not be compounded by limiting oversight of this biotechnology.

The fact that S.B. 863 is packaged with other beneficial legislation — more funding for K-12 schools, mental health programs, and changes to tax rules, is reminiscent of the so called “Monsanto Protection Act,” which was quietly slipped into the federal six month continuing resolution (H.R. 933 -Sec. 735) earlier this year. It was recently announced that this language will be removed from the current continuing resolution to fund the government after public outrage. The language of the “Monsanto Protection Act,” similar to S.B. 863, seeks to preempt the federal courts from rectifying or halting the sale and planting of illegal, potentially hazardous GE crops and compel USDA to allow continued planting of the crop. The immediate enactment of S.B. 863 also fends off attempts to refer a repeal measure to the ballot. Like the “Monsanto Protection Act” fiasco, many in Oregon are still questioning how S.B. 863 made it into legislation hat is designed to help improve Oregon’s schools funding, and retiree benefit issues.

“The rights of farmers to protect their crops from unwanted GMO contamination and the rights of consumers to make informed purchases should never have been at issue,” said the Oregon Environment Council, the Oregon League of Conservation Voters and five other groups in a statement. “Trading away environmental protections in unrelated legislative negotiations is an all too common practice that’s bad for not just democracy but also the people of Oregon.”

Environmentalists rallied against the inclusion of the emergency clause, which Republicans pushed to include. House Minority Leader Mike McLane, R-Powell Butte, said the emergency clause was needed to ensure the policy prevented a patchwork of different county policies, including the Lane and Benton efforts. However, most likely in response to the growing outrage over the legislation, Gov. John Kitzhaber is now asking state officials to map locations of GE crops and pledges to introduce legislation in 2015 to address GE agriculture and labeling requirements. In a letter sent to legislators, the governor states that he intends there to be systems that would allow growers to coordinate buffers and exclusion areas. He is also requesting the state department of agriculture to submit an action plan outlining out what can be done on GE regulations under existing rules, and to convene a task force to examine issues surrounding GE agriculture and foods, including preventing contamination of organic agriculture and labeling requirements for GE foods.

“We’re optimistic about the governor’s commitment and stand ready to work with him and the leadership at the Legislature to make sure we’re addressing this issue across the state, protecting farmers and dealing with issues like consumers’ right-to-know,” said Andrea Durbin, executive director of the Oregon Environmental Council.

The Center for Food Safety in a statement noted that it is considering legal options to challenge S.B. 863.

Given the recent GE contamination episodes, it is imperative that existing safeguards not be undermined for the sake of industry interests, and the ability of local communities to safeguard their environment from GE materials be protected.

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

For more information on the environmental hazards associated with GE technology, visit Beyond Pesticides’ Genetic Engineering webpage.

Source and photo: OregonLive

(Beyond Pesticides, October 4, 2013)  It was hoped that a  recent meeting in Florida between beekeepers and citrus growers could create stronger communication between both agricultural sectors. Beekeepers in Florida have begun to voice growing concerns over the increased use of insecticides on citrus trees where their bees are used as pollinators. Though this meeting worked to set up an important dialog between beekeepers and citrus growers, it focused predominantly on the effects of accidental exposure. This focus does not take into account the long-term residues these systemic insecticides can leave in the environment, contaminating nectar and pollen.    

The recent September meeting that was organized by the Florida Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putman, a former U.S. congressman and citrus farmer, was meant to start a dialog between citrus growers and beekeepers. This dialog was viewed as necessary by Florida’s Department of Agriculture as beekeepers are worried over the increased use of insecticides in citrus groves. Recently, citrus farmers have increased their use of insecticides from several times a year to applications every month or greater to combat the invasive Asian citrus pysllids. Asian citrus pysllids can infect trees with a bacterium that causes citrus greening.

