(Beyond Pesticides, October 9, 2023) On this Indigenous Peoples’ Day, the world turns its attention to the invaluable wisdom that Indigenous communities possess, highlighting their crucial role in addressing the global biodiversity crisis.  While facing disproportionate harm from unjust policies and practices that pollute, Indigenous communities are gaining federal and international recognition as key players in preserving the planet’s ecological balance. 

Many Indigenous communities have a profound connection to, and unique relationship with its land, carrying with them ancestral wisdom that has sustained their ecosystems for generations. Indigenous knowledge, passed down through centuries, emphasizes the intricate relationships between species, the balance of ecosystems, and the importance of coexistence with nature. This knowledge has allowed Indigenous Peoples to thrive sustainably for millennia. 

In the face of the growing biodiversity and climate crises, Indigenous wisdom and traditional insights are a part of the solution. During the 2022 White House Tribal Nations Summit, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) unveiled historic guidance for federal departments and agencies regarding Indigenous Knowledge. This guidance, accompanied by an implementation memorandum, acknowledges the importance of valuing and adopting Indigenous Knowledge into federal decisionmaking to enhance scientific and policy decisions. “As the original stewards of the natural environment, Tribes and Indigenous communities have expertise critical to finding solutions to the climate crisis and protecting our nation’s ecosystems,” said CEQ Chair Brenda Mallory. “The guidance released today will help ensure that their voices are included across the Federal Government for the collective benefit of our communities and the planet.” 

Examples of traditional knowledge being used to improve biodiversity include: 

• Traditional knowledge is being utilized to improve biodiversity in the largest dam removal project in U.S. history, along the California-Oregon border. The Klamath River restoration and dam removal project is collaborating with the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, the Karuk Tribe, the Yurok Tribe, and other Native American tribes to plant and monitor nearly 17 billion seeds to recreate the pre-dam ecosystem. Upon completion, this project will open more than 400 miles of river for threatened species and contribute to a diverse native ecosystem. 

• Scientists are partnering with tribes to study traditional practices that improve biodiversity in ecosystems. One study was conducted on black oaks with interviews and workshops involving tribal members with ancestral knowledge of black oak burning practices. The study revealed opportunities to reintroduce low-intensity fires, along with thinning, to restore black oak stands that are conducive to acorn gathering. The findings also highlighted examples of overcoming challenges in restoring the socioecological benefits of black oak ecosystems for indigenous tribes.  

For more examples of tribes that are having positive environmental impacts, visit this Smithsonian website. To learn about international examples of indigenous knowledge to improve biodiversity, see this video.  

Encroachment on Indigenous lands, the expansion of extractive industries, and shifting climate patterns have threatened the delicate balance that many Indigenous Peoples maintain with nature. The global biodiversity crisis mirrors these interdependent systemic issues as species extinction, habitat degradation, and ecosystem imbalances become more urgent. Recognizing the importance of Indigenous knowledge remains an essential first step, and President Biden’s proclamation on Indigenous Peoples’ Day in 2022 underscored the significance of respecting Indigenous sovereignty and incorporating Indigenous voices into government decisions. As President Biden said, “On Indigenous Peoples’ Day, we honor the sovereignty, resilience, and immense contributions that Native Americans have made to the world; and we recommit to upholding our solemn trust and treaty responsibilities to Tribal Nations, strengthening our Nation-to-Nation ties. . . [T]oday, they remain some of our greatest environmental stewards.” For more information on the proclamation, read Beyond Pesticide’s reporting here. Such recognition from the U.S. government signifies an awareness of the critical role Indigenous Peoples play in the conservation of biodiversity. 

• The restoration of the Elwha River by the Lower Elwha Tribe, featured in the image above, serves as a shining example of how Indigenous and scientific partnerships can contribute to environmental restoration and conservation. The project began after the removal of two large hydropower stations. 

• Kawerak, an Indigenous organization in western Alaska, issued a call for knowledge sovereignty and the indigenization of knowledge. Their concerns center on how research, research funding, and research prioritization have historically excluded Indigenous and local communities. The organization laid out a practical plan for repositioning research agendas to be more inclusive and respectful of Indigenous and local perspectives. 

Biodiversity is a global problem that requires international collaborations and diverse perspectives. The Indigenous Peoples’ Alliance of the Archipelago (AMAN), an independent organization representing over 2,500 Indigenous communities and approximately 20 million individual members across Indonesia, estimates that the nation is home to 50 to 70 million Indigenous individuals within its 250 million population. AMAN has played a pivotal role in advocating for Indigenous rights and knowledge. Despite legal recognition of Indigenous rights in the Indonesian Constitution, there have been challenges in fully implementing the Indigenous Peoples Law, which remains a bill in Parliament—leaving Indigenous communities vulnerable to land grabs and discriminatory regulations. 

Some of the challenges in utilizing traditional knowledge reflect broader issues of land rights. Indigenous communities frequently experience marginalization and discrimination within national legal systems, exacerbating their vulnerability to violence and mistreatment. When Indigenous Peoples lack human rights, it is not only unjust and inhumane, but it also undermines resource management and conservation practices that help sustain a livable world for all. Land return, also known as land reparations, land restitution, or land repatriation, refers to the process of recognizing land theft, the loss of lives, and the devastation of cultures.  
 
In alignment with environmental justice as a human rights issue, Marcos Orellana, PhD, Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights and National Forum Series speaker, emphasized the legacy of severely contaminated sites on indigenous lands at the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in 2022. From pesticide drift to exposure through contaminated waterways, “the list of toxic exposures on indigenous peoples is long,” despite the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169. Dr. Orellana further noted that “toxics are a form of violence against the land and its people.” 

There is growing evidence of the role of Indigenous knowledge at the international level, yet despite this recognition, roadblocks remain that prevent genuine collaboration with Western science for effective conservation and resource management. One such challenge discussed in the opinion piece “Science Must Embrace Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge To Solve Our Biodiversity Crisis,” is the  “gatekeeper” problem, when a few individuals become the sole experts on a particular community or issue, potentially drowning out the diverse knowledge streams and grounded perspectives of Indigenous and traditional communities. 

Chief Edwin Ogar of the Ekuri Initiative, ICCA Consortium Honorary Member Gretta Pecl, and Council Member Tero Mustonen,  the opinion piece authors, explain that it is crucial to shift the link between policy and research away from simplistic, one-size-fits-all solutions and slogans and toward the needs on the ground. This includes investing in training and learning from past successes and failures.  

As the United States commemorates Indigenous Peoples’ Day, it is a moment to celebrate the resilience and wisdom of Indigenous communities. Their traditional knowledge offers solutions to the biodiversity crisis, emphasizing the importance of preserving sovereign Indigenous lands and communities—working collectively to protect and preserve the planet’s rich tapestry of life for future generations. 

Take Action today! >>Tell EPA to begin meaningful dialogue with tribes in order to learn how pesticide use can be avoided by adopting indigenous practices. Tell EPA that when needs can be met without using pesticides, such use causes “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.”

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

Source: Science Must Embrace Traditional and Indigenous Knowledge to Solve Our Biodiversity Crisis 

(Beyond Pesticides, October 5, 2023)  Residents of a Pittsburgh, PA-area extended-stay hotel were evacuated due to a contamination and poisoning incident caused by rat poison. The chemical involved in the incident has not yet been revealed, but officials say the rat poison, when exposed to water, releases the highly toxic phosphine gas. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the gas is known to cause a range of symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, diarrhea, thirst, muscle pain, difficulty breathing, and the accumulation of fluid in the lungs. Higher exposures and prolonged exposure to phosphine can result in more severe health consequences.

EPA has found that phosphine gas causes: Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure to phosphine may cause headaches, dizziness, fatigue, drowsiness, burning substernal pain, nausea, vomiting, cough, labored breathing, chest tightness, pulmonary irritation, pulmonary edema, and tremors in humans.  Convulsions may ensue after an apparent recovery.  Chronic (long-term) occupational exposure of workers to phosphine may cause inflammation of the nasal cavity and throat, weakness, dizziness, nausea, gastrointestinal, cardiorespiratory, and central nervous system symptomology, jaundice, liver effects, and increased bone density.

Deputy Police Chief Brian Kohlhepp of Ross Township explained to multiple media outlets that the hotel used rat bait traps around the exterior of the building. According to reports, the traps became saturated with rainwater and released a dangerous gas that poses risks to human health.

The incident, which occurred on September 25, resulted in seven individuals being rushed to the hospital, with an additional four receiving immediate treatment at the scene for exposure to the rodenticide. Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) teams, local policy, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responded to the emergency.

This incident exemplifies the serious limitations of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture restrictions (so-called risk mitigation measures) of hazardous pesticides, according to Beyond Pesticides. While EPA and the state lead agency (Agriculture Department) apparently recognize the hazardous nature of the rodenticide, it has been registered by EPA and the state for widespread use. This incident reflects the failure of the restrictions in place and the inability of EPA to fully control against adverse effects once released in the environment.

In the case of phosphine, when used as a fumigant, EPA issued the following restriction, which permitted the poisoning incident and evacuation:

Fumigant Management Plans must be written before all applications of phosphine products, including all burrowing pest fumigations. A Fumigant Management Plan is a written description of the steps designed to plan for a safe, legal, and effective fumigation. The certified applicator and owner of the property to be fumigated must characterize the area to be treated and include all safety requirements in the plan before application.

The Pennsylvania incident serves as a stark reminder of the potential dangers associated with pesticide usage and the potential for harm once pesticides are authorized by EPA to be marketed. Beyond Pesticides emphasizes the importance of using nontoxic alternatives for rodent control and encourages families with small children to consider proactive measures, such as sealing gaps around doors, installing door sweeps, and caulking openings around pipes, wires, and vents. The event also sheds light on a much broader and concerning issue that extends beyond the borders of Ross Township – the widespread presence of pesticides in U.S. rivers and streams.

Beyond the immediate exposure, pesticide use results in nontarget exposure, as pesticides move off the target site. The Pittsburgh area has had more than its fair share of chemical spills, with the US Steel Tower leak in April and the nearby East Palestine train derailment in February. Advocates are raising questions about the connection between pesticides, toxic spills, and water quality. A 2020 report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), part of the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project, revealed alarming statistics regarding pesticide contamination in the nation’s waterways. The report indicated that nearly 90 percent of water samples collected from rivers and streams across the United States contained at least five or more different pesticides. This data underscores the extent of pesticide pollution in our aquatic ecosystems.

Pesticide contamination in waterways is not a new issue. A USGS analysis dating back to 1998 already revealed the presence of pesticides in all U.S. waterways, with at least one pesticide detectable. The USGS acknowledges that thousands of tons of pesticides enter rivers and streams from both agricultural and nonagricultural sources, contributing to the contamination of essential drinking water sources, including surface water and groundwater.

What makes this problem even more concerning is the potential for different pesticides to interact synergistically when mixed together. This means that the combined effect of multiple pesticides can be more severe than the sum of their individual effects. As a result, aquatic ecosystems, including fish and other wildlife, are at risk of suffering detrimental impacts due to the presence of these pesticide mixtures.

Recent research by Robert Hunt Sprinkle, M.D. and Ph.D., and Devon C Payne-Sturges Ph.D., catalogs the history of neglect in addressing toxic mixtures and their impacts on wildlife and humans. These authors discuss how exposures to toxicants can occur individually, cumulatively, collectively, and synergistically. Moreover, they discuss the disproportionate harms that are felt in disadvantaged communities.

Beyond Pesticides is calling for the elimination of toxic petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers to protect waterways and reduce pesticide contamination in drinking water. Organic and regenerative farming practices are sustainable alternatives that conserve water, reduce runoff, and eliminate toxic chemicals. Rodent control is one important aspect of reaching Beyond Pesticide’s goal of eliminating pesticides by 2032. For more information about the risks of rodenticides, go to www.beyondpesticides.org/rodenticides and learn about safer alternatives to pesticides at www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/managesafe/overview. 

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

Source: Pittsburgh-Area Hotel Rat Poison-Related Evacuation

(Beyond Pesticides, October 4, 2023) A study published in Food and Chemical Toxicology finds acute exposure to chlordane, an organochlorine insecticide, results in decreased lipid (fat) levels, altered anti-oxidant capacity, and increased testosterone levels (pro-androgenic) in male mice, while increasing liver enzyme activation and reducing regulation of both liver identity and function in females. These findings indicate that chlordane induces toxicant-associated steatosis (fat retention) liver disease (TASLD) with underlying, sex-specific, endocrine, and metabolic effects.

It is well-known that traces of legacy (past-use) pesticides, like organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), remain in the environment for decades—possibly centuries, post-final application, as OCPs have greater chemical stability and gradual attenuation. However, these chemicals have profound adverse impacts on human health, especially on the endocrine system. Obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, and elevated liver enzymes resulting from endocrine disruption contribute to liver diseases and can lead to liver cirrhosis. Although some, but not all, manufacturing and use of specific OCPs have declined in the U.S., OCPs remain a global issue, as much of the developing world still report usage. Considering the lack of studies on OCP-induced endocrine disruption, TASLD, and other liver diseases, research like this highlights the need to understand the underlying mechanisms contributing to growing endocrine disease incidents. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the sex-specific health effects chemical contaminants can produce to mitigate exposure, especially among vulnerable populations. 

The study notes, “The current study highlighted the effects of chlordane as a sex-dependent EDC/MDC [endocrine/metabolic disrupting chemical], that potentially acts as a first hit leading to a compromised liver, and additional insults such as lifestyle stressors could drive this compromised liver state to full-fledged TASLD and associated metabolic comorbidities.”

The study focuses on the link between toxicant-associated steatosis liver disease (TASLD) and underlying sex-specific metabolic/endocrine disruption from pesticide exposure. Chlordane is the focus of the study due to its association with elevated liver enzymes, indicative of liver injury. Using male and female mice, researchers exposed each mouse to 20 mg/kg of chlordane for two weeks and investigated the outcomes for each sex. Although female mice exhibit lower body fat content, lipid retention in the liver and high lipid levels indicate that chlordane plays a role in altering genes involved in an increase in lipid synthesis and uptake. Despite more elevated liver fat levels, female mice have lower cholesterol levels. Additionally, chlordane exposure also influences glycogen and glucose metabolism, reducing the expression of the HNF4A gene, an essential regulator of liver identity and function. In males, chlordane exposure increases testosterone levels in the blood. The study suggests that activation of the constitutive androstane receptor is the mechanism involved in chlordane metabolism, resulting in these adverse hepatic outcomes.

Chlordane is an organochlorine insecticide of the same class as DDT, and like other organochlorines, it can bioaccumulate, increasing contamination levels as it works its way up the food chain. These chemicals are highly persistent, remaining in the environment for decades and perhaps even centuries, with breakdown products of similar toxicity to the parent compound. Chlordane has long been associated with diabetes, developmental disorders, miscarriage, depression, and bone marrow diseases and is a potent carcinogen. More recent data links the chemical to autism and endometriosis. Sales of chlordane began in the mid-1940s and continued until 1988 when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally canceled its remaining uses for household termite applications, in response to litigation filed by Beyond Pesticides (then National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides) against the agency. By that time, per EPA estimates, chlordane had been applied to 30 million homes in the United States. This contamination persists today. Chlordane has been discovered on the grounds of a New Jersey middle school at levels above EPA limits, in the private wells of many Connecticut residents,  in what were once considered “pristine” National Parks, and in coral reefs along the South China Sea.

This study adds to the growing body of research assessing sex-specific disparities in chemical metabolization (breakdown) and elimination in the body. In addition to OCPs, organophosphate (OP) insecticides exhibit endocrine-disrupting properties that may alter estrogen or testosterone activity and receptors, resulting in differences in the clearance rate and toxicity of OPs. For instance, a 2018 study finds female rats manifest airway hyperactivity—a characteristic asthma symptom—at lower OP doses than males. A 2020 study reveals that exposure to acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors like OPs can cause sex-specific differences in depression symptoms among adolescent girls through endocrine disruption. Furthermore, this study is the first to demonstrate that, among the general population, OP exposure causes an increased risk of total cancer for female non-smokers, breast cancer for female smokers, and prostate cancer for male smokers from OP exposure. Researchers suggest that the same endocrine-disrupting properties that induce sex-specific effects also promote hormonal-related cancer development like breast and prostate. 

Although this study highlights that lifestyle, genetics, and race/ethnicity are key factors driving symptoms of metabolic and endocrine-related liver disorders, including TASLD, these factors do not account for the rise in metabolic liver disease among young individuals. In fact, researchers warn of the rise in liver disorders and metabolic syndrome among young people. Therefore, the study suggests future research investigate and identify alternative factors such as toxicant exposures in liver health and metabolic diseases to mitigate further disease outcomes and complications.

Pesticides themselves can possess the ability to disrupt endocrine and metabolic function, especially for chronically exposed individuals (e.g., farmworkers and landscapers) or during critical windows of vulnerability and development (e.g., childhood, pregnancy). Health officials estimate about 100 million individuals in the U.S. have some form of liver disease, with fatty liver disease (FLD) being the most common. Cases of FLD, associated with or without alcohol, have doubled over the past 20 years. Therefore, it is essential to mitigate preventable exposure to disease-inducing pesticides. For more information about pesticides’ effects on human and animal health, see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database, including pages on endocrine disruption, immune system disorders (e.g., hepatitis [liver condition], diabetes, and more.

One meaningful way to reduce human and environmental contamination from pesticides is to buy, grow, and support organic. Numerous studies find that levels of pesticides in urine significantly drop when switching to an all-organic diet. Furthermore, given the wide availability of non-pesticidal alternative strategies, families, from rural to urban, can apply these methods to promote a safe and healthy environment, especially among chemically vulnerable individuals or those with health conditions. For more information on why organic is the right choice for consumers and the farmworkers that grow our food, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture.

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

Source: Food and Chemical Toxicology

(Beyond Pesticides, October 3, 2023) On September 19, 2023, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Corporation Counsel Mary B. Richardson-Lowry took legal action against agrochemical giant, Monsanto, filing a lawsuit that alleges the corporation’s role in polluting Chicago with Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) decades ago, despite knowing the chemicals’ detrimental effects.  

PCBs are identified as “forever chemicals” due to their environmental persistence. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), these chemicals “do not readily break down once in the environment.” They cycle through air, soil, and water and can travel long distances, with PCBs found worldwide. 

They pose serious health risks as they can accumulate in the environment and within organisms including plants, food crops, sea life, and humans. Those who consume fish from contaminated waterways are exposed to PCBs as the chemical bioaccumulates in the fish population. 

PCBs are man-made organic chemicals composed of carbon, hydrogen, and chlorine atoms. They were first manufactured and sold in 1929 by the Swann Chemical Corporation and subsequently came under the ownership of Monsanto Chemical Company in 1935. Due to their non-flammability, stability, and electrical insulating properties, PCBs quickly found widespread use. Their applications included use in electrical equipment, paints, plastics, and carbonless copy paper.  

