Congress is working on the monumental process of altering and renewing the Farm Bill, S. 3240. This process only comes along every five years and has major impacts on how we grow our food. The last Farm Bill was passed in 2008, and expires in 2012. The bill is expected to be introduced on Senate floor on Tuesday, June 19. North Carolina Democratic Senator Kay Hagan and Idaho Republican Senator Mike Crapo have introduced an amendment (amendment 2367, full text available in the Congressional Record) to the Farm Bill that states pesticides should be allowed into water bodies without any oversight, leaving the public to swim, fish and boat on waters that are contaminated with endocrine disruptors, carcinogens and neurological toxicants that are not monitored by federal or state officials.

The amendment which seeks to add the provisions of H.R. 872, would reverse the 2009 ruling in National Cotton Council v. EPA, requiring Clean Water Act permits from pesticide users who spray over water (See Daily News coverage). As of this year, permits are now required for spraying activities like mosquito spraying, treatment of algal blooms or invasive species. The permit does not prevent pesticide spraying, but simply lets the authorities know what is sprayed and when it is sprayed, so that the public may know what chemicals are used in their waterways which can then be monitored for any downstream adverse effects, including contamination of drinking waters.

Take Action: Tell your Senators to Oppose the Amendments to Weaken the Clean Water Act.

Unfortunately, this amendment is receiving bipartisan support in the Senate. The measure counts among its co-sponsors six other Democrats –Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Tom Carper and Chris Coons of Delaware, and three Republicans –James Risch of Idaho, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia and David Vitter of Louisiana. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), a former Agriculture secretary appointed by President George W. Bush, who introduced a similar amendment to the Farm Bill, also supports the measure. His amendment (amendment 2210, full text available in the Congressional Record) will also alter the Clean Water Act and federal pesticide law to prohibit authorities from requiring permits for the discharge of pesticides into waterways.

There is also another provision that requires urgent attention, this one a rider included in an annual agriculture appropriations bill expected to be considered by the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee on Tuesday 19. Misleadingly titled the “Farmer Assurance Provision,” Section 733 of the bill would seriously undermine the Constitutional process of judicial review regarding genetically engineered (GE) crops. Specifically, the rider would force continued sales of GE product, even if a court had found that the crop had not undergone adequate review and had ordered a stop to all sales of the product. This provision undermines USDA’s oversight of GE crops, unnecessarily interferes with the U.S. judicial review process, and could be unconstitutional. It is also completely unnecessary and serves only to offer “assurance” to biotech companies like Monsanto, not farmers.

There have been over 100 amendments submitted so far to the original Farm Bill. Some of these amendments, such as increased funding for research in organic production systems and reforms to make crop insurance fairer to organic farmers, are desperately needed. However, there are also other amendments, like those above, which are gaining traction that would repeal critical statutory protections for health and the environment. With the bill expected to be introduced this week, swift action is needed to ensure that these amendments do not make it into the final Farm Bill.

Beyond Pesticides supports the following Farm Bill amendments that will benefit organic food and farming:

Ӣ Amendment 2234, sponsored by Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) (Full text available in the Congressional Record.) This amendment increased funding through the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative for research in conventional, non-GE, seed breeding. Conventional seeds and breed are a critical resource for farmers and for the very future of our food. As seed diversity dwindles, so does the genetic diversity of our food supply and the security of that supply along with it. The Tester amendment seeks to allocate a relatively small, but desperately needed, amount of funding to support conventional seed and breeding research at land grant universities.

”¢ Amendment 2382, sponsored by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) (Full text available in the Congressional Record.) The U.S. Department of Agriculture currently charges organic farmers an unnecessary and unjustified 5% surcharge on crop insurance for organic farmers who participate in federal crop insurance programs. Additionally, organic crops are insured at the same amounts as conventional crops, despite the fact that they are often worth as much as two times the amount that a conventional crop would receive in the marketplace. This means that organic farmers are not adequately compensated if they suffer a crop loss. Senator Merkley’s amendment seeks to correct organic crop insurance programs and make them work better for organic farmers.

Thus far there have been a staggering 125 pieces of legislation introduced in this Congress that will reduce environmental protection including 50 bills targeting EPA, 16 to dismantle the Clean Water Act, 31 against actions that can prevent pollution, and 22 to defund or repeal clean energy initiatives.

The testing shows that PBO disrupts a biological signaling system that is “critical in neurological development,” the researchers reported in the abstract of their paper. The study finds that the disruption of this critical pathway “may be the molecular basis for profound developmental defects in children exposed in utero to PBO.”

Piperonyl butoxide is not itself classified as a pesticide, but companies combine it with insecticides to increase their potency. PBO came into widespread use when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) phased out chlorpyrifos and other organophosphate pesticides nearly a decade ago after determining that they posed a risk to children’s health. As with many so-called “inert” ingredients, pesticide products often contain five to ten times more PBO than the active ingredient in the formulation. PBO is listed among the top 10 chemicals detected in indoor dust, often a significant route of exposure to children.

“We were concerned when our study confirmed that PBO disrupted neurological development pathways — especially given the widespread use of this chemical in American homes,” said Wei Chen, PhD, assistant professor at the Duke School of Medicine and an author of the new study. “Our study demonstrates the need for additional research and evaluation of the safety profile of PBO as a pesticide synergist and the value of high- throughput screening in assessing the potential toxicity of chemicals.”

Similar research published last year in the journal Pediatrics shows that children exposed to higher amounts of pyrethroid insecticides and PBO are three times as likely to have a mental delay compared to children with lower levels. The study, “Impact of Prenatal Exposure to Piperonyl Butoxide and Permethrin on 36-Month Neurodevelopment,” measured exposure to pesticides using maternal and umbilical cord plasma samples and in personal air samples, collected using backpack air monitors during pregnancy. Children were then tested for cognitive and motor development at three years of age. Children with the highest prenatal exposures scored about 4 points lower on the test.

The Environmental Working Group has compiled a list of common household insecticide products that, among others, contain PBO:

Ӣ Raid Commercial Flying Insect Killer
Ӣ Raid Indoor Fogger Formula IV
Ӣ Raid Flea Killer Plus
Ӣ Black Flag Flying Insect Killer
”¢ Ritter’s flea & Tick Spray
Ӣ Ortho Tomato & Vegetable Insect Killer
Ӣ Bonide Mosquito Insect Spray
Ӣ Terro Insect Killer
Ӣ Terro Carpenter Ant and Termite Killer

For more information on the many ways in which pesticides affect human health, see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide Induced Diseased Database.

Given the lack of evidence that adulticides (insecticides that target adult mosquitoes) reduce or prevent mosquito-borne incidents or illnesses, public health and environmental advocates question the decision to resort to indiscriminate spraying. Studies have shown that aerial spraying for adult mosquitoes is greatly ineffective (as little as 1% of mosquitoes will be hit, according to Cornell University entomologist David Pimentel). Pesticides like those typically used in aerial sprayings against mosquitoes, including synthetic pyrethroids and organophosphates, have been linked to numerous adverse health effects including asthma and respiratory problems, dermatological reactions, endocrine disruption, chemical sensitivities, and cancer. These chemicals can also be harmful or fatal to non-target wildlife, including pollinators like the honeybee. Further, pesticides that kill mosquitoes also kill their predators, leading to fewer biological checks on mosquito populations than without spraying.

Here are some of the areas currently, or soon to be spraying insecticides intended to kill adult mosquitos via airplane:

”¢ An article in the Sacramento Press explains that California’s Sacramento-Yolo Mosquito Vector Control District (SYMVCD) proposed spraying 30,000 acres with highly toxic organophosphate pesticides after years of using Evergreen 6-60, which is composed of the pesticide pyrethrin and the noxious synergist piperonyl butoxide (PBO). The article indicates that public outcry concerning the widespread dispersion of these chemicals has not been recognized. “Local residents, however, have almost no voice in the handling of their health concerns, and have been systematically been ignored by the District,” the article explains.