Honey bees in Florida pollinate several types of citrus fruit, such as tangerine and tangelo trees and, according to Gene Albrigo, Ph.D., serve an unrecognized role in pollinating oranges and grapefruit. Beekeepers also have bees forage in citrus fruit so their bees produce a very popular citrus-flavored honey. Though communication between beekeepers and citrus farmers is important, the meeting appeared to only focus on how to avoid bees being accidently sprayed while foraging. This approach does address how the use of systemic neoncotinoid insecticides can result in long-term damage. Neonicotinoid insecticides are taken up by the pants vascular system and are expressed in contaminated pollen and nectar. Clothianidin, a neoncotinoid, can last up to 19 years in the soil accordng to a recent study.

Recently, one of Florida’s largest citrus growers, Ben Hill Griffin, Inc., was fined $1,500 after a state investigation found that the farm illegally sprayed pesticides, resulting in the death of millions of managed honey bees. According to the report by the Florida Department of Agriculture Montana 2F was applied to the roots of a total of 50 acres of young citrus trees. The active ingredient of Montana 2F is  imidacloprid, which is one of the most widely used chemicals in the neonicotinoid class of insecticides, which have been identified as a  leading factor in bee decline.

The low fine of $1,500 given to one of the largest citrus growers in Florida is problematic because it does not create a strong deterrent for future misapplications. The maximum fine for applying a pesticide in violation of the label in the state of Florida is $10,000 per occurrence, which pales in comparison to $240,000 in lost honey production for the beekeepers. Pesticide misapplication incidents have created obvious tensions between beekeepers and citrus growers. Bobbi Bell of Bell Apiaries LLC in Fort Meade was quoted in The Ledger saying, “The days of putting bees right in the middle of a grove, I think those days are gone.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently acknowledged that current pesticide labels do not adequately protect honey bees and announced  new label language  to prohibit the use of neonicotinoid pesticides when bees are present. This may help curtail some bee kills, as farms have been spraying during the citrus bloom. The new labels will also include a “bee advisory box” and icon with information on routes of exposure and spray drift precautions. However, beekeepers and environmental groups question the efficacy and enforceability of the new label changes in curtailing systemic pesticides. To date, EPA has ignored calls for a ban on these chemicals and continues to try to mitigate their impacts on bees and other pollinators.

The pesticides involved in the Florida incident were purportedly used to control  Asian citrus psyllid, which can spread a disease, Huanglongbing (HLB), or citrus greening, to trees. A pysllid that is infected with HLB can transfer the bacterium every time it feeds on a tree, and once a tree is infected with the disease there is no known cure.  The disease can lie dormant for several years before tests are able to detect it.  In California,  efforts are currently underway  to introduce parasitic wasps from the Asian citrus psyllid’s native range. Teams of invasive species experts have recently released tamarixia  wasps to try to combat the pysllids in urban areas across southern California. The wasps curb pysllid populations by laying eggs inside the psyllid nymph’s stomach. As the eggs hatch, larvae slowly eat away at the nymph. The teams hope that after the wasps hatch they will fly to neighboring trees and lay eggs in new nymphs and establish a growing population. Even though the team is only about a year and a half into this effort, at some release sites the population of psyllids has dramatically declined.

Given that one in every three bites of food is dependent on pollination, and that commercial beekeeping adds between $20 to $30 billion dollars in economic value to agriculture each year, it is imperative that action is taken to protect bees and other pollinators. Beyond Pesticides’  BEE Protective  supports nationwide local action to protect honey bees and other pollinators from pesticides.

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

Source: The Ledger

(Beyond Pesticides, October 3, 2013) According to new research, residents are more highly exposed to organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides in New York City (NYC) than in the U.S. overall.  Researchers from the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene reviewed the 2004 NYC Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NYC HANES) to compare its pesticide exposure patterns in an urban environment with the nation as a whole. The NYC HANES includes a biomonitoring component to evaluate pesticide exposures by measuring concentrations of organophosphate and pyrethroid metabolites in urine. According to the authors, the findings underscore the importance of considering pest and pesticide burdens on cities, where a dense population results in a single exposure source affecting many people at the same time when regulating pesticide use.