PCBs were also instrumental in the pesticide industry. According to O’Reilly, Talbot & Okun Associates, researchers at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) “discovered that the addition of certain oils and/or chemicals to a pesticide formulation prior to its application could inhibit the volatilization and solubilization.” These additives increased the amount of time an application of pesticides would remain effective. PCBs were among the most effective chemical additives, making it a common addition to pesticide formulas.  

Despite the extensive risk posed by PCBs, it was not until 1979 that the Toxic Substances Control Act prohibited PCB production and officially acknowledged their risks to human health and the environment. 

However, the ban came too late. By 1979, PCBs, often sold under the name of Aroclor, had long been popular in the Rust Belt, and companies like General Electric had been illegally disposing the chemical into waterways by the millions of pounds.  

It was not until 2013 that the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified PCBs as likely carcinogens, a significant recognition arriving 84 years after their inception and 34 years after the ban.  

The City of Chicago claims Monsanto’s role extends beyond PCB production, as the corporation is accused of being aware of the hazards posed by PCBs as early as the 1960s but continued manufacturing until 1977. This allegation aligns with Monsanto’s history of concealing adverse effects associated with its products. 

Due to this intentional misleading by Monsanto, Chicago, and several other states and cities, including Oregon, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Baltimore, Ohio, New Jersey, and Washington state are seeking legal retribution from the corporation.  

Mayor Johnson and Corporation Counsel Richardson-Lowry claim Monsanto’s pollution is an environmental justice issue, saying the lasting effects of PCBs have exacerbated inequities in many Chicago neighborhoods. 

Despite the outlawing of PCB production over 40 years ago, Chicago continues to grapple with PCB contamination in its waterways, soils, and air. The Chicago River and surrounding communities remain compromised, prompting advisories against swimming and fish consumption.  

And as Indigenous Peoples Day approaches, it is essential to recognize the injustices experienced by numerous Indigenous communities because of the actions of pesticide corporations such as Monsanto. 

The St. Regis Mohawk tribe in Akwesasne, situated in Franklin County, New York, shares a story that mirrors the experiences of many who have been adversely affected by PCBs over decades. In this case, the tribe’s connection to the St. Lawrence River as a vital lifeline for sustenance, including food and irrigation for livestock and crops, was compromised due to its proximity to an illegal PCB dumping site operated by General Electric.  

During the peak usage of PCBs in the manufacturing industry, General Electric was illicitly disposing millions of pounds of PCBs into local waterways. Downstream, the Mohawk tribe remained unaware that their essential water source had been contaminated. As early as the 1960s, Mohawk farmers began noticing health issues in their livestock, such as lameness and swelling. The lifespan of their animals also drastically declined once manufacturing began at the plant. And when concerns were raised about potential poisoning, the New York State Department of Health dismissed all concerns.  

As a result, women were forced to stop breastfeeding their children for fear of passing chemicals through breastmilk, and the community could not consume fish, a staple in their diet. Their whole way of life was upended without consent as they endured this contamination’s effects unwittingly. 

In many instances across the nation, indigenous communities, like the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, have had to grapple with government agencies’ slow response to their plight, leaving people who are deeply connected to the land and water to face environmental and cultural disruptions. 

PCBs are a reminder that environmental damage often disproportionately affects marginalized communities, including Indigenous peoples. These communities, while quietly enduring the effects of pollution, have often faced barriers to receiving the help and recognition they deserve.  

The lawsuits against Monsanto and the ongoing struggles of Indigenous communities signal a broader need for environmental justice and corporate accountability. The PCB contamination of waterways, from the Chicago River to the St. Lawrence River, highlights the lasting consequences of unchecked industrial practices.  

As we commemorate the upcoming Indigenous Peoples’ Day, let us reflect on the urgent need for environmental justice and the collective responsibility to protect our natural resources and the communities that depend on them. It is a reminder that the legacy of pollution, like PCBs, leaves a lasting imprint on our environment and society, and addressing it requires unity, accountability, and a commitment to a cleaner, more equitable future. Please support Beyond Pesticides’ mission of protecting public health and the environment by ending the use of pesticides like those manufactured by Bayer-Monsanto. See Beyond Pesticides’ webpage to learn more about the link between pesticides and environmental/agricultural justice and help support other marginalized communities affected by harmful pesticide exposure. 

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

Source: Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago Sues Monsanto, The River Is in Us: Fighting Toxics in a Mohawk Community 

(Beyond Pesticides, October 2, 2023) On the 50th anniversary of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), statements out of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raise concerns about the agency’s ability to meet the challenge of evaluating pesticides for their adverse impact on threatened and endangered species. While EPA has initiated efforts to address a significant backlog of pesticide evaluations, the agency faces a task so extensive that it may require several additional decades to fully catch up. EPA officials stated, “Even if EPA completed this work for all of the pesticides that are currently subject to court decisions and/or ongoing litigation, that work would take until the 2040s, and even then, would represent only 5 percent of EPA’s ESA obligations.”  

As part of a “whole of government” approach, EPA must redirect its pesticide program to protecting all species and their habitats.  

The speed and depth of biodiversity loss has reached crisis proportions. A 1,500-page report in 2019 by Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES )—Global Assessment Summary for Policymakers, the most comprehensive look to date at the biodiversity crisis and its implications for human civilization, makes the following finding: “Since 1970, trends in agricultural production, fish harvest, bioenergy production and harvest of materials have increased, but 14 of the 18 categories of contributions of nature that were assessed, mostly regulating and non-material contributions, have declined.” Among the contributions that have declined are soil organic carbon and pollinator diversity. 

The United Nations said last year, “Despite ongoing efforts, biodiversity is deteriorating worldwide, and this decline is projected to worsen with business-as-usual. The loss of biodiversity comes at a great cost for human well-being and the global economy.” And, despite ESA being one of the most effective conservation laws globally, protecting 1,662 species in the U.S. and 638 species elsewhere on Earth. Over the past five decades, ESA has played a pivotal role in preventing these extinctions by safeguarding the most critically endangered species within biological communities. ESA establishes a framework to categorize species as “endangered” or “threatened,” granting them specific protections, but the goal of the ESA is to address the broader issue of biodiversity loss by protecting habitats of species most at risk, or, as stated in ESA, to “Provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions set forth in subsection (a) of this section.” 

Yes, the data paints a clear picture of the inadequacy of the efforts related to dramatic biodiversity loss if the U.S.is going to meet the challenges. Beyond Pesticides has documented many aspects of this decline in biodiversity, and the implications for ecosystem, human, and planetary health. The data points to the importance of broad adoption of organic regenerative / agroecological systems, which can very significantly address the interactive health, biodiversity, and climate crises. 

A coalition of environmental organizations including Beyond Pesticides is calling for bold and comprehensive action to preserve our planet’s natural heritage for future generations in an urgent letter to President Joe Biden.  

As part of a “whole of government” approach, EPA must redirect its pesticide program to protecting all species and their habitats.  

Under ESA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to consult with relevant agencies when registering chemicals to assess their impact on endangered species. Unfortunately, EPA has consistently fallen short in fulfilling this statutory obligation, as highlighted over years of reporting by Beyond Pesticides. EPA admits that its Pesticide Program “has been unable to keep pace with its ESA workload, resulting not only in inadequate protections for listed species but also litigation against the Agency.”  

Pesticide use is a major cause of declining biodiversity, which is manifested in extinctions, endangered species, and species vulnerable to environmental disturbances—including climate change, habitat fragmentation, and toxic chemicals. If EPA is serious about protecting biodiversity, it must look first to the ways it has created the crisis in the first place. 

Studies upon studies upon studies show that pesticides are a major contributor to the loss of insect biomass and diversity known as the “insect apocalypse,” particularly in combination with climate change. Insects are important as pollinators and as part of the food web that supports all life, so the loss of insects is a threat to life on Earth. EPA’s registration of insecticides has always—from DDT to neonicotinoids—endangered insects on a global level. Similarly, pesticides threaten food webs in aquatic and marine environments. 

Pesticides threaten frogs and other amphibians in a way that demonstrates the potential to warp the growth and reproduction of all animals. Agricultural intensification, in particular pesticide and fertilizer use, is the leading factor driving declines in bird populations. 

At a more foundational level, EPA approves pesticides that, in supporting industrial agriculture, eliminate habitat—either through outright destruction or through toxic contamination. In much of the U.S., agricultural fields are bare for half the year and support a single plant species for the other half. The difference between this industrial agriculture and organic agriculture is that through their organic systems plans, organic producers are required to conserve—protect and increase—biodiversity. 

In other words, a major reason that species are endangered is that EPA has registered pesticides that harm them. If EPA is to really protect endangered species, it must eliminate the use of toxic pesticides and encourage organic production. 

The letter to President Biden emphasizes the need for a whole-of-government approach to address this crisis and underscores the importance of consulting with Tribal governments and honoring federal trust obligations to Indigenous communities. Recognizing and incorporating indigenous knowledge and practices in conservation efforts is deemed crucial to safeguard biodiversity, protect the rights of indigenous peoples, and ensure social equity and justice. 

The letter calls on President Biden to take the following actions: 

1. Implement Whole of Government Approaches to Saving Biodiversity and Endangered Species: A national biodiversity strategy is proposed to serve as a blueprint for a coordinated response to biodiversity loss, addressing primary threats such as habitat degradation, climate change, wildlife exploitation, invasive species, and pollution.
   
2. Boost Recovery of Endangered Species Through Robust Funding and Engaging Agencies Across Government: Adequate funding for the ESA and the prioritization of conservation and recovery efforts by all federal agencies, in consultation with Tribal and Indigenous communities, are essential to reversing species decline.

3. Adopt an Ambitious Ecosystem-based Framework to Recover Endangered Species and Rebuild America’s Wildlife Populations: The letter calls for a holistic approach to recovery that considers a species’ role in ecosystems and protects key areas to increase resiliency and preserve biodiversity hotspots.

As part of this “whole of government” approach, EPA must redirect its pesticide program to protecting all species and their habitats. 

Letter to EPA Administrator: 

On the 50th anniversary of the passing of the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must take bold, visionary steps to protect all species and their habitats.  

Pesticide use is a major cause of declining biodiversity, which is manifested in extinctions, endangered species, and vulnerability of species to environmental disturbances—including climate change, habitat fragmentation, and toxic chemicals. If EPA is serious about protecting biodiversity, it must look first to the ways it has created the crisis in the first place. Dwindling biodiversity is an existential crisis that requires removing serious threats posed by pesticides. 

Many studies show that pesticides are a major contributor to the loss of insect biomass and diversity known as the “insect apocalypse,” particularly in combination with climate change. Insects are important as pollinators and as part of the food web that supports all life, so the loss of insects is a threat to life on Earth. EPA’s registration of insecticides has always—from DDT to neonicotinoids—endangered insects on a global level. Similarly, pesticides threaten food webs in aquatic and marine environments. 

Pesticides threaten frogs and other amphibians in a way that demonstrates the potential to warp the growth and reproduction of all animals. And yet, EPA continues to ignore its responsibility to eliminate risks from endocrine disrupting pesticides. Agricultural intensification, in particular pesticide and fertilizer use, is also the leading factor driving declines in bird populations. 

At a more foundational level, EPA approves pesticides that, in supporting industrial agriculture, eliminate habitat—either through outright destruction or through toxic contamination. In much of the U.S., agricultural fields are bare for half the year and support a single plant species for the other half. The difference between this industrial agriculture and organic agriculture is that through their organic systems plans, organic producers are required to conserve—protect and increase—biodiversity. 

In other words, a major reason that species are endangered is that EPA has registered pesticides that harm them. Certainly, these threats to biodiversity qualify as “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment” which, according to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), should disqualify toxic pesticides from being used. If EPA is to really protect endangered species, it must eliminate the use of toxic pesticides and consider organic production in applying the FIFRA “unreasonable adverse effects” standard in the pesticide registration review.  

Thank you. 

Letter to U.S. Senators and Representative: 

On the 50th anniversary of the passing of the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must take bold, visionary steps to protect all species and their habitats.  

Pesticide use is a major cause of declining biodiversity, which is manifested in extinctions, endangered species, and vulnerability of species to environmental disturbances—including climate change, habitat fragmentation, and toxic chemicals. If EPA is serious about protecting biodiversity, it must look first to the ways it has created the crisis in the first place. Dwindling biodiversity is an existential crisis that requires removing serious threats posed by pesticides. 

Many studies show that pesticides are a major contributor to the loss of insect biomass and diversity known as the “insect apocalypse,” particularly in combination with climate change. Insects are important as pollinators and as part of the food web that supports all life, so the loss of insects is a threat to life on Earth. EPA’s registration of insecticides has always—from DDT to neonicotinoids—endangered insects on a global level. Similarly, pesticides threaten food webs in aquatic and marine environments. 

Pesticides threaten frogs and other amphibians in a way that demonstrates the potential to warp the growth and reproduction of all animals. And yet, EPA continues to ignore its responsibility to eliminate risks from endocrine disrupting pesticides. Agricultural intensification, in particular pesticide and fertilizer use, is also the leading factor driving declines in bird populations. 

At a more foundational level, EPA approves pesticides that, in supporting industrial agriculture, eliminate habitat—either through outright destruction or through toxic contamination. In much of the U.S., agricultural fields are bare for half the year and support a single plant species for the other half. The difference between this industrial agriculture and organic agriculture is that through their organic systems plans, organic producers are required to conserve—protect and increase—biodiversity. 

In other words, a major reason that species are endangered is that EPA has registered pesticides that harm them. Certainly, these threats to biodiversity qualify as “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment” which, according to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), should disqualify toxic pesticides from being used. If EPA is to really protect endangered species, it must eliminate the use of toxic pesticides and encourage organic production.  

Please tell EPA to protect endangered species by eliminating the registrations of toxic pesticides and consider organic production in applying the FIFRA “unreasonable adverse effects” standard in the pesticide registration review. 

Thank you. 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 29, 2023) In unsurprising news, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reversed itself and decided not to ban a dangerous pesticide: tetrachlorovenphos (TCVP) used in pet flea collars and other flea products. This is despite its own earlier decision to ban TCVP in pet collars and scathing criticism of its methods and conclusions by the courts.

First registered in 1966, TCVP belongs to the notoriously toxic organophosphate chemical family and is classified by the World Health Organization as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” It was originally registered to Shell Chemical, then to E.I. duPont de Nemours, then to Hartz Mountain Corporation and Fermenta Animal Health Company.  Early on, it was registered for use on food crops and livestock, but the crop uses were voluntarily de-registered in 1987. It is still widely used on pets and farm animals. In 1995, EPA issued the opinion that “all uses of tetrachlorvinphos, with the exception of oral feed-through larvicide treatment to livestock intended for food use, will not cause unreasonable risk to humans or the environment.” Since then, the agency has contorted itself repeatedly to allow TCVP to remain on the market.

There is little research available on TCVP’s human health effects; the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry does not even have a fact sheet for the compound, although it does have one for the related chemical chlorfenvinphos, which is no longer registered for any use in the U.S.

The lack of human data allows EPA to base its decision on manufacturer-commissioned animal studies. The standard battery of toxicological screenings involves exposing rats, rabbits, and other animals to various doses of the test chemical. The analysis of their responses focuses on tumor formation, anomalously large or small internal organs, reproductive dysfunction, birth defects in offspring, skin sensitivity, genetic mutations and other potential endpoints, but few consider chronic low-dose exposures and whether this may lead to neurological problems.

This is especially problematic with pet flea collars, which millions of children are exposed to. The TCVP collars, manufactured by Hartz Mountain, distribute the pesticide gradually over the animal’s body, most of it in the form of dust. EPA has used, according to some advocates, an egregiously illogical rationale for failing to cancel TCVP registration for flea treatments. In its risk assessments, for example, EPA has assumed that children play with pets for an hour a day, without considering whether children may also sleep with pets, and whether households may have more than one pet.

Children are especially vulnerable to toxic substances that interfere with development, especially brain development. Organophosphates inhibit the activity of acetylcholinesterase, an enzyme crucial for effective neurotransmitter function. The effect is irreversible and can lead to cognitive deficits, attention deficits, and motor problems in exposed children. In pets, which receive the highest exposures in home settings, organophosphate exposure can cause nervousness, drooling, seizures and death. EPA has previously determined that all organophosphates have a “common mechanism of toxicity,” (see also EPA cumulative risk assessment of organophosphates) so to determine allowable exposure it must aggregate all food and nonfood exposure to determine allowable risk to human health.

The animal studies used in pesticide registrations are not designed to measure chronic exposures over time, but rather to find those dosage levels where animals begin to show symptoms and the dosage level that kills half the dosage group. Regulatory toxicologists generally analyze only gross organ features like size and weight, and the tests do not capture subtle neurological changes.

It is worth looking in detail at EPA’s actions regarding TCVP in the decades after its initial registration. The most recent registration was in 2006, and the agency has been dawdling ever since over the completion of the current reregistration process. EPA had already canceled all other indoor uses for TCVP out of concern for children’s neurological development, but it has consistently resisted attempts to extend the cancellation to flea collars and liquid treatments.

Most of the impetus for canceling TCVP has come via litigation by the Natural Resources Defense Council. The NRDC released an issue paper in 2009 noting that TCVP residues can remain in a pet’s fur for weeks after application at levels up to 1,000 times the EPA’s acceptable levels. NRDC also petitioned EPA in 2009 and sued in 2014, 2015 and 2019 to cancel the pet product registration, arguing that dust-infused flea collars transfer TCVP more easily than liquid-based treatments. Hartz Mountain joined EPA against NRDC and stressed that liquid flea treatments would cost consumers “five to six dollars more a month” than its flea collars.

Five years after its submission, EPA got around to denying NRDC’s 2009 petition. NRDC appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In 2016, EPA requested remand voluntarily and promised to respond within 90 days after the release of its revised TCVP risk assessment. It did not do so. In late December 2016, EPA emailed NRDC saying it was “EPA’s current intention and belief that the Agency will issue a final revised response to NRDC’s 2009 petition to cancel all pet uses of TCVP within 90 days.” After the 90 days was up in March 2017, EPA notified NRDC saying it would mitigate the risk for pet care use when it conducted its registration review. That was six years ago. EPA not only did not conduct its registration review, but it failed to even list such a review on its schedule. By 2019, EPA had still not published a review schedule for TCVP.

As it often does with registrants, EPA blamed the flea collar company for the delays, resulting in no consequences for the company and continued marketing of the product. EPA had required a study from Hartz Mountain to try to determine how much pesticide, and in what form–dust or liquid—was released from the collars. There were two so-called “torsion studies.” These involved twisting a flea collar to and fro and measuring how much pesticide it released. At first Hartz Mountain tried to say that all the pesticide in the collars was liquid and declined to perform the study. Subsequently the company submitted a torsion study whose methodology had not been approved by EPA ahead of time and EPA gave an estimate of 18 months to get a torsion study properly done and analyzed.

