“We’re proud to join so many dedicated partners in sponsoring National Healthy Schools Day,” said Lisa Jackson, U.S. EPA Administrator. “EPA’s mission is to protect the American public where they live, work and play — and that certainly includes protecting children where they learn. Our nation’s children, parents, and educators deserve to know that their schools provide a safe and healthy environment. We encourage everyone concerned about healthy schools to use National Healthy Schools Day as a spring board to improve our school environment both indoors and out.”

The vulnerability of infants and children to the harmful effects of pesticides has attracted national attention over the last decade. Schools from across the country document a growing trend to adopt safer pest management strategies that dramatically reduce pesticides in the schools, providing children with a healthier learning environment. Schools that have chosen to adopt such strategies, such as an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program, use alternatives to the prevailing chemical-intensive practices because of the health risk such practices pose to children and other school users. A comprehensive IPM program is proven to be cost effective and yield better pest control results.

“There is no reason to expose our children to hazardous pesticides,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, in the Safer Schools report. “The tools and experience are available to ensure a safe school environment for children.”

In absence of a federal law, such as the proposed School Environment Protection Act (SEPA), some states and local school districts have attempted to provide children the protection they need from hazardous chemical exposure while at school, yet the level of protection is uneven and inadequate across the country, with the majority of children left unprotected. SEPA would provide basic levels of protection for children and school staff from the use of pesticides in public school buildings and on school grounds by requiring schools implement an IPM program, establishing a list of least-toxic pesticides to be used as a last resort, and requiring notification provisions when pesticides are used.

According to Beyond Pesticides research on state pesticide laws:
* 21 states recommend or require schools to use IPM;
* 15 states restrict when or what pesticide may be applied in schools;
* 17 states require posting of signs for indoor school pesticide applications;
* 26 states require posting of signs for pesticide application made on school grounds;
* 23 states require prior written notification to students, parents, or staff before a pesticide application is made to schools; and
* 7 states recognize the importance of controlling drift by restricting pesticide applications in areas neighboring a school.

Although these laws are instrumental in improving protections, for a state to truly protect children from pests and toxic pesticide exposure, schools must adopt a comprehensive IPM program that includes organic land management, bans the use of toxic pesticides for aesthetic purposes, and prohibits the use of hazardous pesticides, such as probable, possible or known carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, reproductive toxins, developmental toxins, neurotoxins, and toxicity category I and II pesticides. The least toxic pesticide should only be used as a last resort after non-chemical strategies have been tried.

In the U.S., there are approximately 54 million children and seven million adults in the nation’s 120,000 public and private schools. Recent peer-reviewed, published reports have found that healthy environments can reduce asthma and upper respiratory infections among school children, as well as promote personnel health, safety and productivity, and improve achievement. Asthma is the leading cause of school absenteeism due to chronic illness and a leading occupational disease of custodians and teachers. Healthy indoor environments are also associated with improvements in children’s learning and behavior, and therefore can yield even greater benefits and savings than energy efficiencies alone. EPA has estimated that up to half of all schools may have problems with indoor air quality.

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2005, “Acute Illnesses Associated with Pesticide Exposure at Schools,” finds that students and school employees are being poisoned by pesticide use at schools and from drift off of neighboring farmlands. The study, which analyzes 2593 poisonings from 1998 to 2002, finds incident rates overall of 7.4 cases per million children and 27.3 cases per million employees, while the authors conclude, “[T]hese results should be considered low estimates of the magnitude of the problem because many cases of pesticide poisoning are likely not reported to surveillance systems or poisoning control centers.” The authors recommend that strategies be adopted to reduce the use of pesticides at school and reduce drift.

This regulatory action revises the total pesticide emission benchmarks in the Sacramento Metro, San Joaquin Valley, South Coast, Southeast Desert, and Ventura areas. The ruling is a victory for chemical-intensive farmers, who fear that stricter limits would force some growers to stop using pesticides. Pesticides, especially soil fumigants, which are injected into soil to kill pests by releasing toxic gases, contribute to about 6% of the smog problem in the Valley, according to state figures. According to the state’s Department of Pesticides Regulation, the looser limit will still “meet our obligation to reduce pesticide emissions, but do so in a way that avoids placing an unreasonable or disproportionate burden on fumigant pesticide users.” For the San Joaquin Valley for example, the rule sets the emissions limit at 18.1 tons per day, 2.1 tons higher than what activists wanted. The regulations cover the prime growing season of May 1 though October 31 and cover smog-making gases, called volatile organic compounds, emitted by many pesticides, especially fumigants.

However, Alegría De La Cruz, an attorney with the Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment said that the department “claims that this is not a big deal because it’s such a small amount, but this, from our perspective, is not making good on a promise that they made to Valley residents to protect [their] health.” The center is considering filing a lawsuit to change the rules.

In 2006, a federal judge ruled that the pesticide department ignored clean-air laws and ordered regulations that would cut pesticide emissions in the valley by 20% from 1991 levels. But in August, the department won an appeal to overturn the ruling. The new regulations call for a smaller decrease — a 12% cut from 1990 levels. Other regions still face a 20% cutback, the department said. The rules became an issue during state budget negotiations earlier this year when Republican lawmakers sought to write the looser rules into law, which would have made it harder for environmentalists to pursue a change. However, these lawmakers backed off. The department is now turning its attention to nonfumigant pesticides. Those regulations must be in place by 2014, according to law.

