(Beyond Pesticides, August 17, 2023) Governor Josh Green of Hawai’i declares the recent Maui wildfires as the largest natural disaster in the state’s history, yet advocates say the tragedy is anything but “natural.” As of Wednesday, the death toll has risen to over 100 lives lost and more than 2,200 structures in Lāhainā — the original capital of the Hawaiian Kingdom have burned to ash. With so much loss, many people are asking who is responsible and how another disaster can be prevented.

The answer to who is to blame is not simple. The initial reports of the fire repeated a trope that Lāhainā is a dry area on Maui and is prone to wildfire, yet in recent days, the news stories have shifted to reveal the area’s ecological history as a wetland. Lāhainā was historically known for its aquatic landscape, with common images of boats around Waiola Church, and the Hawaiian fish pond systems.

People in Hawai’i lament Lahaina’s devastation, mourning the loss of its Native Hawaiian history and culture, while also bracing for the lasting impact this tragedy might have on their communities. Kaniela Ing, the national director of the Green New Deal Network, shared his perspective in a recent interview. Mr. Ing emphasizes the historical significance of Lāhainā before colonization, the overthrow of the Hawaiian government by the U.S., and statehood, portraying it as a cultural heartland brimming with indigenous and ecological wisdom that stretches beyond Hawai’i’s borders.

In this fleeting moment where the world’s eyes are focused on Maui, and it is important to underscore the legacy of Maui’s colonial past. In the 18th century, the sugar barons diverted water to irrigate their seized lands. At the same time, colonists introduced invasive grasses, which now blanket 26 percent of Hawai’i’s expanse, serving as explosive fuel for wildfires.

The history of these colonial powers reverberates to the present day. Mr. Ing underscores that descendants of those barons, families like Alexander and Baldwin who descended from the original oligarchs and began the development of vast sugarcane plantations, are the prominent landowners on Maui, furthering a cycle of power and influence.

The legacy of colonization’s diversion of water, coupled with the climate crisis and biodiversity collapse has led to a less resilient ecosystem. As conversations shift toward reconstruction, community members who demonstrate a long-term mindset are seeking to form the leadership for a sustainable future while valuing the Hawai’ian traditions. Beyond Pesticides organizer and one of the founders of the Maui Food Hub, Autumn Ness, says “This is going to be a really long road of need, and the folks that have been displaced are going to need support, especially with shelter in the long term.” (Check out a recent update via Instagram here). 

Kaipo Kekona, indigenous farmer on Maui and president of the Lāhainā Chapter of the Hawai’i Farmers Union United (HFUU), spoke at Beyond Pesticides 2022 National Forum, exemplifies a future that is routed in traditional agriculture. Mr. Kekona is working in Hawai’i to regenerate and sustain traditional farming production on former sugarcane land. He  manages a 12.5 acre-farm site for the Ku’ia Agricultural Education Center in the ahupua’a of Ku’ia on Legacy Lands of Keli’i Kulani (foothills of the West Maui Mountains). Critical to the mission for the site is to not only reclaim space as a native historical food property, but also introduce to the community the practices that encourage a healthier food system and the soil health that forms the foundation of productive land management. Mr. Kepona brings the teachings from indigenous practices that have proven to be resilient, healthy, and respectful of life. He serves as the educational coordinator and project director at the Center. This is a critical time to listen to Mr. Kekona for a vision of a future Maui that nurtures resilience to meet the social, economic, and environmental needs of Hawaiians. Please view Mr. Kekona’s talk on critical issues facing Maui.

The importance of ongoing support for disaster survivors, extending beyond the immediate aftermath, cannot be overstated. The Maui wildfires, touted as Hawai’i’s worst “natural” disaster, reveal connections between historical threads of colonization, climate change, biodiversity loss, and current challenges, urging a united effort to not only rebuild but also reclaim the agency of the affected communities. Click here to support the Maui Food Hub.

HFUU’s Maui Response Fund has been established to support our immediate emergency relief, market restoration, mental health support, and land access initiatives. Maui’s resilience is unwavering, but the need for support is paramount. See HFUU’s Resources for Affected Farmers. 

Please donate here, “Maui Response Fund” in the note section, to help us support Maui’s ʻOhana.

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

Source: Lahaina used to be a wetland

(Beyond Pesticides, August 16, 2023) A study published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research further supports the indication that exposure to organophosphate insecticides (OPs) increases the risk of asthma among the U.S. general population. According to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, “The burden of asthma in the United States falls disproportionately on people with low-income, senior adults, and Black, Hispanic and American Indian/Alaska Native people,” making these groups more susceptible to developing this chronic lung disease upon OP exposure.  

Organophosphorus pesticides have a wide range of biological uses—from insecticides to flame retardants—that make these chemicals ubiquitous, significantly contributing to ecosystem contamination. Furthermore, while organophosphates have less bioaccumulation potential, residues are consistently present in human and animal blood, urine, tissues, and milk. Although research demonstrates that OPs are highly toxic, there remains an inadequate understanding of how OP exposure impacts body systems like the repository system.

The respiratory system is essential to human survival, regulating gas exchange (oxygen-carbon dioxide) in the body to balance acid and base tissue cells for normal function. However, damage to the respiratory system can cause several issues—from asthma and bronchitis to oxidative stress that triggers the development of extra-respiratory manifestations like rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular disease. Therefore, the rise in respiratory illnesses and organophosphate use over the last three decades is highly concerning, especially as research fails to identify an exact cause for the increase in respiratory disease cases.

Focusing on non-institutionalized U.S. adults, researchers gathered representative information on health and nutritional well-being from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). In total, 6,009 adults aged from 20 to 85 years old represented the 313.5 million adults in the non-institutionalized U.S. population. The study detected OP exposure using the urinary concentrations of six metabolites of dialkyl phosphates (DAPs), an indicator of OP concentration in the body. A survey-multivariable logistic regression (SMLR), a generalized weighted quantile sum (WQS) regression, and Bayesian kernel machine regression (BKMR) evaluated the link between OPs and asthma.

The study finds that of the 6,009 participants, 842 participants have asthma. Upon examining urine samples of the 842 patients, four out of the six DAPs were present—dimethyl phosphate (DMP), diethyl phosphate (DEP), dimethyl thiophosphate (DMTP), and dimethyl dithiophosphate (DMDTP)—demonstrating a positive association with asthma in adults. The strongest associations between asthma and OPs occur more strongly among females, non-Hispanic White populations, and individuals lacking physical activity. Thus, OP exposure can elevate asthma risk in the general population.

Working in close contact with pesticides throughout one’s lifetime increases the risk of asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and other respiratory issues. Thus, the connection between pesticides and associated respiratory risks is nothing new, as many studies link pesticide use and residue to various respiratory illnesses. Studies find pesticide exposure can trigger asthma attacks and also causes asthma, as exposure to insecticides before the age of five can increase the risk of asthma diagnosis, with toddlers twice as likely to become asthmatic. Furthermore, Significant disparities in asthma morbidity and mortality disproportionately impact low-income populations, people of color, and children living in inner cities.

Chronic inhalation of agriculture-related dust (e.g., particulates from grains, feed, soils, and biological aerosols from plant and animal matter that may harbor synthetic pesticide and fertilizer residues) can increase airway inflammatory diseases, including asthma, chronic bronchitis, and COPD. The particulates in dust play a part in disease development, but so, too, do the various microbiota that may be part of a dusty agricultural environment. A disruption of the homeostasis of the human microbiome (known as dysbiosis) can increase the risk of asthma and other respiratory diseases. In addition, pesticide exposures can alter the gut microbiome, which mediates a significant portion of the human immune response.

Many researchers, including those in this study, suggest an increase in environmental pollutants like pesticides may be responsible for the influx of respiratory diseases. Regarding this study, OPs have a significant influence on respiratory pathology. This chemical class has a similar mode of action as cholinesterase inhibitors, which means they bind to receptor sites for the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, or AChE, essential to normal nerve impulse transmission. In binding to these receptor sites, cholinesterase inhibitors inactivate AChE and prevent the clearing of acetylcholine. The buildup of acetylcholine can lead to acute impacts, such as uncontrolled, rapid twitching of some muscles, paralyzed breathing, convulsions, and, in extreme cases, death. The compromise of neural transmission can have broad systemic impacts on the function of multiple body systems, including the respiratory system.

This study also adds to the growing body of research demonstrating disproportionate risk to certain population groups from chemical exposure. The stronger association between asthma, OPs, and women highlights sex-specific disparities characterized by chemical metabolization (breakdown) and elimination in the body. OPs 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. Additionally, CDC data establishes women as having a higher prevalence of asthma incidence compared to men. Low-income populations, people of color, and children living in inner cities also experience disproportionately high morbidity and mortality due to asthma. For instance, African Americans are at least three times more likely than whites to die from asthma. Therefore, any time policies allow regulators to permit the use of pesticides with known asthma effects, a disproportionate impact is felt among these communities. 

Despite the difference in methods, the study emphasizes that the data results remain consistent. “Though with different study designs, objectives, and populations, our study found plenty of evidence that is consistent with previous similar studies which explore the complicated associations of OPI metabolites with asthma.” The study concludes, “Our findings suggest that more urinary OPIs exposure may be associated with an increased risk of asthma in the general US adults. Meanwhile, further prospective studies are needed to confirm the causality between OPIs exposure and asthma and explore the potential harm of low-dose but chronic exposure to OPIs in the development of asthma.”

In the U.S., over 25 million people live with asthma. The increasing rate of respiratory pathology since the 1980s demonstrates a need for better environmental policies and protocols surrounding contaminants like pesticides. Considering respiratory diseases represent a significant health issue for agricultural workers—who often experience pesticide exposure at higher rates due to occupation—it is essential to understand the association between pesticide exposure and respiratory pathology or the study of causes and effects of respiratory diseases. Furthermore, with a new report finding an association between air pollution and higher death rates (9%) related to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), global leaders must eliminate excessive pesticide use to mitigate respiratory diseases’ impacts on human health. Policies should enforce stricter pesticide regulations and increase research on the long-term impacts of pesticide exposure. Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent studies related to pesticide exposure through our Pesticide Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). This database supports the clear need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on the multiple harms of pesticides, see PIDD pages on asthma/respiratory effects and other diseases. Learn more about how inadequate pesticide use regulations, including organophosphates, can adversely affect human and environmental health; see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticides and You article “Highly Destructive Pesticide Effects Unregulated.”

Beyond Pesticides advocates a precautionary approach to pest management in land management and agriculture by transiting to organic. Buying, growing, and supporting organic can help eliminate the extensive use of pesticides in the environment and from your diet. For more information on how organic is the right choice for consumers and the farmworkers who grow our food, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture. Removing pesticides from parks that disproportionately affect people of color in the community and as landscapers. Help convert your parks, playing fields, and schoolyards to organic land management through Beyond Pesticides’ Parks for a Sustainable Future program. 

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

Source: Environmental Science and Pollution Research

(Beyond Pesticides, August 14, 2023) Marijuana regulators in the state of Washington issued administrative holds on 18 licenses due to pesticide-contaminated marijuana, forcing producers and processors to cease operations until now. This shutdown of legal marijuana businesses serves as a window into a broader historical backdrop of pesticide issues within the marijuana industry. Within Washington, pesticide concerns have been growing since a study in 2018 of legal marijuana farms in the state had 84.6% (of 26 samples) with significant quantities of pesticides including insecticides, fungicides, miticides, and herbicides. Last year, a national study identified a list of contaminants in 36 states and the District of Columbia and found 551 pesticides within cannabis products. For over a decade, Beyond Pesticides has sounded the alarm about the highly-concentrated levels of pesticides in marijuana products, calling on state officials to require organic marijuana, especially in the context of medical marijuana.