Finally in 2022, Hartz Mountain submitted a new torsion study. A key finding was that 97.2 percent of the dust coming off the flea collar was TCVP—belying EPA’s assumption that only 14.6 percent of the cast-off dust was TCVP. EPA ignored the new finding. On the other hand, EPA accepted the study’s purported finding that only 0.38 percent of the collars’ total weight was released as dust, and the balance of TCVP was released as liquid. EPA also assumed pet owners were trimming a fifth of the collar off once it was placed on the animal. The agency provided no justification for ignoring the major finding until its reply brief in the most recent Ninth Circuit case, in which it said the “Torsion Study used ‘exaggerated twisting conditions…[which] likely overrepresented the amount of [TCVP] in dust extruded from the collars in normal use on pets.’” In that case, the Ninth Circuit opinion rather acidly pointed out that “the TVCP in the collar is specifically designed to be released.”

EPA had published a revised human health risk assessment in 2016 in which it acknowledged the epidemiologic evidence of children’s harm from TCVP exposures and admitted that “more stringent regulatory restrictions are necessary to protect public health.” In its October 2022 response to NRDC’s 2009 petition, EPA stated that it would “grant NRDC’s petition for pet collars” but would do nothing about “pet spray products” because there were no “risks of concern” related to those products.

The latest development is EPA’s September 19 release of its revised human health assessment and decision to reverse last year’s acknowledgment of TCVP’s toxicity, saying instead that the flea collars do not pose an “unacceptable” health risk to children.

Advocates feel strongly that this long and winding road demonstrates that the current regulatory process is corrupt and does not protect public health and the environment. The fact is that EPA succumbs to pressure from the chemical industry and is unlikely to move forward with pesticide restrictions without a public or side agreement with the registrants (pesticide manufacturer) of the chemical in question.

Along with TCVP, controversy has erupted over Seresto flea collars, which are alleged to have killed or sickened thousands of dogs. Seresto collars contain flumethrin, a pyrethroid, and imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid. EPA has not taken any action other than to change the labels slightly and urge the manufacturers and veterinarians to raise awareness of the risks. The controversy is continuing, as Beyond Pesticides has noted.

Beyond Pesticides has long covered a long list of corrupt practices by EPA and the chemical industry, demonstrating that the TCVP saga is nothing new. For example, in 2021 four whistleblower scientists asserted that “risk assessments for both new and existing chemicals were improperly changed by agency managers to eliminate or reduce calculations of risks.”

See also Beyond Pesticides’ coverage of Monsanto/Bayer malfeasance related to dicamba; and our review of EPA’s receptivity to industry influence detailed by The Intercept; whistleblower “outing” of unethical practices at EPA; and the “capture” of EPA by industry. In the latter case, 37 environmental, public health and sustainable agriculture groups led by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and Beyond Pesticides, urged the Biden administration to reform the Office of Pesticide Programs as soon as possible.

The letter is available here. It would serve well as a model for citizen letters to President Biden and various other elected officials.

You can also voice your opinion directly to EPA regarding TCVP because its current registration review is still underway and accepting public comment until November 20.

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

Source: Pesticides Registration Review: Proposed Interim Decision for Tetrachlorvinphos; Court Rules EPA Must Revise “Flawed” Analysis of Toxic Chemical TCVP in Pet Flea Collars.

(Beyond Pesticides, September 28, 2023) As the United States commemorates the 50th anniversary of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there is a growing recognition that the planet faces an existential biodiversity crisis, with a rising number of species on the brink of extinction. In a collective effort to address threats to global biodiversity (i.e. diversity of all life), a coalition of environmental organizations including Beyond Pesticides, are sending an urgent letter to President Joe Biden. This letter, titled “Meeting the Challenges of the Biodiversity and Extinction Crisis Over the Next 50 Years,” calls for bold and comprehensive action to preserve our planet’s natural heritage for future generations.

The ESA is celebrated as one of the most effective conservation laws globally, credited with preventing the extinction of 99 percent of listed species. Over the past five decades, the ESA has played a pivotal role in preventing these extinctions by safeguarding the most critically endangered species within biological communities. However, this concentration on highly threatened species often results in temporary solutions that may not comprehensively address the broader issue of biodiversity loss. The ESA establishes a framework to categorize species as “endangered” or “threatened,” granting them specific protections. While it is crucial in preventing species extinction, it does not proactively enhance biodiversity.

Under the ESA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to consult with relevant agencies when registering chemicals to assess their impact on endangered species. Unfortunately, EPA has consistently fallen short in fulfilling this statutory obligation, as highlighted over years of reporting by Beyond Pesticides.

EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs has a checkered history of responding to biological opinions from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service as part of the pesticide registration process. EPA’s announcement in March 2022 allowing the continued use of malathion follows the release of a final biological opinion by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which, according to the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), “relies on scientifically unfounded assessment methods imposed during the Trump administration [and] stands in sharp contrast to the agency’s 2017 conclusion that 1,284 species would likely be jeopardized by malathion.” Meanwhile, the National Marine Fisheries Service, a sister agency to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, released an updated biological opinion that determined malathion and two other toxic organophosphate pesticides are causing jeopardy to virtually every endangered U.S. salmon, sturgeon, and steelhead species, as well as to Puget Sound orcas. See Beyond Pesticides action Tell EPA To Take Meaningful Action To Protect Endangered Species.

The letter to President Biden emphasizes the need for a whole-of-government approach to address this crisis and underscores the importance of consulting with Tribal governments and honoring federal trust obligations to Indigenous communities. Recognizing and incorporating indigenous knowledge and practices in conservation efforts is deemed crucial to safeguard biodiversity, protect the rights of indigenous peoples, and ensure social equity and justice.

The letter calls on President Biden to take the following actions:

1. Implement Whole of Government Approaches to Saving Biodiversity and Endangered Species: A national biodiversity strategy is proposed to serve as a blueprint for a coordinated response to biodiversity loss, addressing primary threats such as habitat degradation, climate change, wildlife exploitation, invasive species, and pollution.
2. Boost Recovery of Endangered Species Through Robust Funding and Engaging Agencies Across Government: Adequate funding for the ESA and the prioritization of conservation and recovery efforts by all federal agencies, in consultation with Tribal and Indigenous communities, are essential to reversing species decline.
3. Adopt an Ambitious Ecosystem-based Framework to Recover Endangered Species and Rebuild America’s Wildlife Populations: The letter calls for a holistic approach to recovery that considers a species’ role in ecosystems and protects key areas to increase resiliency and preserve biodiversity hotspots.

In light of the alarming global decline in biodiversity, the letter underscores the urgency of bold, visionary action by the Biden administration. The signatories express their commitment to working collaboratively with the government to ensure the Endangered Species Act and new initiatives for biodiversity conservation continue to save and restore the natural world for the next 50 years and beyond.

EPA recognizes its failure in assessing the impact of pesticides on endangered animals and plants. A settlement agreement was recently approved in federal district court and it mandates EPA to implement a series of endangered species protections from pesticides, covering over 300 pesticide active ingredients. The plaintiffs in the agreement are Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) and the defendants are the EPA (with defendant-interveners CropLife America). On EPA’s website, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Michal Freedhoff, said, “This agreement is a win-win-win to protect endangered species, ensure the availability of pesticides needed to grow food across America, and save considerable time and taxpayer expenses required to further litigate this case.”

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the EPA will develop strategies to reduce harm from various pesticides, including herbicides and insecticides, while focusing on protecting the most vulnerable species. The agreement also requires the EPA to develop protection strategies for herbicides by 2024, insecticides by 2025, and address the harms of hazardous insecticides on endangered species by 2027. Simultaneously, the agency has initiated efforts to address a significant backlog of evaluations, a task so extensive that it may require several additional decades to fully catch up. EPA agency officials wrote, “Even if EPA completed this work for all of the pesticides that are currently subject to court decisions and/or ongoing litigation, that work would take until the 2040s, and even then, would represent only 5 percent of EPA’s ESA obligations.” Under the Biden administration, EPA, prompted by a series of court rulings, has committed to a reversal of its previous stance as it conducts reviews of new pesticides. 

One of the best ways to prevent biodiversity loss is to eliminate the toxic chemicals that negatively impact and kill wildlife. Scientists have documented the negative impacts of pesticides on wildlife since before the ESA. For example, glyphosate impairs collective thermoregulation in bumblebees, organophosphates, and carbamates can affect the nervous system of wildlife by inhibiting an enzyme called acetylcholinesterase, and numerous other studies about the impact on wildlife have been cataloged here. Beyond Pesticides has a goal to eliminate petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers by 2032, because all life on Earth should not have to wait another 50 years. Join Beyond Pesticides at our 40th National Forum Series and learn how you can forge a biodiverse future. Register here!

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

Source: Meeting the Challenges of the Biodiversity and Extinction Crisis Over the Next 50 Years

(Beyond Pesticides, September 27, 2023) A study published in Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology finds organophosphate (OP), organochlorine (OC), and pyrethroid (PYR) pesticides have links to insulin resistance (IR) associated with metabolic disorders like diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and hypertension. Metabolic disorders are among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality, with over 11 percent (>37 million) of individuals in the U.S. having diabetes, and cases are growing by millions annually. Additionally, there is a rise in metabolic disorders among young people. Studies even find low levels of pesticide exposure during pregnancy or childhood cause adverse health effects, including metabolic disorders tied to gut microbiome disruption (dysbiosis). With increasing rates of diabetes and obesity, the two most prominent metabolic diseases in the study, cases among the global population, studies like these highlight the importance of evaluating how chemical contaminants deregulate normal bodily function through metabolic changes. 

To investigate the association between pesticide exposure and insulin-related metabolic disorders in humans, researchers searched the PubMed database for articles, performing a systematic review. The study notes, “IR is defined as a pathological state in which a higher-than-normal level of insulin is required to produce the optimal response in cells.” The search generated 4,051 articles related to the topic. However, after excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 75 epidemiologic studies linked human exposure to pesticides and IR-related metabolic diseases remained. In total, 30 articles find an association with diabetes, 20 with obesity, seven with hypertension (associated with cardiac issues), seven with chronic kidney disease (CKD), six with metabolic syndrome (i.e., high blood pressure, sugar and serum triglycerides), and three with polycystic ovarian syndrome (POS). The review highlights specific mechanisms of pesticide exposure associated with IR-related metabolic disorders, including liver enzymes and lipid profile alterations, weakening of intracellular insulin signaling from xenobiotic (a foreign chemical in the body) effects, oxidative stress, and inflammation response to chemical exposure.

There are many pesticides linked with the growing global metabolic disorder incidence rates over the past few decades. The World Health Organization (WHO), European Union (EU), and endocrine disruptor expert (deceased) Theo Colborn, Ph.D., classify over 55 to 177 chemical compounds (e.g., detergents, disinfectants, plastics, and pesticides, etc.) as endocrine disruptors associated with notorious metabolic disorders like diabetes/obesity that can span generations. The obesity rate is increasing and has been over the last five decades. Although general overeating and underexercising are attributed to obesity, researchers find the current obesity epidemic has alternative factors contributing to development. Besides genetics, exposure to obesogenic compounds, like pesticides, can promote obesity development. These compounds routinely cause reproductive, cardiovascular, and endocrine (hormone) issues among exposed individuals, especially farmers.

Obesogenic (obesity-causing) compounds affect the general population and future generational health. For instance, studies demonstrate that ancestral DDT exposure increases the risk of breast cancer and cardiometabolic disorder—promoting an epigenetic inheritance of obesity—up to three successive generations. Although the U.S. banned DDT five decades ago, the insecticide (technically, its hazardous metabolite DDE) is still environmentally persistent in all ecosystems and is still used in some countries. Like DDT, exposure to other POPs, like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), during pregnancy can increase cardiometabolic disorders, like obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases, among offspring. Since DDT/DDE residues, current-use pesticides, and other chemical pollutants contaminate the environment, exposure to these chemical mixtures can synergize to increase toxicity and disease effects.

The study is a comparative analysis. This systematic review adds to the growing research indicating pesticides’ role in metabolic disorders. Pesticides have long been linked to higher rates of diabetes, as a 2008 study on pesticide applicators in two U.S. states found that every pesticide investigated increased diabetes risk by over 50%. A 2017 study zeroed in on one particular class of insecticides, carbamates, finding a propensity to adversely affect human melatonin receptors that regulate sleep, insulin secretion, and glucose homeostasis, increasing the risk of diabetes. A 2017 report commissioned by Gallup-Sharecare found that farmers recorded the second-highest rate of diabetes among all professions. Additionally, a 2019 study from the University of California, Davis, found that South Asian immigrants exposed to higher rates of DDT also displayed higher rates of type 2 diabetes. Regarding obesity, many pesticides are obesogenic compounds that directly impact hormone and receptor function and include pesticides like organochlorines, organophosphates, carbamates, and pyrethroids, as mentioned in this study. These chemicals can negatively affect reproductive function, nervous system function, metabolic/immune function, hormone-related cancers, and fetal/body development.

The study concludes, “Taken together, the link of pesticides with IR-related metabolic diseases can be a wide area of research from different aspects, including epidemiological evidences [of] cellular mechanisms weakening insulin signaling and preventing approaches. However, […] there is a need for studies to evaluate specific mechanisms by which different chemical groups of pesticides can develop IR-related metabolic diseases, especially those with increasing prevalence in the future.”

Pesticides themselves can possess the ability to disrupt metabolic function, especially for chronically exposed individuals (e.g., farmworkers) or during critical windows of vulnerability and development (e.g., childhood, pregnancy). Health officials identify diabetes as one of the most common chronic diseases. Therefore, it is essential to mitigate preventable exposure to disease-inducing pesticides. For more information on the effects of pesticide exposure on autoimmune and metabolic health, see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database pages on diabetes, obesity, endocrine disruption, and more.

Replacing dietary exposure to food grown in chemical-intensive agriculture with organic consistently reduces pesticide levels in one’s body. Preventive practices like organic can eliminate exposure to toxic metabolic disrupting pesticides. There is an indication that maintaining lower levels of conventional, synthetic pesticides is likely to reduce the risk of developing chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes. In addition to positive impacts on the human microbiome, organically grown food (i.e., milk, meat, strawberries, tomatoes, and a range of other foods) contain a much more diverse bacterial community than their chemically grown counterparts. Organic agriculture represents a safer, healthier approach to crop production that does not necessitate toxic pesticide use. Beyond Pesticides encourages farmers to embrace and consumers to support regenerative organic practices. A complement to buying organic is contacting various organic farming organizations to learn more about what you can do.

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

Source: Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology

(Beyond Pesticides, September 26, 2023) In Ethiopia’s Bahir Dar, where Lake Tana feeds into the Blue Nile, a major hydroelectric power plant stands, serving as an emblem of the ecosystem services the river provides to over two million inhabitants. Yet ever since its first appearance in 2012, this crucial waterway has been under attack by one of the world’s most invasive species: the water hyacinth.  

In America and Europe, where agrochemical giants such as Bayer and Syngenta are headquartered, such problems might quickly be remedied using herbicides. However, the prevailing ethos coming from the African continent is quite different. Dion Mostert, whose South African boat business has suffered due to the water hyacinths infestation, encapsulates this sentiment, saying he has considered herbicides but sees them as a temporary fix to a much larger challenge. 

Instead of relying on temporary—and often harmful—agrochemical solutions, Ethiopia and other African countries are embracing holistic and sustainable solutions.  

For instance, Lake Victoria–a water body shared by Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda—suffered from a water hyacinth infestation in the 1990s. In response, scientists introduced two species of weevils known to be natural predators of the hyacinth: Neochetina bruchi and Neochetina eichhorniae. The initiative was extremely successful, with a 90 percent decrease in hyacinth cover. This strategy was so fruitful it continues to serve as the blueprint for many other African countries facing similar infestations. Following the victories observed in East Africa, Benin mirrored this biological strategy to combat their own water hyacinth issues, reaping similar benefits.  

And now, as South Africa tackles a growing water hyacinth problem, they are turning to weevils once again, denoting another chapter in a broader African tale of ecological resistance.  

On the other hand, Ethiopia has adopted mechanical removal as a primary control method. In several organized campaigns, over 200,000 individuals, ranging from students to farmers, have contributed their labor to the cause by removing hyacinths by hand and building harvesting machines. While the issue has been ongoing, there have been many victories along the way. According to a study by Minychl G. Dersseh, et al., there has been a notable decrease in the expansion rate of water hyacinth. In 2016, the expansion rate was 120.5 percent, but by 2019, that number was reduced to 23 percent, reflecting the effectiveness of the persistent efforts of the community. And in November 2020, those efforts persevered in the form of a month-long initiative that aimed to clear 90 percent of the weed through physical removal. 

As nations across the world grapple with invasive species like the water hyacinth, Africa’s approach offers a unique perspective. Not only is there an overwhelming desire to employ ecologically-sound solutions, but there also is an ever-growing push to address root causes rather than symptoms. While the water hyacinth was once thought of as a nuisance to Lake Tana, the plant is now gaining recognition as a potential resource. Instead of disposing or burning the biomass after removal, there is a growing push to repurpose it into fertilizer and feedstock. Officials like Ayalew Wondie, PhD, seek to engage with the issues more deeply. “The problem isn’t Lake Tana,” Dr. Wondie says. Rather, the issue is the excessive levels of phosphorous and nitrogen that make their way into the lake through agricultural runoff and poor wastewater management. Plans to create an integrated watershed management system for Lake Tana are underway at Bahir Dar University. 

Despite the nuances of the many ecological systems found on the continent, globally, there is a tendency to simplify Africa’s ecological strategies, often relegating them as less sophisticated than alternative industrialized methods. Prominent politicians and corporations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation emphasize Africa’s need for a green revolution. Yet, historically, these prescribed interventions deliver poor results. 

In Burkina Faso, the adoption of genetically modified Bt cotton was initially seen as a revolutionary step toward achieving higher yields and combating pests. However, cotton quality was compromised over time, with the cotton fiber becoming shorter and less valuable. The economic promise it once held started waning as farmers grappled with declining revenues and increased seed costs. Even without considering the shortcomings of the cotton fiber length, the high susceptibility rate of Bt crops to insect resistance indicates further issues would have arisen in the cotton crop. Meanwhile, in Ethiopia, the fight against relentless locust invasions led to the extensive deployment of insecticides between 2019 and 2021. While these chemicals offered short-term relief against the swarms, the consequences for the broader ecosystem were profound. Widespread use of these insecticides resulted in the inadvertent death of an estimated 76 billion honey bees. Not only did the insecticide kill bees critical for pollination, but their loss also affected the livelihoods of countless beekeepers, further exacerbating ecological and economic problems. 

These instances serve as stark reminders that solutions anchored in industrialized agricultural practices often introduce new challenges, undermining the very objectives they aim to achieve. This critical understanding is held by many in Africa, which is why it has sustained several ecological successes even in the face of invasive species like the water hyacinth.  