According to state reports, pesticide use declined in California for the period 2006-2007. The use of fumigants decreased by 0.8 percent, but acres treated increased by 1,235 acres, or 0.3 percent. Researchers have found that fumigants, such as sulfuryl fluoride, stay in the atmosphere at least 30-40 years and perhaps as long as 100 years and is about 4,000 times more efficient than carbon dioxide at trapping heat. Others like methyl bromide, deplete ozone and is under an international phase-out under the Montreal Protocol, which the U.S. continues to ignore. Last July, EPA proposed new rules for soil fumigants which fell short of protecting people, workers and the environment.

To gain a better understanding of why this is happening, some of the UK’s major research funders have joined together to launch an important new research program. The biggest challenge will be to develop a better understanding of the complex relationships between biological and environmental factors which affect the health and lifespan of pollinators.

The funding will be made available to research teams across the UK under the Living With Environmental Change (LWEC) partnership, the major initiative by UK funders to help the UK respond effectively to changes to our environment. This is a joint initiative from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), the Wellcome Trust and the Scottish Government.

Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said, “Aristotle identified bees as the most hard working of insects, and with one in three mouthfuls coming from insect-pollinated crops, we need to support bees and other pollinators. I announced in January that Defra would put an extra £2M into research funding, and I am delighted our partners have agreed to boost this to up to £10M. This funding will give some of Britain’s world-class researchers the chance to identify the causes of the decline we’re seeing in bee numbers, and that will help us to take the right action to help.”

Professor Douglas Kell, BBSRC Chief Executive said, “We are facing a fundamental problem with the decline of bees and other pollinators. They have an absolutely crucial role in pollinating many of our important crops. Without effective pollination we will face higher food costs and potential shortages. This program will help us to understand why numbers have decreased and the steps we could take to reverse this. Complex problems such as this require a modern systems biology approach, a strategy at the core of BBSRC’s vision. This will also feed into BBSRC’s wider food security research program which aims to deliver the science necessary to provide the nutritious and affordable food we need for the future.”

Professor Alan Thorpe, Chief Executive of NERC, “Through the Pollinator Initiative, the LWEC partners will address what is a complex multidisciplinary problem. We need to conduct research that will help us to understand the links between bees and other pollinators and the range of environmental factors that affect them in various ways. This research will provide vital insights into why there has been a steep decline in these insect populations in recent years and help us to find solutions to the problem.”

Sir Mark Walport, Director of the Wellcome Trust said, “It is extremely important that we move swiftly to understand and try to reverse the decline in the populations of bees and other pollinating insects. The devastating effect that this decline may have on our environment would almost certainly have a serious impact on our health and well being. Without pollinating insects, many important crops and native plants would be severely harmed.”

Richard Lochhead, Cabinet Secretary of the Scottish Government said, “It is vital that we increase our understanding of the issues affecting populations of bees and other pollinators such as wasps, butterflies and beetles and in particular whether these are due to climate change. The impact these insects have on our rural industries, such as the soft fruit sector, and on plant biodiversity across Scotland cannot be under-estimated. Any reduction in numbers could have catastrophic consequences not just for our environment but also for our economy. I welcome this initiative and am confident the results of the program will enhance our knowledge and help prevent further declines in bee numbers.”

Elin Jones, Minister for Rural Affairs of the Welsh Assembly Government said, “Honeybees and other pollinators are vital for local food production, which is the key to environmentally sustainable farming. By working with the other partners in this initiative Defra have shown their commitment to safeguarding the population of the honeybee in the UK.”

The funding program will be administered through BBSRC. The NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology will provide post-award coordination for the program and contribute special expertise in long-term and large-scale ecology that will strengthen the research effort.

“Disinfectants, mold and mildew cleaners, weed killers and pool chemicals are just a few of the many over-the-counter pesticide products available for home use,” DPR Director Mary-Ann Warmerdam said. “As people begin their spring cleaning and gardening, they should select products that best target the problem and then follow the label instructions carefully to prevent accidents.” Beyond Pesticides adds that people should consider non-chemical approaches that manage unwanted insects and plants with prevention-oriented practices.

Ms. Warmerdam suggests the following precautions to prevent pesticide exposure in and around the home:

*Select products that pose the least risk to your health and the environment — do you really need a pesticide for the task?
*Never put pesticides in food or drink containers. Keep pesticides in their original containers so they are not mistaken for food or drink.
*Store pesticides properly to keep them away from children and adults who are unable to recognize pesticide containers.
*Do not mix bleach with ammonia or other cleansers because a toxic gas may be formed.

The Butte County incident and blunders below were drawn from 2007 illnesses and injuries reported to DPR. State privacy law protects their identities.

In San Diego County, a resident attempting to fix his home pool filter forgot which hose had the check-valve. He blew into one hose thinking he could tell which one had the valve and inhaled chlorine gas. He sought medical care after coughing and vomiting.