The absence of federal regulations for pesticides in cannabis production has raised significant concerns about exposure risks for recreational and medicinal use, exposure risks to workers, and potential environmental contamination impacting wildlife. Since marijuana is classified as a Schedule 1 narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act, the EPA does not regulate pesticides in cannabis. Despite this federal policy gap, states have taken various state laws and regulations to restrict pesticides in marijuana.

During the years following the scientific breakthroughs catalyzed by chemical warfare in World War II, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) was extensively used to combat mosquitoes and insects harmful to crops, particularly fruits. Unfortunately, this pesticide had unintended consequences, leading to significant bird and insect mortality. Rachel Carson’s influential book, “Silent Spring,” published in 1962, exposed the devastating impact of DDT on the environment, effectively catalyzing the environmental movement. As a result of this awakening, a nationwide prohibition on the agricultural use of DDT was implemented in 1972. Today, the legacy of DDT extends beyond the four-decade-old ban. Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE), is a remnant chemical when DDT breaks down in the soil. The EPA classifies DDE in Group B2 probable human carcinogen, the same category as glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp.

Earlier this year, a chemist from the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board detected elevated levels of DDE in 59 samples of marijuana products. After the board requested recalls for the toxic levels of the pesticide, Okanogan Gold, Bodie Mine, Kibble Junction, and Walden Cannabis issued recalls. Unfortunately, many of the impacted products had already been sold by the time of the recall.

This story may sound familiar, as it has been told many times in Colorado, Oregon, California, and Washington. The Colorado Department of Revenue, the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA), and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, emphasized that the use of unapproved pesticides in marijuana cultivation poses a threat to public health and safety. Beyond Pesticides maintains that even low levels of pesticide residues in marijuana raise serious issues because they are not subject to regulatory review, taking into account multiple chemical exposures, aggregate and synergistic hazards, and health outcomes, such as endocrine disruption, that are not evaluated by state regulators. This is particularly problematic with marijuana, grown with chemical-intensive rather than organic practices, given the crops’ multiple routes of chemical exposure through injection, inhalation, and dermal absorption. Beyond Pesticides has said that, since pesticides in the U.S. are not registered for use in marijuana production, states must not allow their use and default to organic is the only allowable production system.

A similar concern arose in California when the state implemented rigorous cannabis testing protocols. Sequoia Analytical Labs, a cannabis testing facility in Sacramento, faced allegations that its lab director falsified analysis reports for hundreds of cannabis batches sent to retailers. The alleged fraud went undetected for some time, leading to the Bureau of Cannabis Control’s unannounced inspection, during which the lab director admitted to the falsifications. Sequoia subsequently surrendered its 2018 cannabis testing license, hoping to regain it for 2019.

Advocates say these incidents demonstrate a need for comprehensive regulation within the rapidly evolving legal cannabis landscape. The federal classification of marijuana as a Class I illegal substance creates a complex legal environment, with states striving to establish effective legislation and regulation in the face of this federal challenge resulting from a lack of regulatory oversight.

To address these concerns, several states, including Colorado, Washington State, and Oregon, have taken steps to list “allowable” pesticides for marijuana cultivation. In California, comprehensive testing requirements for cannabis have been put in place, covering various pesticides and contaminants. The dynamic nature of the regulatory framework in these states, coupled with events such as the recent Washington recalls, may necessitate further adjustments.

A genuinely precautionary approach to the cannabis industry should extend beyond detecting prohibited contaminants. Given the absence of federal testing for pesticide effects on cannabis consumers, producers, and the environment, states should establish rules for sustainable production practices that safeguard public health and the environment. Beyond Pesticides recommends a systems-level approach to cannabis production, mandating compliance with national organic standards. Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides says, “The only safe path forward to pesticide-free marijuana products must require organic certification.” An organic approach would be prudent, precautionary, and a positive step forward for the cannabis industry. For more information on Beyond Pesticides’ coverage of cannabis and pesticides, visit the Daily News archival page on the topic.

For more information on safety issues and sustainable solutions to using toxic pesticides on cannabis, see Beyond Pesticides’ report.

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

Source: Pesticide Use in Marijuana Production: Safety Issues and Sustainable Options, Washington shutters pot businesses due to old pesticide, Washington legal cannabis farms get back to work after pesticide concerns halted operations

(Beyond Pesticides, August 14 2023) The Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2023 (PACTPA), introduced on July 28, 2023 in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 5085) and previously introduced on February 2, 2023 in the U.S. Senate (S.269), seeks to improve federal pesticide law. Many advocates, while endorsing the Congressional effort, maintain that the law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act—FIFRA) is structurally flawed in not requiring restrictions and the elimination of pesticides for which there are safer alternative practices and products. A key provision in the legislation includes language that affirms local authority to restrict pesticides.

Both the House and Senate bills retain the basic structure of FIFRA, while strengthening various aspects of the current risk assessment-based approach to pesticide restrictions. Risk assessment in the current policy context assumes that pesticides are necessary and sets allowable levels of harm based on inadequate information on chemical effects—and margins of safety that allow for numerous uncertainties and disproportionate effects to vulnerable population groups. Importantly, the legislation does include a provision that grants communities local authority to restrict pesticides on all property, public and private, within their jurisdiction, allowing towns, cities, and counties to move society away from pesticide dependency and transition to organic practices. At the same time, the chemical industry and its allies in Congress are backing legislation, the Agricultural Labeling Uniformity Act (H.R.4288), which institutionalizes federal preemption of state and local authority, enshrining weak pesticide law against the will of local efforts to protect the health and environment of their communities.

As more and more communities across the country outlaw pesticides on their public land, parks, and playing fields, most states prohibit (or preempt) localities from restricting hazardous use on private property. As a result, pesticides used on landscapes—uses that can be replaced by organic management practices—result in chemical drift and runoff, putting the community in harm’s way and people involuntarily exposed. While the U.S. Supreme Court (in Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Mortier) in 1991 found that FIFRA does not preempt local governments’ authority to restrict pesticide use in their town, cities, or counties, state governments have taken that authority away in 44 states at the behest of the pesticide lobby.

Urge your U.S. Representative and Senators to cosponsor PACTPA and reforms to the toxic core of FIFRA, including upholding the right of local governments to restrict pesticides. Or, thank current cosponsors.

A guarantee of local authority is necessary because FIFRA is more protective of the pesticide industry than human and ecological health. The toxic core of FIFRA permits the unnecessary dispersal of toxic chemicals in the environment. If passed, PACTPA will “fix” some major problems, which are symptoms of this toxic core. PACTPA:

* Bans some of the most damaging pesticides scientifically known to cause significant harm to people and the environment:
– Organophosphate insecticides, which are designed to target the neurological system and have been linked to neurodevelopmental damage in children;
– Neonicotinoid insecticides, which have contributed to pollinator collapse around the world (the European Union and Canada have significantly restricted or banned their use to protect pollinators and other wildlife) and have recently been shown to cause developmental defects, heart deformations, and muscle tremors in unborn children;
– Paraquat, which is one of the most acutely toxic herbicides in the world —according to the EPA, just “one sip can kill.” Science has shown that chronic exposure to paraquat increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease by 200% to 600%. It is already banned in 32 countries, including the European Union.

* Removes dangerous pesticides from the market by:
– Creating a petition process to enable individual citizens to petition the EPA to identify dangerous pesticides so that the EPA would no longer be able to indefinitely allow dangerous pesticides to remain on the market;
– Closing dangerous loopholes that have allowed the EPA to issue emergency exemptions and conditional registrations to use pesticides before they have gone through full health and safety review by the agency;
– Enabling local communities to enact protective legislation and other policies without being vetoed or preempted by state law;
– Suspending the use of pesticides deemed unsafe by the E.U. or Canada until they are thoroughly reviewed by the EPA.

* Provides protections for frontline communities that bear the burden of pesticide exposure by:
– Requiring employers of farmworkers to report all pesticide-caused injuries to the EPA, with strong penalties for failure to report injuries or retaliating against workers;
– Directing the EPA to review pesticide injury reports and work with the pesticide manufacturers to develop btter labeling to prevent future injury;
– Requiring that all pesticide label instructions be written in Spanish and in any language spoken by more than 500 pesticide applicators.

Despite this impressive list of reforms, PACTPA does not touch the toxic core of FIFRA, which permits the unnecessary dispersal of toxic chemicals in the environment, regardless of the availability of regenerative organic management practices and products. To eliminate this toxic core, Congress must pass legislation to:

* Prohibit the registration and use of pesticides that do not meet these criteria:
– Necessary to prevent harm to humans and the environment based on an analysis of all alternatives;
– Cause no harm to humans and the environment; and
– Protect against the existential crises of biodiversity collapse, runaway climate change, and chronic and acute health threats.

* Require all supporting data to be submitted and examined by the public before registration (including the elimination of conditional registration).
* Deny and cancel all pesticide registrations not supported by studies demonstrating a lack of endocrine-disrupting effects.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to life in the soil—and hence threatening the climate.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to any endangered species.

Urge your U.S. Representative and Senators to cosponsor PACTPA and reforms to the toxic core of FIFRA, including upholding the right of local governments to restrict pesticides. Or, thank current cosponsors.

And, If  You Have Not Already. . . .Help stop the pesticide lobby from enshrining in federal law a prohibition on local authority to restrict pesticides. See Parts I and II below:

Part I: Tell your local officials to sign onto a letter opposing the preemption language | Part 2: Tell your U.S. Representative and Senators to support communities by opposing anti-democratic preemption language in the 2023 Farm Bill.

Part II: Tell Congress to support communities by opposing anti-democratic preemption language in the 2023 Farm Bill.

Letter to Members of  Congress who are not yet cosponsors:

I am writing to ask you to cosponsor the Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2023 (PACTPA—S. 269). PACTPA provides urgently-needed fixes of serious problems with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Crucially, it protects the right of local governments to protect citizens when EPA fails to act.

If passed, PACTPA will “fix” some major problems, which are symptoms of underlying problems in FIFRA. PACTPA:

* Bans some of the most damaging pesticides scientifically known to cause significant harm to people and the environment:
– Organophosphate insecticides, which are designed to target the neurological system and have been linked to neurodevelopmental damage in children;
– Neonicotinoid insecticides, which have contributed to pollinator collapse around the world (the European Union and Canada have significantly restricted or banned their use to protect pollinators and other wildlife) and have recently been shown to cause developmental defects, heart deformations, and muscle tremors in unborn children;
– Paraquat, which is one of the most acutely toxic herbicides in the world —according to the EPA, just “one sip can kill.” Science has shown that chronic exposure to paraquat increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease by 200% to 600%. It is already banned in 32 countries, including the European Union.

* Removes dangerous pesticides from the market by:
– Creating a petition process to enable individual citizens to petition the EPA to identify dangerous pesticides so that the EPA would no longer be able to indefinitely allow dangerous pesticides to remain on the market;
– Closing dangerous loopholes that have allowed the EPA to issue emergency exemptions and conditional registrations to use pesticides before they have gone through full health and safety review by the agency;
– Enabling local communities to enact protective legislation and other policies without being vetoed or preempted by state law;
– Suspending the use of pesticides deemed unsafe by the E.U. or Canada until they are thoroughly reviewed by the EPA.

* Provides protections for frontline communities that bear the burden of pesticide exposure by:
– Requiring employers of farmworkers to report all pesticide-caused injuries to the EPA, with strong penalties for failure to report injuries or retaliating against workers;
– Directing the EPA to review pesticide injury reports and work with the pesticide manufacturers to develop better labeling to prevent future injury;
– Requiring that all pesticide label instructions be written in Spanish and in any language spoken by more than 500 pesticide applicators.