Organophosphate metabolites were measured in the urine of 882 New Yorkers, while 1,452 residents were tested for pyrethroid metabolites. As the researchers explain, the building density and disrepair in parts of NYC likely increased the chances of a pest infestation, which in turn can lead to the reliance on indoor pesticide use. By the 1980’s, organophosphates were the most common class of insecticides in the U.S., and were used indoors until the early 2000’s when structural pest control operators shifted toward the use of pyrethroid products. Some organophosphates have been banned for residential use the U.S. in recent years, although many are still heavily used in agriculture. Both chemical classes work by disrupting the insect’s nervous system. Organophosphates inhibit cholinesterase, a neurotransmitter that carries signals between nerves and muscles. Inhibiting cholinesterase can cause poisoning victims to suffocate due to paralysis and cause lungs to fill up with fluid. Children are at an elevated risk for organophosphate pesticide poisoning. A 2012 study that pulled data from 14 studies over the past 20 years found that long-term low-dose exposure to organophosphates can damage neurological and cognitive functions. Other studies have also connected low-dose exposure to organophosphates to ADHD,  reduced IQs, and Alzheimers. Previous research has already suggested that pesticides, particularly organophosphates, cause a variety of serious neurological health problems, including Parkinson’s disease. This is not surprising, as organophosphates are known to be extremely toxic to nerve cells and deadly at large doses. Recently, organophosphate pesticides caused the deaths of 25 children in India from contaminated school lunches.

Among New Yorkers who were 20 to 59 years old in 2004, the highest exposed group had between two and six times more organophosphates in their urine than the highest exposed group in a national study. They also had between 1.7 and 2.4 times more pyrethroids than the nationwide group. Researchers also sought to identify some of the demographic and cultural characteristics that predict the higher exposures. They found that overall, Hispanics and blacks, older residents, and people who had pesticides professionally applied recently in their home had higher levels of organophosphates. Interestingly, the researchers also find that those who ate one or more pieces of fruit every day were more likely to have higher levels of organophosphates. These factors are not necessarily linked, and researchers found no published evidence that more frequent fruit consumption in NYC might explain higher exposure than the rest of the U.S. However, the researchers do point out that metabolites they found in urine are derived from pesticides that are the most commonly used in agriculture, and that residues from this class of active ingredients are detected in 41% of apple, pear and strawberry samples measured by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pesticide Data Program in 2004. For pyrethroids, there were no major differences between the races or ages, suggesting widespread exposure. People who ate green vegetables had higher levels but the researchers said the differences “are relatively small and not likely to be biologically meaningful.”

With the phase-out of most residential uses of the common organophosphate insecticides, home use of pyrethroids has increased. These chemicals are widely used around the home for various insects and mosquito control as well as in agricultural settings. This class of chemicals includes permethrin, bifenthrin, resmethrin, cyfluthrin and scores of others. Pesticide products containing synthetic pyrethroids are often described by pest control operators and community mosquito management bureaus as “safe as chrysanthemum flowers.” While pyrethroids are a synthetic version of an extract from the chyrsanthemum plant, they are chemically engineered to be more toxic, take longer to break down, and are often formulated with synergists, increasing potency, and compromising the human body’s ability to detoxify the pesticide.

Pyrethriods are known irritants and can have a high acute toxicity depending on the specific formulation. Pyrethriods have also been connected to multiple symptoms of acute toxicity, asthma, incoordination, tremors, and convulsions. In addition to human health effects, which this cumulative risk assessment addresses, pyrethroids are also persistent in the environment and adversely impact non-target organisms. A 2008 survey found pyrethroid contamination in 100 percent of urban streams sampled in California. Researchers also find pyrethroid residues in California streams  at relatively low concentrations (10-20 parts per trillion) in river and creek sediments that are toxic to bottom dwelling fish. Other studies find pyrethroids present in effluent from sewage treatment plants at concentrations just high enough to be toxic to sensitive aquatic organisms.

Fortunately, the authors point out, since the 2004 NYC HANES was conducted, the NYC Health Department has taken several steps to try and reduce pesticide exposure by restricting the use of certain pesticides on city property, and promote Integrated Pest Management. The state of New York has also taken actions in recent years to protect its citizens and the environment from nutrient pollution and exposure to toxic pesticides. In 2010, the state of New York passed the Child Safe Playing Field Act, which requires that all schools, preschools, and day care centers both public and private stop using pesticides on any playgrounds or playing fields. The bill allows pesticides to be used for infestations only if the County Health Department, the Commissioner of Health, the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation or the school board deems it an emergency.