In Sacramento County, a teenage girl saw a mouse in her home and decided to use gopher bait to control the problem because she had seen her parents use it effectively against gophers in the yard. She said she read the label, but did not understand it. She poured about a handful of pellets into a corner of two bedrooms and waited in another room. Within two hours, she experienced a sharp pain behind her eyes, and tightness in her chest when she breathed in. She was taken to an emergency room for evaluation.

A Butte County man used a salt shaker to apply insecticidal dust on his dog for flea control. Later, he thought the salt shaker contained garlic salt and sprinkled the insecticidal dust on a bowl of chili. The man realized his mistake because the chili tasted strange and the beans were a gray color. He experienced some stomach discomfort and went to a hospital for treatment.

In Los Angeles County, an elderly woman spilled insecticidal powder on herself as she tried to open the container to use for roach control in her house. She apparently held the container over her head. She experienced “burning” and was taken to her doctor.

In Sacramento County, pest control company employees returned to air a house that had been fumigated three days earlier. They found a man asleep on the couch who had broken into and ransacked the house. He was taken to the hospital by paramedics and admitted in serious condition.

In Riverside County, a homeowner found a small plastic bottle of malathion leaking in his garage. He threw the bottle into his dumpster, where it spilled. A resident across the street experienced chest tightness and lightheadedness after smelling the pesticide and went for medical care. Two other neighbors reported symptoms, but declined care. The homeowner was found in violation for improperly disposing of a pesticide.

The NYC Housing Authority is the largest public housing owner in North America with more than 405,000 low-income residents. The successful implementation of IPM in an institution of this size was thought to offer many potential benefits; pesticide use reduction, improved pest management and reduced pest and allergen burdens in housing populated by largely African American and Latino families with a disproportionately high prevalence of asthma. Following a successful pilot program in public housing, the NYC Department of Health and Housing Authority developed an IPM intervention designed to be simple, low-cost and relatively easily scaled.

In buildings participating in the study, Housing Authority IPM teams spent 8-12 person-hours in each apartment unit. The teams employed mechanical and steam cleaning using soap in kitchens and bathrooms, used caulk to seal cracks and crevices, and applied boric acid and cockroach baits (gels or containerized solids containing fipronil or hydramethylnon) to kill remaining cockroaches. The IPM supervisor instructed apartment residents to store open food in sealed containers, cover garbage containers with a tight-fitting lid, and dispose of garbage frequently. Residents were provided with a covered garbage container, food storage containers and cleaning supplies, and were specifically asked not to use pesticides. The control buildings received usual care from the Housing Authority’s licensed pesticide applicators. Usual care consists of the offer of conventional, calendar-based extermination visits every three to six months.

Previous studies have shown that IPM is more successful and economical than traditional pesticide applications. The researchers from the city government believe that two features of the earlier studies limit their instructiveness for significant institutional replication and expansion. First, they have typically recruited from, and analyzed impact of IPM on individual rental apartments without building level interventions. Second, the studies, some of which involved goals beyond just pest control, have involved repeated visits by pest control professionals, cleaning services, or educators. The new study, in contrast, involves a single visit by pest control professionals with the intervention at the building level.

Compared to controls, apartments receiving IPM had significantly lower counts of cockroaches at three months, and greater success in reducing or sustaining low counts of cockroaches at three and six months. IPM was associated with lower cockroach allergen levels in kitchens at three months, and in beds and kitchens at six months. Pesticide use was reduced in IPM relative to control, apartments. Residents of IPM apartments also rated building services more positively.

“The biotech industry has spent billions on research and public relations hype, but genetically engineered food and feed crops haven’t enabled American farmers to grow significantly more crops per acre of land,” said Doug Gurian-Sherman, a biologist in the UCS Food and Environment Program and author of the report. “In comparison, traditional breeding continues to deliver better results.”

The report, “Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops,” is the first to closely evaluate the overall effect genetic engineering has had on crop yields in relation to other agricultural technologies. It reviewed two dozen academic studies of corn and soybeans, the two primary genetically engineered food and feed crops grown in the United States. Based on those studies, the UCS report concludes that genetically engineering herbicide-tolerant soybeans and herbicide-tolerant corn have not increased yields. Insect-resistant corn, meanwhile, has improved yields only marginally. The increase in yields for these crops over the last 13 years, the report found, is largely due to traditional breeding or improvements in agricultural practices.

The UCS report comes at a time when food price spikes and localized shortages worldwide have prompted calls to boost agricultural productivity, or yield””the amount of a crop produced per unit of land over a specified amount of time. Biotechnology companies maintain that genetic engineering is essential to meeting this goal. Monsanto, for example, is currently running an advertising campaign warning of an exploding world population and claiming that its “advanced seeds ”¦ significantly increase crop yields”¦.” The UCS report debunks that claim, concluding that genetic engineering is unlikely to play a significant role in increasing food production in the foreseeable future.

The biotechnology industry has been promising better yields since the mid-1990s, but “Failure to Yield” documents that the industry has been carrying out gene field trials to increase yields for 20 years without significant results.