Despite this impressive list of reforms, PACTPA does not touch the toxic core of FIFRA, which permits the unnecessary dispersal of toxic chemicals in the environment, regardless of the availability of regenerative organic management practices. To eliminate this toxic core, I ask you to introduce legislation to:

* Prohibit the registration and use of pesticides that do not meet these criteria:
– Necessary to prevent harm to humans and the environment based on an analysis of all alternatives;
– Cause no harm to humans and the environment; and
– Protect against the existential crises of biodiversity collapse, runaway climate change, and chronic and acute health threats.

* Require all supporting data to be submitted and examined by the public before registration (including the elimination of conditional registration).
* Deny and cancel all pesticide registrations not supported by studies demonstrating a lack of endocrine-disrupting effects.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to life in the soil—and hence threatening the climate.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to any endangered species.

Thank you.

Letter to Congressional cosponsors of PACTPA:

Thank you for sponsoring the Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2023 (PACTPA). PACTPA provides urgently-needed fixes of serious problems with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Crucially, it protects the right of local governments to protect citizens when EPA fails to act.

If passed, PACTPA will “fix” some major problems, which are symptoms of underlying problems in FIFRA. PACTPA:

* Bans some of the most damaging pesticides scientifically known to cause significant harm to people and the environment:
– Organophosphate insecticides, which are designed to target the neurological system and have been linked to neurodevelopmental damage in children;
– Neonicotinoid insecticides, which have contributed to pollinator collapse around the world (the European Union and Canada have significantly restricted or banned their use to protect pollinators and other wildlife) and have recently been shown to cause developmental defects, heart deformations, and muscle tremors in unborn children;
– Paraquat, which is one of the most acutely toxic herbicides in the world —according to the EPA, just “one sip can kill.” Science has shown that chronic exposure to paraquat increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease by 200% to 600%. It is already banned in 32 countries, including the European Union.

* Removes dangerous pesticides from the market by:|
– Creating a petition process to enable individual citizens to petition the EPA to identify dangerous pesticides so that the EPA would no longer be able to indefinitely allow dangerous pesticides to remain on the market;
– Closing dangerous loopholes that have allowed the EPA to issue emergency exemptions and conditional registrations to use pesticides before they have gone through full health and safety review by the agency;
– Enabling local communities to enact protective legislation and other policies without being vetoed or preempted by state law;
– Suspending the use of pesticides deemed unsafe by the E.U. or Canada until they are thoroughly reviewed by the EPA.

* Provides protections for frontline communities that bear the burden of pesticide exposure by:
– Requiring employers of farmworkers to report all pesticide-caused injuries to the EPA, with strong penalties for failure to report injuries or retaliating against workers;|– Directing the EPA to review pesticide injury reports and work with the pesticide manufacturers to develop btter label|
– Requiring that all pesticide label instructions be written in Spanish and in any language spoken by more than 500 pesticide applicators.

Despite this impressive list of reforms, PACTPA does not touch the toxic core of FIFRA, which permits the unnecessary dispersal of toxic chemicals in the environment, regardless of the availability of regenerative organic management practices and products. To eliminate this toxic core, I ask you to introduce legislation to:

* Prohibit the registration and use of pesticides that do not meet these criteria:
– Necessary to prevent harm to humans and the environment based on an analysis of all alternatives;
– Cause no harm to humans and the environment; and
– Protect against the existential crises of biodiversity collapse, runaway climate change, and chronic and acute health threats.

* Require all supporting data to be submitted and examined by the public before registration (including the elimination of conditional registration).
* Deny and cancel all pesticide registrations not supported by studies demonstrating a lack of endocrine-disrupting effects.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to life in the soil—and hence threatening the climate.
* Deny and cancel registrations of all pesticides posing a threat to any endangered species.

Thank you.

(Beyond Pesticides, August 11, 2023) Reinforcing earlier findings, a systematic review published in Chemosphere finds the popular herbicide glyphosate and its formulations (glyphosate-based formulations-GBF) exhibit five out of the ten key characteristics (KC) of carcinogens (cancer-causing chemicals). Specifically, glyphosate exhibits strong evidence of genotoxicity, epigenetic alterations (heritable changes in gene expression), oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, endocrine disruption, and disturbs gut microbiota implicated in lymphomagenesis (growth and development of lymphoma). Although organizations like the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) designate glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, and scientific literature supports the findings on these adverse effects purported by glyphosate, the chemical remains on the U.S. market in various formulations.

Glyphosate is the most commonly used active ingredient worldwide, appearing in many herbicide formulas, not just Bayer’s (formerly Monsanto) Roundup®. The use of this chemical has been increasing since the inception of crops genetically modified to tolerate glyphosate over two decades ago. The toxic herbicide readily contaminates the ecosystem with residues pervasive in food and water commodities. In addition to this study, literature proves time and time again that glyphosate has an association with cancer development, as well as human, biotic, and ecosystem harm. Therefore, advocates point to the need for national policies to reassess hazards associated with disease development and diagnosis resulting from or exacerbated by exposure to chemical pollutants. The study highlights, “Our findings strengthen the mechanistic evidence that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen and provide biological plausibility for previously reported cancer associations in humans, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma.”

Using in vivo, ex vivo, and in vitro human and mammalian mechanistic studies, researchers compare exposure to glyphosate/GBF with little to no exposure counterparts for evidence of the ten KCs of carcinogens. All known human carcinogens have one or more of the ten KCs, and these mechanisms cause cancer through,

1. Electrophilic (an affinity towards electrons) or metabolic activation (KC1),
2. Genotoxicity (KC2),
3. Alterations in DNA repair, causing genome instability (KC3),
4. Inducing epigenetic changes (KC4),
5. Inducing oxidative stress (KC5),
6. Inducing chronic inflammation (KC6),
7. Immunosuppression (KC7),
8. Reducing receptor-mediated effects/endocrine disruption (KC8),
9. Immortalizing cancer cells (KC9),
10. Alterations in cell proliferation, death, or nutrient supply (KC10).

Researchers screened all in vivo, ex vivo, and in vitro studies of glyphosate/GBF exposure in humans/mammals, reporting any KC-related outcome available in PubMed before August 2021. The researchers used the selected studies to construct a matrix, analyzing the matrix in program R to determine the strength of evidence and quality assessments. Although only 175 of the 2,537 articles met inclusion criteria, the researchers extracted over 50,000 data points related to the aforementioned KC outcomes.

The results of the analysis find strong evidence for KC2, KC4, KC5, KC6, and KC8, limited evidence for KC1 and KC3, and inadequate evidence for KC7, KC9, and KC10. Specifically, genotoxicity (KC2) and endocrine disruption (KC8) from GBF have the strongest association with carcinogenicity. The reviewed studies demonstrate that the evidence of genotoxicity is stronger among humans than in animal studies, with GBF having a greater impact on both study groups than just glyphosate alone. Additionally, the review indicates glyphosate can alter hormone (endocrine) levels and receptor activity, with the estrogen receptors being most sensitive to glyphosate and GBFs.

Almost five decades of extensive glyphosate-based herbicide (GBH) use has put human, animal, and environmental health at risk. The chemical’s ubiquity threatens 93 percent of all U.S. endangered species, resulting in biodiversity loss and ecosystem disruption (e.g., soil erosion and loss of services). Exposure to GBHs has implications for specific alterations in microbial gut composition and trophic cascades. Similar to this paper, past studies find a strong association between glyphosate exposure and the development of various health anomalies, including cancer, Parkinson’s disease, 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. Thus, EPA’s classification perpetuates environmental injustice among individuals disproportionately exposed to chemicals like farmworkers, especially in marginalized communities. Chemical companies knowingly fail and continue to fail to warn farmers adequately about the dangers of glyphosate. Additionally, the manufacturer’s (Bayer/Monsanto) discredited chemical review conclusions challenge the European Union research.

The territory for research on pesticides’ potential carcinogenicity and other impacts on human health is exceedingly complicated. Yet there is some convergence across research that exposure to certain pesticides increases the risk of developing some cancers. The association that has been in the blinding spotlight for the past few years is between exposures to glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides and the risk of developing cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL). Beyond Pesticides has covered the mounting evidence of the dangers of glyphosate, including a meta-study that suggests a compelling link between exposures to glyphosate-based herbicides and increased risk of NHL.

In addition, Beyond Pesticides has traced the developments in the science and regulatory arena, including:

• the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 2015 landmark designation of glyphosate as potentially carcinogenic
• Evidence that EPA colluded with Monsanto (maker of Roundup, the most widely used glyphosate-based herbicide) to advantage industry and that Monsanto had ghostwritten research that countered scientific conclusions on the cancer associations of the compound,
• and California’s 2017 listing of glyphosate under Proposition 65 as a probable carcinogen and a 2018 Appellate Court affirmation of its ability to do so.

Glyphosate has been the subject of public advocacy, regulatory attention, and the target of thousands of lawsuits. (Beyond Pesticides has covered the glyphosate tragedy extensively; see its litigation archives for multiple articles on glyphosate lawsuits.) In June 2020, facing approximately 125,000 suits for Roundup’s role in cancer outcomes, Bayer announced a $10 billion settlement to resolve roughly 75% of current and potential future litigation. However, roughly 30,000 complainants ultimately did not sign on to the settlement, so the queue of potential lawsuits is still potentially enormous. Although Bayer tried for a second settlement (~ $2 billion) to handle future claims, a U.S. District Court judge for the Northern District of California rejected Bayer’s 2021 settlement proposal. The judge stated that the settlement was inadequate for future victims diagnosed with cancer after using the herbicide. Bayer has never acknowledged any harm caused by glyphosate, maintaining the chemical is safe for use. However, in July 2021, Bayer announced its plan to end sales of its glyphosate-based herbicides (including its flagship product, Roundup) in the domestic U.S. residential lawn and garden market in 2023. Under the plan, uses in food production will continue.

The results of the systemic review highlight an all too familiar issue. Despite these concerning data, evidence of widespread exposure to a carcinogen has failed to sway regulators at EPA, necessitating meaningful change by elected officials to reform pesticide law. Scientists highlight epidemiological evidence associating glyphosate with blood cancers like non-Hodgkin lymphoma and strong evidence of carcinogenicity in laboratory animal research brought on by genotoxicity (DNA damage) and oxidative stress. In 2015, the IARC Working Group demonstrated glyphosate has strong evidence of genotoxicity (KC2) and oxidative stress (KC5). However, recent studies providing additional data supports evidence of KC2 and KC5, as well as epigenetic changes (KC4), chronic inflammation (KC6), and endocrine disruption (KC8) regarding glyphosate and GBF. Thus, glyphosate presents evidence of all five KCs of carcinogens. Although there is limited or inadequate evidence for the remaining KCs, the review encourages further examination of the effects of glyphosate and other chemicals through all ten KCs and its relation to lymphoid cancers. 

The study concludes, “Overall, the mechanistic evidence for glyphosate and GBFs possessing multiple key characteristics of carcinogens has become stronger since IARC’s evaluation in 2015 and implicates several pathways by which these substances could induce cancer, such as lymphoma, in humans. […][O]ur understanding of glyphosate’s effects using the KCs paves the way for exploring the intricate mechanisms underlying its potential pathway to lymphoma.”

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, with over eight million people succumbing to the disease every year. Notably, IARC predicts an increase in new cancer cases from 19.3 million to 30.2 million per year by 2040. Therefore, studies related to pesticides and cancer will aid in understanding the underlying mechanisms that cause the disease. Beyond Pesticides challenges the registration of chemicals like glyphosate in court due to their impacts on soil, air, water, and our health. While legal battles press on, government officials must eliminate the use of toxic synthetic herbicides to avoid the adverse effects of chemical exposure and contamination. Instead, emphasis on converting to regenerative-organic systems, using least-toxic pest control to mitigate harmful pesticide use, restore soil health, reduce carbon emissions, and increase carbon sequestration should be the main focus. Public policy must advance a shift to organic, rather than allow unnecessary reliance on pesticides. Considering glyphosate levels in the human body decrease by 70% through a one-week switch to an organic diet, purchasing organic food whenever possible—which never allows glyphosate use—can help curb exposure and resulting adverse health effects.