There are clear established methods for managing homes that prevent infestation of unwanted insects without the use of synthetic chemicals, including exclusion techniques, sanitation and maintenance practices, as well as mechanical and least-toxic controls (which include boric acid and diatomaceous earth). Based on range of successful pest prevention practices, use of these hazardous chemicals are unnecessary.

Most people are unaware that they carry chemical compounds in their bodies. Chemical ‘body burden’ refers to the accumulation of synthetic chemicals found in pesticides, cosmetics, industrial solvents, heavy metals in our bodies. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ Body Burden entry in the  Pesticide Induced Diseases Database (PIDD).

The full article, “Population-Based Biomonitoring of Exposure to Organophosphate and Pyrethroid Pesticides in New York City” is available from Environmental Health Perspectives.

Source: Environmental Health News

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

(Beyond Pesticides, October 2, 2013) New research reveals that Costa Rica’s iconic spectacled caiman crocodiles are under threat from pesticides used on the country’s massive banana plantations. Nearly two million tons of bananas are shipped out of the small South American country each year, and exports are rising alongside with the use of hazardous pesticides. Both past and present use of agricultural chemicals has caused significant impacts on the health of the spectacled caiman, according to scientists from the study published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.

Researchers found that the pesticide burden on the caiman increases as they move closer to banana plantations. “The animals are very, very thin””about 50 percent thinner than those away from the plantations,” said study co-author Peter Ross, Ph.D, an aquatic ecotoxicologist and associate professor at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. The scientists note that it is unclear whether the toxic effects of the pesticides are hurting the caiman’s health, or whether the chemicals have caused a more systemic problem, knocking out the prey on which the animals depend.

Whatever the case may be, results of the study show that high-trophic level species are being adversely affected by the use of agricultural pesticides on banana plantations, and effects seen at the top of the food chain are indicative of environmental damage throughout the ecosystem. Researchers hope that the study will highlight the lax rules and enforcement surrounding pesticides in Costa Rica, which ranks second in the world for intensity of pesticide use, and has seen the use of agricultural chemicals double in the past 20 years. “Without adequate enforcement of regulations, dangerous practices, such as aerial spraying close to streams or washing application equipment in rivers, also contributes to contamination downstream,” said Paul Grant, Ph.D, lead author of the study.

Pesticide use on banana plantations has not only affected the health of the surrounding ecosystem, but also affected humans living and working on or near the plantations. Earlier this year, Beyond Pesticides reported on a study published in the journal Environmental Research, which showed that children living near chemical intensive banana plantations are exposed to twice as much of the neurotoxic insecticide chlorpyrifos as children living near organic plantations. In 2010, Dole Food Co., which controlled 19% of global banana production in 2009, announced a settlement with farmworkers claiming that they became sterile as a result of exposure to the chemical dibromochloropropane, a soil fumigant used on banana plantations that has since been banned.

Costa Rica provides a perfect climate for the seedless Cavendish banana, which is exported widely throughout the western world. The bananas are reproduced through cuttings and grow in large monocultures; because most all bananas grown for export are nearly identical genetically they are an easy target for insects and disease. However, toxic chemicals are not necessary in order to produce marketable bananas. As evidenced by a fourfold increase in U.S. imports between 2000 and 2010, organic banana production is a safer, viable alternative to chemical intensive practices that can harm sensitive wildlife, children, and farmworkers. Organic methods include planting several varieties of bananas and rotating crops to lessen the chance of pest infestation, using pheromone traps to lure away pests, digging trenches around the banana plants, removing diseased plants by hand to reduce the spread of infestations and disease, and boosting the soil with organic matter and beneficial organisms to strengthen plants and improve soil health.