“After more than 3,000 field trials, only two types of engineered genes are in widespread use, and they haven’t helped raise the ceiling on potential yields,” said Margaret Mellon, a microbiologist and director of UCS’s Food and Environment Program. “This record does not inspire confidence in the future of the technology.”

“Failure to Yield” makes a critical distinction between potential””or intrinsic””yield and operational yield, concepts that are often conflated by the industry and misunderstood by others. Intrinsic yield refers to a crop’s ultimate production potential under the best possible conditions. Operational yield refers to production levels after losses due to pests, drought and other environmental factors. The study reviews the intrinsic and operational yield achievements of the three most common genetically altered food and feed crops in the United States: herbicide-tolerant soybeans, herbicide-tolerant corn and insect-resistant corn (known as Bt corn, after the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis, whose genes enable the corn to resist several kinds of insects). Herbicide-tolerant soybeans, herbicide-tolerant corn and Bt corn have failed to increase intrinsic yields, the report found. Herbicide-tolerant soybeans and herbicide-tolerant corn also have failed to increase operational yields, compared with conventional methods.

Meanwhile, the report finds that Bt corn likely provides a marginal operational yield advantage of three to four percent over typical conventional practices. Since Bt corn became commercially available in 1996, its yield advantage averages out to a 0.2 to 0.3 percent yield increase per year. To put that figure in context, overall U.S. corn yields over the last several decades have annually averaged an increase of approximately one percent, which is considerably more than what Bt traits have provided.

In addition, recent studies have shown that organic and similar farming methods that minimize the use of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers can more than double crop yields at little cost to poor farmers in such developing regions as Sub-Saharan Africa.

The report recommends that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, state agricultural agencies, and universities increase research and development for proven approaches to boost crop yields. Those approaches should include modern conventional plant breeding methods, sustainable and organic farming, and other sophisticated farming practices that do not require farmers to pay significant upfront costs. The report also recommends that U.S. food aid organizations make these more promising and affordable alternatives available to farmers in developing countries.

Organic agriculture does not permit GE crops or the use of synthetic herbicides, and focuses on building the soil—minimizing its effect on climate change. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ GE program page.

“Endocrine disruptors can cause lifelong health problems, especially for children,” stated EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. “Gathering this information will help us work with communities and industry to protect Americans from harmful exposure.”

EPA’s recent announcement of these chemicals can be found on EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) page. According to EPA, “The Agency deleted 6 chemicals from the draft list of 73 based upon recent information showing that the chemicals are no longer expected to be found in 3 exposure pathways.” To be included on the initial list, EPA established that chemicals need to be found in three of EPA’s four exposure pathways: food, drinking water, residential use, and occupational exposure. Azinphos-methyl and fenvalerate were removed from the draft list because all uses will have ended by 2012, when Tier 2 begins. Aldicarb, allethrin, dichlorvos, and methiocarb were removed because by that year, they will be found in fewer than three exposure pathways. Once EPA has tested the first 67, any remaining registered chemicals should be entered in the same review.

According to the EDSP manager, Linda Phillips, it will take about two years for EPA to generate full data for these chemicals, and then take another year to determine the effect each has on the endocrine system.

The pesticide industry, led by CropLife America, submitted a petition to EPA last summer that called EDSP “unnecessary and redundant,” given the current data requirements for pesticide toxicity. Of the result, CropLife’s president and CEO, Jay Vroom, said, “In arriving at this formal response, we worry EPA have not taken into account the unique aspects of pesticide regulatory requirements as they intersect with the overarching, new endocrine screening process.” Since then, however, Mr. Vroom has stated that he is “very confident our products will come through with flying colors,” and “If we do learn something about our products that raises a cause for concern, our industry will be at the table, ready and willing to step forward and take action to mitigate risk.”

A wide variety of pesticides, however, have been found to affect both human and animal hormone systems at low levels. For an overview of endocrine disruptors, view Beyond Pesticides’ article, “Pesticides that Disrupt Endocrine System Still Unregulated by EPA.”

Bed bug outbreaks have tripled since 2005, according to a survey of 800 pest control firms across the country, infesting apartment buildings, college dormitories, hospital wings, homeless shelters and top-rated hotels. Bedbugs outbreaks have been reported in at least 27 states, including Honolulu, San Francisco, Cincinnati, Chicago, Houston and Miami. In 2006, a Chicago woman sued a New York hotel for $20 million after suffering more than 500 bed bug bites.

Persistent outbreaks are normally concentrated in low-income neighborhoods, where people cannot afford to replace or professionally clean bedding and soft furnishing. Both New York and San Francisco have passed city legislation to help control the spread of the bugs. In San Francisco, the legislation centers on landlord and tenant rights while in New York, it involves controlling the sale and transport of used mattresses.

Bed bugs are reddish brown and range in size between 1/8 — ¼ of an inch. They live in the crevices and folds of mattresses, sofas and sheets, cracks in walls, behind picture frames or other wall hangings, or inside the bindings of books or even on stuffed animals. While they do not transmit disease, bites can become infected, which occurs in about 30% of those bitten, leaving behind red raised welts. Signs of a bed bug infestation include a pungent odor, and blood or fecal spots on pillow casings and sheets. A bed bug can live up to one year on a single blood meal.