It is essential to understand the health implications of pesticide use and exposure for humans, especially when pesticides increase chronic disease risk. Beyond Pesticides tracks news and studies related to pesticides through the Daily News Blog and Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). This database supports the clear need for strategic action to shift from pesticide dependency. For more information on the adverse effects of pesticides on human health, see PIDD pages on cancer (including lymphoma) and other diseases. 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 on glyphosate/Roundup at Beyond Pesticides’ 36th National Pesticide Forum. Help convert your town to organic land management through Beyond Pesticides’ Parks for a Sustainable Future program.

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

Source: Chemosphere

(Beyond Pesticides, August 10, 2023) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Safer Choice program, a voluntary labeling program, has announced an opportunity for public comment on new areas of work—opening up a public discussion of priorities for identifying less toxic products in the marketplace. EPA describes the labeling program as a part of its Pollution Prevention (P2) program, which, according to the agency, “includes practices that reduce, eliminate, or prevent pollution at its source, such as using safer ingredients in products.” A July 17 Federal Registration Notice, Stakeholder Engagement Opportunity for the Safer Choice and Design for the Environment (DfE) Programs’ Potential Expansion Into New Product Categories, announces a public listening session August 28, and a public comment deadline of September 11, 2023

In the face of existential health, biodiversity, and climate crises, advocates say that the question before EPA is whether strict systemic measures will be adopted to meet the urgency of the crises. This will require the quick phase out of hazardous substances that are contributing to the existential crises (including petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers). While the Safer Choice program can identify practices and products that are not harmful to health, biodiversity, and climate, it is a labeling rather than a regulatory program that can mandate an elimination of known hazards. As a labeling program, the Safer Choice program is not typically incorporated into the regulatory review process, although it could be. Under the “unreasonable adverse effects” standard of the federal pesticide law (the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA]), regulators could determine that the registration of a toxic substance is unreasonable in light of the availability of alternative practices and products identified by the Safe Choice program.

Safer Choice bills itself as a pollution prevention program. The program is a part of the agency’s pollution prevention program that describes itself as including the elements of eliminating hazardous materials and preventive practices that stop the uses of known toxic substances. According to the program, “Pollution prevention (P2), also known as source reduction, is any practice that reduces, eliminates, or prevents pollution at its source prior to recycling, treatment or disposal.”

In its Master Criteria for Safer Ingredients, the Safer Choice program spells out the purpose of the criteria:

“The Safer Choice Master Criteria for Safer Ingredients (Master Criteria) are comprehensive, science-based criteria designed to ensure that the safest possible ingredients are used in Safer Choice products. Safer Choice evaluates every ingredient in a formulation within its functional class context and based on its key, distinguishing human health and environmental characteristics. In this way, potential product ingredients can be viewed as part of a continuum of improved or safer ingredient choices. These criteria also enhance the transparency of the Safer Choice Program.

The Master Criteria make it possible to draw a line demarcating the greener or “low-concern” end of the continuum of chemical safety. To define low concern, Safer Choice uses toxicological thresholds established by highly respected health and environmental protection authorities, including the United Nation’s Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for the Classification and Labeling of Hazard Substances and the U.S. EPA’s New Chemicals Program. For functional classes where no low-concern ingredients currently exist, Safer Choice works with its stakeholders to carefully modify the Master Criteria in a way that allows for ingredient choices while ensuring the safest possible ingredients in that functional class. These criteria were designed for use in distinguishing safer chemicals for the Safer Choice Program.

Safer Choice product review is chemistry and toxicology intensive, calling on the extensive expertise of the EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. The Office’s depth of expertise helps ensure that chemicals are fully and accurately characterized based on the best available information. Information for the review is drawn from peer-reviewed literature, primary source materials, hazardous chemical lists, Agency databases, and predictive tools which estimate potential human health and environmental concerns based on a chemical’s structural and/or biological similarity to known chemicals of concern. EPA will consider all sources of developing information, such as the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program or enhancements to estimation models such as EPI Suite™ that occur over time.”

EPA’s pollution prevention program explains its approaches as follows:

“Pollution prevention approaches can be applied to all potential and actual pollution-generating activities, including those found in the energy, agriculture, federal, consumer and industrial sectors. Prevention practices are essential for preserving wetlands, groundwater sources and other critical ecosystems – areas in which we especially want to stop pollution before it begins.”

In the energy sector, pollution prevention can reduce environmental damages from extraction, processing, transport and combustion of fuels. Pollution prevention approaches include:

• increasing efficiency in energy use;
• use of environmentally benign fuel sources.

In the agricultural sector, pollution prevention approaches include:

• Reducing the use of water and chemical inputs;
• Adoption of less environmentally harmful pesticides or cultivation of crop strains with natural resistance to pests; and
• Protection of sensitive areas.

In the industrial sector, examples of P2 practices include:

• Modifying a production process to produce less waste
• Using non-toxic or less toxic chemicals as cleaners, degreasers and other maintenance chemicals
• Implementing water and energy conservation practices
• Reusing materials such as drums and pallets rather than disposing of them as waste

In homes and schools examples of P2 practices include:

• Using reusable water bottles instead of throw-aways
• Automatically turning off lights when not in use
• Repairing leaky faucets and hoses
• Switching to “green” cleaners

The Safer Choice program, which was launched as a label under the Design for the Environment in the early 1990s, intersects with the Federal Sustainability Plan announced in President Biden’s Executive Order 14057. While focused on clean jobs in response to the climate crisis, the plan sets goals for the federal government:

• 100% Carbon Pollution-Free Electricity by 2030, including 50% on a 24/7 basis
• 100% Zero-Emission Vehicle Acquisitions by 2035, including 100% light-duty acquisitions by 2027
• Net-Zero Emissions Buildings by 2045, including a 50% reduction by 2032
• Net-Zero Emissions Procurement by 2050
• Net-Zero Emissions Operations by 2050, including a 65% reduction by 2030
• Climate Resilient Infrastructure and Operations
• Develop a Climate- and Sustainability-Focused Workforce
• Advance Environmental Justice and Equity-Focused Operations
• Accelerate Progress through Domestic and International Partnerships

Labeling is a beginning to help move markets. As a purchaser of products, the federal government can elevate products that meet clear sustainability standards. However, with U.S. and global pollution, including pollution from pesticides and fertilizers, exceeding safe limits for humanity, labeling and federal purchasing does not meet the challenge, according to advocates. And, beyond product purchasing, meeting the current challenge requires that the federal government dramatically alter its approach to the management of all federal lands (from the National Park Service to the National Forest Service, National Wildlife Refuges, and Bureau of Land Management) to regenerative organic practices that meet certified organic standards under the National Organic Program.

With the public comment period open for the Safer Choice program, the public can advise, for example, that the program evaluate fertilizers and educate the public on the harm caused by synthetic petrochemical fertilizer production and use on farms, gardens, lawns, and landscapes.

Public advocacy is needed to integrate the findings of Safer Choice into the regulatory decision-making process across agencies that currently allow the use of hazardous materials and practices that can be replaced by organic-compatible practices and products.

Market-driven labeling has effected changes in the availability of products. Organic labeling helped the organic market grow to a $68 billion market under the Organic Food Production Act and the guidance of the National Organic Standards Board. However, the public interest goal is not to continue as a voluntary program in the market but to incorporate the findings of alternative products and practices into regulatory decision making, which currently defaults to the assumption that toxic practices are necessary to achieve productivity and profitability goals, when that has been proven –as a result of the voluntary organic certification program—to be untrue. The petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers have been proven to be unnecessary.

At the same time that the public pushes to expand and tighten the Safer Choice program, it must serve as the basis for findings that harmful chemicals and practices should be ended as a matter of law, not voluntary action. In some cases, EPA may be able to incorporate Safer Choice criteria into preexisting regulatory standards. For example, EPA could modify its regulations under FIFRA to state that any pesticide that does not meet Safer Choice criteria poses an unreasonable risk. In other cases, it may require Congressional action.

Beyond Pesticides maintains a database of organic-compatible practices that are practical and cost-effective. See ManageSafe for Least-Toxic Control f Pesticides in the Home and Garden. Help convert all your community public spaces, parks, playing fields, and schoolyards to organic land management by working with Parks for a Sustainable Future.

Plan to comment by September 11, 2023 during the Safer Choice comment period. 

Virtual Listening Session: You must register by 5 p.m. EST on August 28, 2023 at https://abtassociates.webex.com/​weblink/​register/​r3055e675f25be841c60ff1a37c70118d to receive the webcast meeting link and audio teleconference information before the meeting, [Virtual Listening Session date: August 29, 2023, 2:00–3:00 p.m. EST.]

Special Accommodations: To request accommodation for a disability, please contact the

Taylor Dunivin, Safer Choice Program (7409M), Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 566–0580; email address: [email protected].

Written Comments: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2023–0311, through https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/​dockets.

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

 Source: Stakeholder Engagement Opportunity for the Safer Choice and Design for the Environment (DfE) Programs’ Potential Expansion Into New Product Categories

(Beyond Pesticides, August 9, 2023) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have agreed to assess the harms of applying pesticides in waterways to threatened and endangered wildlife under a legal agreement with the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). Under the Clean Water Act, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit is needed when pollutants are discharged from a point source (an identifiable source) into the “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS), but federal authorities, in their general permitting process, have long failed to assess effects to threatened and endangered species.

According to the terms of the settlement agreement, FWS must complete consultations required under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to prevent harm to protected species such as bull trout, pallid sturgeon, Oregon spotted frogs, and other threatened aquatic organisms. 

The agreement is a step in implementing the 1973 ESA, a law that is saving numerous species from extinction, facilitating the recovery of hundreds more, and enabling the preservation of habitats. The humpback whale, bald eagle, and snail darter are among the species that have been saved thanks to the ESA. For years, Beyond Pesticides has reported on decades of neglecting to fully implement and fund the ESA. 

In 2021, CBD filed a lawsuit in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on the 2021 Pesticide General Permit (PGP) for Discharges from the Application of Pesticides. The lawsuit challenged EPA’s failure to complete a required endangered species consultation with FWS prior to issuing a 2021 pesticide general PGP permit. PGP is a permit process within the NPDES permit process. The NPDES program is designed to control and manage the discharge of pollutants, such as pesticides, into U.S. waters and protect water quality and aquatic life. The lawsuit also challenged the permit process for failing to comply with monitoring and recordkeeping obligations under the Clean Water Act.

PGP targets biological and chemical pesticides that leave a residue in water bodies for the following uses: (1) flying insect pest control, including mosquito control; (2) aquatic weed and algae control; (3) aquatic nuisance animal control; and (4) forest canopy pest control. Biological pesticides are derived from living organisms and are used for pest control. Examples include certain bacteria, fungi, and viruses that target specific pests. Chemical pesticides, on the other hand, are synthetic substances designed to kill or control pests.

PGP sets out regulations and requirements for entities, such as industries or agricultural operations, that apply directly to water for the aforementioned uses. Overall, the NPDES general permit for pesticides plays a crucial role in safeguarding water resources and protecting aquatic species from the potential adverse effects of pesticide discharges. However, the program falls short of protecting 56 percent of streams that are sampled by the U.S. Geological Survey, and contain one or more pesticides that exceed water quality standards. 