”¢ The Sun Sentinel reports that Palm Beach County, Florida has begun spraying a proposed 270,000 acres with mosquito adulticides. Even though the spraying is intended to prevent mosquito born disease, The Sun Sentinel explains, “They [current mosquito populations] are most likely floodwater mosquitoes, authorities said, which hatch quickly in rainwater and attack aggressively, but don’t carry disease. In about a month or two, a more dangerous species will hatch in water accumulating in ditches, ground depressions, buckets and other containers.”

”¢ The Boston Globe reports that new guidelines from Massachusetts public health officials may increase the number of aerial sprayings in the state this year. The guidelines issued by the state’s Department of Public Health (DPH) lower the threshold for considering when to spray. The DPH declares, “When a spraying is scheduled, the department encourages residents to stay inside, close their windows, and turn off air conditioning units.” However, these drastic steps are unnecessary if an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach to mosquitoes is adopted by the state.

”¢ Colorado’s Valley Courier details a recent decision by residents in Alamosa County to purchase an airplane for use in aerial spraying for mosquito control. Many residents voiced their opposition to the decision, including resident and organic farmer, Trudi Kretsinger, who explained, “Chemicals present much greater problems in our populace than mosquitoes do.”

Prevent Mosquitoes in Your Backyard:

The first step in avoiding mosquitoes around your property is prevention. Remove any standing water where mosquitoes can breed around the home, such as potted plants, leaky hoses, empty buckets, toys, and old tires. When outdoors in the evening, while mosquitoes are most active, the best way to avoid them is to wear long pants and long sleeves and use natural repellents. Burning citronella candles outside also helps repel mosquitoes. Since these two options are not always possible, least-toxic mosquito sprays can sometimes be a good alternative. Many common mosquito sprays can contain toxic ingredients, however, so it is important to consider all of the option and read labels carefully before buying or spraying the repellents.

Stop the Spray in Your Community:

Beyond Pesticides believes the ideal mosquito management strategy comes from an integrated approach emphasizing education, aggressive removal of standing water sources, larval control, monitoring, and surveillance for both mosquito-borne illness and pesticide-related illness. To get the word out, communities should utilize all forms of educational tools: the media; websites; posters placed around schools, libraries, post offices, and markets; and, pamphlets distributed to doctors’ offices and libraries. Public officials should also communicate mosquito prevention methods.

If mosquito transmitted disease is a concern in your area, Beyond Pesticides has several text and Mp3 copies of PSA’s available for distribution. Include a cover letter when contacting your local radio station’s PSA manager, in order to give an overview of the announcement and the importance of public education (using the facts provided above). If you are with a local organization, you are welcome to add your organization’s name on to the text. Let us know where you sent the PSA and Beyond Pesticides will follow-up on your behalf.

Many municipalities around the country have consistently proven that dangerous pesticides are not necessary to effectively control mosquitoes and prevent outbreaks of West Nile virus. Prevention strategies, such as those listed above, have been adopted in such densely populated areas as Shaker Heights, OH and the District of Columbia.

For more information on safe and effective mosquito management strategies, see Beyond Pesticides’ page on Mosquitoes and Insect Borne Diseases, or contact us at [email protected], or call our office at 202-543-5450.

Lindane has been found to cause skin irritation, seizures, and, in rare instances, even death. Infants and children are especially sensitive to the health risks posed by pesticides such as lindane because of their developing bodies. In 2005, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services determined that lindane could cause cancer in humans, and the EPA cancelled all pesticide registrations for agricultural uses of lindane in 2006 because of its toxicity to humans and persistence in the environment. It was banned in California in 2000 because of high levels of water contamination. Following the ban, water contamination drastically declined, and an increase in head lice cases was not reported. A 2002 study that compared efficacy of five available products on head lice found that lindane was the least effective of all the products.

“In the case of lindane, the cure is worse than disease,” said Rep. Markey. “There is not a nit of scientific evidence to support the FDA’s decision to continue to allow the use of this toxic chemical for treatment used predominantly on children.”

Rep. Markey’s letter also notes that the presence of lindane in treatment products has led to its detection in and contamination of waterways. Officials in Los Angeles found that a single treatment for head lice or scabies contains enough lindane to bring six million gallons of water above the California water quality standard. The pharmaceutical use of lindane was banned in California in 2002. And in 2009, more than 160 nations agreed to ban the agricultural use of lindane.

Rep. Markey’s letter to FDA asks for responses to questions that include:
Ӣ Why is this compound still allowed for use on children even after the FDA noted that lindane is especially harmful to this segment of the population?
Ӣ Has the FDA taken into consideration the long-term chronic impacts that lindane exposure may have on children?
Ӣ Has the FDA evaluated the increased resistance that head lice and scabies have developed to lindane treatment?
Ӣ If FDA determined that approval of lindane as a treatment for head lice and scabies was no longer warranted because of safety and efficacy concerns, what immediate actions could FDA take to halt the use of lindane and to ensure the public is protected from this dangerous chemical?

Head lice affect an estimated 12 million people in the U.S. each year, and are rapidly becoming resistant to over-the-counter and prescription medications. According to researchers on alternative lice treatments, one method for eliminating head lice that will not lead to resistant strains of lice is the use of hot air, which desiccates the insects and eggs, thus killing them.

For information on controlling head lice without toxic chemicals, see Beyond Pesticides’ Head Lice Factsheet or Getting Nit Picky About Head Lice.

Source: Congressman Ed Markey Press Release

Monsanto’s advertising campaigns touted its intention to develop seeds that yield “more crop per drop,” but there is no evidence that DroughtGard will help the crops or farmers use water more efficiently. The report, High and Dry: Why Genetic Engineering is Not Solving Agriculture’s Drought Problem in a Thirsty World, finds that during limited testing DroughtGard ””the only crop genetically engineered (GE) for drought tolerance approved for commercial use, containing the engineered gene cspB”” reduced crop losses by about six percent. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) analysis of data supplied by Monsanto show that DroughtGard produces only modest results, and only under moderate drought conditions. The report estimates that DroughtGard does not improve water use efficiency. By comparison, breeding and improved farming practices have increased drought tolerance by roughly one percent per year over the past several decades. UCS calculates this is roughly equal to or better than what the new GM corn has demonstrated.

Agriculture accounts for about 70 percent of all water extracted from rivers and wells, making drought a serious and costly problem for farmers. An extreme drought still plaguing Texas triggered a record $5.2 billion in agricultural losses in 2011 alone. Monsanto’s new corn is not likely to provide any practical help under such conditions, even by the company’s guarded claims. In terms of crop yields, DroughtGard will increase overall corn production by about one percent because it is likely to be of practical value on only about 15 percent of U.S. corn acreage. Breeding and improved farming practices increase corn production by about 1.5 to 2 percent annually.

According to the report, DroughtGard is further handicapped by the fact that it will work well only under moderate drought conditions, and climate scientists predict that drought frequency and severity likely will increase in some regions as climate change worsens. The fact that drought is not predicable also makes it difficult for farmers to decide whether it is worthwhile to buy DroughtGard seed prior to the growing season.

“Farmers are always looking to reduce losses from drought, but the biotechnology industry has made little real-world progress on this problem,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, Ph.D., a senior scientist with UCS’s Food & Environment Program and author of the report. “Despite many years of research and millions of dollars in development costs, DroughtGard doesn’t outperform the non-engineered alternatives.”