“The problem seems to be increasing and it could definitely be worse in densely populated areas like cities, although it can be a problem for anyone,” said Lois Rossi, director of the registration division in the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs. In 2002, EPA classified bedbugs as a public health pest.

The use of broad spectrum insecticides, which kills common household insects, such as cockroaches, ants and other insects including bed bugs, exposed these organisms to a range of chemicals and allowed them to gradually build up resistance to these chemicals. Many of the chemicals used against bed bugs, such as esfenvalerate and various pyrethroids (permethrin, deltamethrin, cyfluthrin, etc) are also associated with adverse human effects including skin irritation (important if applied to mattresses) endocrine disruption, cancer and neurotoxicity.

“Generally I can guarantee that they will be tolerant to at least one or more of the things that are being used against them,” said Harold Harlan, the leading bug expert for the U.S. military. “They’ve been exposed to chemicals so they are more resistant to chemicals.”

Saul Hernandez, an aide to the Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C who introduced H.R. 6068 -The Don’t Let the Bed Bugs Bite Act of 2008, says he plans to reintroduce the legislation next week, which establishes grant programs to assist States with inspection programs for bed bugs. Federal funding for research into alternative solutions, such as heating, freezing or steaming the bugs out of bedrooms will also be sought by other stakeholders.

There are several habitat modifications and least-toxic alternatives available to prevent, control and treat bed bugs which are all be part of a sound integrated pest management (IPM) strategy. These include sealing cracks and crevices where bed bugs can hide, regular laundering of bed linens and clothing in hot water (120oF), as well as regular vacuuming and steam cleaning of carpets and other soft furnishings which can destroy bed bugs and their eggs. There are also several least-toxic chemical alternatives on the market, including diatomaceous earth. For more information on detecting and preventing a bed bug infestation in your home, read our factsheet “Bed Bugs- Back with a Vengeance” or contact Beyond Pesticides.

Environmentalists, scientists and farmers opposed to GE crops have argued that the corn, which confers resistance to pests, could pollute other crops and pose a threat to the environment and human health. The debate over the use of GE crops in Europe has been ongoing for at least a decade.

MON810 maize, brand name YieldGard, is the only GE crop currently cultivated in the European Union (EU). Under EU laws, countries are allowed to ban individual GE crops for environmental and health reasons. Currently, Hungary, France, Austria, Greece and Luxembourg ban MON810 maize. In March, EU environment ministers overwhelmingly rejected a European Commission proposal to force Austria and Hungary to lift their bans on the controversial cultivation of varieties of genetically modified (GM) corn. Over 20 member states voted against the Commission proposal. Hungary can maintain its ban on Monsanto’s GM maize MON810, and Austria on MON810 and Bayer’s T25.

The effects of Monsanto’s genetically modified maize MON 810, which is engineered to produce a toxin to kill the corn borer, are uncertain and controversial. European Environment Ministers concluded last December that GE risk assessment in the EU is not fulfilling legal requirements, that long term impacts have not been assessed. MON810 is currently being re-assessed at EU level as required under EU law. On November 10, 2008, the Austrian government released a report of long term research showing GE corn fed to mice significantly reduced their fertility over three to four breeding cycles within one generation. Similar effects were found in mice fed GE corn and bred over four generations.

According to a recent report by the by the Center for Food Safety and Friends of the Earth International, GE seeds cost from two to over four times as much as conventional, non-GM seeds, and the price disparity is increasing. From 80% to over 90% of the soybean, corn and cotton seeds planted in the U.S. are GE varieties. Thanks to GE trait fee increases, average U.S. seed prices for these crops have risen by over 50% in just the past two to three years. Exploitation of the food crisis has been extremely profitable for Monsanto, by far the dominant player in GE seeds. Goldman Sachs recently projected that Monsanto’s net income (after taxes) would triple from $984 million to $2.96 billion from 2007 to 2010.

The exorbitant cost of GM seeds is not the only problem. The vast majority of GE crops are not grown by or destined for the world’s poor, but instead are soybeans and corn used to feed animals, generate biofuels, or produce highly processed food products consumed mostly in rich countries. The report documents that nearly 90% of the global area planted GE crops in 2008 was found in just 6 countries with highly industrialized, export-oriented agricultural sectors in North and South America, with the U.S., Argentina and Brazil responsible for 80% of GE crops. The United States alone produced 50% of the world’s GE crops in 2008.

Despite more than a decade of hype, the biotechnology industry has not introduced a single GE crop with increased yield, enhanced nutrition, drought-tolerance or salt-tolerance. In fact, the biotechnology industry’s own figures show that 85% of all GE crop acreage worldwide in 2008 was planted with herbicide-tolerant crops. Roundup Ready crops, which are genetically engineered to be resistant to Monsanto’s best selling herbicide Roundup (active ingredient glyphosate) have been a boon to Monsanto’s profits, but not without environmental costs.

Colombian glyphosate spraying

Colombia is the only country in the world that allows this kind of herbicide spraying””known as fumigation””as an anti-drug practice. Yet the spraying has been a complete failure. According to U.S. government studies, the area subject to coca cultivation has actually increased by 23 percent since the U.S.-backed fumigation began in earnest, and Colombia remains the leading supplier of cocaine for U.S. markets. Coca farmers simply spread out and relocate the crops, moving deeper into the forest and clearing new areas. The environmental impacts have been disastrous.