The PGP permit is issued by EPA every five years. It establishes the requirements for pesticide applications directly to water for purposes such as aquatic weed control, mosquito spraying, and forest canopy pest control. In the 2021 lawsuit, CBD alleges that FWS failed to complete endangered species consultations, even when requested by the EPA. Under the new agreement, FWS will complete consultations prior to the finalization of the next permit (no later than 2025).

The agreement also requires that EPA take additional actions to improve pollution monitoring and other permit compliance requirements under the Clean Water Act to protect freshwater species against harm from these pesticide applications between now and 2025.

In finalizing the permit, EPA did complete consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service. As a result, the permit already includes protections for oceangoing species like Pacific salmon and steelhead. Consultation with FWS under this legal agreement will expand these protections to dozens of freshwater species.

“This agreement is important progress for improving the health of our rivers and streams and the incredible critters that rely on them,” said Hannah Connor, an attorney at CBD. “My hope is that it will be a wake-up call for the Fish and Wildlife Service to fully embrace its critical role in preventing harm from pesticides to protected species.”

In a related issue, President Joe Biden vetoed a bill passed by Congress that would have narrowed the definition of waterways under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act and the NPDES process. The U.S. House of Representatives’ Republican majority voted on March 9 and the Senate voted on March 29 to overturn a Biden administration rule that expands the definition of and protections for the “waters of the United States.” The rule, Revised Definition of Waters of the United States, clarifies that thousands of wetlands, smaller streams, and other kinds of waterways are included under the Clean Water Act’s protection provisions. The attempted Congressional rollback in March would have put at greater risk the nation’s waterways from all sorts of pollution, including the more than 90% of the nation’s rivers and streams that are contaminated with five or more pesticides, according to Beyond Pesticides 2020 coverage. See Daily News on legislation.

Two ways that you can combat the negative impacts of pesticides on wildlife are to (1) implement organic practices for your own lawn and garden, and (2) support organic agriculture, rather than conventional agriculture, which relies on pesticide use. Beyond Pesticides supports organic agriculture as effecting good land stewardship and reducing wildlife’s hazardous chemical exposures. The pesticide reform movement, citing pesticide problems associated with chemical agriculture — from groundwater contamination and runoff to drift — views organic as the solution to these serious environmental threats. You can transition your communities’ public spaces to organic land management by becoming a parks advocate. Sign up today to learn how to protect children, pets, and pollinators in your local parks, playing fields, and other public spaces. 

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

Source: Legal Agreement Will Help Protect Endangered Wildlife From Pesticides Applied to Waterways

(Beyond Pesticides, August 8, 2023) A study published in PLOS ONE finds a pointed, positive association between chronic kidney disease (CKD) of unknown origins (CKDu) and the use of indoor pesticides. Longer exposure times have an especially detrimental impact on kidney function, even among individuals without underlying diseases like diabetes mellitus and hypertension. The innovation of this study’s purpose highlights the lack of exposure-related studies on kidney health outcomes associated with indoor pesticide use.

Although CKD risk increases with age and is associated with other health factors like smoking, heart disease, and diabetes, cases without clear causes are increasingly common, indicating that environmental factors are likely playing a role. Over six million people in the U.S. have kidney disease (i.e., nephritis [kidney inflammation], nephrotic syndrome [improper protein filtration], and nephrosis). Although many studies find an association between exposure to outdoor environmental contaminants like pesticides and CKD, the association between CKDu and indoor pesticides—whose uses are more commonly concentrated in homes— remains unclear. Therefore, studies like this highlight the need for comprehensive information regarding co-occurring exposure patterns and disease prevalence that can have global implications. 

The study notes, “Previous research has highlighted the potential harm of pesticides on kidney function, particularly in outdoor uses. Our findings raise concerns about the impact of indoor pesticide use on kidney function in individuals without common risk factors for CKD. Further, longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the effects of indoor pesticide use on kidney health outcomes and to determine safe dosage levels for these substances.”

The growing epidemic of CKDu globally, especially among residents of agricultural communities, has scientists questioning the cause of CKDu and if pesticide use plays a role in disease prognosis.  Using a population-based study, the Prospective Epidemiological Research Studies in Iran, the researchers tested individuals to estimate a glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 to indicate CKDu. Researchers obtained data on indoor pesticide use and duration of exposure through a questionnaire. After excluding subjects with diabetes mellitus and/or hypertension, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 60-89 ml/min/1.73 m2, and unavailable creatinine measurement, 1079 subjects remained in the study.

The results find that the prevalence of CKD in females was 2.6 times higher than in male subjects. The duration of exposure to indoor use of pesticides is significantly higher in subjects in the CKDu group than those in the non-CKDu group (50.3% and 40.8%, respectively). Additionally, single women participating in low physical activity, with triglyceride (TG) levels of more than 150 mg/dl, a body mass index (BMI) of more than 25 kg/m2, a non-smoker, and high pesticide exposure time for indoor pesticide use have a greater association with CKDu. The most significant factors in the multivariable analysis are age, sex, TG levels of more than 150 mg/dl, pesticide use, and high pesticide exposure time.

Many studies document pesticides’ impacts on kidney function, finding a range of chemicals linked to kidney damage. Even among the 40 most commonly used lawn care pesticides, 80 percent have associations with kidney or liver damage. These chemicals include widely used herbicides like glyphosate and organophosphate insecticides like malathion. Glyphosate was initially created as a chelating agent (bonding ions and molecules to metal ions) to form strong chemical bonds with metals.

In 2013, the Center for Public Integrity highlighted that glyphosate bonds with toxic heavy metals in the environment, such as cadmium and arsenic, forming stable compounds. These compounds are present in food and water for consumption and do not break down until they reach the kidneys. Thus, farmworkers exposed to glyphosate are likely to have these toxic metals in their kidneys. In 2019, researchers Sararath Guanatilake, MD, and Channa Jayasumana, Ph.D., were awarded the Freedom and Responsibility Award from the American Association of the Advancement of Science for their work uncovering the link between glyphosate and chronic kidney disease.

Another pesticide, malathion, has recently been cited for its close link to kidney damage. Individuals may encounter malathion through consuming food produced in chemical-dependent agriculture or drinking water or as a result of drift from pesticide application and public use. A study published in October 2021 found significant associations with malathion exposure, low kidney function, and increased risk of CKD. A 2022 study found that 68 percent of well water sampled in Sri Lanka (south-east Asian) contains at least one pesticide above the global drinking water guidelines, including the organophosphate insecticide diazinon. Individuals reporting drinking well water during their lifetime have significantly (6.7 times) lower kidney health on average than those who never drank well water. With researchers now finding evidence that pesticide-contaminated well water may be a source of kidney dysfunction, it is evident that pesticide mitigation measures must protect those in intensive agricultural areas from pesticide exposure. While there is a desire to neatly separate bad from good actors in environmental ‘mysteries,’ including chronic kidney disease and the ongoing decline of pollinators, it is evident that in a world awash in chemicals, it is a combination of these factors that is likely at play. Therefore, protection from pesticide exposure is critical for those working and living in chemical-intensive agricultural areas.

The study finds longer exposure to indoor pesticides is more frequent among patients with CKDu, with a history of indoor pesticide use having 1.36 times higher odds of CKDu. Although previous studies report the prevalence of CKDu is 1.7 times higher among women than men, this study highlights a greater prevalence of CKDu (2.6 times higher) among female patients, demonstrating a possible uptick in CKDu odds. In fact, the study used multivariable models, including indoor use of pesticides (model 1) and duration of exposure to indoor pesticides (model 2), to determine the odds of having CKDu, with the disease odds increasing 7.5 and 8.6 times among the respective models. The study suggests the disproportionate risk of CKDu to women may be because women spend more time at home in pesticide-treated areas, increasing the risk of pesticide exposure. Moreover, patients who experience the highest quartile of pesticide exposure duration in the study have a 1.64 times higher risk of developing CKDu compared to individuals who never used indoor pesticides.

Thus, the study concludes, “This finding emphasizes the role of cumulative exposure dose at a specific time on kidney function. Although we cannot comment on safe threshold dose of house use of pesticides, as this was not in our study scope, but finding the safe use threshold of these materials could be of great interest that could be evaluated in longitudinal studies.”

The kidneys are one of the most important organs for filtering waste out of the  human body. However, kidneys are often the main target of pesticide toxicity mediated through oxidative stress. Therefore, we must protect human and ecological health by shifting to organic/regenerative systems to limit exposure to these toxic chemicals. Additionally, buying, growing, and supporting organic can help eliminate the extensive use of pesticides in the environment. Organic agriculture has many health and environmental benefits, eliminating the need for chemical-intensive agricultural practices. Considering pesticide levels in the human body can decrease by 70% through a one-week switch to an organic diet, purchasing organic food whenever possible—which eliminates toxic pesticide use—limits overall exposure (toxic body burden) and resulting adverse health effects. Learn about pesticides’ impacts on human health by visiting Beyond Pesticides’ pages on kidney/renal cancer and disease, oxidative stress, and other diseases in the Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database. This database supports the need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on how organic is the right choice for consumers and farmers, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture. 

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

Source: PLOS ONE

(Beyond Pesticides, August 7, 2023) Why is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowing the use of pesticides under the “unreasonable adverse effects” to health or the environment standard of the federal pesticide law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA]) if the pesticides quickly lose their efficacy? Pest resistance to pesticides is a well-known biological mechanism that becomes problematic when farmers are faced with crop failure and economic loss. It becomes especially threatening when the goal is to manage insects that are a disease vector and when the regulatory process ignores nonchemical management strategies that are efficacious and sustainable.

Tell EPA, Governors, and Congress that given the certainty of pesticide resistance, ecologically-based mosquito management must replace a reliance on pesticides.

Insect resistance to insecticides has been an issue since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s. Although most countries currently ban DDT use, several currently used insecticides pose the same threat. In fact, resistance is predicted by elementary population genetics, and the speed of its evolution is directly related to the toxicity—that is, strength of selection pressure—and inversely related to the generation length of the organism. When that target organism of the pesticide is a disease vector, like West Nile Virus, the consequences of EPA’s failed regulatory review process to calculate target organism (e.g., mosquito) resistance are not merely economic—they pose a threat to public health. The threat is effectively caused by the reliance on chemical-intensive management strategies by virtue of the registration of the toxic chemicals instead of focusing public attention on sustainable nonchemical management practices that focus of preventing breeding and underlying conditions that contributes to the unwanted organism(s).

Areawide, indiscriminate spraying of insecticides causes resistance to develop among many organisms. Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to synthetic pyrethroids, in addition to other classes of insecticides, such as carbamates and organophosphates. For example, a study published in Pest Management Science finds resistance to insecticides like pyrethroids is jeopardizing attempts to control the mosquito Aedes aegypti, the primary vector of dengue fever. Prevention of disease outbreaks is threatened by reliance on chemical biocides—whether to antibiotics, antimicrobials, or pesticides—to which pathogens and their vectors develop resistance.

Resistance is an entirely normal, widely known, and expected phenomenon. Organisms evolve under the strong selection pressure of constant pesticide use, exploiting beneficial genetic mutations that give them a survival advantage. Another component of resistance is learned behavior, which allows mosquitoes to escape pesticides. As resistance grows in all areas in which biocides are used, including agriculture and medicine, it often leads to an increase in pesticide use, with implications for human health—including cancer, endocrine (hormone) disruption, reproductive dysfunction, neurotoxicity, and kidney/liver damage—and the ecosystem.

Thus, resistance demonstrates the need for sustainable and effective strategies to combat the growing disease burdens. These strategies must start with an understanding of the ecological and social conditions leading to the spread of the diseases and their vectors. They must abandon the doomed pesticidal approach, which take resources from successful ecological approaches, poison humans, and disrupt healthy ecosystems that keep mosquito populations in balance with predators.