Monsanto’s DroughtGard corn hybrids are in the final phase before commercialization in on-farm field trials. The company hopes to roll the product out commercially next year. The evidence suggests that alternatives to GE ””classical breeding, improved farming practices, or crops naturally more drought-tolerant than corn, such as sorghum and millet”” can produce better results, often at lower cost. Drought is a significant problem for agriculture in the U.S. and globally. Last year, extreme drought in Texas and throughout the U.S. South wiped out crops and left livestock without pasture or hay, with damages to the agriculture industry calculated at more than $5 billion.

The U.S. has in recent times moved to deregulate GE crops without fully understanding the human health and environmental consequences, and without sufficient evidence to support the claims made by the technology. Another recent report highlights scientific research and empirical experiences around the globe that demonstrate the failure of GE seeds and crops to deliver on their advertised promises to increase yields, reduce pesticide usage, and tolerate drought with “climate ready” traits.

Most recently, USDA is considering deregulating GE corn engineered to be tolerant to 2,4-D as a means of controlling weeds that have become resistant to Roundup (glyphosate). GE crops tolerant to Roundup have proliferated over the last decade and have directly resulted in resistant “super weeds.” Beyond Pesticides and dozens of other organic and environmental organizations wrote comments to USDA, urging the agency to not allow this new strain of GE corn to enter the environment.

The U.S. decision to welcome and deregulate GM crops fails to take into account several scientifically-validated environmental concerns, such as the indiscriminate nature of genetically modified gene flow in crops, a heavy reliance on faulty data, and a high degree of uncertainties in making safety determinations. It also overlooks the problem of herbicide-resistant weeds and insects, as well as the widespread corruption of conventional seed varieties by GE strains, along with documented severe economic injury to farmers and markets. There is also an oversight of possible health consequences from eating GE foods, despite the fact that long-term health effects of consuming GM food are still largely unstudied and unknown.

Fortunately, GE crops are not permitted in organic food production. For more information about why organic is the right choice, see our Organic Food: Eating with a Conscience Guide and visit the Organic Program page. For more information on the failure of genetically engineered food, read “Genetically Engineered Food: Failed promises and hazardous outcomes,” from the Summer 2011 issue of Pesticides and You, or go to our Genetic Engineering web page.

Source:
Union of Concerned Scientists, Reuters

FDA has held off on taking decisive action on the application from Massachusetts-based AquaBounty Technologies, which has been seeking approval to sell its GE salmon product in the U.S. for more than a decade. Unlike natural salmon raised in aquaculture net pen systems, the AquaBounty GE salmon grows throughout the year and reaches market weight in 18 months instead of 36, while consuming 25% less food over its lifetime. AquaBounty’s GE Salmon was developed by inserting part of a gene from an Ocean Pout, an eel-like fish, into the growth gene of a Chinook salmon. The blended genetic material is then injected into the fertilized egg of a North Atlantic salmon. When FDA first announced its intent to approve the application in the fall of 2010, the public sent more than 400,000 comments in opposition.

Earthjustice attorney Khushi Desai said, “The citizen petition was filed to ensure that the FDA conducts a careful, comprehensive, and open review of the many significant environmental risk questions raised by this first-of-its-kind application.” Mr. Desai added that, “It is unacceptable that a full year has passed and we still have no answers and absolutely no insight into the agency’s consideration of these risks.”

The disclosure in December 2011 that salmon at AquaBounty’s Price Edward Island, Canada production facility had tested positive for infectious salmon anemia (ISA) in 2009 has heightened concerns of unforeseen consequences should GE salmon production win approval. The ISA is thought to have entered the facility through eggs and/or smolts brought in for increasing the experimental population. “The need for a full environmental impact statement has only become more urgent in light of recently revealed information showing that Aquabounty’s egg facility had previously been infected with infectious salmon anemia,” said Eric Hoffman, food and technology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth. “The fact that the presence of this disease was found in the company’s own facility and was concealed from the public is unacceptable and irresponsible. Proper environmental review would look at these and other environmental risks, and would provide an opportunity for the public to provide input into this precedent-setting decision.”

Beyond Pesticides believes that genetically engineered food is shortsighted, dangerous and unnecessary. Organic production practices, which explicitly prohibit the use of genetic engineering and any materials derived from such practices, offer a preferable alternative for meeting the world’s growing demand for food, while simultaneously protecting natural resources. For more information on Genetic Engineering, see our program page.

Source: Center for Food Safety

Researchers from Ohio State University focused on the efficacy of three over-the-counter ”˜foggers,’ or ”˜bug bombs,’ including Hotshot Bedbug and Flea Fogger, Spectracide Bug Stop Indoor Fogger, and Eliminator Indoor Fogger. Results from the study reveal that bed bugs are not affected by direct exposure to the pyrethriods present in these products. Even long-term laboratory populations of bed bugs, known to be susceptible to pyrethroids, were unaffected by the pesticide when given a thin cloth as cover. This means that even if the current strain of bed bugs in the U.S. were not resistant to pyrethriods, the chemical still would not be an effective method of control because of bed bugs’ propensity to hide in small cracks and crevices in residences and other settings.

“If you use these products, you will not get the infestation under control, you will waste your money, and you will delay effective treatment of your infestation,” says co-author Susan Jones, PhD. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has a consumer alert out against companies misrepresenting claims about pest control and elimination. Consumers beware the use of ”˜bug bombs’ and ”˜foggers’ could hurt your health, and your wallet.

An over-reliance on pesticide controls over the years pushed bed bugs to evolve a resistance to these chemicals. Research presented at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene’s 60th annual meeting showed that exposure to treated bed nets and linens resulted in pesticide-resistant bed bug populations.

A previous study by the Ohio State University researchers details the hereditary changes that allowed the bugs to evolve their chemical resistance. The researchers found that the bugs developed the ability to produce certain enzymes, which can break down toxic chemicals, at higher levels of than previous generations. These enzymes allow the chemicals to be easily excreted by the insects without being harmed.

Pyrethroid class chemicals, which also includes permethrin, bifenthrin, resmethrin, cyfluthrin and scores of others, are synthetic versions of pyrethrin, a natural insecticide found in certain species of chrysanthemum. They were initially introduced on the market as ”˜safer’ alternatives to the heavily regulated and highly toxic organophosphates such as chlorpyrifos and diazinon, which were banned for residential use in 2001 and 2004, respectively. However, exposure to synthetic pyrethroids has been reported to lead to headaches, dizziness, nausea, irritation, and skin sensations. EPA classifies permethrin and cypermethrin as possible human carcinogens, based on evidence of lung tumors in lab animals exposed to these chemicals. Synthetic pyrethroids have also been linked to respiratory problems such as hypersensitization, and may be triggers for asthma attacks.

Despite the fact that there are plenty of effective pest control methods that are not nearly as toxic, pyrethroids are now some of the most popular household pesticides. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC ) Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals reports that widely used pyrethroids are found in greater than 50% of the subjects tested. Ignoring a plethora of data that links pyrethroids to human health effects and insect resistance, EPA has proposed to expand the use of these pesticides (see Beyond Pesticides’ public comments on the proposal here for more information).

Last fall, CDC published a study in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report linking pesticides sprayed in attempts to control bed bugs to poisoning incidents and death. Because bed bugs do not transmit disease and can be controlled without pesticides, this risk is completely unnecessary. The study, “Acute Illnesses Associated with Insecticides Used to Control Bed Bugs,” utilized data from California, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, New York, Texas, and Washington. In those seven states, over 100 poisonings, including one fatality, were associated with bed bug-related insecticide use.