Further, the chemical mixture of glyphosate and surfactants used in Colombia has not been fully tested for environmental or human health impacts under these conditions. People on the ground in affected regions say that the spraying significantly harms both. The concentrations applied are much greater than those commonly used for aerial spraying, and the spray drift lands on food crops, water sources, and even humans. At least 10,000 farmers have reported food crops killed by fumigations, and the UN Special Rapporteur on Health said there is “credible and trustworthy evidence” that fumigations are harmful to human health.

In 2007, scientists from Pontificia Catholic University in Quito, Ecuador, completed a study of 24 residents living within three kilometers of the Colombian border — an area targeted by the coca spraying – and have found a wide variety of ailments. The study’s subjects suffer from symptoms that include intestinal pain, diarrhea, vomiting, headaches, dizziness, numbness, blurred vision, skin irritation, rashes, and difficulty breathing. In addition, the damage to their chromosomes was 600 to 800 percent greater than that of people living 80 km away, which can signal possible conditions like cancer and reproductive effects like miscarriages.

Now is the time to cut U.S. support and funding for this inhumane, ineffective and environmentally destructive program. Send your letter to President Obama today.

“This decision means that EPA recognizes its responsibility to move forward with implementing the Clean Water Act, instead of trying to circumvent this bedrock public protection statute as was attempted by the Bush EPA,” stated Charlie Tebbutt of the Western Environmental Law Center, who argued the case for the environmental plaintiffs. “We now look forward to working with EPA and the states to bring about meaningful changes in site specific uses of pesticides to protect our nation’s waters,” continued Mr. Tebbutt.

In this same announcement, EPA stated that it will seek to continue the Bush rule for two years, despite the court ruling it illegal. “This part of the EPA’s decision is troubling,” said Mr. Tebbutt, but he added, “I expect that the 6th Circuit will deny the request to keep an illegal rule in place.” The court decision simply reinstates the law as it was before Bush’s intervention in 2006 and numerous states had permits in place prior to the rule change. “It will not be the great hardship that the pesticide industry has concocted. It is time to reinstate the full protections to our nation’s rivers, lakes and streams envisioned by the Clean Water when it was passed in 1972,” Mr. Tebbutt concluded.

In January, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a Bush EPA decision that the spraying of pesticides into the nation’s waters should no longer be regulated by the Clean Water Act. The Court held that pesticide residuals and biological pesticides constitute pollutants under federal law and therefore must be regulated under the Clean Water Act in order to minimize the impact to human health and the environment.

With this decision, virtually all commercial pesticide application to, over and around waterways will now require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. The NPDES permits will allow for local citizen input, and provide for accountability and oversight. The permits will also require the regulatory agencies to evaluate effects on fish and wildlife from individual applications, to monitor exactly how much of a pesticide application goes into in our nation’s waters, and to evaluate the cumulative impact this residual effect has on aquatic organisms.

Government delegates will gather in Geneva early next month to decide whether lindane will be added to a list of chemicals targeted for a global phase out under the international Stockholm Convention.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration Joshua Sharfstein, a coalition of groups are calling on the agency leaders to support listing of lindane under the international treaty without exemption for lotions and shampoos (“pharmaceutical uses”). The letter also urges FDA to “take definitive action in ending pharmaceutical use of lindane domestically, as has already been accomplished in California.”

“These lindane shampoos and lotions have already been banned in California and in many countries around the world,” says Kristin Schafer, Associate Director for Advocacy with Pesticide Action Network North America. “U.S. agencies must do their job, and take action now to protect children in the US and around the world from this persistent pesticide.” Lindane has also been restricted in Michigan for use on head lice and scabies.

In addition to the letter, the groups submitted a scientific study from the journal Environmental Health Perspectives documenting the success of the 2001 California ban, as well as a compilation of personal stories from parents around the country who have used less hazardous methods to control lice.

“The California experience shows that a ban on lindane products leads to cleaner water and healthier children,” says Dr. Sarah Janssen, co-author of the EHP article. “We have seen no lice or scabies outbreaks after more than seven years. There is simply no reason to keep these products on the market.”

Exposure to lindane, a neurotoxic organochlorine pesticide, has been linked to seizures, developmental disabilities and hormone disruption. It is known to be particularly hazardous to children. Lindane and associated isomers are among the most ubiquitous chemicals in the Arctic environment, contaminating traditional foods of Indigenous communities in the region.

“Our traditional foods are polluted by chemicals that aren’t even used here in the Arctic,” says Shawna Larson, Environmental Justice Program Director for Alaska Community Action on Toxics. “The U.S. has been one of the few countries pressing to allow continued use of these products — it makes no sense, and it has to change.”

The groups also submitted several statements and resolutions from Indigenous organizations in the Arctic region calling for an immediate phaseout of all uses of the pesticide lindane.