In view of the impacts of relying on pesticides for managing insect transmission of disease vectors, their use constitutes unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment, which should result in the cancellation of their registrations.

Tell EPA, Governors, and Congress that given the certainty of pesticide resistance, ecologically-based mosquito management must replace a reliance on pesticides.

Letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

All harms resulting from pesticides are unreasonable if no benefits ensue from their use. So, why is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowing the use of pesticides under the “unreasonable adverse effects” to health or the environment standard of the federal pesticide law, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), if the pesticides over short periods of time lose their efficacy on the target organism because of the well-known biological mechanism of chemical resistance? This is particularly problematic when the goal is to manage insects that are a disease vector and we are ignoring nonchemical management strategies that are efficacious and sustainable.

Insect resistance to insecticides has been an issue since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s. Although most countries currently ban DDT use, several currently used insecticides pose the same threat. In fact, resistance is predicted by elementary population genetics, and the speed of its evolution is directly related to the toxicity—that is, strength of selection pressure—and inversely related to the generation length of the organism. When that target organism of the pesticide is a disease vector, like West Nile Virus, the consequences of EPA’s failed regulatory review process to calculate target organism (e.g., mosquito) resistance are not merely economic—they pose a threat to public health. The threat is effectively caused by the reliance on chemical-intensive management strategies by virtue of the registration of the toxic chemicals instead of focusing public attention on sustainable nonchemical management practices that focus of preventing breeding and underlying conditions that contributes to the unwanted organism(s).

Areawide, indiscriminate spraying of insecticides causes resistance to develop among many organisms. Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to synthetic pyrethroids, in addition to other classes of insecticides, such as carbamates and organophosphates. For example, a study published in Pest Management Science finds resistance to insecticides like pyrethroids is jeopardizing attempts to control the mosquito Aedes aegypti, the primary vector of dengue fever. Prevention of disease outbreaks is threatened by reliance on chemical biocides—whether to antibiotics, antimicrobials, or pesticides—to which pathogens and their vectors develop resistance.

Resistance is an entirely normal, widely known, and expected phenomenon. Organisms evolve under the strong selection pressure of constant pesticide use, exploiting beneficial genetic mutations that give them a survival advantage. Another component of resistance is learned behavior, which allows mosquitoes to escape pesticides. As resistance grows in all areas in which biocides are used, including agriculture and medicine, it often leads to an increase in pesticide use, with implications for human health—including cancer, endocrine (hormone) disruption, reproductive dysfunction, neurotoxicity, and kidney/liver damage—and the ecosystem. 

Thus, resistance demonstrates the need for sustainable and effective strategies to combat the growing disease burdens. These strategies must start with an understanding of the ecological and social conditions leading to the spread of the diseases and their vectors. They must abandon the doomed pesticidal approach, which take resources from successful ecological approaches, poison humans, and disrupt healthy ecosystems that keep mosquito populations in balance with predators. 

In view of the impacts of relying on pesticides for vector control, their use constitutes unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment, which should result in the cancellation of their registrations.

Thank you.

Letter to Governor:

All harms resulting from pesticides are unreasonable if no benefits ensue from their use. So, why are we allowing the spraying of toxic pesticides if over short periods of time they lose their efficacy on the target organism because of the well-known biological mechanism of chemical resistance? This is particularly problematic when the goal is to manage insects that are a disease vector and we are ignoring nonchemical management strategies that are efficacious and sustainable.

Insect resistance to insecticides has been an issue since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s. Although most countries currently ban DDT use, several currently used insecticides pose the same threat. In fact, resistance is predicted by elementary population genetics, and the speed of its evolution is directly related to the toxicity—that is, strength of selection pressure—and inversely related to the generation length of the organism. When that target organism of the pesticide is a disease vector, like West Nile Virus, the consequences of EPA’s failed regulatory review process to calculate target organism (e.g., mosquito) resistance are not merely economic—they pose a threat to public health. The threat is effectively caused by the reliance on chemical-intensive management strategies by virtue of the registration of the toxic chemicals instead of focusing public attention on sustainable nonchemical management practices that focus of preventing breeding and underlying conditions that contributes to the unwanted organism(s).

Areawide, indiscriminate spraying of insecticides causes resistance to develop among many pests. Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to synthetic pyrethroids, in addition to other classes of insecticides, such as carbamates and organophosphates. For example, a study published in Pest Management Science finds resistance to insecticides like pyrethroids is jeopardizing attempts to control the mosquito Aedes aegypti, the primary vector of dengue fever. Prevention of disease outbreaks is threatened by reliance on chemical biocides—whether to antibiotics, antimicrobials, or pesticides—to which pathogens and their vectors develop resistance.

Resistance is an entirely normal, expected phenomenon. Organisms evolve under the strong selection pressure of constant pesticide use, exploiting beneficial genetic mutations that give them a survival advantage. Another component of resistance is learned behavior, which allows mosquitoes to escape pesticides. As resistance grows in all areas in which biocides are used, including agriculture and medicine, it often leads to an increase in pesticide use, with implications for human health—including cancer, endocrine (hormone) disruption, reproductive dysfunction, neurotoxicity, and kidney/liver damage—and the ecosystem. 

Thus, resistance demonstrates the need for sustainable and effective strategies to combat the growing disease burdens. These strategies must start with an understanding of the ecological and social conditions leading to the spread of the diseases and their vectors. They must abandon the doomed pesticidal approach, which take resources from successful ecological approaches, poison humans, and disrupt healthy ecosystems that keep mosquito populations in balance with predators. 

In view of the impacts of relying on pesticides for vector control, our state should move towards sound ecologically-based mosquito management. Information about this approach is available from websites of Beyond Pesticides and the city of Boulder, CO.  (https://ow.ly/q9cE50Pt4nb)

Thank you.

Letter to U.S. Representative and Senators:

All harms resulting from pesticides are unreasonable if no benefits ensue from their use. So, why is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowing the use of pesticides under the “unreasonable adverse effects” to health or the environment standard of the federal pesticide law, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), if the pesticides over short periods of time lose their efficacy on the target organism because of the well-known biological mechanism of chemical resistance? This is particularly problematic when the goal is to manage insects that are a disease vector and we are ignoring nonchemical management strategies that are efficacious and sustainable.

Insect resistance to insecticides has been an issue since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s. In fact, resistance is predicted by elementary population genetics, and the speed of its evolution is directly related to the toxicity—that is, strength of selection pressure—and inversely related to the generation length of the organism. When that target organism of the pesticide is a disease vector, like West Nile Virus, EPA’s failure to calculate target organism (e.g., mosquito) resistance is not merely economic—it poses a threat to public health. The threat is effectively caused by the reliance on chemical-intensive management strategies by virtue of the registration of the toxic chemicals instead of focusing public attention on sustainable nonchemical management practices that focus of preventing breeding and underlying conditions that contributes to the unwanted organism(s).

Areawide, indiscriminate spraying of insecticides causes resistance to develop among many organisms. Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to synthetic pyrethroids, in addition to other classes of insecticides, such as carbamates and organophosphates. For example, a study published in Pest Management Science finds resistance to insecticides like pyrethroids is jeopardizing attempts to control the mosquito Aedes aegypti the primary vector of dengue fever. Prevention of disease outbreaks is threatened by reliance on chemical biocides—whether to antibiotics, antimicrobials, or pesticides—to which pathogens and their vectors develop resistance.

Resistance is an entirely normal, expected phenomenon. Organisms evolve under the strong selection pressure of constant pesticide use, exploiting beneficial genetic mutations that give them a survival advantage. Another component of resistance is learned behavior, which allows mosquitoes to escape pesticides. As resistance grows in all areas in which biocides are used, including agriculture and medicine, it often leads to an increase in pesticide use, with implications for human health—including cancer, endocrine (hormone) disruption, reproductive dysfunction, neurotoxicity, and kidney/liver damage—and the ecosystem.

Thus, resistance demonstrates the need for sustainable and effective strategies to combat the growing disease burdens. These strategies must start with an understanding of the ecological and social conditions leading to the spread of the diseases and their vectors. They must abandon the doomed pesticidal approach, which take resources from successful ecological approaches, poison humans, and disrupt healthy ecosystems that keep mosquito populations in balance with predators. In view of the impacts of relying on pesticides for vector control, our nation should move towards sound ecologically-based mosquito management. Information about this approach is available from websites of Beyond Pesticides (https://ow.ly/q9cE50Pt4nb) and the city of Boulder, CO.

In view of the impacts of relying on pesticides for vector control, their use constitutes unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment, which should result in the cancellation of their registrations. Please ensure that EPA does not continue to approve these pesticides that threaten human and ecological health.

Thank you.

(Beyond Pesticides, August 4, 2023) The results of an Australian study published in Nature strike a contrast between land and water contamination with pesticide active substances (PAS), highlighting contamination as pesticides are transported through waterways. 

The study results on water transport raise serious contamination issues. Only about one percent of the pesticides entering rivers degrade, so that long stretches of waterways and the oceans suffer the direct impact of a pesticide’s active ingredient. The lack of degradation also means that water organisms are being exposed to levels of pesticides exceeding many of the regulatory threshold limits set by governments. Although observation data are highly variable, the authors note that measured concentrations of pesticides in some river reaches of North America, East Asia and Europe exceed one or more regulatory threshold limits “at least once a year.” Further, the pesticides can bioaccumulate at each level of the aquatic food web, which can multiply concentrations by a thousand or more in the highest trophic levels, according to the study authors.

The study finds that more than four-fifths of PAS are degraded in the soil, leaving about 10 percent of the original chemical in the soil as residue. Nearly half of that residues migrate into deeper layers of the soil where there are fewer microorganisms to break the active ingredient down. This means that fraction of the PAS likely accumulates in aquifers, mostly in its original chemical form. Aquifers are the source of most well water.

The authors of the study, through their assessment of hydrology and biogeochemistry, have developed their estimate of how much pesticide remains on land, how much reaches the oceans, and how pesticides behave in both ground and surface waters along the way. Understanding how pesticides behave in the global water cycle, from wells and ponds to rivers and the oceans, has been lacking.

The authors note, “[I]n many observed cases PAS may degrade into a cascade of daughter substances which can be as toxic as the parent and occasionally even more persistent.” For example, in 2021 Beyond Pesticides covered a study of pesticide metabolites, stating that “neonic [neonicotinoid] metabolites, such as desnitro-imidacloprid and descyano-thiacloprid, are more than 300 and ~200 times more toxic to mammals, respectively, than the parent compound imidacloprid.”

Globally, approximately 3.3 million tons of pesticides are applied to crops every year. While most of these pesticides are applied on land, some portion of everything on land gets into water and ends up in the ocean eventually. Pesticides are no exception.

The scientists assess the hydrology and biogeochemistry of PAS for the 92 most-used pesticides based on 2015 data. The PAS are a fraction of the total mass of pesticide compounds applied to crops, amounting to 1.1 million tons—a third of the total global usage. Of this, the researchers calculate that 783 tons of PAS are released to the oceans annually. So, according to this study, a fraction of the total reaches the oceans.

Active ingredients are virtually the only component of pesticide compounds whose toxicity is tested and regulated, so both the “inert” or “inactive ingredients” and chemicals resulting from geochemical or microbial action or disinfection processes are omitted from calculations of pesticide harms. For example, as Beyond Pesticides noted in its coverage of the pesticide metabolites study, “Nearly half of all breakdown products (transformation products) from four common-use environmental pesticides produce stronger endocrine (hormone) disrupting effects than the parent compound.”