As the global community confronts a changing climate and its impacts, a pressing need to reevaluate reliance on agrochemicals is needed. While these chemicals are still widely promoted as quick fixes, such methods’ long-term viability and sustainability are in question. Instead, a more holistic, ecologically balanced strategy may be the key to sustainable progress. 

The African approach to the invasive water hyacinth symbolizes a mindset that might be a solution to issues of sustainability worldwide. For example, in the U.S., numerous health conditions are linked to pesticide and herbicide exposure, so making a transition away from these chemicals is crucial for the well-being of both the environment and the greater community. Beyond Pesticides offers resources to help attain these ecological goals. Consider supporting organic land management and championing pesticide-free parks and lawns in your community. If you are dealing with an invasive species outbreak, please refer to our ManageSafe™ database as a resource for best management practices for handling pests.  

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

Source: InfoNile, The Continual Wrath of Water Hyacinth 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 25, 2023) It happens twice a year. The transparent process of a stakeholder board of farmers, consumers, environmentalists, a scientist, retailer, and certifier get together as members of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and vote on allowable materials and standards in organic agriculture. This Congressionally mandated board has authorities not often given to people outside of government—authorities to determine what should be allowed in organic food production, under assessments of synthetic and natural substances. And the underlying law that makes this happen, the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), stipulates that the Secretary of Agriculture may not allow synthetic and prohibited natural materials unless they are recommended by the NOSB.

The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is receiving written comments from the public, which must be submitted by September 28, 2023.

The values and principles embedded in OFPA far exceed the standards of health and environmental protection of any other health and environmental laws, which establish risk mitigation measures to determine allowable harm, under a set of guiding standards that require the board to (i) protect health (from production of inputs to their disposal), (ii) ensure compatibility with organic systems (with determinations that inputs do not hurt biodiversity of the soil and the ecosystem), and (iii) determine essentiality (is the substance under review necessary given the availability of other materials). Also unique to OFPA implementation is a public participation process that establishes a twice-yearly mechanism for public input to the NOSB and a uniquely efficient process for responding to those comments. As can be seen from Beyond Pesticides comments to the NOSB (see Keeping Organic Strong), there is always room for improvement and updating based on new scientific studies and new materials coming on line, ensuring that the board is always involved in an interactive process of continuous improvement.

The public comment period, which ends on September 28, precedes the upcoming public comment webinar on October 17 and 19 and deliberative hearing October 24-26—concerning how organic food is produced. Sign up to speak at the webinar by September 29. Written comments must be submitted through Regulations.gov. by 11:59 pm EDT, September 28. Links to the virtual comment webinars and the public meeting will be posted on this webpage in early October. The public’s personal concern in upholding the integrity of organic standards is critical, given the pressure from some in the food and chemical industry to weaken organic standards. Public input is important because the success of the organic market is totally dependent on public trust in the USDA certified organic label. Organic is not just important for the individual health of consumers, but has wide ranging benefits for improving  environmental protection, stopping biodiversity collapse, and drawing down atmospheric carbon to reverse the climate emergency. The holistic benefits of organic land management offer a solution to these existential crises that threaten the sustainability of life.

The NOSB plays an important role in bringing the views of organic producers and consumers to bear on USDA, which is not always in sync with organic principles. There are many important issues on the NOSB agenda this Fall. We encourage you to use the Beyond Pesticides organic webpage and comment on as many issues as you can. For a complete discussion, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2023 issues page. See Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2023 issues page.  

Some important issues that need your comments:

1. “Inert” ingredients used in organic agriculture must be evaluated individually.“Inert” ingredients are not necessarily biologically or chemically inert—in almost every category of harm, there are more harmful “inerts” than active substances used in organic production. OFPA allows the use of a synthetic substance in organic production only if it is listed on the National List “by specific use or application” based on a recommendation by the NOSB, following procedures in OFPA. The NOSB has repeatedly passed recommendations telling NOP to evaluate individual “inerts.”
2. Plastic mulch is under consideration this year as a part of its five-year review cycle. This is part of the larger issue relating to the use of plastic in organic production and handling. Awareness is growing about the impacts of plastic—and the microplastic particles resulting from its use—on human health and the environment. Plastics manufacture requires transportation of hazardous chemicals, such as those involved in the recent derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. Organic should lead the way. Plastic mulch should not be relisted as allowable in organic production. Moreover, the NOSB should initiate action to eliminate all uses of plastic in organic processing and packaging.
3. Nonorganic ingredients should be eliminated from processed foods under the NOSB review (or sunset) process. Materials listed in §205.606 in the organic regulations are nonorganic agricultural ingredients that may comprise 5% of organic-labeled processed foods. The intent of the law is to allow restricted nonorganic ingredients (fully disclosed and limited) when their organic form is not available. However, materials should not remain on §205.606 if they can be supplied organically, and we can now grow virtually anything organically. The Handling Subcommittee needs to ask the question of potential suppliers, “Could you supply the need if the organic form is required?” The materials on §205.606 up for sunset review this year are made from agricultural products that can be supplied organically and thus should be taken off the National List of allowed materials.

>Submit Comments Now.

Need help in submitting comments? Regulations.gov requires more than a single click, but it is not difficult. Please feel free to cut-and-paste language from the comments above into Regulations.gov and add or adjust the text to personalize it. See this instructional video. (Regulations.gov has changed its look since this video was made.) 

Thank you for keeping organic strong! 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 22, 2023) Beyond Pesticides today announced the second session of the National Forum, Forging a Future with Nature: The existential challenge to end petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use, scheduled for October 24, 2:00pm EDT. The hard-hitting talks of Dave Goulson, PhD, and André Leu, DSc. are now available as recordings on the Beyond Pesticides website. 

Beyond Pesticides introduces the Forum: A future supported by the natural environment depends on our effective involvement in decisions in our homes, communities, states, and at the federal level to ensure that we are taking the steps necessary to protect against existential threats to health, biodiversity, and climate. The Forum is an important opportunity to hear from those working as scientists, advocates, land managers (from gardens, parks, play fields to farms), and public decisionmakers about steps being taken and action needed to prevent catastrophic collapse of the natural systems that sustain life. A key part of this conversation, according to Beyond Pesticides, is addressing inequities associated with elevated rates of poisoning, contamination, and diseases in people of color communities.

In introducing the importance of environmental justice and addressing the disproportionate risk from toxic pollution to people of color communities as a key part of policies and practices governing ecosystems, the Forum materials quote Dr. Martin Luther King: Dr. King (1963) who said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.” Sixty years later, people of color in the U.S. and around the world struggle with inequities that place disproportionate risk in ways that are institutionalized in the economic and social system.   

This session of the Forum will highlight environmental justice as a human rights issue. In 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council declared “the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment.” According to the UN, “This right is an important catalyst for change, being crucial for the right to life, food, and decent work, among others.” 

Speaking at the Forum will be Marcos Orellana, PhD, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights, who is an expert in international law and the law on human rights and the environment. His recent reports in South Africa and Australia capture the significance of his pursuit of environmental justice. Dr. Orellana teaches at the American University Washington College of Law.  

His work around the world captures critical truths that are challenges across the globe, such as his statement after a visit to South Africa in September. Dr. Orellana said, “The term “environmental racism” describes institutionalized discrimination based on race or colour. In pre-1994 South Africa, the distribution of environmental risks and harms disproportionately and often deliberately targeted low-income groups and along racial lines. Today, despite the efforts by Government in setting up institutions and laws to address this legacy of environmental racism, pervasive air, water, and chemical pollution still imposes a heavy toll, especially on disadvantaged communities. Overcoming it will require significant additional efforts, including structural, legislative, economic, and environmental changes. 

Professor Orellana has extensive experience working with civil society around the world on issues concerning global environmental justice. He was the inaugural director of the Environment and Human Rights Division at Human Rights Watch. Previously he directed the trade and the human rights programs at the Center for International Environmental Law, and he co-chaired the UN Environment Program’s civil society forum. Dr. Orellana teaches at the American University Washington College of Law. He has also lectured at prominent universities around the world, including Melbourne, Pretoria, Geneva, and Guadalajara. He was a fellow at the University of Cambridge, a visiting scholar with the Environmental Law Institute in Washington DC, and an instructor professor of international law at the Universidad de Talca, Chile. 

Also speaking at the Forum will be jayson porter, PhD, an environmental historian of Mexico and the Americas who teaches science and technology studies, material culture, and black geographies in Latin America. Dr. Porter focuses on oilseeds, agrochemicals, environmental justice, and ecological violence. He is an editorial board member of the North American Congress on Latin America and a Voss Postdoctoral Fellow at the Institute at Brown for Environment and Society (2022), and he recently began teaching in the Department of History at the University of Maryland, College Park. 

In “Cotton, Whiteness, and Poisons” (Environmental Humanities, Nov. 2022), which Dr. porter coauthored, identified are some of the historical roots of environmental injustice characterized as “labor exploitation conditioned by racist ideologies” underpinning plantation agriculture. The recognition that dependency on pesticides and fertilizers undermines the economic stability of small farmers, the article states, “At the Tuskegee Institute’s agricultural experiment station, George Washington Carver recognized that commercial fertilizers were a key source of debt for Black farmers and tenants. He encouraged composting and the use of organic fertilizers found on the farm, writing that “many thousands of dollars are being spent every year here in the South for fertilizers that profit the user very little, while Nature’s choicest fertilizer is going to waste.” 

In 2022, Dr. porter wrote, Agrochemicals, Environmental Racism, ad Environmental Justice in U.S. History (Organic Center, 2022), Dr. Porter writes, “Robert Bullard defines environmental racism as any policy or practice that unequally affects or disadvantages individuals, groups or communities based on their race. Vann Newkirk II adds that environmental racism is the opposite of environmental justice and often ignores or belittles input from the affected communities of color.” 

Attention has been brought to the need for environmental justice in the U.S. in recent years by the establishment of the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council and the Justice 40 Initiative, which includes issues relating to climate change, legacy pollution, clean water, and wastewater infrastructure, and the establishment of a new EPA office of environmental justice and external civil rights (2022), “elevating equity concerns to higher levels within the agency.” The organizers cite the need for more work to be done, given the toxic legacy, high-risk occupational exposures (e.g., farmworkers, landscapers, chemical manufacturing), manufacturing emissions to fenceline communities, pesticide drift in agricultural communities, and the continuing registration and use of toxic pesticides that cause disproportionate adverse effects to people of color and their communities. 

Make plans to attend the 40th National Forum, Forging a Future with Nature, on October 24, 2:00-4:00pm EDT. Sign up here to receive a Zoom link, if you have not already signed up!

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

(Beyond Pesticides, September 21, 2023) A literature review published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva finds environmental exposure to all classes of pesticides (fungicides, herbicides, insecticides) has an association with childhood astrocytoma (brain/central nervous system [CNS] tumor). CNS tumors represent half of all malignant neoplasms (tumors) in children. Although medical advancements in disease survival are progressing, childhood cancer remains the leading cause of death from disease among children. Furthermore, childhood cancer survivors can suffer from chronic or long-term health complications that may be life-threatening. The etiology or cause of childhood cancer involves the interaction of multiple components that include environment, lifestyle and genetics. However, emerging evidence indicates that environmental contaminants like pesticides (e.g., occupational exposures, air pollution, pesticides, solvents, diet, etc.) affect disease etiology.

Pesticide contamination is widespread in all ecosystems, and chemical compounds can accumulate in human tissues, resulting in chronic health effects. Children are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of pesticide exposure, as their developing bodies cannot adequately combat exposure effects. Moreover, several studies demonstrate an association between environmental or occupational pesticide exposure and the risk of childhood cancer. Considering that maternal pesticide exposure can have a stronger association with cancer among children than childhood exposure, and newborns can still encounter pesticides, it is essential to understand how pesticide accumulation and co-occurrence can increase the risk of latent diseases (e.g., cancers) among vulnerable populations, such as children/infants.

In this piece, Brazilian researchers systematically review the literature in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL databases to investigate the association between pesticide exposure and CNS tumors in children aged 0 to 14. The literature review identifies 1,158 studies associated with CNS and pesticide exposure, with the paper focusing on 14 eligible studies. The results confirm evidence of CNS tumor development, specifically brain tumor development, among children exposed to all classes of pesticides. The most common exposure setting was in the home.

There is a significant scientific connection between pesticides and cancer, as several studies link pesticide use and residues to various cancers. Both current and past-use pesticides and chemical contaminants play a role in similar disease outcomes as several chemicals have implications for specific cancer risks (e.g.,  breast cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, prostate cancer, etc.). Additionally, 66 percent of all cancers have links to environmental factors, especially in occupations of high chemical use. In addition to the robust links between agricultural practices and pesticide-related illnesses, over 65 percent of commonly used lawn pesticides and 70 percent of commonly used school pesticides have links to cancer. Although general pesticide exposure can increase susceptibility to cancer, prenatal and early-life exposure to environmental toxicants can increase cancer risk. For decades, studies have demonstrated that childhood and in-utero exposure to the U.S.-banned insecticide DDT increases the risk of developing breast cancer later in life. Moreover, a 2021 study finds previous maternal exposure to the chemical compound during pregnancy increases the risk of breast cancer and cardiometabolic disorders (e.g., heart disease, obesity, diabetes) up to three successive generations. 

This study highlights that any pesticide type can lead to CNS tumor development. Most notably, exposure to pesticides in the home represents the most typical type of exposure setting. This is concerning as most of one’s lifetime is spent in the home. This study is not the first to find a risk between childhood cancer development and household pesticide exposure. Pregnant mothers’ exposure to household cleaners, many of which are pesticides, can increase nephroblastoma (kidney cancer) and brain tumor risk in children. Therefore, it is essential to understand how external stimuli—like environmentally relevant pesticide exposure—can drive cancer development to avoid exposure and lessen potential cancer risks. The study concludes, “The investigation of factors related to the risks of using pesticides is vital to inform environmental policy and curb the indiscriminate use of these substances in agriculture. […] A package of measures are therefore required, including public policies, effective environmental protection, and educational initiatives in primary health care services. The latter should address the residential use of potentially harmful chemicals, encourage healthy eating based on the consumption of organic foods, promote the use of personal protective equipment by parents employed in agriculture, and provide guidance to avoid the use of pesticides in the home before and during pregnancy.”

Globally, cancer is one of the leading causes of death, with over eight million people succumbing to the disease every year. Notably, the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) predicts a 67.4 percent rise in new cancer cases by 2030. Thus, it is critical that both government officials and the public understand the health implications of pesticide use and exposure on humans, especially when pesticides increase chronic disease risk. Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent news and studies on pesticides through the Daily News Blog and Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). This database supports the need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on the adverse effects of pesticides on human health, see PIDD pages on cancer (lymphoma, multiple myeloma), birth/fetal defects, and other diseases. Additionally, since pesticides can have multi-generation impacts on our health, you can learn more about the hazards posed to children’s health through Beyond Pesticide’s Pesticide and You Journal article, “Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix.”

There is a strong consensus among pediatricians that pregnant mothers and young children should avoid pesticide exposure during critical windows of development. However, the general population should follow this advice as the effects of pesticide exposure span every individual. Fortunately, the wide availability of non-pesticidal alternative strategies allows families and agricultural industry workers to apply these methods to promote a safe and healthy environment, especially among chemically vulnerable individuals. For instance, buying, growing, and supporting organic land management can reduce human and environmental contamination from pesticides. Organic agriculture has many health and environmental benefits, which curtail the need for chemical-intensive agricultural practices. Numerous studies find that pesticide metabolite levels in urine significantly decrease when switching to an all-organic diet. For more information on how organic is the right choice for both consumers and the farmworkers that grow our food, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage on Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture.

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

Source: Ciência & Saúde Coletiva 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 20, 2023) Higher concentrations of a pyrethroid metabolite (3-PBA) in the body have an association with increased osteoarthritis (OA) risk among US adults, according to a study published in BMC Public Health. Regardless of analysis sensitivity and population subgroup (e.g., sex, socioeconomic status, etc.), the association between pyrethroid exposure and OA remains. Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease resulting from the degradation (breakdown) of joint cartilage and underlying bone. This disease affects 1 in 7 U.S. adults and is the fourth leading cause of disability in the U.S. Unfortunately, OA is one of the most recently attributed pesticide-induced diseases associated with this dangerous class of chemical insecticides—harm to individual Americans that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is not considering when it registers pesticides.

To remedy the significant deficiencies in EPA’s reviews and protect residents from chronic disease, more and more communities are transitioning to safer, organic pest management practices that do not require pyrethroids and other toxic synthetic pesticides. Thus, this study and others like it highlight the need for increased monitorization of pyrethroid exposure among the general population.

Using data from the 1999–2002 and 2007–2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), this study explores the relationship between pyrethroid exposure and osteoarthritis. NHANES is a long-running monitoring program that began in the early 1960s and has since become a continuous program focused on American health and nutrition measurements. The researchers gathered urine samples from the participants, with 650 out of the 6,523 participants having OA, and examined the samples for levels of 3-phenoxybenzoic acid (3-PBA), the primary metabolite of pyrethroids. Multivariable logistic regression models allowed researchers to investigate the association between pyrethroid exposure and OA. The results demonstrate that the higher the levels of urinary 3-PBA, the greater the odds of OA in U.S. adults, highlighting the importance of routinely monitoring pyrethroid exposure among the general population.

Synthetic pyrethroids are one of the most frequently detected chemicals in Americans’ bodies. Prior NHANES data shows that 78 percent of adults and 79 percent of children have some level of 3-PBA in their urine. Avoiding pyrethroid exposure can be difficult as synthetic pyrethroids are increasingly the first choice for mosquito management in many communities nationwide. These chemicals have increasingly replaced organophosphate insecticides in homes, food production, local parks, and playing fields. Often characterized by the chemical industry as “safe as chrysanthemum flowers,” they are less acutely toxic than organophosphates. Still, it is increasingly evident that they pose insidious, chronic risks to health that are no less concerning than the hazardous pesticides that came before them. Beyond Pesticides urges government agencies to avoid using these insecticides, primarily because of the risk to young children, pregnant mothers, and communities of color already exposed to disproportionate pesticide use. At the same time, a 2021 study finds that disease-carrying mosquitoes are found at higher rates in lower socioeconomic areas, and a study published earlier 2022 finds that children’s exposure to pyrethroid mosquito control operations is associated with significant increases in the risk of allergies and respiratory diseases. Much of this exposure can occur from a diet laden with these toxic pesticides. However, those who switch from a conventional to an organic diet can significantly reduce the amount of pesticide in their body, as evidenced by drastic drops in urinary 3-PBA after going organic. In fact, children who eat organic are more likely to score higher on cognitive tests than those who consistently eat conventional, pesticide-contaminated food. However, for many low-income and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities around the country, eating organic is not likely to limit all exposures. In public housing, synthetic pyrethroids are often used as insect sprays for common household pests that would not have been a problem with proper building maintenance and upkeep. Research finds that, after sprayed, synthetic pyrethroids can remain on surfaces for up to a year, representing a continuous source of re-exposure. This data tells a story of low-income communities and children being sprayed more often and placed at greater risk due to a lack of investment in maintenance and infrastructure that would prevent pest problems before they begin.