CDC’s study reported a total of 111 illnesses associated with bed bug—related pesticide use; although 90 (81%) were low severity, one fatality occurred. Pyrethroids, pyrethrins, or both were implicated in 99 (89%) of the cases, including the fatality. The most common factors contributing to illness were excessive insecticide application, failure to wash or change pesticide-treated bedding, and inadequate notification of pesticide application. Although few cases of illnesses associated with insecticides used to control bed bugs have been reported, these incidents highlight the importance of educating the public about effective bed bug management.

Fortunately, the chemical treatments that are more harmful to humans than bed bugs are also not actually necessary. Beyond Pesticides advocates for an integrated pest management (IPM) approach to bed bugs, which includes methods such as vacuuming, steaming, and exposing the bugs to high heat can control an infestation without dangerous side effects. This approach, as well as taking steps such as sealing cracks and crevices, reducing clutter and encasing mattresses can also help to prevent an infestation in the first place.

The bed bug resurgence in the U.S. in recent years has led to public anxiety about the pests and drastic attempts to stem their spread through various means, often including the use of highly toxic and harmful chemicals. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ Bed Bug webpage which includes a detailed fact sheet discussing bed bugs, the problems with pesticide treatments, and alternative control methods.

Source: CBS News

“Translocations can persist for years after exposure. Some accumulated damage will be repaired, but not everyone’s repair capacity is the same. Previous studies have suggested that chromosomal breaks can double an adult’s lifetime risk for cancer, though implications for children are unknown,” says first author Manuela A. Orjuela, MD, ScM, assistant professor of clinical environmental health sciences and pediatrics (oncology) at Columbia University Medical Center and a pediatric oncologist at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital.

The researchers followed 113 children, age 5, who are part of a larger cohort study in New York City. They assessed the children’s exposure to naphthalene; a CDC laboratory measured levels of its metabolites””1- and 2-naphthol””in urine samples. (Metabolites are products of the body’s metabolism, and can serve as a marker for the presence of a chemical.) Researchers also measured CAs in the children’s white blood cells using a technique called fluorescent in situ hybridization. Chromosomal aberrations were present in 30 children; of these, 11 had translocations. With every doubling of levels of 1- and 2-naphthol, translocations are 1.55 and 1.92 times more likely, respectively, to occur.

Napthalene is classified as a possible carcinogen by the International Agency for Cancer Research. Inhalation of vapors is linked to nasal tumors in laboratory animals. It has also been associated with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and blood disorders, including several types of anemia. Studies have shown reactions including acute hemolysis, jaundice and death in infants wrapped in blankets that had been stored with mothballs. German workers exposed to naphthalene were found to have a variety of cancers, including laryngeal, gastric, nasal, and colon cancer.

Napthalene belongs to a class of air pollutants called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Prior research at the CCCEH has established a link between prenatal exposure to PAH and increased risk for childhood obesity, IQ deficits, and CAs. The new study is the first to present evidence in humans of CAs, including translocations, associated with exposure to one specific PAH ””naphthalene”” ,during childhood.

To obtain a better sense of the long-term consequences of naphthalene exposure, Dr. Orjuela and other CCCEH investigators are following some of the children in the study as they reach fourth grade. While they expect to see further translocations, they do not expect to see any signs of cancer in the white blood cells. “So far, the translocations seem to be random, and there has been no evidence of the specific translocations that are known to be associated with leukemia. This is entirely expected; leukemia is very rare.” Frederica Perera, DrPH, senior author on the paper, adds that, “The findings provide yet more evidence of the vulnerability of the young child to carcinogenic air pollutants.”

Apart from mothballs, crystalline naphthalene is used as a deodorizer for diaper pails and toilets. It is also used as an intermediate in the manufacture of a wide range of products, including phthalate plasticizers, resins, dyes, pharmaceuticals, insect repellents, and other products. Since naphthalene easily vaporizes, its gas has a variety of other fumigant uses, including use as an insecticidal soil fumigant.

Source: Columbia University Press Release

The chemical manufacturer Syngenta has two weeks to report its own evidence before the ban officially goes into effect. If enacted, France’s Agriculture Ministry stated that the ban will take effect before the start of canola sowing season in late summer. Minister Le Foll reinforced the fact that farmers do not need to rely on this product to protect their crop. “To protect rapeseed [canola] plants, there exist alternatives to coating seeds that are already widely used. If the withdrawal of the authorization (for Cruiser OSR) is confirmed, farmers will therefore have solutions to call on,” Minister Le Foll explained.

The decision to ban the coating of canola seeds with thiamethoxam, commercially labeled Cruiser OSR, is based on a late March study in the journal Science, entitled “A Common Pesticide Decreases Foraging Success and Survival in Honey Bees.” In their study, the researchers used Radio-frequency identification (RFID) to test the hypothesis that a sub-lethal exposure to a neonicotinoid indirectly increases hive death rate through homing failure in foraging honey bees. When exposed to sub-lethal doses of thiamethoxam, at levels present in the environment, honey bees are less likely to return to the hive after foraging than control bees that were tracked with RFID, but not intentionally dosed with pesticides. Higher risks are observed when the homing task is more challenging. The survival rate is even lower when exposed bees are placed in foraging areas with which they are less familiar.

The legal petition in the U.S., crafted in collaboration with environmental groups and beekeepers around the county, points to the fact that EPA has failed to follow its own regulations. EPA granted a conditional, or temporary, registration to clothianidin in 2003 without a required field study establishing that the pesticide would have no “unreasonable adverse effects” on pollinators. Granting conditional registration was contingent upon the subsequent submission of an acceptable field study, but this requirement has not been met. EPA continues to allow the use of clothianidin nine years after acknowledging that it had an insufficient legal basis for initially allowing its use. Additionally, the product labels on pesticides containing clothianidin are inadequate to prevent excessive damage to non-target organisms, which is a second violation of the requirements for using a pesticide and further warrants removing all such mislabeled pesticides from use.

A British study, published in the journal Science at the same time as the French study, “Neonicotinoid Pesticide Reduces Bumble Bee Colony Growth and Queen Production,” examines the impacts of another neonicotiniod pesticide imidacloprid on bumble bee colony health. Researchers exposed colonies of the bumble bees to levels of imidacloprid that are realistic in the natural environment, and then allowed them to develop naturally under field conditions. Treated colonies had a significantly reduced growth rate and suffered an 85% reduction in production of new queens compared to unexposed control colonies. The study is particularly noteworthy because it shows that bumble bees, which are wild pollinators, are suffering similar impacts of pesticide exposure to “managed” honey bees.

A third recent study in published by Harvard University’s School of Public Health in the June 2012 Bulletin of Insectology reinforces the link between the neonicotinoid imidacloprid and CCD even at sub-lethal doses. The Harvard study provides an in situ look into CCD by performing the experiment in the field following normal commercial beekeeping practices. Researchers looked at the effect of feeding High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) to honey bees, a common practice during the winter months. Results show that 94% of the hives had died after exposure to imidacloprid, at levels hypothesized to have been present in HFCS since the introduction of neonicotinoids.

Neonicotinoids are taken up by a plant’s vascular system and expressed through pollen, nectar and gutation droplets from which bees then forage and drink. Several EU countries, including Germany, France, Italy and Slovenia, have put restrictions on the use of these toxic substances. beyond Pesticides and other groups are calling on the U.S. to do the same.

Learn more at Beyond Pesticides’ Pollinator Protection webpage.