The rivers receiving the most pesticide runoff from land include the Mississippi and the Sacramento in the U.S., the Parana in Argentina, the Ganges in India, the Yangtze, Pearl and Yellow, in China, and the Irrawaddy and lower Mekong in South Asia. These are not all of the rivers that discharge the most PAS into the oceans, however. The Danube and the Amazon joined the group in that category. In all, fifteen of the most important rivers in the world discharge at least 5,000 kg of PAS each to the oceans annually. The effects of pesticides on the oceans—unlike those of fertilizers, which deplete oxygen and cause harmful algal blooms—are little understood.

The researchers calculated another measure of the pesticide burden by comparing their estimates to actual observations in specific locations in North America, the European Union and Australia. They found that their model “generally underestimated observations,” which means that the burden on rivers and oceans is likely also heavier than they had predicted.

The most common chemicals in the modeled waters were glyphosate, metam potassium (a soil disinfectant), chlorothalonil and chlorpyrifos. The ratios of pesticide types in rivers were estimated at just over half as herbicides, about 36 percent multi-purpose pesticides, about 11 percent fungicides and 0.6 percent insecticides. The ratio reaching the oceans was even more unbalanced, with about 63 percent herbicides, a little over a quarter multipurpose pesticides, about 10 percent fungicides and 0.7 percent insecticides.

A final result of the study: The group analyzes which variables exert the most control over how much PAS remain unchanged in soils and how much is discharged to the oceans. In both cases the main predictor is the rate of application to fields. For soil residues, annual soil water saturation, temperature and organic carbon content come next. For the oceans, the next most controlling variables are the surface area of the crop treated with pesticides, the surface area of the watershed, and the length of the river.

The study is a first approximation of the scale of the problem posed by pesticides traveling through planetary waters. Its results suggest that pesticides’ deleterious effects on the biosphere extend much farther than manufacturers claim. Over time, the global water cycle ensures that everything on land, including mountains, reaches the sea, and putting anything into water diminishes any control humans might have over it.  To interrupt the cascade of pesticide catastrophes, understanding the source is critical: the fields where the pesticides are applied. Stopping the process there is the most direct and effective way to start recovering from the damage pesticides cause.

The U.S. Supreme Court is not making the task any easier. As Beyond Pesticides observed last June, President Biden said the Court’s recent ruling in Sackett v.  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “will take our country backwards” because it “dramatically limits the EPA’s ability to protect critical wetland ecosystems,” which are integral parts of continental watersheds. This means the burden of pesticides on waterways will increase, and, according to the Australian researchers, part of their active ingredients will traverse rivers all the way to the ocean.

Government agencies are not monolithic in their failure to press for improved regulation. Beyond Pesticides has covered the U.S. Geological Survey’s critique of the EPA’s regulation of pesticides in water. The USGS reported in 2020 that of its 110 National Water Quality Monitoring Network sampling sites, only 2.2% of the water samples were free of detectable pesticides. It is firmly established that humans are exposed to pesticides and their various related compounds through drinking water and carry body burdens of these chemicals that threaten their health.

You can take action. Urge Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland to expand USGS monitoring and mapping of U.S. waterways. Tell EPA Administrator Michael Regan that pesticides shown to contaminate our waters must be banned. For sample letters, click here. Visit here for more information on threatened waters and action suggestions.

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

Source: Maggi, F., Tang, F.H.M. & Tubiello, F.N. Agricultural pesticide land budget and river discharge to oceans. Nature (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06296-x;             https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06296-x

It’s hard to escape the impacts of the Barbie movie’s estimated $150 million marketing campaign. You may have noticed advertisements with Burger King’s pink burgers to Airbnb’s Barbie Dreamhouse. Perhaps you have seen viral memes or news stories about the movie’s takedown of the patriarchy or critiques that the movie is overly woke. The pink symbol of Barbie is often followed by a second symbol — plastic. The total mass of plastics on Earth now doubles the total mass of all living mammals, so would Barbie say life is fantastic? Or, might she urge the National Organic Standards Board to ban plastic mulch, an issue on the agenda at the Board’s upcoming October meeting?

Plastic products, including those used in chemical-intensive and organic agriculture, and pesticides, play a seemingly necessary role in modern life, encompassing many items beyond straws and grocery bags. However, the convenience of plastic comes at a considerable cost to the planet and human health. The majority of plastics are manufactured using oil and gas, exacerbating climate change. Scientists are becoming increasingly alarmed by the repercussions of microplastics, which are plastic particles smaller than 5 mm in size.

In 2022, Philip Landrigan, M.D., et al., announced the Minderoo-Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human Health to “inform the work of international leaders as they strive to fulfill the urgent call of the United National Environment Assembly to end plastic pollution and its unsustainable environmental, social, economic, and health-related impacts by negotiating a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty,” Led by heads of state, ministers of the environment from United Nations member states, 175 nations signed an agreement to develop a treaty by 2024 to end plastic pollution. The UN Environment Program has written: “A shift to a circular economy can reduce the volume of plastics entering oceans by over 80 per cent by 2040; reduce virgin plastic production by 55 per cent; save governments US$70 billion by 2040; reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 per cent; and create 700,000 additional jobs – mainly in the global south.”

In oceans, microplastics may impact phytoplankton populations, which account for 50% of Earth’s oxygen levels. Beyond Pesticides reported on the Global Oceanic Environmental Survey Foundation’s two-year water sampling of the Atlantic Ocean near the United Kingdom, which found plankton populations may have plummeted by 90% since baseline 1940 levels. Just as insects are crucial as the basis of terrestrial ecosystems, plankton organisms are the base of aquatic and marine food chains.

Microplastics can cause harmful effects on humans and other organisms through physical entanglement and physical impacts of ingestion. They also act as carriers of toxic chemicals that are adsorbed to their surface. Some studies on fish have shown that microplastics and their associated toxic chemicals bioaccumulate, resulting in intestinal damage and changes in metabolism. Soil organisms and edible plants have been shown to ingest microplastic particles. Earthworms can move microplastics through the soil, and microplastics can move through the food chain to human food. Microplastics can have a wide range of negative impacts on the soil, which are only beginning to be studied, but include a reduction in the growth and reproduction of soil microfauna. When looking at the impact of microplastics, it is important to include the impact of associated substances. As noted above, they can carry toxic chemicals. A review by Zhu et al. cites several studies showing, “[M]icroplastics can serve as hotspots of gene exchange between phylogenetically different microorganisms by introducing additional surface, thus having a potential to increase the spread of ARGs [antibiotic resistance genes] and antibiotic-resistant pathogens in water and sediments.” Read more about the impacts of microplastics and pesticides on ocean ecosystems here.

There is growing evidence of microplastic’s effects on terrestrial organisms. A report in 2021 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations found “the land we use to grow our food is contaminated with even larger quantities of plastic pollutants” than the well-publicized amount of plastics in our oceans. The plastic coating of some synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, as investigated by a 2022 report from the Center for International Environmental Law, found that plastic-coated agrochemicals are adding microplastics to soil and crops directly. According to the report, the addition of plastics into the food supply compounds the health and environmental hazards of toxic pesticides and other agrochemicals.

Beyond Pesticides has written about the “contributions” of plastics to the climate crisis, as well as issues related to the use of plastics in organic agriculture and the scourge of chemical-intensive farming. An enormous amount of plastic in thousands of forms is produced globally each year. Toxic plastic pollution is now found, as The Guardian puts it, “from the summit of Mount Everest to the deepest oceans.” 

Beyond Pesticides has long fought for a precautionary approach to the regulation of toxic pesticides and microplastics. In order to safeguard human and ecosystem health now and for future generations, it is critical to pass laws that consider the full life cycle of material and forgo production if hazards are too high.

In 2023, the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is reviewing the allowance of plastic mulch in certified organic agriculture. This is part of the larger issue relating to the use of plastic in organic production and handling. Because of growing awareness about the impacts of plastic—and the microplastic particles resulting from its use—on human health and the environment, this issue is on the agenda of the NOSB meeting, scheduled for October 24, -26 in Providence, RI. Public comments can be delivered to the NOSB by virtual meetings on October 17 and 19. (Details on how to make written and/or oral comments will be announced when the meeting announcement is published in the Federal Register.) Plastics manufacturing requires the transportation of hazardous chemicals, such as those involved in the February 2023 derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. Beyond Pesticides has urged that plastic mulch not be relisted as allowable in organic production. See Beyond Pesticides’ comments on plastic mulch on the organization’s Keeping Organic Strong webpage. Moreover, Beyond Pesticides urges that the NOSB should initiate action to eliminate all uses of plastic in organic processing and packaging. The Crops Subcommittee last month voted 4 (yes)-2 (no) (1 absent) to remove plastic mulch and covers from the National List. The notes from the subcommittee: “Commenters and the NOSB acknowledged the need for these materials, while also finding the issue of plastic problematic. The Board is interested in determining how much plastic is actually used in organic production and is unsure how to find that data. Members discussed alternatives and solutions, and feel that biodegradable biobased plastic mulch, which is on the National List although no products exist currently, may not be the solution.”

We must ask ourselves if we want to live in a Barbie world — a world where our clothes, food, parks, and playfields are filled with plastic. Learn more about how easy it is to create non-plastic and non-chemical natural turfgrass. Prevent plastics from entering your local community with toxic and unsafe astroturf and artificial grass. Sign up to be a Parks Advocate today to encourage your community to transition to organic land management and prevent a plastic Barbie world.

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

Source: Microplastics can alter phytoplankton community composition, Sowing a Plastic Planet: How Microplastics in Agrochemicals Are Affecting Our Soils, Our Food, and Our Future, Health impacts of artificial turf: Toxicity studies, challenges, and future directions

(Beyond Pesticides, August 2, 2023) A study published in Pest Management Science finds resistance to insecticides like pyrethroids are challenging attempts to control the mosquito Aedes aegypti (Ae. aegypti), the primary transmitter (vector) of dengue fever. While this study takes place in Bangladesh, resistance to biocides—whether to antibiotics, antimicrobials, or pesticides—is growing globally. Prevention of disease outbreaks is threatened by reliance on chemical biocides to which pathogens and their vectors develop resistance. In fact, resistance is predicted by elementary population genetics, and the speed of its evolution is directly related to the toxicity—that is, the strength of selection pressure—and inversely related to the generation length of the organism. (See PAY articles here and here, a PBS article here.)

Insecticide resistance has been an issue since the introduction of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) in the 1940s. Although most countries currently ban DDT use, the compound is not the only chemical pesticide promoting pest resistance. Several current-use insecticides pose the same threat. Areawide, indiscriminate spraying of insecticides is causing resistance to develop among many pests. Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to synthetic pyrethroids, in addition to other classes of insecticides, such as carbamates and organophosphates. Thus, this study demonstrates the need for sustainable and practical strategies to combat the growing disease burdens.

The study notes, “Intensive use of pyrethroids in Dhaka has selected for highly resistant mosquito populations, which was confirmed through bioassays. This pyrethroid resistance is associated with high frequencies of the V1016G kdr mutation and activities of detoxifying enzymes. As evidenced from our free-flight experiments, the effective operational use of pyrethroids in control programs is compromised and, therefore, requires reconsideration. […] Ultimately, scalable and sustainable non-insecticide-based approaches such as Wolbachia-based population replacement could have an important role in curbing Aedes-borne diseases in Bangladesh.”