According to the coalition, U.S. pesticide and other chemical plants remain one of the sectors of America’s infrastructure most vulnerable to accidents and terrorist attacks. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identified approximately 7,000 high-risk U.S. chemical facilities. However, unless Congress replaces a flawed temporary law with a comprehensive chemical security program, millions of Americans will remain at risk.

Watch Greenpeace's Chemical Security video

The statute Congress passed in 2006 temporarily authorized “interim” regulations that are wholly inadequate to protect communities. Furthermore these rules expire on October 4, 2009 leaving the 111th Congress only six months to enact truly protective legislation. Congress must pass comprehensive legislation before the temporary law expires.

Among the fatal flaws in the “interim” statute:

— It prohibits the DHS from requiring the most ironclad security measures. DHS cannot require any specific “security measure,” including the use of safer and more secure chemical processes that can eliminate catastrophic hazards posed by poison gas, even when cost-effective alternatives are readily available.

— It explicitly exempts thousands of chemical facilities, including approximately 2,650 water treatment facilities, some of which put major cities at risk.

— It fails to involve plant employees in the development of vulnerability assessments and security plans or protect employees from excessive background checks.

In March 2008 the House Homeland Security Committee adopted the “Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2008” (H.R. 5577) in a bipartisan vote. H.R. 5577 addresses many of the flaws in the interim law. However, the chemical manufacturers lobby opposed it and favors making the interim law permanent.

Just last summer, a pesticide tank exploded at a Bayer chemical plant in West Virginia, drawing comparisons between the site’s potential risk and the 1984 Bhopal disaster, in which an explosion and leak at the Bayer site’s sister plant killed thousands. Read more. Chemical plant tragedies, as well as the slow poisoning of our environment through everyday pesticide and other toxic chemical use, raises the issue of whether these toxic chemicals should be manufactured at all, when safer practices and products exist.

“Inert” refers to ingredients in a pesticide formulation that have been added to the active ingredient to serve a variety of functions, such as acting as solvents, surfactants, or preservatives. However, the common misconception is that “inert” ingredients are physically, chemically, or biologically inactive substances. EPA allows pesticide manufacturers to put harmful chemicals into pesticide products without telling the public — chemicals linked with cancer, genetic damage, and reduced fertility, despite admitting the policy is misleading. EPA has stated that “many consumers have a misleading impression of the term ”˜inert ingredient,’ believing it to mean water or other harmless ingredients.”

A December 2006 commentary in the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ journal Environmental Health Perspectives calls for improvements in pesticide regulation and “inert” ingredient disclosure, citing an extensive body of literature illustrating the concern over related human and environmental health effects. The authors, Caroline Cox, then with NCAP and now research director at the Center for Environmental Health, and Michael Surgan, Ph.D., chief scientist in the Office of the Attorney General of New York State, highlight the regulatory weaknesses that allow the “inert” ingredients in pesticide formulations to go largely untested. The commentary provides evidence that inerts are often far from harmless and need to be examined closely for environmental, wildlife and public health effects. Further, they present an urgent need for “inert” regulation and disclosure due to the ubiquitous nature of pesticides in the environment. Read a summary or the full article.

EPA must be told that these ingredients can no longer be kept secret. That is why in 2006 the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, along with Beyond Pesticides and other allies filed a legal petition challenging the EPA’s policy of secrecy on these ingredients. Fifteen Attorneys General submitted a companion petition to EPA. Please e-mail Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lisa Jackson at [email protected], no later than May 1, urging EPA to respond to NCAP’s petition and mandate that pesticide manufacturers list hazardous “inert” ingredients on pesticide labels.

At the same time, the market for organic potatoes is growing. A bulletin by the University of Maine Cooperative Extension Service states, “Organic potatoes in Maine are an industry that is increasing in scope and in value. Organic potatoes may bring a premium price in the marketplace, because many consumers understand that organic practices not only produce safe, high-quality food; they preserve topsoil and reduce pollution. Organically grown foods are flavorful and nutritious, which is why gourmet restaurants are increasingly seeking organic suppliers. Potatoes and Maine have a long tradition together, perhaps because potatoes can be stored for use during the long Maine winter. Organic potatoes and Maine may have a long tradition together as well.”

This new development is the result of an agreement with a shareholder group concerning the company’s pesticides use. Following the agreement, the Bard College Endowment, Newground Social Investment and the AFL-CIO Reserve Fund, withdrew a shareholder proposal they were going to present at the company’s annual meeting which would have required the company to publish a report on options for cutting pesticide use in its supply. The shareholders said the company’s commitment will support progress on the pesticide issues that affect the environment, public health, and farm employees.

The three investor groups teamed with Investor Environmental Health Network to engage McDonald’s in talks about pesticide reduction. Through the agreement, McDonald’s has committed to:

Ӣ survey its current U.S. potato suppliers;
”¢ compile a list of best practices in pesticide reduction that will be recommended to the company’s global suppliers (through the company’s Global Potato Board); and
”¢ communicate findings related to best practices to shareholders, as well as in the company’s annual corporate social responsibility report.

The details of the agreement were developed by shareholders and McDonald’s, with support Investor Environmental Health Network, which is a collaborative partnership of investment managers advised by nongovernmental organizations concerned about the financial and public health risks associated with corporate toxic chemicals policies.