The videos include such notable presentations as:

“Inventing the Future of Food“ by Gary Hirshberg — Mr. Hirshberg discusses organics, his experience with Stonyfield Farm and future of food. Mr. Hirshberg is chairman and co-founder of Stonyfield Farm, the world’s leading organic yogurt producer, and the author of Stirring It Up: How to Make Money and Save the World. Previously, he directed the Rural Education Center, the small organic farming school from which Stonyfield was spawned. Before that, he had served as executive director of The New Alchemy Institute, a research and education center dedicated to organic farming, aquaculture and renewable energy. He has also authored books on wind power and organic gardening. He is a speaker on sustainability, climate change, the profitability of green and socially responsible business, organic agriculture, and sustainable economic development.

“Poisoning of the Bees” by Dave Hackenberg. Mr. Hackenberg is the beekeeper who first discovered the disappearance of honey bees known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) and he tells his story here of his fight to save the bees. Mr. Hackenberg believes that pesticides contribute to CCD and that honey bees are a barometer of the environment. He is featured in the film Vanishing of the Bees and various media reports, including this 60 Minutes segment. Mr. Hackenberg founded Hackenberg Apiaries in 1962 as a high school vo-ag project. Today, he and his son operate approximately 3,000 hives of bees in 5 states for pollination and honey. David is a past president of the American Beekeeping Federation, and currently serves as co-chair of the National Honey Bee Advisory Board.

“Essential Lessons from Pesticide History” by John Wargo, PhD. Dr. Wargo is the Tweedy-Ordway professor in environmental health and politics at Yale University. He has lectured extensively on the limits and potential of environmental law, with a focus on human health. He has recently written Green Intelligence: Creating Environments that Protect Human Health. The book won the Independent Publishers Award of Gold Medal in the field of “environment, ecology, and nature” for 2010. He compares the history of five serious and global environmental threats to children’s health in the twentieth century: nuclear weapons testing, pesticides, hazardous sites, vehicle particulate emissions, and hormonally active ingredients in plastics.

“Pesticides and Federal Policy” by U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). Senator Blumenthal has long advocated for stricter control of pesticides to protect children and as Connecticut’s Attorney General joined with five other Attorneys General (AG) to sue the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to adopt pest management practices that only use pesticides as a last resort. At the time, he said, “HUD is solving one problem with another problem -controlling pests, but poisoning public property and the children and citizens who live in public housing, There are safer and sounder affordable alternatives to these pesticides.” He also joined other AGs in pushing EPA to disclose secret or “inert” ingredients in pesticide products, saying, “The public has a basic right to know what they’re being exposed to so they can make educated decisions on the products allowed into their own homes. That’s especially true when products may be harmful to their health.” In that spirit, earlier this year Senator Blumenthal joined 54 Members of Congress in calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to require the labeling of genetically engineered food.

Also included are several workshops such as Local Action to Protect the Environment, Protecting Pollinators, and Genetically Engineered Food. Be sure to visit the full playlist to see the rest of the videos.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the study is an effort to find new ways to combat the disease, which infected 1,600 people in Maryland in 2010. Half of the 185 families that have volunteered for the study will have water sprayed on their lawns to serve as a control group, while the other half will receive the bifenthrin treatment. The 185 families that have signed up so far this year get a $25 gift card, lowered from $40 given to the 440 participants last year.

Last year, while the pesticide reduced the amount of ticks on treated lawns compared to the control group, there was a negligible difference in both the numbers of ticks that volunteers reported on their bodies and the number of Lyme disease cases. State officials have declared that they will not advise residents to use pesticides to combat Lyme disease if this second year of testing shows similar inconclusive results in the number of tick bites and Lyme disease cases between the two groups.

Beyond Pesticides believes that it is wrong to put Maryland families at risk of pesticide exposure, especially since the study proved ineffective in its first year. Beyond Pesticides has spoken directly with state health officials in an effort to relate concerns about this study. “It’s improper to be conducting a human experiment like this,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides.

Bifenthrin is identified as an endocrine disruptor by the European Union in May 2010, and is considered a possible carcinogen by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is a pyrethroid class pesticide, a group of known neurotoxic chemicals. A recent study in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives (2007) of infants born to women with agricultural exposure shows a possible impact of bifenthrin on the occurrence of autism spectrum disorders. EPA studies with rodents test subjects have led the organization to classify bifenthrin as a possible carcinogen due to the increase of bladder, kidney, and lung tumors in mice exposed to the substance. Further, EPA studies have associated bifenthrin with developmental/reproductive effects, and an increased risk of ovulatory dysfunction in females. See Beyond Pesticides’ action alert on EPA’s proposal to expand the use of these pesticides.

The CDC website and informed consent form do not elucidate the hazards posed by this pesticide.
It reads, “If a person (including a young child or a pregnant woman) or animal were to swallow breathe or touch the chemical, the individual or animal is not likely to become ill. If the chemical comes into contact with the skin or eyes before it has dried, some individuals may have short term irritation that will likely disappear within 12 hours. There are no studies that indicate bifenthrin exposure risks in humans are increased for children or women who are pregnant. At the beginning of the study, you will receive a bifenthrin product information sheet about how to clean skin, flush eyes, and if you should seek medical attention for yourself or pets in case this occurs.”

Beyond Pesticides has stated that it is misleading for the CDC to claim that there are no studies that indicate exposure risks for humans are increased for children or pregnant women. In fact, it would be highly unethical to conduct such a study. Instead, EPA extrapolates the impact on people based upon data from rodent/animal studies. Volunteers for the study may interpret the CDC’s statements to indicate that the pesticide is safe for people, when in reality it is a potential carcinogen.

Lyme disease is the most prevalent tick-borne disease in the U.S. It is caused by the bacterium Borrelia Burgdorferi that is harbored by several species of ticks, but most significantly the blacklegged tick that is ubiquitous in the northeastern and north central United States. According to Bryan Schwartz, M.D. of John Hopkins University, ticks start their life feeding on smaller hosts, such as small birds and reptiles, but prefer to feed on white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus), a notorious transmitter and reservoir of the bacterium. After molting, adult ticks prefer to feed on larger mammals, such as deer and humans, at which time they may have already picked-up the bacterium. An infected tick transmits the disease by biting and attaching itself to its host. Research suggests that a tick must feed for 24-48 hours before B. Burgdorferi is transmitted to the host. This makes proper education and awareness about Lyme disease prevention incredibly important.

Although Beyond Pesticides commends the state for attempting to address this serious disease, we advocate for the least-toxic method of tick control possible. For more information on non-toxic tick control, see our fact sheet.

Take Action: Contact Maryland’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and let them know pesticides controls are not the answer to Lyme Disease!

“The scope of this historic settlement is enormous and its protection of the health of millions of Americans across the country is a huge benefit to the public, the environment, and the taxpayers,” the lead plaintiffs’ lawyer Stephen M. Tillery told the media.

The individual amounts that eligible CWSs will recover will be calculated based on the levels of atrazine and frequency of atrazine contamination measured in the water of impacted CWSs and the population served by each CWS. The 300 CWSs with the highest contamination levels will recover 100 percent of their costs.

Atrazine Settlement Details

”¢ Under the reported settlement, Syngenta will pay $105 million to pay the claims of the nearly 2,000 CWS that have ever experienced atrazine contamination, costs, and attorneys’ fees.
”¢ The settlement resolves the claims of CWSs raised in this lawsuit. It will have no impact on any consumer’s ability to bring an action for personal injury as a result of ingestion of atrazine. It will also not prevent a CWS from bringing a lawsuit in connection with a point-source spill or against a farmer or applicator who used atrazine other than in accordance with the label instructions.
Ӣ Any CWS that does not want to be bound to the terms of the settlement has until August 27, 2012 to exclude itself.
Ӣ Every CWS that has ever found a measurable level of atrazine in its raw or finished water is eligible for payment.
”¢ Each CWS’ share will be determined based on its historical atrazine contamination levels and volume of water filtered.
Ӣ Generally, CWSs that processed more water or frequently had high concentrations of atrazine are eligible for more funds; CWSs that processed less water or whose atrazine contamination was sporadic or limited will get less compensation.
Ӣ All of the $105 million will be distributed. None will revert to Syngenta.
Ӣ Public records sand other data available to the plaintiffs show that approximately 2,000 CWSs have detected atrazine in their water.
Ӣ Syngenta expressly denies any liability for contamination of drinking water by atrazine and any risk to public health from the herbicide.