This study is one of the first to identify the association between chronic exposure to pyrethroids and OA. The study suggests pyrethroids’ adverse impact on thyroid hormones plays a significant role in OA development, affecting cell secretions of cartilage and enzyme activity in joints. Additionally, a study within the last year by the same researchers found that pyrethroids are also associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This autoimmune disease causes systemic inflammation throughout the body, progressively damaging an individual’s joints. Thus, exposure to pyrethroids can induce co-occurring impacts on the skeletal structure through autoimmune disruption and degenerative disease, making it possible to have both OA and RA. Like past studies, this study suggests possible sex-specific effects from pyrethroid exposure, especially among men. However, this study shows pyrethroids and their metabolites may have anti-estrogenic activity in humans, further implicating potential endocrine (hormone) disruption from exposure. The anti-estrogenic activity can lead to type II collagen degradation and structural changes in the joints of exposed females.

With many diseases in the U.S. associated with pesticide exposure, reducing pesticide use is critical to safeguarding public health and addressing cost burdens for local communities. Policies should enforce stricter pesticide regulations and increase research on the long-term impacts of pesticide exposure. Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent studies on pesticide exposure through our Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD) and Daily News Blog. The adverse health effects of pesticide exposure and the aggregate risk of pesticides showcase a need for more precise research surrounding occupational and residential pesticide exposure to make complete determinations and the importance of fully recognizing uncertainty in precautionary regulatory decisions. Existing information, including this study, supports the clear need for a strategic shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on pesticide-related illnesses, see PIDD pages on immune system disorders, including arthritis.

Arthritis disease has no cure, but preventive practices like organics can eliminate exposure to toxic arthritis-inducing pesticides. Organic agriculture represents a safer, healthier approach to crop production that does not necessitate pesticide use. Beyond Pesticides encourages farmers to embrace regenerative, organic practices. A compliment to buying organic is contacting various organic farming organizations to learn more about what you can do. 

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

Source: BMC Public Health

(Beyond Pesticides, September 19, 2023) Farmworkers in Paarl, South Africa took to the streets on Friday, September 8, demanding an end to the indiscriminate importation and use of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides containing substances prohibited by the European Union (EU). This protest is part of a broader global trend of outcry against systemic issues of environmental racism that disproportionately burden communities with environmental and health risks.  

Organized by the Women on Farms Project, the protesters marched to the headquarters of Bayer. The German pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and pesticide company, responsible for producing and exporting agrochemicals known to be toxic to ecosystem and human health, has previously faced multiple lawsuits, including a multimillion-dollar one linking their glyphosate weed killer products (Roundup®) to non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. At the Bayer office, the protesters presented a memorandum demanding an end to the importation and use of EU-prohibited substances.   

Protesters sought to expose the hypocritical tactics European agrochemical companies use to sell products in developing nations, even when those products are deemed unsafe in their home countries. Numerous farmworkers, like victim-turned-activist Antie Dina, spoke out about their health issues from petrochemical exposure. In her talk, Dina emphasizes that, “… enough is enough, we do not want any more [pesticides].” Meanwhile, the chants of demonstrators echoed throughout: “We’re dying of asthma, we’re dying of cancer, we’re dying of heart attacks,” a reminder of the dire consequences of corporate actions like Bayer’s.   

This demonstration comes on the heels of a visit to South Africa by Marcos Orellana, PhD, the UN Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights. Dr. Orellana’s report highlights discrepancies in South Africa’s handling of hazardous materials. Apartheid-era laws, such as the Hazardous Substance Act, No.15 of 1973, and the Fertilizers, Farm Seeds, and Seeds and Remedies Act 36 of 1947, persist and permit the use of chemicals that other nations deem too unsafe despite their recognition of health risks posed to agricultural workers.   

In the report, Dr. Orellana voices concerns about environmental racism in the country, highlighting the reality of a post-Apartheid legacy. He observes, “despite the efforts by Government in setting up institutions and laws to address this legacy of environmental racism, pervasive air, water and chemical pollution still imposes a heavy toll, especially on disadvantaged communities.” 

Dr. Orellana suggests addressing these challenges will require “significant additional efforts, including structural, legislative, economic and environmental changes,” especially against the backdrop of grave issues like children being poisoned and killed from handling toxic pesticides and the neglectful response of government and industry to hazardous waste incidents. 

Despite the avenues for improvement, Dr. Orellana commends South Africa for their efforts and states “I would like to congratulate South Africa for having ratified the key multilateral environmental agreements on chemicals and wastes (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm, and Minamata Conventions and the Montreal Protocol). I would also like to recognize South Africa’s leadership in the multilateral system and in capacity-building in the human rights and environmental areas. South Africa hosts the Regional Centre for English-speaking countries of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. The country also supported a proposal to amend the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, to overcome the breakdown of the Convention’s science-policy interface mechanism. While South Africa has yet to become party to the Bamako Convention, which aims to ban the import of all hazardous substances into Africa, it has ratified the Basel Ban Amendment that prohibits the import of hazardous wastes from OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries.” 

Although South Africa has ratified many key multilateral environmental agreements that are meant to prevent hazardous waste imports, enforcement has been deficient.  

Bayer’s updated website lists products like Antracol 70 WP (Propineb), Biscaya 240 OD (thiacloprid), Confidor (imidacloprid), and Gaucho (imidacloprid)—all of which are prohibited in the EU—as available for purchase in South Africa. These products, alongside many others containing terbufos and paraquat, are widespread in the country. The ongoing sale of EU-banned chemicals suggests the ratification of international agreements at times might be more symbolic than substantive in effect, and that more needs to be done.  

This issue of exporting toxic agrochemicals is not unique to Germany and South Africa. A previous Beyond Pesticides article identified the Netherlands, France, Spain, Switzerland, and Belgium as culprits, exporting prohibited chemicals to countries like Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, and Ukraine. Advocates point to this behavior as indicative of the deep-rooted racism that allows racial and wealth disparity to thrive–the belief that the lives of the poor and non-white individuals in developing countries are worth less than the lives of Westerners.   

Western lawmakers and corporations often absolve themselves of any responsibility by suggesting the onus for protection lies with the receiving countries to enforce their own bans on toxic chemicals. This deflection, according to advocates, is especially egregious considering the lasting impact of European colonialism on many of these nations. After years of colonial dominance, resource extraction, and imposed economic structures, many of these countries still grapple with systemic challenges that make it difficult for them to resist or regulate such imports effectively.   

Action Needed: Considering the historical context, as we bear witness to the perseverance of South African farmworkers, we must genuinely commit to change and understand our collective responsibility. While those on the ground lead the change against systemic injustice, the EU must act quickly to close loopholes that enable manufacturers to distribute banned substances offshore. Yet, the most transformative and enduring solutions will be championed by these very farmers and workers. The voices from South Africa and similarly affected regions signal a grave sense of urgency against harmful practices. Advocates are urging countries victimized by international trade in toxins to join for a sustainable agricultural path forward with the tools, knowledge, and freedom to nurture their lands and people.  

Our active support of farmworkers worldwide—whether through legislative action, joining their cause in protest, or advancing agroecological and organic initiatives—amplifies the systems they have been advocating for abroad and at home. Many of the systemic injustices observed in South Africa parallel the challenges faced in the U.S agricultural sector, like in California’s Central Valley and Florida’s citrus groves where workers face some of the lowest wages and harshest conditions. These practices perpetuate environmental racism in the fallout of agricultural work, with pesticide drift and tainted water supplies constantly compounding health risks for those residing in farming-intensive regions. It is vital for readers to take actionable steps towards change. Please consider helping Beyond Pesticides advocate for the cessation of forever chemicals by urging senators to ratify the Stockholm Convention. Send a message to the EPA that persistent toxic pesticides should be deemed an unreasonable environmental risk under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).   

See Beyond Pesticide’s Agricultural Justice webpage and support farmworkers in the U.S. 

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

Source: Ground Up—Farmworkers march against pesticides

Image: CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(Beyond Pesticides, September 18, 2023) Advocates for organic have consistently maintained that public engagement with the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is critical to protecting the values and principles embedded in the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). While the NOSB is a stakeholder board that reflects the sectors of the organic community—from consumers, farmers, processors, certifiers, retailers, and scientists—public interaction with the board offers critical input to the NOSB’s decision-making process. Ultimately, Board authority over the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances and its advisor relationship to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture have a direct effect on the underlying decisions that determine the credibility of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) organic label that is now widely found on products in virtually all grocery stores. A major issue that continues to plague label integrity is the Board’s review of so-called “inert” ingredients in materials allowed in organic. These are potentially toxic ingredients that should be reviewed by the Board, substances not disclosed on labels of products that may be used in organic production or processing. The NOSB has access to the complete list of “inerts” used in organic materials, and advocates are urging the Board to begin immediately its National List review process for them.

The NOSB is now receiving written comments from the public that must be submitted by September 28, 2023. This precedes the upcoming public comment webinar on October 17 and 19 and the deliberative hearing October 24-26—concerning how organic food is produced. Sign up to speak at the webinar by September 29. Written comments must be submitted through Regulations.gov. by 11:59 pm EDT, September 28. Links to the virtual comment webinars and the public meeting will be posted on this webpage in early October.

The NOSB is responsible for guiding the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in its administration of OFPA, including the materials (substances) allowed to be used in organic production and handling. The role of the NOSB is especially important as we depend on organic production to protect our ecosystem, mitigate climate change, and enhance our health.

The NOSB plays an important role in bringing the views of organic producers and consumers to bear on USDA, which is not always in sync with organic principles. There are many important issues on the NOSB agenda this Fall. We encourage you to use the Beyond Pesticides organic webpage and comment on as many issues as you can. For a complete discussion, see Keeping Organic Strong and the Fall 2023 issues page. USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) and the NOSB have relied on an allowable list of “inert” ingredients that is no longer maintained by the U.S. Environmental Protection (EPA), Lists 4A and 4B. While most of these materials are not of toxicological concern and are natural, many are synthetic and must undergo NOSB review under its responsibility to evaluate allowable synthetic substances on the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances in OFPA. Beyond Pesticides has advocated that the NOSB break down the hundred or so “inerts” of potential concern into groups of chemical families and common toxicological mechanisms to conduct its review over several years. For example, the ethoxylated compounds could be evaluated together. In fact, they are not permitted in EPA’s Safer Choice labeling program. (For a more in-depth discussion of the “inerts” in organics, please see “Inert” Ingredients Used in Organic Production.)

This is not a new issue for the NOSB and NOP, but one that needs resolution now.

Some crucial facts must be acknowledged by USDA:
* “Inert” ingredients are not necessarily biologically or chemically inert. The Beyond Pesticides report ”Inert” Ingredients in Organic Production compares the toxicity of active substances and “inert” substances used in organic production. In almost every category, there are more harmful “inerts” than active substances.

* OFPA allows the use of a synthetic substance in organic production only if it is listed on the National List “by specific use or application” based on a recommendation by the NOSB, following procedures in OFPA.

* The NOSB has repeatedly passed recommendations telling NOP to evaluate individual “inerts.”

We urge you to submit comments to the docket on the NOSB/NOP “Inerts Pre-Discussion Document” (under consideration at the upcoming NOSB meeting in October), incorporating the following points (feel free to cut-and-paste these comments you submit in the docket):

No issue is more important than the need for the NOSB to evaluate so-called “inert” ingredients in the products used in organic production to ensure that they meet the criteria in the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). The NOSB, which is responsible for giving direction to the National Organic Program (NOP), has passed repeated recommendations instructing NOP to replace the generic listings for EPA Lists 3, 4A, and 4B “inerts” with specific substances approved for the use. NOP must allocate resources for this project. Recent appropriations have increased for NOP, and some of this money must be used for the evaluation of “inert” ingredients to ensure compliance with the law and to maintain the integrity of the USDA organic label.

OFPA provides stringent criteria for allowing synthetic materials to be used in organic production. In short, the NOSB must judge—by a supermajority—that the material would not be harmful to human health or the environment, is necessary to the production or handling of agricultural products, and is consistent with organic farming and handling. These criteria have been applied to “active” ingredients but not to “inert” ingredients, which make up the largest part of pesticide products—up to 90% or more.

A comparison of the hazards posed by active and “inert” ingredients used in organic production reveals that in seven of 11 categories of harm, more “inerts” than actives pose the hazard.

As a result, NOP and the NOSB have been allowing unknown toxic mixtures to be applied to organic crops and livestock. They are applied not only in products containing approved National List synthetic materials but also in products in which the active ingredient is nonsynthetic, which require no NOSB review.

The NOSB and NOP must address this fatal threat to organic integrity by immediately compiling and posting in the Federal Register a list of all “inert” ingredients used in organic production, as recommended by the NOSB in 1999. They must develop a process for beginning the evaluation of those “inerts” before the next sunset date.

The value of organic in eliminating hazardous pesticides and fertilizers has been widely documented as the most effective alternative to chemical-intensive agriculture and land management. These “inert” ingredients and many even more hazardous ones are used in chemical-intensive or conventional food production that consumers buy and feed to their families every day. The continued use of hazardous “inerts” is an anomaly in organic and must be corrected now. Ignoring this issue will undermine public trust in the USDA organic label.

Submit Comments Now.

 Need help in submitting comments? Regulations.gov requires more than a single click, but it is not difficult. Please feel free to cut-and-paste the comments above into Regulations.gov and add or adjust the text to personalize it. See this instructional video. (Regulations.gov has changed its look since this video was made.)

(Beyond Pesticides, September 15, 2023) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency suspended the registration of the herbicide dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA) (also widely known as Dacthal), effective August 22, 2023 and leaves existing stocks (products containing DCPA manufactured before August 22) available on the market. The decision is one of a series of EPA attempts dating to 2013 to get more data from the manufacturer as the agency considers reregistration of DCPA. The suspension is toothless, however, since EPA did not totally close the book on this chemical. Six days before the suspension, EPA signed a settlement agreement with the sole manufacturer, AMVAC Corporation, to reinstate the registration upon receipt of the complete toxicological data—that is, animal and laboratory tests— needed to determine the chemical’s safety and how and where it can be used. DCPA is currently classified by EPA as a possible human carcinogen and has also been shown to be a thyroid hormone disrupter.

DCPA is regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Pesticides are supposed to undergo reregistration every 15 years to take new science into consideration, but this process is glacial. Congress amended FIFRA in 1988 to speed up reregistration of products registered before 1984, and the EPA issued a DCPA reregistration document in 1995. Originally registered only for crabgrass and other weeds in turf, by 1995 there were 83 registrations for products made with DCPA. EPA had issued three calls for additional data on DCPA between 1987 and 1992, including one in 1987 because of concerns about dioxin and furan contamination. The 1995 reregistration allowed all uses of DCPA except the original turf application. The agency could not decide on approval for turf because, “The risks of concern include carcinogenic risk to children playing on lawns post-treatment, carcinogenic risk through contaminated drinking water, chronic risks to wild mammalian species, including endangered species, and acute risks to freshwater and estuarine mollusks, including endangered species.”

When the DCPA review came before an administrative law judge last year, an EPA specialist in the Office of Pesticide Programs testified that by October 2020, “AMVAC had not satisfied approximately 41 [data call-in] requirements.”

AMVAC’s attitude has been particularly egregious. The EPA expert further testified, “AMVAC’s actions as to the [Data Call-In] are abnormally dilatory and repetitive. Following EPA’s denial of AMVAC’s requests to waive certain data requirements, AMVAC followed up with additional waiver requests, which usually provided rationales similar to the originals, often with only minor or insignificant changes. In some cases, AMVAC simply opposed the Agency’s denials and did not offer any additional, substantive rationale. During this cycle of waiver requests and denials, AMVAC did not initiate attempts to satisfy the subject data requirements.”

In its suspension notice, EPA recites its enforcement efforts only since 2013. But EPA’s tolerance for industry malfeasance goes much farther back than that. DCPA was first registered under the 1947 FIFRA law in 1958—65 years ago. The EPA did not exist. Since then, manufacturers of DCPA have undergone several mergers and acquisitions, but they have all disregarded their obligations to provide toxicology data. By the time the first EPA Registration Standard was issued in 1988, only one test had been submitted by the then-manufacturer, Fermenta Plant Protection Company.

The most recent EPA action is emblematic of the agency’s timid capitulation to industry pressure by allowing manufacturers to procrastinate on required testing, which enables EPA to delay decision-making. This pattern prevents protection of public health. EPA discourse uses terms like “partners” to describe pesticide companies whose products are collapsing the planet’s biosphere. Time and time again, instead of regulating under clear standards of protection, EPA negotiates settlements with the regulated industry. This is a troubling and deadly pattern that has plagued the agency since its creation, and certainly since the adoption of the 1972 amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Beyond Pesticides has argued since its founding in 1981 that EPA should regulate and litigate against chemical manufacturers as it is charged with doing under FIFRA and should let the industry know that it will not compromise with the public’s health and the protection of the environment.

The U.S. General Accountability Office (formerly known as the U.S. General Accounting Office) has issued two documents critical of EPA’s handling of registrations. In 1993, GAO reported to Congress regarding delays in reregistrations of lawn and turf pesticides, which includes DCPA. This report cites repeated slippage in deadlines for reregistration because the pesticide companies failed to provide the required studies. GAO noted that EPA did not even have testing and assessment guidelines for human exposure occurring after lawn and turf pesticides were applied. The 2013 GAO analysis took EPA to task for issuing inappropriate conditional registrations and for sloppy recordkeeping. “Specifically, EPA does not have a reliable system, such as an automated data system, to track key information related to conditional registrations, including whether companies have submitted additional data within required time frames. As a result, pesticides with conditional registrations could be marketed for years without EPA’s receipt and review of these data,” the report stated.

The 1993 GAO analysis also noted that EPA had likely underestimated children’s exposures to lawn and turf pesticides while playing on grass. Exposures to DCPA are of critical importance for children, pregnant women, and people who work in agriculture or live near fields treated with DCPA. A recent study by a scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, and Oregon State University gave 100 Latina teenagers in the Salinas Valley silicon wristbands to wear over the summer in 2016. Such wristbands absorb chemicals their wearers are exposed to, and laboratory processing can reveal a wearer’s exposome. The agricultural pesticide found most frequently was DCPA, and a breakdown product of the flea treatment pesticide fipronil had the overall highest occurrence. There was a distinct difference in pesticide exposures between city and country, with rural girls having higher exposures than those who lived in Salinas. Proximity to a field or orchard was also a very large factor in exposures.