Conventional banana production is one of the second most pesticide intensive agricultural systems in the world, next to cotton. Because of its thick skin, bananas are widely considered one of the “cleaner” conventional crops to eat, however Beyond Pesticides encourages consumers to think about the big picture, and support a wider shift toward organic practices through their purchases. Buying organic is a simple move that makes a big difference in preventing unnecessary contamination to themselves, the environment, and those living near pesticide treated fields. For more information on the chemicals used on everyday conventional produce, see the Eating With a Conscience website. And for more information on why organic is the right path for the future of agriculture, see Beyond Pesticides’ Organic Agriculture webpage.

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

Source:  EurekAlert!. National Geographic, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Photo Source: Flikr (spencer77)

(Beyond Pesticides, October 1, 2013) Kauai’s Committee on Environmental Development, Agriculture, and Sustainability approved a bill that requires large agricultural companies in the county to disclose the pesticides they  use. The legislation will now go to the full council for a vote. The measure, County Bill 2491, which Beyond Pesticides supported with testimony, would provide transparency and restrict the operations of DuPont Pioneer, Syngenta, Dow AgroSciences, BASF and Kauai Coffee, on the island.

In a 4-1 vote, the majority of Kauai’s council members demonstrated support for the need to improve pesticide regulations to protect the  community health and the local ecosystem. The bill, introduced by Kauai County Councilmen Gary Hooser and Tim Bynum, provides long overdue protections from chemical exposure occurring on the island, requiring a 500-foot buffer zone near schools, hospitals, residential areas, public roadways and sensitive ecological sites, such as streams, rivers and shorelines. Under the bill’s language, (i) the testing of experimental pesticides are restricted only to greenhouses and other contained structures, (ii) all pesticide applications and GE crops  are to  be subject to mandatory disclosure to the county, and (iii) the use of any pesticides by these corporations will require prior notification through the public posting of signs. (See previous Daily News coverage here.)

As the industry exerts pressure to quash the legislation, thousands of people have marched and rallied to support the bill. But the Council’s decision was determined by more than just public support. “We’ve had lots of passionate testimony as well as a lot of expert testimony,” said Mr. Hooser. “We’ve had doctors that serve in hospitals, pediatricians, obstetricians, oncologists, testify about their serious concerns about the impacts of this industry.”

In concluding remarks to the Council committee, however, Mr. Hooser pledged to make the bill “stronger and better” when it returns to the full Council discussion and vote. Indeed, the bill has had some provisions appreciably strengthened. For example, the original language required industrial agriculture companies to simply submit an annual report detailing what pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and other chemicals they used. “The new amendment requires weekly reports, requires a lot more detail in terms of locations and quantities, which way the wind’s blowing, so people know whether those chemicals are likely to go into their neighborhoods,” said Mr. Hooser.

Though many of the bill’s core provisions remain intact in the bill, major weakening amendments to the bill were adopted in committee. “There was an important provision requiring a moratorium on the future growth of the industry. That was taken out. There was a prohibition on open-air testing. That was taken out,” said Mr. Hooser.  Also eliminated from the bill were restrictions on the permitting of commercial GE crops.

Additionally, the bill’s adoption  was undercut by a proposal by Gov. Neil Abercrombie to create a voluntary (as opposed to a mandatory) program of company safeguards for  human health and safety from pesticide use. Bill supporters say the Governor’s proposal  falls short of securing protection for the people of Kauai.

Mr. Hooser   told The Garden Island that he will encourage Mr. Abercrombie to meet with doctors of Kauai’s Veterans Memorial Hospital, local pediatricians, and the plaintiffs who have sued DuPont Pioneer for toxic trespass that forces residents to live with the threat of pesticide-related health effects. “Delaying putting into place measures for the health and environment of our community is not an acceptable solution,” Mr. Hooser said. “We need to put those in place now.”

For more information on the failed promises of GE agriculture, read “Ready or Not, Genetically Engineered Crops Explode on Market,” or see Beyond Pesticides website on Genetic Engineering.   If you want to get involved, check out the organizations Hawaii Seed or the website Stop Poisoning Paradise.

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

Source: Hawaii News Now
Image Source: The Garden Island