“Because McDonald’s has such a commanding presence in the marketplace, this commitment offers the promise of significant reductions of pesticide use — which will benefit consumer health, as well as farm workers, local agricultural communities, and the environment,” said Newground Social Investment Chief Executive Bruce Herbert, who is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Institute for Children’s Environmental Health.

“Consumers, workers and our environment all suffer from over-use of pesticides,” said John Sweeney, President of the AFL-CIO. “As investors, we knew McDonald’s could take an important first step and we’re ready to work with the company to change and grow.”

Potatoes are a heavy user of pesticides and use more pounds of pesticides per acre than most crops. Farmers often spray on a weekly basis, or even more frequently to try to prevent blight. They also spray herbicides to kill the tops of the plants at the end of the growing season to make the underground tubers easier to harvest. Over 40 toxic pesticides are used on potatoes including ethoprop, mancozeb, chlorothalonil, EPTC and metribuzin. Most of these pesticides are linked to serious chronic effects such as cancer, endocrine disruption and reproductive/developmental effects. Many leach to groundwater and contaminate surface waters. Intensive potato cultivation and pesticides usage have been implicated in the high rates of rare cancers in young children in rural western Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada. The island farming community of about 14,000 has experienced occurrences of osteosarcoma, several lymphomas, Ewing’s sarcoma, and a number of myeloid leukemia cases, all among children.

For more information on potatoes and pesticides read the factsheet entitled “Sustainable Potato Production” by the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP).

The major findings of the data show that:
 The majority of pesticide illnesses are associated with chlorpyrifos, malathion, chlorine, and cypermethrin;
 The largest number of pesticide illnesses were from pesticide drift;
 For occupational cases, the most common activity during pesticide exposure were for applicators and fieldworkers;
 For non-occupational cases, the most common activity during exposure were being in an indoor environment and for applicators;
 For incident setting, the largest number of cases were for single-family homes;
 For agricultural cases, the majority were for individuals between the ages of 20 and 40 years;
 For non-agricultural cases, the majority were for individuals between the ages of 20 to 60 years and 0 to 9 years; and,
 For reported school pesticide cases, 68 percent were related to antimicrobial pesticide exposure.

The data comes from several sources and includes both occupational, such as agricultural and structural use, and home-use incidents of pesticide-related illnesses and injuries. DPR works with other state and local entities in hopes to capture the majority of significant illness and injury incidents associated with pesticide use. For example, in 2007, 538 of the cases were reported through the California Poison Control System (CPCS), which previously offered this service through a federally funded pilot program that expired in 2002. CPCS resumed its reporting of pesticide illnesses in October 2006 under a new contract funded by DPR.

DPR reports that in 2007, the number of illnesses and injuries investigated returned to a level typical of recent years after a dip in 2006. In 2006, only 680 illnesses were identified, the lowest number since pesticide illness records were computerized in 1982. In 2005 and 2004, more than 1,300 and 1,200 cases were identified, respectively. Based on information available at the time of evaluation, DPR concludes that 407, or 41 percent, of the 982 pesticide-associated cases might have been avoided if pesticide users had strictly followed safety procedures on the pesticide labels and California regulations. Interestingly, in a report released three months ago, DPR data shows that pesticide use in the state declined in 2007 to 172 million pounds statewide.

The counties with the greatest number of pesticide exposure cases were Monterey, Los Angeles, Tulare, San Diego, Kern and Frenso, respectively. Nonetheless, the largest quantity of pesticides in the state are applied in Fresno County. Agricultural Commissioners in Tulare and Kern Counties, also in the top five counties that apply the greatest amount of pesticides, have adopted pesticide buffer zone rules that prohibits aerial applications of restricted use pesticides within one-quarter mile of schools in session or due to be in session within 24 hours, occupied farm labor camps and residential areas.

DPR’s Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program, run by the Worker Health and Safety Branch, does not produce a “census” of pesticide injuries, since there is no way to document illnesses that go unreported. Worker Health and Safety Branch studies have shown that pesticide-related injuries at work, or cases related to agricultural activities, are more likely to be reported than pesticide illnesses at home. Pesticide illness studies, supported by hospital records, also show that DPR’s program is effective at detecting any incident involving multiple victims. Although physicians are required by law to report any suspected pesticide illness, compliance is low. DPR has developed other sources of illness data, and County Agricultural Commissioners investigate every report they receive from physicians, DPR or other sources. DPR’s Worker Health and Safety Branch then reviews county investigations and determine whether cases are pesticide-related.

For the first time, the complete California Pesticide Illness Query, or CalPIQ, with data from 1992 to 2007 is available on-line. CalPIQ enables users to analyze the data with individual, user-defined queries based on several variables, including year of incident; agricultural or non-agricultural use; county of occurrence; and pesticide by category, active ingredient or intended use.

Using previous data collected from California and other state surveillance programs, a 2008 study by a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researcher finds the pesticide poisoning incidence rate among U.S. agricultural workers is thirty-nine times higher than the incidence rate found in all other industries combined.

Contact Beyond Pesticides to find out what to do in a pesticide emergency and how to file reports to the organization’s Pesticide Incident Reporting system.