These results are consistent with many other studies showing agricultural workers bear the brunt of toxic pesticide exposures and suffer the worst health consequences. This makes EPA’s delays unconscionable, and the agency’s commitment to environmental justice lukewarm.

For the current reregistration cycle, the Endocrine Society, a global group of more than 18,000 endocrine clinicians and researchers, submitted a letter to the EPA saying its members are “extremely concerned about the results of the DCPA thyroid toxicity studies, which showed decreased levels of T3 and T4  [forms of thyroid hormone] in fetal rats at very low, biologically relevant levels, indicating that this chemical is an [endocrine disrupting chemical].” The society also urged adoption of the Precautionary Principle and called for restriction measures, “including cancelling the registration of all products containing DCPA.”

DCPA is a high concentration technical grade product used in the formulation of other commercial herbicide products with an alarming mechanism of action: It affects plants’ ability to reproduce by interfering with the formation of microtubules, a major structural element in every cell on the planet (with slightly different structures in multicellular organisms than in most bacteria and archaea). It is used widely in the cultivation of cabbage, broccoli, cilantro, strawberries, cotton, garlic, and onions, as well as on golf courses and athletic fields. The Yuma, Arizona area is a major DCPA hotspot which grows at least 80 percent of the nation’s winter vegetables and leafy greens, according to Raymond Griffin of Griffin Family Farms, in a comment to EPA protesting EPA’s threat of cancellation. DCPA use is also ubiquitous in California.

The DCPA toxicological results that are available from EPA archives contain disturbing contradictions that the manufacturer and the EPA both disregarded. An EPA analysis in 1994 shows unambiguous thyroid and liver tumors in both sexes of rats tested. Other EPA reports indicate effects on test animals that should have been red flagged. One in 1967 reviewing various dosages in rats, dogs and rabbits, noted significant effects in some dosage groups, such as “depression” in rats and low lactation in rat mothers, and included a remark that, “Data seems to indicate the animals are in poor physical condition. Reproductive indices are low.” Dogs were observed to lose their appetites, lose weight, and become lethargic, yet the various examinations of their internal organs found “no observable gross pathology.” Thus obvious health effects were disregarded in favor of registration.

In 1982, despite numerous detailed criticisms of the test methodologies, such as “[I]t is questionable that the integrity of test cultures was properly maintained in performing the assay,” the EPA’s deference to the DCPA manufacturer was obvious when it proposed to “discontinue establishing potable water tolerances…as an uncessary [sic] burden on applicants for registration of products which may be used in potable water supplies.”

All of this illustrates that EPA knew most of the major ecosystem and human health hazards associated with DCPA almost from the chemical’s first registration. As with the registrations for glyphosate, which disregarded early EPA scientists’ concerns in favor of allowing Roundup (glyphosate) to spread around the world, EPA has ignored DCPA’s clear hazards for decades. It is questionable whether EPA would even require reregistrations of many pesticides if it were not required by law to do so. As it is, EPA drags its feet at every opportunity.

Nathan Donley, PhD of the Center for Biological Diversity observes in a Brookings Institution article that as the U.S. shies away from rational regulation of pesticides, other parts of the world have moved far ahead. For example, in 2019 the U.S. used 322 million pounds of 70 agricultural pesticides that are banned in the European Union. Similarly, the U.S. uses 40 million pounds of pesticides banned or phased out in Brazil. Other countries are making similar decisions. Donley also points out that much of the time when EPA cancels a registration, it is because the company requests it; over the last 20 years, pesticide companies have voluntarily taken 60 pesticides off the market, but EPA has only removed five on its own authority.

Dr. Donley points out that pesticide users are shooting themselves in the foot economically by continuing to treat their products with chemicals banned in their overseas target markets. The U.S. is already losing about $17 million in revenue from the European Union annually. Thailand has banned chlorpyrifos and paraquat, costing U.S. producers $1.8 billion annually; France rejected cherries treated with dimethoate, costing U.S. growers about $5 million over four years; and Mexico is phasing out glyphosate. The failure to even apply enlightened self-interest to the pesticide issue, let alone altruism, is costly in lives, dollars and jobs.

One of the most egregious failings of EPA’s pesticide regulations—indeed, of all its chemical oversight—is its reliance on piecemeal and outdated toxicological concepts while ignoring a vast body of academic health effects research. One result of this is that EPA ignores the commonalities among various parts of the biosphere, such as between vertebrates and invertebrates, animals and plants, microbes and metazoans. DCPA is an outstanding example of this blindness.

DCPA’s interference with microtubules makes it an effective weed suppressor, but as with most pesticides, collateral damage is at least as dramatic. Importantly, DCPA is a phthalate, one of the most notorious reproductive hormone disrupters in the world. DCPA’s microtubular mechanism of action is common to about a quarter of all herbicides that have reached the market, and is not confined to members of the same chemical family. For example, carbendazim, a fungicide used on turf, fruits, and nuts, prevents mouse ova from maturing and damages male sperm production. Oryzalin, a dinitroaniline pesticide commonly used on soybeans, almonds, grapes, and other crops to control weed growth, suppresses microtubule synthesis in a complex process involving oxidative stress that prevents embryos from implanting.

It does not appear that the pesticide industry is able to make the obvious connection between biological interference in one type of organism with the same in other organisms, given that all life stems from a common ancestor and shares a great deal of DNA in common—humans and cabbages have about half their genes in common. It is not surprising that something that kills a cabbage or a dandelion might also injure a human.

The EPA should adopt the Precautionary Principle by assuming that it should not grant approval of groups of chemicals with similar structures if one member is already known to be harmful to humans and ecosystems; and by doing the same thing with chemicals with a common and harmful mechanism of action regardless of their structural families. As the DCPA saga proves, the EPA needs to apply balanced science in a timely manner to the registration of pesticides and stop treating the pesticide industry with kid gloves.

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

Source: EPA Issues Notice of Intent to Suspend the Herbicide DCPA

(Beyond Pesticides, September 14, 2023) As we celebrate National Organic Month this September, it is the perfect time to reflect on why you should consider going organic. Do you try to buy organic food when you can? Are you looking for a way to reduce your and your family’s exposure to toxic pesticides?

The benefits of choosing an organic lifestyle extend far beyond your diet or your own health. Beyond Pesticides is helping communities transition parks and public lands to organic land management. Here are some reasons why Beyond Pesticides believes in building organic communities:

Why Go Organic?

1. Health and Safety: Organic foods and parks are free from harmful pesticides, fossil-fuel-based substances, and toxic chemicals, making them safer and healthier for all ages. Visit Beyond Pesticide’s 40 Common Lawn and Landscape Chemicals page to learn more about the health impacts of pesticides in communities.
2. Environmental Stewardship: Opting for organic parks and products supports practices that protect pollinators, improve soil health, increase biodiversity, and reduce toxic runoff into water bodies. Learn more about how to protect pollinators in your community by reading BEE Protective.
3. Trust and Transparency: The USDA Certified Organic label ensures strict standards and regulations for organic products, providing trust and transparency for consumers worldwide. We provide oversight for parks that use organic land management. Visit Beyond Pesticide’s literature called Save Our Organic to learn more about the power of the organic label and use our Keeping Organic Strong page to keep USDA accountable to the principles and values in the Organic Foods Production Act.
4. Just Communities: Supporting organic farming practices can benefit local communities and economies, as well as promote responsible animal welfare and fair labor conditions. Organic parks are the ethical choice to promote environmental justice. The Black Institute’s Poison Parks report shines a spotlight on New York City’s previous reliance on glyphosate-based herbicides and that people of color communities, including landscapers, bear the burden of this toxic chemical’s impact.
5. Climate Resilience: Organic farming often exhibits better performance during droughts and challenging environmental conditions. Watering needs are very site-specific and the type of soil impacts drainage. Once established, a deep root system from organic land management requires less water and organic soil management results in the drawn down of atmospheric carbon, contributing to efforts to reduce the adverse efforts of carbon on climate.

How to Go Organic?

Each person’s organic journey is unique, with some emphasizing organic choices in their diet, lawn care, or community involvement. If you are interested in fostering an organic community, one impactful step is to initiate an organic park in your neighborhood. Become an organic parks advocate!

Fall is the best time to transition to organic land management, focusing on healthy soil and proper maintenance practices. Healthy soil leads to weed and pest-resistant grass. Transitioning from chemical-dependent lawns may require extra effort and attention to timing, but organic care saves resources and ensures safety for all. Here are some steps you can take to make your garden or park organic:

1. Mow High and Keep Sharp – Mowing with a dull blade makes the turf susceptible to disease and mowing too close invites sunlight in for weeds, so be sure to sharpen your mower blades frequently. For the last and first mowing, mow down to 2 inches to prevent fungal problems. For the rest of the year, keep it at 3-3.5 inches to shade out weeds and foster deep, drought-resistant roots.
2. Aerate – If a lawn is hard, compacted, and full of weeds or bare spots, aerate to help air, water, and fertilizer enter the soil. If you cannot stick a screwdriver easily into the soil, it is too compacted. Getting an aerator on the turf will be especially helpful. Once you have an established, healthy lawn, worms and birds pecking at your soil will aerate it for free!
3. Fertilize Without Fossil Fuels – Fertilizing in early fall ensures good growth and root development for your grass. Nitrogen, the most abundant nutrient in lawn fertilizers promotes color and growth. Adding too much nitrogen, or quick release synthetic petrochemical (fossil-fuel-based) fertilizers, will result in quicker growth and the need for more mowing. Too much nitrogen can also weaken the grass, alter the pH, and promote disease, insect, and thatch build-up. If applied too late, nutrients can leach directly into nearby surface waters. Be aware of local phosphorus or nitrogen loading concerns. Use safer fertilizers such as”
   1. Grass clippings contain 58% of the nitrogen added from fertilizers, improve soil conditions, suppress disease, and reduce thatch and crabgrass. So, leave the clippings on the lawn.
   2. Compost and compost tea is an ideal soil amendment, adding the much-needed organic content to the soil and suppressing many turf pathogens. In the fall and spring, preferably after aerating, spread ¼ inch layer of compost over your lawn. Compost tea and worm castings are also great additions. Learn more from Beyond Pesticides’ factsheet, Compost is Key to Successful Plant Management.
4. Overseed With the Right Grass Seed – Once again, fall is the best time to seed a lawn. Grass varieties differ enormously in their resistance to certain pests, tolerance to climatic conditions, growth habit and appearance. Endophytic grass seed provides natural protection against some insects and fungal disease —major benefits for managing a lawn organically. The local nursery will know the best seed for the area. Check to see the weed content of the grass seed and that there are no pesticide coatings.
5. Analyzing Soil is highly recommended to determine specific soil needs. Contact the university extension service to find out how to take and send in a soil sample. In addition to nutrients and pH, ask for organic content analysis, and request organic care recommendations. Ideal pH should be between 6.5-7.0, and organic content should be 5% or higher. Soil test results will ensure that only the materials that are needed are applied. Read Maintaining a Delicate Balance: Eliminating phosphorus contamination with organic soil management for in-depth information on the problem of fertilizer contamination, and how to apply fertilizer properly.
6. Develop Your Tolerance – Many plants that are considered weeds in a lawn have beneficial qualities. Learn to read your “weeds” for what they indicate about your soil conditions. Monocrops do not grow in nature and diversity is a good thing. See more information on our Least Toxic Control of Weeds factsheet.
7. Become an Organic Parks Advocate – Send the municipal parks department links to our factsheets on Establishing New Lawns and Landscapes and Maintaining Sustainable Lawns and Landscapes. Or print them out and take them to the parks manager. For more support from Beyond Pesticides, sign up to become an organic parks advocate!

There is a lot more at Lawns and Landscapes on the Beyond Pesticides’ website. For more information about becoming an advocate for organic parks, see Parks for a Sustainable Future and Tools for Change.

TAKE ACTION: In addition to priming your own lawns, and landscapes, tell your mayor or county executive to transition your public parks and lands to organic management practices!

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

Source: Parks for a Sustainable Future FAQ, Establishing New Lawns and Landscapes, It Is the Season to Transition Lawns and Landscapes to Organic for Municipalities, Schools, and Homes

(Beyond Pesticides, September 13, 2023) A study published in Global Change Biology finds climate change increases bees’ sensitivity to pesticide exposure, impairing the pollinators’ ability to respond to light (Ultra-Violet [UV] stimuli), reducing floral syrup consumption, and lessening longevity (length of life) up to 70 percent. Notably, the reduction in floral syrup consumption indicates nutritional stress that further impacts bee species’ fecundity (productiveness), driving bee declines. Unless more is done to combat the climate crisis, the current global warming scenario increasing bees’ sensitivity to pesticide exposure will continue to threaten all pollinator health.

The pervasiveness of pesticide exposure, combined with climate change, threatens global species biodiversity. As has been widely reported, pollinators (such as bees, monarch butterflies, and bats) are a bellwether for environmental stress as individuals and as colonies. Pesticides intensify pollinators’ vulnerability to health risks (such as pathogens and parasites), with pesticide-contaminated conditions limiting colony productivity, growth, and survival. The globe is currently going through the Holocene Extinction, Earth’s 6th mass extinction, with one million species of plants and animals at risk, including pollinators. Pollinator declines directly affect the environment, society, and the economy. Without pollinators, many agricultural and nonagricultural plant species will decline or cease to exist as U.S. pollinator declines, particularly among native wild bees, depress crop yields. In turn, the economy will take a hit since much of the economy (65%) depends upon the strength of the agricultural sector. As the science shows, pesticides are one of the most significant stressors for pollinators. Additionally, the devastating impacts of pesticides on bees and other pollinators and the larger context of what scientists have called the “insect apocalypse.” In a world where the climate crisis shows no sign of abating, scientists have concluded that the globe cannot afford to continue to subject its critically important wild insects to these combined threats. Therefore, studies like this emphasize the need to consider how many stressors impact the survivability of essential species.

The study notes, “Our findings indicate that ongoing global warming may exacerbate the impact of pesticides on bee health and compromise bee reproductive success, with potentially important consequences on population dynamics. The magnitude of these impacts will depend on our ability to reduce the dependence of agriculture on pesticides and on the extent to which bee populations can adjust to the new climate scenario through adaptation and/or phenotypic plasticity.”

The study analyzes the synergistic (combined) effects of global warming and sublethal insecticide exposure in the solitary bee (European orchard bee/horned mason bee) Osmia cornuta. Using a simulated wintering treatment, the researchers exposed O. cornuta females to three different temperature scenario models: current scenario (2007–2012 temperatures), near-future (2021–2050 projected temperatures), and distant future (2051–2080). During the spring, the bees emerged, and researchers examined the pollinator’s sensitivity to a formulation of sulfoxaflor insecticide at two sublethal doses. Lastly, the researchers measured the combined impact of the various temperature scenarios and sublethal insecticide exposure on the phototactic response (response to light stimuli), feeding behavior, and longevity. The results find the temperature treatment has a profound effect on body weight, as increasing temperatures led to decreasing body weight in bees. This is concerning as body fat plays a crucial role in chemical detoxification. Although the temperature has little impact on phototactic response or feeding behavior, bees exposed to the warmest temperature scenario have shorter lifespans. Insecticide exposure negatively affects the phototactic response, feed behavior, and lifespan of bees, especially at higher doses. The combination of the warmest temperature and high insecticide exposure decreased longevity in bees by 70 percent. Thus, warming temperatures and insecticide exposure represent two significant drivers of bee decline that have important implications for the future of ecosystem services.

The scientific literature demonstrates pesticides’ long history of adverse environmental effects, primarily on wildlife, biodiversity, and human health. Most notably, pesticides are immensely harmful to pollinators. Over the last decade and a half, increasing scientific evidence shows a clear connection between the role of pesticides in the decline of honey bees and wild pollinators (e.g., wild bees, butterflies, beetles, birds, bats, etc.). For instance, monarchs are near extinction, and commercial beekeepers continue to experience declines that are putting them out of business. The continued loss of mayflies and fireflies disrupts the foundation of many food chains. Additionally, the reduction in many bird species has links to insect declines. Pollinators’ decline directly affects the environment, society, and the economy. The United Nations states that 80 percent of the 115 top global food crops depend on insect pollination, with one-third of all U.S. crops depending on pollinators, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Globally, the production of crops dependent on pollinators is worth between $253 and $577 billion yearly. Hence, pesticide use fails to support the current ecosystem, decreasing agricultural and economic productivity and social (human/animal) and environmental well-being.

This study adds to the growing body of research supporting the adverse effects climate change and pesticide exposure have on pollinators, as these stressors already affect bee population dynamics. Warming temperatures alter the body composition of bees, reducing body fats. Bees are ectotherms and thus highly dependent on environmental temperatures for adequate growth, development, and reproduction, making these essential pollinators particularly vulnerable to global warming. Nevertheless, climate change and extensive use of pesticides, like neonicotinoids, sulfoxaflor, pyrethroids, fipronil, and organophosphates, increase the potential risk and indiscriminate threat to all insects. Research shows that residues from neonicotinoids (including seed treatments) and sulfoxaflor accumulate and translocate to pollen and nectar of treated plants. Pyrethroids and fipronil impair bee learning, development, and behavioral function, reducing survivability and colony fitness. However, inert ingredients in these products cause similar or more severe impacts on insect populations, such as disruption in bee learning behavior through exposure to low doses of surfactants. With the global reliance on pollinator-dependent crops increasing over the past decades, a lack of pollinators threatens food security and stability for current and future generations. It is increasingly clear that humanity’s continued use of fossil fuels and fossil fuel-derived pesticides are the core drivers of pollinator declines. These are not siloed but interacting crises, creating a positive feedback loop and compounding one another’s harmful effects. Despite these stressors, alternatives are within reach.

Pollinator protection policies need improvements to safeguard not only all pollinators but also the crops they pollinate. Beyond Pesticides holds that we must move beyond pesticide reduction to organic transition and commit to toxic pesticide elimination in our agricultural system to prevent the crop loss presented in this study. Pesticide elimination can alleviate the effect of these toxic chemicals on humans and wildlife. With EPA failing to take the most basic steps to protect declining pollinators, it is up to concerned residents to engage in state and community action and demand change. Moreover, the government should pass policies that eliminate a broad range of pesticides by promoting organic land management. Habitat in and of itself may assist, but it must be free of pesticides to protect wild pollinator populations. To protect wild bees and other pollinators, check out what you can do by using pollinator-friendly landscapes and pollinator-friendly seeds, engaging in organic gardening and landscaping, and supporting organic agriculture through purchasing decisions. Learn more about the science and resources behind the adverse effects of pesticides on pollinators and take action against the use of pesticides. Buying, growing, and supporting organic will help eliminate the extensive use of pesticides in the environment. Organic land management and regenerative organic agriculture eliminate the need for toxic agricultural pesticides. For more information on the organic choice, see the Beyond Pesticides webpages, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture, Lawns and Landscapes, and Parks for a Sustainable Future. 