Atrazine is used to control broadleaf weeds and annual grasses in crops, golf courses, and residential lawns. It is used extensively for broadleaf weed control in corn. The herbicide does not cling to soil particles, but washes into surface water or leaches into groundwater, and then finds its way into municipal drinking water. It is the most commonly detected pesticide in rivers, streams and wells, with an estimated 76.4 million pounds of atrazine applied in the U.S. annually. It has been linked to a myriad of environmental concerns and health problems in humans, including disruption of hormone activity, birth defects, and cancer, as well as effects on human reproductive systems, as we have noted.

Atrazine is also a major threat to wildlife. It harms the immune, hormone, and reproductive systems of aquatic animals. Fish and amphibians exposed to atrazine can exhibit hermaphrodism. Male frogs exposed to atrazine concentrations within federal standards can become so completely female that they can mate and lay viable eggs.

In March, U.S. Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) reintroduced legislation to ban atrazine, HR 4318. “No one should ever have to worry if the water they drink is making them sick or affecting fertility,” said Rep. Ellison. “Germany and Italy banned atrazine use in 1991 and EU health officials banned its use in 2003. Yet, almost 10 years later the United States is still using it. We need to remove toxins like atrazine from our waterways.”

In 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published a petition to ban atrazine. Beyond Pesticides submitted comments last year in support of this petition in which we outline in detail the numerous reasons that this chemical is harmful and unnecessary. Read our full comments here.

According to reports on the settlement, Syngenta is neither accepting contamination responsiblity nor acknowledging hazards associated with its product.

Source: Korein Tillery

The article reported that Dr. Denison had spoken with EPA officials who told him that they do not expect any regulations for engineered nanoscale pesticides or chemicals to be approved by OMB. OMB is a powerful agency within the Executive Office of the President of the United States which exercises final authority for approving all significant regulatory actions initiated by Cabinet departments. “My understanding is that there is a view in some circles in the White House that they do not want to stigmatize nanomaterials nor stifle the technology even by requiring the reporting of information that EPA needs to make judgments as to whether there are risks,” Dr. Denison said.

EPA published a proposed rule in June 2011, citing existing authority under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) that would allow the agency to obtain information on engineered nanoscale pesticide ingredients. In the proposal, EPA said it would prefer to collect information under Section 6(a)(2) of FIFRA, which requires registrants to inform the agency of additional information related to “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment,” because it is “the most efficient and expedient administrative approach.”

The Chemical Regulation Reporter article cited Mr. Hanson from the Center for Food Safety as saying that OMB will not approve EPA’s preferred approach. It quoted Mr. Hanson as saying that, “I am of the opinion that OMB has basically told the EPA, ‘Don’t bother’”‰” with a final rule. Mr. Hanson further stated that EPA may move forward with an alternative approach of asking registrants to submit data voluntarily on nanoscale ingredients, but that voluntary data requests are unlikely to be successful because registrants are not under any legal obligation to respond.

EPA has already granted a conditional registration to a pesticide product containing nanosilver as a new active ingredient. The antimicrobial pesticide product, HeiQ AGS-20, a silver-based product for use as a preservative for textiles to help control odors, is being granted registration despite a long list of outstanding studies that have yet to be submitted and reviewed by EPA. As a testament to EPA’s flawed registration process, the agency will now require additional data on the product after it has entered the marketplace to confirm its assumption that the product will not cause ”˜unreasonable adverse effects tp human health or the environment,’ the general standard for registration under the FIFRA.

The article also reported that a separate proposed rule from EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), which was developed to obtain information on engineered nanoscale chemicals, is stalled at OMB. In 2009, EPA said it would be developing regulations for engineered nanoscale chemicals because industry had failed to provide information voluntarily. Based on EPA’s authority under the Toxic substance Control Act, OPPT submitted its regulatory proposal to OMB on Nov. 22, 2010. That proposed rule has neither been approved nor withdrawn, and OMB has remained publicly silent on its position on the rulemaking.

The two proposed rules purportedly being held up at OMB are separate from rulemaking actions applicable to the use of nanoparticles used in sunscreens, cosmetics, and drugs. A coalition of six consumer safety groups filed suit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on December 21, 2011, citing FDA’s chronic failure to regulate nanomaterials used in these products. The lawsuit demands that FDA respond to a May 2006 petition that the coalition filed calling for regulatory actions, including nano-specific product labeling, health and safety testing, and an analysis of the environmental impacts of nanomaterials in products regulated by FDA. After years of no federal regulatory oversight, FDA in April 2012 issued two draft guidance documents addressing the use of nanotechnology by the food and cosmetics industries. The documents “encourage” safety assessments for cosmetic products containing nanomaterials, including the need for modification or development of new methods for standardized safety tests. The new guidelines for the first time show the FDA believes nanomaterials deserve greater scrutiny

Source: Chemical Regulation Reporter

Since 2006, beekeepers in North America and Europe have lost about one-third of their managed bee colonies each year due to “colony collapse disorder.” While the exact cause is unknown, researchers believe pesticides have contributed to this decline. One group of crop pesticides, called “neonicotinoids,” has received particular attention from beekeepers and researchers. Neonicotinoids, including clothianidin and thiamethoxam, in addition to imidacloprid, are highly toxic to a range of insects, including honey bees and other pollinators. They 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 treated seeds that have been coated with the chemicals are planted. Previous research has shown that these effects cause significant problems for the health of individual honey bees as well as the overall health of honey bee colonies, including disruptions in mobility, navigation, feeding behavior, foraging activity, memory and learning, and overall hive activity.

The UCSD biologists focused this particular study on imidaclprid, which has been banned for use in certain crops in some European countries and is being increasingly scrutinized in the United States. “In 2006, it was the sixth most commonly used pesticide in California and is sold for agricultural and home garden use,” said James Nieh, PhD, a professor of biology at UCSD who headed the research project with graduate student Daren Eiri, the first author of the study. “It is known to affect bee learning and memory.”

The two biologists found in their experiments that honey bees treated with a small, single dose of imidacloprid, comparable to what they would receive in nectar, became “picky eaters.” “In other words, the bees preferred to only feed on sweeter nectar and refused nectars of lower sweetness that they would normally feed on and that would have provided important sustenance for the colony,” said Mr. Eiri. “In addition, bees typically recruit their nestmates to good food with waggle dances, and we discovered that the treated bees also danced less.”

The two researchers point out that honey bees that prefer only very sweet foods can dramatically reduce the amount of resources brought back to the colony. Further reductions in their food stores can occur when bees no longer communicate to their kin the location of the food source. “Exposure to amounts of pesticide formerly considered safe may negatively affect the health of honey bee colonies,” said Dr. Nieh.

To test how the preference of sugary sources changed due to imidacloprid, the scientists individually harnessed the bees so only their heads could move. By stimulating the bees’ antennae with sugar water, the researchers were able to determine at what concentrations the sugar water was rewarding enough to feed on. Using an ascending range of sugar water from 0 to 50 percent, the researchers touched the antennae of each bee to see if it extended its mouthparts. Bees treated with imidacloprid are less willing to feed on low concentrations of sugar water than those that were not treated. A video showing the experiments can be found on UCSD’s YouTube page:

The biologists also observed how the pesticide affected the bees’ communication system. Bees communicate to each other the location of a food source by performing waggle dances. The number of waggle dances performed indicates the attractiveness of the reward and corresponds to the number of nestmates recruited to good food. “Remarkably, bees that fed on the pesticide reduced the number of their waggle dances between fourfold and tenfold,” said Mr. Eiri. “And in some cases, the affected bees stopped dancing completely.”