Learn more by registering for the virtual 40^th National Forum Series, Forging a Future with Nature: The Existential Challenge to end petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use, starting on September 14, 2023. Go to the Forum website. Meet David Goulson, PhD—preeminent authority on bees, pollinators, and ecosystems; author of Silent Earth, researcher, and professor at the University of Sussex—at the Forum! And, learn from André Leu, PhD, director of Regeneration International, organic farmer, and author, about organic regenerative land management practices to protect community health, the environment, and the planet.

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

Source: Global Change Biology

(Beyond Pesticides, September 11, 2023) A future supported by the natural environment depends on our effective involvement in decisions in our homes, communities, states, and at the federal level to ensure that we are taking the steps necessary to protect against existential threats to health, biodiversity, and climate. The 40th National Forum Series is an important opportunity to hear from those working as scientists, advocates, land managers (from gardens, parks, and play fields to farms), and public decision makers about steps being taken and action needed to prevent catastrophic collapse of the natural systems that sustain life.

The goal of the Forum—to enable a collective strategy to address the existential health, biodiversity, and climate threats and chart a path for a livable and sustainable future. We come together to empower effective action.  

We are honored to begin this year with two international experts in their fields as they discuss steps that can and must be taken in our communities around the globe:

Internationally renowned researcher and author David Goulson, PhD, is able to draw together essential scientific research on the elements of nature that we must cherish, support, and enhance if we are to have a future. The data, as Dr. Goulson documents, describes the importance of nature in contributing to the web of life that sustains the rich diversity needed for a healthy planet. Dr. Goulson is a professor of biology at the University of Sussex in Great Britain, the founder of the Bumblebee Conservation Trust, a fellow of the Royal Entomological Society, a trustee of Pesticide Action Network UK, an ambassador for the UK Wildlife Trusts, and author of more than 300 scientific articles on ecology and conservation of insects. 

In his book, A Sting in the Tale (2013), Dr. Goulson writes, “We need worms to create soil; flies and beetles and fungi to break down dung; ladybirds and hoverflies to eat greenfly; bees and butterflies to pollinate plants to provide food, oxygen, fuel and medicines and hold the soil together; and bacteria to help plants fix nitrogen and to help cows to digest grass. . . [yet] we often choose to squander the irreplaceable, to discard those things that both keep us alive and make life worth living. Perhaps if we learn to save a bee today, we can save the world tomorrow?” He is also the author of the Sunday Times bestseller The Garden Jungle: or Gardening to Save the Planet (2019).

In his most recent book, Silent Earth: Averting the Insect Apocalypse (2021), he writes, “We have to learn to live in harmony with nature, seeing ourselves as part of it, not trying to rule and control it with an iron fist. Our survival depends on it, as does that of the glorious pageant of life with which we share our planet.” Furthermore, during an interview with The Guardian, Dr. Goulson offers a strategy for moving forward: “The UK has 22 million gardens, which collectively could be a fantastic refuge for wildlife, but not if they are overly tidy and sprayed with poisons. We just don’t need pesticides in our gardens. Many towns around the world are now pesticide-free. We should simply ban the use of these poisons in urban areas, following the example of France.” To that end, he supported a petition to ban urban pesticides in the UK. 

A leader in advancing organic agriculture, André Leu, DSc, is the international director of Regeneration International, with more than 370 partners in 70 countries, working with numerous agricultural systems—agroecology, organic permaculture, ecological agriculture, holistic grazing, biological agriculture, and organic agroforestry. The organization, founded in 2015, is cultivating an international movement united around a common goal: to reverse global warming and end world hunger by facilitating and accelerating the global transition to regenerative agriculture and land management. Its mission is to promote, facilitate, and accelerate the global transition to regenerative food, farming, and land management for the purpose of restoring climate stability, ending world hunger, and rebuilding deteriorated social, ecological, and economic systems. 

Dr. Leu previously served as president of IFOAM—Organics International, the international umbrella organization for the organic sector. IFOAM has about 850 member organizations in 127 countries. His most recent book, Growing Life: Regenerative Farming and Ranching, explores organic regenerative systems being adopted worldwide, which, he says, “require a shift in the mindset of the land manager and operator, away from being primarily reliant on external inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides, and toward dependence on knowledge, measurement, and management. He is the author of two other books, Poisoning Our Children (2018) and The Myths of Safe Pesticides (2014). Dr. Leu and his wife, Julia, own and manage an organic tropical fruit farm in Daintree, Australia. 

Jeff Moyer, CEO emeritus of the Rodale Institute, describes Growing Life: “In his powerful and well-written new book, André Leu introduces us all to the concepts of regenerative organic agriculture, asks provocative questions, then shares answers only decades of experience could possibly hope to inspire, and then finally invites us on a journey to, as André says, ‘Become your own researcher.’ Every farmer needs to read, discover, and realign their priorities to focus on the power of basic biological principles to feed us all while regenerating the soil resources we need to survive as a species. André has captured the very essence of the word regenerative by clearly and simply explaining the basic building blocks of healthy soil, showcasing how the science of biology dictates that we can improve the resource we need while using it to grow food. The science of regenerative organic agriculture uncovers how the systems are complex, but the implementation isn’t complicated.” Dr. Leu speaks to the need for clearly defined and enforceable regenerative, organic land management systems that are critical to meet the challenges of our time, lest we fall victim to empty words and promises that do not advance the urgent changes required for a livable future. 

The time is now! Don’t miss this EPIC meeting of the minds as we kick off our 40th iteration of the National Forum Series on Zoom THIS THURSDAY and move forward in the quest to end petrochemical pesticide and fertilizer use! You are part of the solution to these existential crises— be a part of the conversation!

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TODAY!

Registration is Complimentary: Donations are requested, but not required. Your registration includes access to all three seminars for the fall!

Reach, Influence, Support—Join the following organizations to sponsor Beyond Pesticides’ 40th National Forum Series as we bring together an important and powerful group of movers and shakers—scientists, policymakers, educators, practitioners, advocates, and activists—to elevate with greater clarity the threats associated with environmental decline and collapse and the urgency with which we need to adopt solutions that are within our grasp.

Tax Deductions: All donations on this site are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law and are processed in U.S. dollars. Beyond Pesticides is a U.S. nonprofit, tax-exempt charitable organization (tax identification number 521360541) under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

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

(Beyond Pesticides, September 11, 2023) As environmental groups pursue a legal strategy to challenge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for its failure to protect a wildlife refuge from industrial aquaculture, they are also urging the public to hold Refuge officials accountable to the Refuge Improvement Act with a write-in campaign. (See Take Action campaign below.) Earlier this year, USFWS allowed the establishment of a commercial aquaculture operation that cultivates 34 acres of non-native Pacific oysters within a 50-acre tideland parcel leased  from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources within the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. The failure to fully evaluate the compatibility of this use with the purposes of the refuge raises concerns of compliance with the law governing National Wildlife Refuges throughout the country. Beyond Pesticides has said, “USFWS is willing to allow, for private profit, the industrialization of refuge lands for shellfish operations.” 

Refuges are critical habitat throughout the U.S. that protect critical ecosystems. According to the lawsuit, the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge shelters a bay rich in marine life. Eelgrass beds attract brant, shorebirds feed on the tideflats, and ducks find sanctuary in the calm waters. The Refuge is a preserve and breeding ground for more than 250 species of birds and 41 species of land animals. Dungeness Spit protects nutrient-rich tideflats for migrating shorebirds in spring and fall; a quiet bay with calm waters for wintering waterfowl; an isolated beach for harbor seals and their pups; and abundant eelgrass beds for young salmon and steelhead nurseries and some duck species, such as the Black Brant.

Tell the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland that the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge lease for industrial aquaculture must be rescinded.

In spite of demonstrated harm to birds, salmon, forage fish, and shellfish, and a recommendation by the National Marine Fisheries Service that “an alternative site be identified in a location that results in less potential impacts to wildlife that is more appropriate for aquaculture and meets the goals of the tribe,” USFWS approved a lease for an industrial oyster farm inside the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. This decision, which is in violation of the Clean Water Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, must be reversed. 

In the words written within an October 2022 USFWS internal memorandum, “Forgoing a compatibility determination in order to facilitate incompatible commercial activities by any entity would be a subversion of the fundamental requirements in the [USFWS] Improvement Act.” 

We are targeting the most recent case of the USFWS’s permissiveness in one of the country’s most pristine nature lands, the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge in the small rural town of Sequim Washington, just below the Olympic National Park. In this case, the shellfish corporation raises shellfish on other sites. They do not need to operate in a national refuge and deny wildlife their feeding and breeding grounds. 

The Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge was created by Executive Order in 1915 by Woodrow Wilson, directing the area to be set aside as a “refuge, preserve and breeding ground for native birds and prohibits any disturbance of the birds within the reserve.” The front page of the Refuge website states: “Pets, bicycles, kite flying, Frisbees, ball-playing, camping, and fires are not permitted on the Refuge as they are a disturbance for the many migrating birds and other wildlife taking solitude on the Refuge.” With this level of concern, it is counterintuitive to allow destructive industrial aquaculture.  

Industrial shellfish aquaculture is known to reduce or eliminate eelgrass with the use of pesticides. Shellfish aquaculture also involves large-scale use of plastics—PVC tubes and plastic netting—that are hazardous to marine organisms and can trap and entangle wildlife. Commercial shellfish aquaculture is a major industry in Washington state that has significant impacts on the nearshore marine environments, which provide essential habitat for many species, including invertebrates, fish (including herring and salmon), and birds (migratory and shorebirds). 

Among the negative impacts of this project are: 50% reduction in bird primary feeding grounds;  plastic oyster bags that exclude the probing shorebird flocks from feeding deeply into the substrate, entrap fish and birds, add macro- and micro-plastic bits to the sediment throughout the refuge, and shift the benthic community composition; diminishing of the ecological benefits provided by eelgrass to threatened fish and birds, such as nourishment and cover from predators; and increased algal blooms that will leave a graveyard of dead oysters. These detrimental effects to the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge are NOT minimal. Decisionmakers should not place financial benefits to the corporation above the long-term and cumulative impacts to the refuge. Half of the world’s 10,000-odd bird species are in decline. One in eight faces the threat of extinction. 2.9 billion breeding adult birds have been lost from the United States and Canada in only 50 years. 

Let’s raise our national voice and try and stop this refuge destruction with public persuasion. This is a public space we pay to protect. For more information, check out the Daily News post from last August, “Groups Sue U.S. Interior Department to Protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge from Industrial Aquaculture.” 

This action follows a lawsuit filed by three environmental organizations against the U.S. Department of Interior for failing to protect the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge from industrial aquaculture. The groups, including Protect the Peninsula’s Future, Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat and Beyond Pesticides, filed their complaint in the U.S. Western District Court of Washington State. The complaint states that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Department of Interior, must “take action that is required by the Refuge Improvement Act and conduct a compatibility determination and require a special use permit for a proposed industrial aquaculture use” that will abut and impact the Refuge. The plaintiffs are represented by the Seattle, WA law firm of Bricklin and Newman LLP. 

Tell the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland that the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge lease for industrial aquaculture must be rescinded.

The targets for this Action are the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Secretary of State.  

Thank you for your active participation and engagement!

Letter to Hugh Morrison, Regional Director for the Pacific Region USFWS, and U.S. Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland: 

As a citizen and taxpayer of the United States, I strongly oppose your support for allowing a for-profit shellfish operation in the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. It is upsetting to learn that USFWS would have operations known to be destructive of the wildlife refuge and refuse to abide by its own compatibility determination regulations. 

In spite of demonstrated harm to birds, salmon, forage fish, and shellfish, and a recommendation by the National Marine Fisheries Service that “an alternative site be identified in a location that results in less potential impacts to wildlife that is more appropriate for aquaculture and meets the goals of the tribe,” UFWS approved a lease for an industrial oyster farm inside the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge. This decision, which is in violation of the Clean Water Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, must be reversed. 

The Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge was created by Executive Order in 1915 by Woodrow Wilson, directing the area to be set aside as a “refuge, preserve and breeding ground for native birds and prohibits any disturbance of the birds within the reserve.” The front page of the Refuge website states: “Pets, bicycles, kite flying, Frisbees, ball-playing, camping, and fires are not permitted on the Refuge as they are a disturbance for the many migrating birds and other wildlife taking solitude on the Refuge.” With this level of concern, it is counterintuitive to allow destructive industrial aquaculture.  

Industrial shellfish aquaculture is known to reduce or eliminate eelgrass with the use of pesticides. Shellfish aquaculture also involves large-scale use of plastics—PVC tubes and plastic netting—that are hazardous to marine organisms and can trap and entangle wildlife. Commercial shellfish aquaculture is a major industry in Washington state that has significant impacts on the nearshore marine environments, which provide essential habitat for many species, including invertebrates, fish (including herring and salmon), and birds (migratory and shorebirds). 

Among the negative impacts of this project are: 50% reduction in bird primary feeding grounds;  plastic oyster bags that exclude the probing shorebird flocks from feeding deeply into the substrate, entrap fish and birds, add macro- and micro-plastic bits to the sediment throughout the refuge, and shift the benthic community composition; diminishing of the ecological benefits provided by eelgrass to threatened fish and birds, such as nourishment and cover from predators; and increased algal blooms that will leave a graveyard of dead oysters. These detrimental effects to the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge are NOT minimal. Decisionmakers should not place financial benefits to the corporation above the long-term and cumulative impacts to the refuge. 

Please let me know that you will write an honest compatibility determination. 

Thank you. 

(Beyond Pesticides, September 8, 2023) In a united effort, climate and environmental justice movements from around the world have come together to announce a global “end to fossil fuels,” including the end of pesticides.

The “March to End Fossil Fuels” is scheduled for September 17 and the Secretary General’s Summit in New York City on September 20. See the full map for other marches around the world.

At the Beyond Pesticides, 2022 National Forum session on climate (November, 2022), we discussed the science and the urgent need for a strategic response to the climate crisis as part of a constellation of crises that intersect. Whether we are talking about a health crisis borne out of chemical-induced diseases, the collapse of life-sustaining biodiversity, or the dramatic catastrophes caused by greenhouse gases and rising temperatures—the interconnectedness of the crises requires strategic solutions that are holistic and nurturing of our relationship with nature —a relationship we have minimized as a matter of policy and practice.

The data on climate calls on us to be audacious in our demand for urgent change in our households and communities, and from decision makers at all levels of government.

At Beyond Pesticides, our audacious goal is to ban petroleum-based pesticides and fertilizers by 2032 and transition to a society and world committed to organic management practices. To do this requires a change in public understanding of what is possible. And, it will take a fair amount of public outrage that we are not moving fast enough to embrace this goal in all sectors.

Leveraging the science, we need to show with hands-on examples what change looks like. That process has begun, and today we will hear about some of what’s possible now. But the change will take people working together locally across the country and around the world. The audacious goal is achieved through on-the-ground work that becomes mainstream. If we buy or grow food, use a park or a playing field, buy consumer products, advocate for change, or hold elective office or advisory positions, we all play a critical role.

Our work at Beyond Pesticides offers daily insight into the destruction that is being wrought by holding on to practices and toxic chemical dependencies that are defined by piecemeal approaches, antithetical to holistic thinking. As a matter of policy, we are neither preventive nor precautionary. We too often accept the underlying premise of statutory and regulatory frameworks that have been created with this thinking –the thinking that has brought us to this moment of existential crises.

Many see the solution in building resilience— and apply a narrow definition of the word.  

In the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, they write: 

“Resilience in the literature has a wide range of meanings. Adaptation is often organized around resilience as bouncing back and returning to a previous state after a disturbance. More broadly, the term describes not just the ability to maintain essential function, identity and structure, but also the capacity for transformation.”

The IPCC continues:

“The drivers of transformation are multidimensional, involving social, cultural, economic, environmental, technical and political processes. The combination of these creates the potential for abrupt and systemic change . . . .”

In the U.S., the foundation of our agriculture and the management of our built environment is intricately tied to polluting practices, with disproportionate harm affecting segments of our society and world who are exploited, low income, in ill-health, and disproportionately people of color. We have a responsibility to find a different path and we can.

We do not have to be theoretical about this. We have organic systems in place, governed by a clear definition and requirements for compliance with standards. Under the Organic Foods Production Act (in the U.S. and similar statutes worldwide), those selling products as organic are required to adhere to a legal definition of soil management practices, a list of allowed and prohibited substances, a certification and inspection system that establishes compliance with defined organic standards, and a participatory public decision-making process for continuous improvement. This approach, whether in agriculture or in our parks and playing fields, eliminates the reliance on fossil fuel-based toxic chemicals that release greenhouse gases. It also employs the ability of healthy soil, rich in biodiversity, to draw down atmospheric carbon. To this end, Beyond Pesticides advances the continuous improvement of organic agriculture (see Keeping Organic Strong) and the development of Parks for a Sustainable Future. Both programs advance in real-time and with urgency the elimination of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers. See how you can get involved and to make a difference along with thousands of others.

Our goal must be to adopt productive land management systems that do not use toxic petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers—substances that we can no longer use, if we are to sustain life.

Despite a growing global consensus on the urgency of addressing the climate crisis, the Biden administration has sanctioned several major fossil fuel projects, ensuring the United States maintains its status as the world’s foremost oil and gas producer and exporter. In 2023 alone, the administration approved multiple liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facilities in Alaska and along the Gulf Coast, conducted a substantial oil and gas lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico, and expedited the Mountain Valley Pipeline. Furthermore, more onshore and offshore oil and gas lease sales are slated for this year.

 Over 500 groups, including Beyond Pesticides, are calling on President Biden to:

1. STOP FEDERAL APPROVALS for new fossil fuel projects and REPEAL permits for climate bombs like the Willow Project and the Mountain Valley Pipeline.
2. PHASE OUT FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING  on our public lands and waters.
3. DECLARE A CLIMATE EMERGENCY to halt fossil fuel exports and investments abroad, and turbo-charge the build-out of more just, resilient distributed energy (like rooftop and community solar).
4. PROVIDE A JUST TRANSITION to a renewable energy future that generates millions of jobs while supporting workers’ and community rights, job security, and employment equity. Our renewable energy future must not repeat the violence of the extractive past. Justice must ground the transition off fossil fuels to redress the climate, colonialist, racist, socioeconomic, and ecological injustices of the fossil fuel era.

To learn more about the September 17th Climate March to stop fossil fuels, visit https://www.endfossilfuels.us/

The climate crisis is part of a broader set of interconnected crises, including health issues from pesticide-induced diseases, the loss of biodiversity, and catastrophic climate change events.  A study in the journal Nature finds, “The interaction between indices of historical climate warming and intensive agricultural land use is associated with reductions of almost 50% in the abundance and 27% in the number of species within insect assemblages relative to those in less-disturbed habitats with lower rates of historical climate warming.” A study in Environmental Health Perspectives finds the loss of pollinators, “3%–5% of fruit, vegetable, and nut production is lost due to inadequate pollination, leading to an estimated 427,000 (95% uncertainty interval: 86,000-691,000) excess deaths annually from lost healthy food consumption and associated diseases.” That study also finds the economic value of crops to be “12%–31% lower than if pollinators were abundant.”