On March 21, 2012, commercial beekeepers and environmental organizations filed an emergency legal petition with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to suspend use of clothianidin, another neonicotinoid pesticide which affects bees, urging the agency to adopt safeguards. The legal petition, supported by over one million citizen petition signatures, targets the pesticide for its harmful impacts on honey bees. The petition points to the fact that EPA failed to follow its own regulations. EPA granted a conditional, or temporary, registration to clothianidin in 2003 without a required field study establishing that the pesticide would have no “unreasonable adverse effects” on pollinators. Granting conditional registration was contingent upon the subsequent submission of an acceptable field study, but this requirement has not been met. EPA continues to allow the use of clothianidin nine years after acknowledging that it had an insufficient legal basis for initially allowing its use. Additionally, the product labels on pesticides containing clothianidin are inadequate to prevent excessive damage to non-target organisms, which is a second violation of the requirements for using a pesticide and further warrants removing all such misbranded pesticides from use.

For more information on how pesticides affect pollinators and what you can do to help, see Beyond Pesticides’ pollinators program page.

Source: UCSD press release

The study was conducted over the course of four weeks using several 300-gallon tanks that were filled with water to mimic pond conditions. Using EPA calculations of how much chemical the farmer would use and how much would be expected to runoff into nearby bodies of water, they dosed the tanks with chlorothalonil. Though some species were able to recover from the chemical assault, researchers found that the ecosystem was fundamentally changed.

“In addition, to reducing biodiversity and altering ecosystem functions, chlorothalonil reduced the decomposition of waste, an important service that freshwater ecosystems provide to humans,” said Dr. McMahon.

“Interest in the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functions stems at least partly from the concern that anthropogenically-driven declines in biodiversity will reduce or alter the benefits offered by ecosystems,” Dr. Rohr said. “Surprisingly, however, this is one of the first studies to actually manipulate an anthropogenic factor and link it to changes in ecosystem functions mediated by declines in biodiversity.”

Chlorothalonil is a widely used golf course and food crop broad-spectrum fungicide, which was originally registered in 1966. It is registered for use against plant diseases such as powdery mildew, early and late blight and various rots and molds. Previous studies have found high concentrations of chlorathalonil in bee hives. Large concentrations have also been discovered in high altitudes, where polluted air from farm land often gets pushed, which helps to shed light on shrinking amphibian populations at high altitudes.

The researchers point out that this study emphasizes the need to re-evaluate the safety of chlorothalonil and hope that this work will encourage further research on effects of anthropogenic factors on ecosystem functions in systems with complex food webs.

Though probably well-intentioned —Dr. Mateo has already invested $6 million of her family’s money and $12 million in grants from nonprofits, on research, creating educational programs about hygiene, and donating paint to more than 8,000 homes in Latin America and Africa””the product puts the people it is supposed to protect from disease at risk for other health problems. Organophosphate insecticides have been linked to a host of neurodevelopmental problems, especially in children. Because these OPs are endocrine disruptors, exposure to the paint could cause damage, even at the extremely low levels touted by its manufacturer. Both chlorpyrifos and diazinon have been linked to reproductive and developmental effects and organ damage. Pyriproxyfen exposure causes kidney and liver damage as well. Furthermore there could be a synergistic effect among the pesticides in the paint or other chemicals in the home.

With the indoor use of organophosphates decreasing globally because of health concerns, one must question the decision to include these outdated pesticides in new products. Studies have shown that exposure to organophosphate compounds cause hyperactivity and cognitive deficits in animals. A study published in Pediatrics found that exposure to organophosphates in developing children might have effects on neural systems and could contribute to ADHD behaviors, such as inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Researchers discovered that for children with a 10-fold increase in the concentration of the most common phosphate metabolites measured in their urine, the odds of ADHD increases by more than half compared to those without detectable levels. A recent study found that exposure of pregnant women to organophosphate pesticides may affect both length of pregnancy and birth weight. Women with higher levels of organophosphates were found to have pregnancies that were 3 to 4 days shorter and babies that were about â…“ pound lighter on average than women with lower levels of pesticides. Just this spring, a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences linked prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos to brain abnormalities.

According to Business Week, various formulations of the paint are already approved for use in 15 countries, including China, Germany, and Spain. Dr. Mateo is seeking approval in the U.S. and a recommendation from the World Health Organization. Inesfly plans to move its manufacturing of the paint from a Spanish facility to Ghana to cut costs and make the paint cheaper. They hope the pesticide paint will be the same price as traditional paint. Inesfly also believes that its combination of three insecticides will help combat pesticide resistance.

Beyond Pesticides recently reported that the World Health Organization (WHO) has recently advocated for multiple toxic pesticides to combat mosquito resistance to insecticides that is showing up in sub-Saharan African. Insecticide resistance, according to the WHO report, is already rampant in 64 malaria-ridden countries and may result in as many as 26 million more cases of malaria a year, which could end up costing between $30 and $60 million annually for tests and medication. Mosquitoes in sub-Saharan African countries are becoming resistant to pyrethroid insecticides, which are used extensively for household spraying and treating bed nets, as well as to the organochloride compound DDT -which is still used in many parts of the world to control mosquitoes. Rather than reducing the reliance on these products, WHO is recommending rotating classes of pesticides used to spray inside homes and developing a new non-pyrethroid insecticide to treat bed nets.

Beyond Pesticides advocates fighting malaria without poisoning future generations of children in malaria hot spots. “We should be advocating for a just world where we no longer treat poverty and development with poisonous band-aids, but join together to address the root causes of insect-borne disease, because the chemical-dependent alternatives are ultimately deadly for everyone,” says Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides.

“Farmers want to be good stewards and neighbors by purchasing seeds and growing corn that supports healthy honey bees and successful beekeepers,” said Doug Voss, a Minnesota corn farmer who also keeps beehives. We have a genuine concern with the majority of corn produced having properties that can negatively impact honeybees.”

At least 94% of the nation’s 92 million acres of corn will be treated with one of two neonicotinoids, both manufactured by Bayer. This area is greater than the total size of the state of Minnesota, Nebraska, or both Dakotas. In addition, these are among the largest honey producing states in the country, housing some of the nation’s largest pollination services businesses. On average, USDA reports that beekeepers have been losing over 30% of their honey bee colonies each year since 2006.

“Honey bees are caught in the crossfire,” said Steve Ellis, owner of Old Mill Honey Co. and the subject of the recent NBC Nightly News piece. “Honey bees, like mine, are subjected to increasingly toxic load of pesticides in corn fields. It’s time to rethink the use of neonicotinoids and provide farmers with better options that allow all of us to prosper.”

Neonicotinoids, including clothianidin, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam, are highly toxic to a range of insects, including honey bees and other pollinators. They 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 treated seeds that have been coated with the chemicals are planted. These effects cause significant problems for the health of individual honey bees as well as the overall health of honey bee colonies, including disruptions in mobility, navigation, feeding behavior, foraging activity, memory and learning, and overall hive activity.

Seeds treated with these insecticides are sticky and do not readily come out of common corn planting machines; so farmers often use talcum powder to help the seeds move more easily through the machine and into the ground. The talcum powder, mixed with the loose pesticide, creates a powerful pesticide dust that can directly coat and kill bees flying over freshly sown fields, and travel on wind to contaminate nearby untreated fields, creating even greater potential exposure for bees.