To address these crises, we need holistic and nature-based solutions, as our relationship with the natural environment has often been overlooked in policy and practice. At Beyond Pesticides, our audacious goal is to eliminate petroleum-based pesticides and fertilizers within a decade, transitioning to organic management practices. Like the transition off of fossil fuels, achieving this goal requires changing public perceptions of what’s possible and generating public outrage over the slow pace of change.

In this moment of international environmental momentum, we must work together locally and globally, whether it’s buying or growing food, advocating for change, or holding elective office. We must examine the destructive consequences of maintaining toxic chemical dependencies and piecemeal approaches that lack a preventive or precautionary stance.

We need to embrace holistic thinking, recognizing that resilience involves not just bouncing back but also transforming our systems. Organic systems offer a path forward, with clear standards and a focus on healthy soil and biodiversity, reducing reliance on toxic petrochemicals and contributing to carbon sequestration. Our ultimate goal is to sustain life without the use of harmful chemicals that threaten our planet.

For more information on the dangers ongoing pesticide use poses to our ability to combat climate change, see talks from Beyond Pesticides climate change webinar, featuring Rachel Bezner Kerr, PhD, Cornell University professor and co-author of the definitive United Nations (UN) report on climate and food production and Andrew Smith, PhD, chief operating officer of the Rodale Institute and coauthor of several landmark reports on soil biology and carbon sequestration in organic agricultural production. As reported in Beyond Pesticides Daily News in 2022, the longest-running — four-decade — investigation comparing organic and chemical-intensive grain-cropping approaches in North America yields impressive results for organic. In 2022, the Rodale Institute’s Farming Systems Trial — 40-Year Report reports on these outcomes: (1) organic systems achieve 3–6 times the profit of conventional production; (2) yields for the organic approach are competitive with those of conventional systems (after a five-year transition period); (3) organic yields during stressful drought periods are 40% higher than conventional yields; (4, 5, and 6) organic systems leach no toxic compounds into nearby waterways (unlike pesticide-intensive conventional farming), use 45% less energy than conventional, and emit 40% less carbon into the atmosphere. And, as the Rodale Institute reports, “Healthy soil holds carbon and keeps it out of the atmosphere.“ Beyond Pesticides reported in 2019 on similar results, from the institute’s 30-year project mark, which have been borne out by another three years of the trials.

Think global and act local: Join the global climate march on September 17th, 2023 and transition your local park to organic land management to end fossil fuels.

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

Source: March to End Fossil Fuels

(Beyond Pesticides, September 7, 2023) During Organic Month, the importance of organic practices is brought into sharp focus by a study published in July in Environmental Health Perspectives, which emphasizes the importance of an organic diet and location to residues of pesticides in the body. The study finds urinary levels of the weed killer glyphosate significantly decrease through an organic diet for pregnant individuals living further than 0.5km (~1640ft) from an agricultural field. However, the study finds that adopting an organic diet among pregnant individuals living closer than 0.5km to an agricultural area does not significantly decrease glyphosate levels, indicating alternative sources of contamination outside of diet. Although past studies prove time and time again that an organic diet can reduce the levels of pesticides in the body, far too few studies investigate how the intervention of the organic diet can alter glyphosate levels among pregnant individuals living near or far from agricultural fields on which the herbicide is used. Furthermore, pesticides’ presence in the body affects human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age.

The study raises the complexity of fully tracking multiple exposures to glyphosate and other pesticides and the need for a more holistic or systemic solution, as embraced by those transitioning to organic management practices and/or the need for regulatory decisions that eliminate the use of toxic chemicals based on the availability of nontoxic alternative practices and products.

Pesticide exposure during pregnancy is of specific concern as health effects for all life stages can be long-lasting. This study highlights the importance of where you live and the associated exposure patterns. In the study population, the primary source of chemical exposure appears to differ among vulnerable populations depending on rural-urban location. Suppose rural communities’ primary exposure source comes from agricultural uses, while urban communities mainly encounter glyphosate through diet. Or suppose that residential and urban populations get multiple glyphosate exposures from diet, landscaping, park and playing field use, and roadside or rights-of-way management. In these cases, as this study notes, “[I]t is necessary to understand sources of exposure in diverse populations to develop effective exposure-reduction recommendations.”

Conducted in Idaho, the researchers evaluated the urinary glyphosate concentrations of 39 pregnant individuals living near (0.5km or less; rural) and from (more than 0.5km; urban) agricultural fields routinely treated with pesticides. Randomly, participants receive a supply of organic or conventional (non-organic) groceries (grown with chemical-intensive practices) over two weeks to determine the glyphosate concentration in urine samples. The study compares the difference in urine sample glyphosate concentration between the organic and conventional grocery weeks, stratifying by proximity to agricultural fields. The results find urinary glyphosate levels among individuals furthest from agricultural fields (urban) are moderately lower than those of individuals living near agricultural fields (rural), with the concentrations decreasing when switching from a conventional to an organic diet. Thus, the study suggests that “diet is an important contributor to glyphosate exposure in people living >0:5 km from agricultural fields; for people living near crops, agriculture may be a dominant exposure source during the pesticide spray season.”

Glyphosate is the most commonly used active ingredient in the U.S. and worldwide, appearing in many herbicide formulations and readily contaminating soil, water, food, and other resources. As the active ingredient in the popular weed killer Roundup^TM, with use growing especially during the last few decades, extensive glyphosate use has put human, animal, and environmental health at risk. Four out of five U.S. individuals over six years have detectable levels of glyphosate in their bodies. Exposure to glyphosate has implications for the development of various health anomalies, including cancer, Parkinson’s disease, developmental and birth disorders, and autism. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies glyphosate herbicides as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans,” stark evidence demonstrates links to various cancers, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma. EPA’s classification perpetuates adverse impacts, especially among vulnerable individuals, like pregnant women, infants, children, and the elderly. Glyphosate’s ubiquity threatens 93 percent of all U.S. endangered species, resulting in biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption (e.g., soil erosion, loss of services, and trophic cascades). Moreover, chemical use has been increasing since the inception of crops genetically modified to tolerate glyphosate.

Not only do health officials warn that continuous use of glyphosate will perpetuate adverse health and ecological effects, but that use also highlights recent concerns over antibiotic resistance. It is commonly used on crops grown from genetically engineered (GE) companion seeds for various staple crops (e.g., soybeans, cotton, and corn). These GE seeds are glyphosate-tolerant, whose attribute has allowed growers to apply the herbicide and expect that it will kill weeds and not harm the crop. This calculation is changing, however, as weeds develop resistance to glyphosate, causing the industry to double down on its chemical solutions.

This study is one of the first “to examine the effect of an organic diet intervention on glyphosate among people living near and far from agricultural fields.” Most notably, this study is the first to investigate the impact of an organic diet mediation on glyphosate exposure during pregnancy. Pregnancy is a critical window of susceptibility for exposure to glyphosate and other environmental chemicals, as prenatal exposure has associations with adverse birth outcomes that can impact subsequent generations.

Previous studies demonstrate a significant reduction (up to 70 percent for glyphosate) in urinary pesticide metabolites (breakdown products from parent compounds) achieved by a dietary shift from consuming conventionally grown food to organically grown foods in as little as a week. This subject research furthers the investigation of the impacts of an organic diet on pesticide exposure. Like this article, the paper, Organic Diet Intervention Significantly Reduces Urinary Glyphosate Levels in U.S. Children and Adults, reports on the second phase of a two-part study evaluating the same set of urine samples. 

Although the results of this study and others suggest an organic diet effectively reduces exposure to pesticides for most of the general population, rural areas have difficulty avoiding glyphosate exposure because of its use on farms. Thus, sources of glyphosate exposure in rural areas are far beyond diet. Organic agriculture is not magically “free” of all chemicals, given the reality of pesticide drift and background levels in the environment. However, the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances, overseen by the National Organic Standards Board and subject to public review and comment, establishes the prohibition of toxic pesticides in certified organic production under the USDA organic seal.

This September, celebrate National Organic Month to improve and sustain human, animal, and environmental health. Emissions from fossil-fuel-based synthetic pesticides and nitrogen fertilizers continue to threaten the ecosystem, fueling the climate crisis. A complete switch from chemical-intensive agriculture to regenerative organic agriculture can significantly reduce the threat of the climate crisis by eliminating petrochemical, synthetic fertilizers and toxic pesticide use. Furthermore, supporting the use of alternative practices such as polyculture rather than monoculture, mulching systems instead of herbicides for weed management, animal integration, and other organic practices assist in eliminating the need for pesticides and their movement through air (pesticide drift) and into waterways (runoff). 

As for glyphosate, Beyond Pesticides has challenged the registration of this chemical in court due to its impacts on soil, air, water, and our health. While legal battles press on, the agricultural system should eliminate the use of toxic synthetic herbicides to avoid the myriad of problems they cause. Instead, the main focus should be converting to regenerative-organic systems and using least-toxic pest control to mitigate harmful pesticide exposure, restore soil health, and reduce carbon emissions. Public policy must advance this shift, rather than allow unnecessary reliance on pesticides. Additionally, purchasing organic food whenever possible—which never allows glyphosate use—can help curb exposure and adverse health effects. Moreover, Beyond Pesticides provides tools, information, and support to take local action: check out our factsheet on glyphosate/Roundup and our report, Monsanto’s Roundup (Glyphosate) Exposed. Contact us for help with local efforts and stay informed of developments through our Daily News Blog and our journal, Pesticides and You. Additionally, check out Carey Gillam’s talk on Monsanto’s corruption in glyphosate/Roundup at Beyond Pesticides’ 36th National Pesticide Forum. Help to take glyphosate and other toxic pesticides and fertilizers out of your community by collaborating with Beyond Pesticides through our Parks for a Sustainable Future program.

As we forge ahead, converting local parks and playing fields to organic land management practices to make them safer for kids (and pets!) to play in via our Parks for a Sustainable Future program, Beyond Pesticides is also honored to partner with Natural Grocers for Organic Month! As part of their Organic Month Headquarters® campaign, Natural Grocers is donating $2 for every Ladybug Love pouch sold and $1 for every “Organic Month Headquarters” bag sold at all in-store locations to Beyond Pesticides! With your support, we can say YES to the livable future we are working to achieve! 

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

Source: Environmental Health Perspectives

(Beyond Pesticides, September 6, 2023) In late August, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a report concluding that EPA “took a siloed approach” to the cumulative impacts of chemical exposures and the disproportionate nature of those exposures. This approach keeps different parts of the EPA from coordinating their efforts and hinders understanding of the breadth and depth of chemical exposures.

OIG reached this disturbing finding despite the issuance of several executive orders by President Biden requiring EPA to develop policies and actions to assess cumulative impacts of chemical exposures across departments, laws, and environmental media (air, water, bodies, food etc.) and to pay more attention to environmental justice.

Beyond Pesticides has stressed that the whole constellation of chemical exposures and effects should be considered when governments set public policies and regulations. Just last March, Daily News covered another OIG report castigating EPA for betraying its mission by failing to address the fact that very high levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl compounds known as “forever chemicals” have been found in some common pesticides. OIG also berated EPA for succumbing to Donald Trump’s interference with setting toxicity values for the “forever chemical” perfluorobutane sulfonic acid. These failures, Beyond Pesticides reported, were owing to a “deeper problem afflicting EPA: industry influence on career staff, and an unwillingness from the EPA to address it.”

Although the new OIG study does not focus on pesticides, its findings also apply to populations exposed to pesticides. The report says that EPA has developed neither the procedural protocols for analyzing chemicals across different environmental media and exposure routes nor the proper scientific tests to study chemical mixtures. Among the laws that require cumulative risk assessments for chemicals with a common mechanism of toxicity is the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), an amendment to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which specifically requires EPA to consider cumulative risk in setting tolerances for pesticides.

Pesticides are almost always mixtures of “active” and “inert” ingredients. A 2021 study by Robert Sprinkle, MD, PhD, and Devon Payne-Sturges, DrPH, in Environmental Health, took a comprehensive look at EPA’s practices regarding mixtures, which are a rat’s nest of convoluted reasoning. The authors write that in the original 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, mixtures were excluded from the agency’s definition of a “chemical substance.” What this means in practice is that “[a]n environmental mixture could not be, in TSCA terms, a ‘mixture’ if its components include chemical substances altered in the environment. Nor could the still toxic breakdown products of two different industrial substances constitute a mixture.” There is an exception: if EPA finds that if a mixture’s effects could not be predicted by each constituent’s effects, laboratory testing would be required. This means that the agency could view each component of a mixture as “acting in isolation both from nature and from each other.”

Encouraged by the pesticide industry, EPA only requires the “active” ingredient to be tested, and not the other elements of the mixture, because the latter supposedly has no effect. However, according to Drs. Sprinkle and Payne-Sturges, “In July 2016, an intensive search of applications for patents on pesticide formulations had reported that 96 of 140 (69 percent) had been described by their respective manufacturers as demonstrating ingredient synergies. These synergies, rather than going unmentioned out of fear that their documentation would increase regulatory scrutiny, were being presented to strengthen claims of novelty and, hence, patentability.” EPA could check patent records periodically to find honest industry information.

Tests used to justify the registration of pesticides are usually paid for and conducted by manufacturers or their subcontracted consultancies and laboratories. There is a fairly standard battery of animal tests in laboratories using regulatory toxicological protocols. But, Drs. Sprinkle and Payne-Sturges wrote that this approach “could not be expected to succeed at an integrative task, an environmental-ecological-epidemiological task. Yet laboratory toxicology remained the empirical arbiter of toxicant regulation.”

Moreover, EPA only considers the cumulative effects of groups of chemicals with the same mechanism of action, so any effects must be additive. It does not look for effects from combined chemicals and different mechanisms of action, even though there are many studies demonstrating this. As Patrick Masseo wrote in Environmental Health News, “[O]ur government still lacks a thorough and adequate process to conduct assessments of and to collect critical information about, the cumulative risk and impact of co-exposures such as vinyl chloride via air pollution and dioxins through groundwater contamination.”

Poor people of color often take the brunt of these co-exposures, and environmental justice is often ignored, even though the EPA has both legal obligations and executive instructions to support it. FQPA is a step forward in that it requires taking into account dietary and nondietary exposures, but it also has a huge loophole because it does not include occupational exposure. This omission has a disproportionate effect on people of color, particularly farmworkers and landscapers and their families.

EPA also ignores parts of the Superfund law, formally known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), which entails analyzing the effects of many chemicals at once because almost all Superfund sites contain multiple contaminants and nearby residents are exposed to them.

In its August report, OIG used EPA Region 4’s actions at the 35^th Avenue Superfund site in Birmingham, Alabama as a case in point. Although it has been partially remediated, there has been substantial industry interference with the process. Numerous industries, including two coal-fired coke plants, a cast iron pipe company, a paint and coatings company, an aluminum company, and several other industries are located there. These companies have emitted arsenic, lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) benzo(a)pyrene, and other pollutants for more than 100 years. Three neighborhoods cluster around the Superfund site, and the EPA investigation found that soil from the largest coke plant had been used as yard fill on many home lots. The EPA has removed soil from about 650 homes in the three neighborhoods and spent about $46 million so far.

This area of North Birmingham was crucial to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Bethel Baptist Church in the Collegeville neighborhood was a gathering spot for participants in the Freedom Rides. The church was bombed three times during the era. This hard-fought history may be one reason why some residents want to stay in the neighborhood and see it thoroughly cleaned up rather than moving elsewhere.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, conducted a public health consultation with the 35^th Street community. The investigation covered only surface soil and garden produce exposures and only measured levels of arsenic, lead, and benzo(a)pyrene in residents’ blood, even though the pollution in the area contains many other substances. Nor did the ATSDR consider the cumulative impacts of these toxicants combined.

While ATSDR did not find blood lead levels above the EPA reference value of 5 µg/dL, the agency also noted that, even below that threshold, children are at risk of decreased academic achievement, lowered IQ, attention deficits, hearing problems, and delayed growth and puberty. Lead also crosses the placenta and can create a risk of miscarriage, premature birth, low birth weight, and damage to a fetus’s brain, kidney, and nervous system. Children who play in dirt and ingest it are at particular risk. In adults, lead contributes to kidney problems, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and cognitive dysfunction.

Notably, ATSDR’s “next steps” section of its consultation lists seven actions to be taken, five of them directed at parents, such as “prevent[ing] their children from intentionally or inadvertently eating soil, especially for those yards with elevated arsenic, lead, and PAH levels that have not yet been cleaned up and for those yards that have not yet been tested.” These recommendations shift the burden of public health once again to individuals.

The industry has brought further cleanup to a standstill. In 2018, a Birmingham attorney and a vice president of the coke plant responsible for most of the emissions, now owned by the Drummond Company, were convicted of bribing a state legislator to prevent EPA from adding the site to the National Priorities List.  A listing would have enabled long-term cleanup of the area. The EPA could send the bill to the company, and the State of Alabama would have to pay 10% of the cost, which it wanted to avoid. The state environmental director argued that “the site did not pose a health hazard to people living there,” according to AL.com. To keep the state out of the costs of cleanup, the lawyer and the executive bribed the legislator with a $375,000 contract to work against the listing. To date, the 35^th Street Superfund site has not been added to the NPL.

In its August report, OIG states EPA has not coordinated efforts across divisions responsible for enforcing various laws like the Clean Water Act, TSCA, the Clean Air Act, and FQPA because, preposterously, it did not think it had executive or legislative authority to do so. EPA is divided into sections based on these laws, and the sections do not have a history of talking to each other despite the clear legal obligations. This inertia contributes to delays in providing environmental justice to exposed communities and resolving the glaring issue of chemical mixtures.

There is one federal agency that seems to get it. In the mid-2000s, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) began addressing the mixtures problem and its implications for environmental justice. According to Drs. Sprinkle and Payne-Sturges, under the directorship of Linda Birnbaum, PhD, NIEHS began to support research into the “exposome,” meaning “the totality of an individual’s exposure before conception onwards through the lifespan, plus the microbiome plus the genetic and epigenetic diversity of human vulnerability.”

However, since 2016, the undertow of political interference has restricted its ability to achieve this goal. Its reach is also limited because the NIEHS is not a regulatory body and is without the requisite authority to make substantive policy changes. In the meantime, interference with regulatory actions at the EPA is likely to yo-yo again unless there is stability in the executive branch.

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

Source: The EPA Needs to Further Refine and Implement Guidance to Address Cumulative Impacts and Disproportionate Health Effects Across Environmental Programs, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 23-P-0029, Aug.22, 2023.