“We know that these insecticides are highly toxic to bees; we found them in each sample of dead and dying bees,” said Christian Krupke, PhD, associate professor of entomology at Purdue University and author of several recent bee studies. Dr. Krupke said, “Whatever was on the seed was being exhausted into the environment. This material is so concentrated that even small amounts landing on flowering plants around a field can kill foragers or be transported to the hive in contaminated pollen. This might be why we found these insecticides in pollen that the bees had collected and brought back to their hives.”

Despite their best intentions, even those involved in such efforts as the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy’s (IATP) Working Landscapes Certificate program, farmers have struggled to find alternatives to neonicotinoid treated seeds. As conventional growers began to transition away from pesticide and herbicide treatments, they discovered that sourcing corn seed that was not treated with neonicotinoids was the most difficult challenge of all.

“Corn farmers engaged in Working Landscapes are concerned about pollinators, and are becoming increasingly aware of the impacts of neonicotinoids on bee populations, said Jim Kleinschmit, Rural Communities Program Director at IATP. “The problem is that there isn’t much supply of bee-friendly seeds. The fact is, you just can’t find high-yield, untreated corn seed anymore because of seed industry consolidation.”

On March 21, 2012, commercial beekeepers and environmental organizations filed an emergency legal petition with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to suspend use of clothianidin, urging the agency to adopt safeguards. The legal petition, supported by over one million citizen petition signatures, targets the pesticide for its harmful impacts on honey bees. The petition points to the fact that EPA failed to follow its own regulations. EPA granted a conditional, or temporary, registration to clothianidin in 2003 without a required field study establishing that the pesticide would have no “unreasonable adverse effects” on pollinators. Granting conditional registration was contingent upon the subsequent submission of an acceptable field study, but this requirement has not been met. EPA continues to allow the use of clothianidin nine years after acknowledging that it had an insufficient legal basis for initially allowing its use. Additionally, the product labels on pesticides containing clothianidin are inadequate to prevent excessive damage to non-target organisms, which is a second violation of the requirements for using a pesticide and further warrants removing all such misbranded pesticides from use.

Learn more about the science, legal petition, and what you can do to help pollinators on Beyond Pesticides’ Protecting Pollinators program page.

Source: Pesticide Action Network North America

Mosquitoes in sub-Saharan African countries are becoming resistant to pyrethroid insecticides, which are used extensively for household spraying and treating bed nets, as well as to the organochloride compound DDT -which is still used in many parts of the world to control mosquitoes. In Somalia, Sudan and Turkey, resistance has spread to carbamates and organophosphates in addition to pyrethroids and organochloride pesticides. Rather than reducing the reliance on these products, WHO is recommending rotating classes of pesticides used to spray inside homes and developing a new non-pyrethroid insecticide to treat bed nets. Implementation for these suggestions are estimated to cost around $200 million, which is in addition to the $6 billion that the WHO requested last year for existing malaria-control programs.

According to Pesticide Action Network (PAN) , control programs to fight malaria have so far been based on three different interventions: a) the use of bed nets, b) spraying insecticides – including DDT — indoors and c) medical treatment of malaria victims and pregnant women. Though there has been a 25% overall drop in the mortality rate of malaria since 2000, a reliance on chemical programs to combat a pest problem is not a sustainable approach, because the predicable consequence of repeated pesticide use results in resistance

Malaria is both preventable and curable, and the global community must build on the success of those countries that have successfully controlled it. From Mexico to Vietnam to Kenya, the most successful programs are those that rely on community participation and full commitment of the national government to combat the disease. Improved health care infrastructure along with environmental management, widespread use of bed nets and other community-specific solutions are key to success.

PAN Germany and PAN Africa began a pilot program in Senegal in 2011 to implement an ecological and community-based system to control Malaria, which takes into account the type and number of vectors and parasites, identifies existing resistance, analyzes the local epidemiology and ecosystem, and takes into account the economic and social situation.

Beyond Pesticides advocates fighting malaria without poisoning future generations of children in malaria hot spots. “We should be advocating for a just world where we no longer treat poverty and development with poisonous band-aids, but join together to address the root causes of insect-borne disease, because the chemical-dependent alternatives are ultimately deadly for everyone,” says Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides.

Source: Nature

As the country commemorates the 40th anniversary of the Clean Water Act this year, the Potomac is emblematic of what is at stake for rivers nationwide. American Rivers launched a national call to action, giving citizens the opportunity to contact members of Congress and speak up for clean water. The report, “America’s Most Endangered Rivers,” notes that urban development is funneling tons of polluted rainwater to the river, that chemical fertilizer and manure from farms make matters worse, and that wastewater overflowing from sewers, along with pharmaceuticals flushed down toilets, contribute to dead zones in which marine life dies and might cause intersex fish.

Beyond Pesticides notes that the U.S. Geological Society (USGS) has even found low level pesticide residues in drinking waters. The report placed the Potomac atop nine other rivers nationwide, including the Green River, the largest feeder to the Colorado River, the Chattahoochee River, which runs by Atlanta, and the Missouri River.

“This year’s Most Endangered Rivers list underscores how important clean water is to our drinking water, health, and economy,” said Bob Irvin, President of American Rivers. “If Congress slashes clean water protections, more Americans will get sick and communities and businesses will suffer. We simply cannot afford to go back to a time when the Potomac and rivers nationwide were too polluted and dangerous to use.”

Attempts to protect U.S. waterways from chemical contamination, including contamination from pesticides, have recently been attacked by industry groups and Congress. The bill H.R. 872, “Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011,” seeks to revoke EPA’s authority to require permits for pesticide discharges into waterways and passed in the U.S. House of Representatives, an attempt to reverse a 2009 federal court order instructing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require permits under the Clean Water Act for pesticide discharges. (See All Daily News coverage) Soon after H.R. 872 was passed, the Republican-controlled chamber passed the “Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011,” H.R. 2018. This act would prevent EPA from stepping in to enforce clean water standards when it deemed that a state agency was not effectively enforcing the law. It would also prevent EPA from refining its existing water standards to reflect the latest science without first getting approval from a state agency. Thus far, there have been a staggering 125 pieces of legislation that will reduce environmental protection including 50 bills targeting EPA, 16 to dismantle the Clean Water Act, 31 against actions that can prevent pollution, and 22 to defund or repeal clean energy initiatives.

Recently this year, the “Preserve the Waters of the United States Act” (S. 2245, H.R. 4965) was introduced in the House and Senate to prevent the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers’ attempts to finalize guidance, “Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act” that would extend federal protections to more of the nation’s waterways, including small streams and wetlands. According to EPA and the Army Corps, under this proposed guidance the number of waters identified as protected by the Clean Water Act will increase compared to current practice, and this improvement will aid in protecting the nation’s public health and aquatic resources. Industry and their supporters in Congress are campaigning to prevent federal authorities from restoring and protecting small streams and wetlands.

Before the Clean Water Act was enacted in 1972, the Potomac and other notable rivers in the U.S. were cesspools of sewage and industrial pollution. The Clean Water Act affords the Potomac and other rivers across the country some protections from indiscriminate pollution from industrial and agricultural sources so that waterways are cleaner and safer for drinking, boating, and fishing. However, according to the USGS, over 50 percent of waterways in the U.S. are contaminated with pesticides and other pollutants that exceed federal standards. A University of Maryland report card has given the river, and by extension the Chesapeake Bay, a “D” grade for water quality for the past two years. Five million people in the DC region depend on the Potomac for drinking water.

Sources: American Rivers Press Release, Washington Post