Researchers from the QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Australia, examined the common insecticides used in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to determine the mechanisms and intensity of insecticide application driving resistance. The pyrethroid insecticides tested include permethrin and deltamethrin. Using a bottle assay, the research measures the mortality percentage of mosquitos after insecticide exposure. The study finds Ae. Aegypti mosquito colonies display significantly higher levels (high-intensity) of resistance to pyrethroids. Although the mortality rate of mosquitos exposed to permethrin is much lower than deltamethrin (2–24% mortality and 48–94% mortality, respectively), the metabolic mechanisms involved are the same. Specifically, responses to the synergistic reaction between pyrethroids induce multi-function oxidases, esterases, and glutathione S-transferases. Moreover, a high frequency of kdr alleles for resistance indicates a V1016G mutation, conferring resistance to deltamethrin. Although exposure can mitigate host-seeking behavior, this effect is only temporary. Considering over 74 percent of mosquitos from colonies in Dhaka survive initial exposure to pyrethroids, the implication for increased disease prevalence is elevated. 

Associate Professor Gregor Devine, Ph.D., at the Mosquito Control Laboratory, said, “‘The use of pyrethroids in Dhaka is no longer effective, and the control program needs to switch to a different approach.’ The study suggests the presence of high levels of insecticide resistance among Ae. aegypti populations may have contributed to the escalating dengue burden.”

This study resembles an all too familiar phenomenon of resistance among pest populations. Scientists note resistance is an entirely normal, adaptive phenomenon: organisms evolve, “exploiting” beneficial genetic mutations that give them a survival advantage. However, resistance is growing in all sectors of pest control, including critically needed agriculture and medicine. For nearly a century, the human response to resistance is the development of a compound that kills the resistant organism (whether pest or weed or bacterium or fungus), which works for a while. However, the dependence on chemical solutions is increasingly failing. Whether it is antibiotics for bacterial infections, herbicides for weeds/pests, or insecticides to mitigate vector-borne diseases, organisms are becoming resistant to usually toxic compounds. Once an organism inevitably becomes resistant to a particular chemical control strategy, people —the chemical industry, researchers, applicators, farmers, public health workers, clinicians, et al.—will have typically moved on to the subsequent chemical “solution.” Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) notes, “The World Health Organization underscored the problem in their 2012 guidance on policymaking for Integrated Vector Management (IVM): ‘Resistance to insecticides is an increasing problem in vector control because of the reliance on chemical control and expanding operations…Furthermore, the chemical insecticides used can have adverse effects on health and the environment.’”

Beyond Pesticides has written extensively on the issue of resistance, particularly the relationship to the use of agricultural and other land management pesticides, with the central message: resistance is a symptom of the ineffectiveness of chemical-intensive agriculture and leads to increased use of more and more toxic pesticides. In addition, resistance in one of the “sectors” mentioned above can “crossover” to become problematic in another. Growing pesticide resistance often leads to an increase in chemical inputs to control pests. Exposure to permethrin already has implications for human health, including cancer, endocrine (hormone) disruption, reproductive dysfunction, neurotoxicity, and kidney/liver damage. Mosquito resistance can augment the use of chemical control methods, including the addition of toxic synergists like piperonyl butoxide (PBO), known to cause and exacerbate adverse health effects from exposure. Therefore, researchers need to understand the mechanisms prompting pesticide resistance among mosquito populations to safeguard human health from disease.

The use of permethrin and deltamethrin through fogging and ariel application plays a significant role in the high intensity of resistance among the Ae. aegypti colonies from Dhaka. The study highlights that pyrethroids act on the nervous system of insects, using a “knockdown” effect to cause death. Although this study suggests mosquitos can recover from the knockdown (KD) effect via a mutation in the kdr alleles, this KD effect is dose-dependent. Thus, pyrethroid increases the frequency of kdr mutation to prompt resistance. The study highlights, “[…] the substantial recovery seen after KD suggests poor binding of the pyrethroid to the mutated VGSC and a key role for metabolic mechanisms in ‘mopping up’ the pyrethroids.”

This study is not the first to demonstrate resistance to metabolic mechanisms driving genetic resistance among mosquito populations. A Colorado State University study finds two types of pyrethroid resistance: VGSC and detoxification metabolism. Similar to this study, the Colorado researchers suggest mosquitos that recover from the initial insecticide knockdown contribute to resistance in the field. Sublethal exposure may be responsible for the mosquito’s ability to recover. Rather than dying from dehydration and predation, recovery mechanisms allow mosquitoes to develop resistance over time. This study enables researchers to fully understand the genetic differences between mosquitos that exhibit resistance and those who recover or die. Knowing how genes factor into pesticide metabolism can help researchers understand how resistance evolves under field-realistic conditions. Therefore, it is essential to understand insect behavior that propagates vector-borne disease transmission that exacerbates the widespread public health crisis. Previous studies associate memory and associative learning with behavioral changes occurring in response to chemical exposure. 

In the context of deadly pesticide use in developing countries, Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, has noted, “We should be advocating for a just world where we no longer treat poverty and development with poisonous band-aids but join together to address the root causes of insect-borne disease because the chemical-dependent alternatives are ultimately deadly for everyone.” He also said, “We should focus on the deplorable living conditions and inequitable distribution of wealth and resources worldwide that give rise to squalor, inhumane living conditions, and the poor state of development that, together, breed insect-borne diseases like malaria.”

Even if dengue is not a local concern, there remains general concern surrounding the diseases mosquitoes can transmit, including the West Nile and Zika viruses. Beyond Pesticides provides valuable information on mosquito management and insect-borne diseases in the Mosquito Management and Insect-Borne Diseases section devoted to these issues. Furthermore, keep up on pesticide-related science and news, including mosquitoes and pesticide resistance, on Beyond Pesticides’ Daily News blog.

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

Source: Pest Management Science, Phsy.org

(Beyond Pesticides, August 1, 2023) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced that it is publishing a decade’s worth of pesticide incident data in a searchable database that will be updated on a monthly basis. The Incident Data System (IDS), with poisoning reports generated mostly from chemical manufacturers, states, a national hotline, and poison control centers, offers information on reported pesticide exposures from accidental poisoning of pets, wildlife, and humans, to pesticide drift, noncompliance, and other pesticide incidents that may be associated with product uses in compliance with label instructions. Tracking this incident data is essential to understanding the risks and damages associated with pesticide use.  

The bulk of the data on incidents is from consumer reports to chemical manufacturers. Chemical companies are required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Section 6(a)(2) to report incidents: “If at any time after the registration of a pesticide the registrant has additional factual information regarding unreasonable adverse effects on the environment of the pesticide, the registrant shall submit such information to the Administrator.” The determine of threshold number of incidents required to be reported as a pattern of “unreasonable adverse effects” is left to the manufacturers to determine. Through EPA’s Voluntary 6(a)(2) Incident Reporting Form, chemical companies are instructed to determine “the severity category of any given incident” and “the appropriate method of reporting that incident to the EPA.” According to EPA, “There are two sets of forms to reflect the two methods of reporting incidents to the Agency. Incidents that are of a more significant nature must be reported individually. Incidents that are either minor or more commonly encountered must be reported in aggregate.” 

Publishing incident data in the IDS is the first step to analyzing pesticide incidents to help regulatory agencies and stakeholders identify patterns, take appropriate actions, and presumably improve pesticide restrictions for the protection of public health and the environment. The underlying data in the IDS relies on pesticide incident reports, which are generated when a person experiences harm or witnesses harm to another person, animal, or plant and alerts the appropriate authorities (including the EPA, poison control centers, and state regulatory agencies). For more information on how to respond to pesticide emergencies. Read more here.  

Information in the IDS database includes details about the location of the pesticide incident, the exposure of an animal or human, the severity level, the date of the incident, and information about the ingredient or product involved in the exposure. Additionally, the database provides aggregated counts of reported incidents by exposure type.  

Before the IDS, access to pesticide incident data required filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, a cumbersome process that was out of reach for many. Now, the public can access data from over 44,000 reports of pesticide incidents.  

Many have long interpreted FIFRA, Section 6(a)(2) to mean that once any adverse effect on the environment has been identified, registrants are required to submit (additional) product information to the agency in order to address any data gaps for registration reevaluation. However, Section 6(a)(2) “does not require a registrant to generate new data or to seek out additional information.” Reports of bee deaths, which is by all intents and purposes, an unreasonable adverse effect, can and should be reported under Section 6(a)(2). The problem is that the registrant is required to report these incidents to EPA, but only after the incidents are reported to them by the affected party. The manufacturer of the product suspected of causing the bee incident most likely will conduct its own investigation into the incident, and as many believe, can misstate the results of the investigation in their favor. See Pesticide Enforcement and Compliance. 

The IDS database will help uncover patterns in pesticide data, which can be used to address widespread harms such as the Seresto flea collars that were linked to nearly 1,700 pet deaths (with active ingredients of flumethrin and imidacloprid). For more coverage from Beyond Pesticides on the risks of the popular flea and tick collar, see here and here and here and here.   

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, the IDS covers information about the following pesticides incidents:  

• 4,412 incidents involving Glyphosate and human harm. Glyphosate is one of the most common herbicides.   
• 4,423 incidents involving Imidacloprid (a common neonicotinoid insecticide) and human harm  
• 6,343 incidents involving atrazine, the second most common herbicide.
• 1,169 incidents involving brodifacoum, one of the most widely used rodenticides in rat poison products. 
• At least 18 human deaths associated with paraquat  

If you would like to prevent your wild stock, pets, family, and ecosystem from experiencing the harms that are reported in the IDS, pass a local ordinance to eliminate pesticides in your community. Visit Beyond Pesticide’s website to learn how to pass an ordinance in your community here. To get your community off the pesticide treadmill, see Beyond Pesticides’ Parks for a Sustainable Future. 

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

Source: EPA Posts Pesticide Incident Data Publicly 

(Beyond Pesticides, July 31, 2023) As the national debates on the rights of women to make health decisions about their bodies in the context of abortions, the scientific literature is increasingly documenting involuntary spontaneous abortions and other reproductive effects associated with pesticide exposure—raising critical questions about the ability to control one’s health. Last week, Beyond Pesticides reported on an exploratory study, published in Environment International, that adds to the many studies demonstrating residential prenatal pesticide exposure can result in adverse birth outcomes. Residential exposure to five active pesticide ingredients (Ais) fluroxypyr-meptyl, glufosinate-ammonium, linuron, vinclozolin, and picoxystrobin has adverse effects on gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW), mortality after birth, child’s sex, premature development, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA), and large for gestational age (LGA). 

Despite the political furor surrounding medical abortions, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to allow pesticides that cause involuntary spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and other reproductive effects in exposed women.

Tell EPA to ban pesticides that cause involuntary spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and other reproductive effects. Tell Congress to ensure that EPA does not permit the use of pesticides affecting reproduction. 

Most spontaneous abortions occur during the first trimester. The most common cause of miscarriage during the first trimester is chromosomal abnormality. Pesticide-induced chromosomal abnormalities may be seen in a damaged egg or sperm cell. Female farmworkers are particularly at risk, though exposure of the father to pesticides also increases the risk of spontaneous abortion. 

Pesticides are ubiquitous in the environment, with 90 percent of Americans having at least one pesticide compound in their body. Numerous studies indicate chemical exposure mainly stems from dietary exposure, like food and drinking water. Although many countries ban most organochlorine compounds, these chemicals remain in soils, water (solid and liquid), and the surrounding air at levels exceeding U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. These compounds have a global distribution, with evaporation and precipitation facilitating long-range atmospheric transport, deposition, and bioaccumulation of hazardous chemicals in the environment. Thus, exposure to these toxicants can cause many adverse environmental and biological health effects, including spontaneous abortions. The scientific literature demonstrates pesticides’ long history of severe adverse effects on human health (i.e., endocrine disruption, cancer, reproductive/birth problems, neurotoxicity, etc.) and wildlife, and biodiversity. With the increasing ubiquity of pesticides, current measures safeguarding against pesticide use and exposure must be improved. 

The presence of pesticides in the body has implications for human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age. Pesticide exposure during pregnancy is of specific concern both because of the risk of spontaneous abortion and the health effects of those who survive, as well as to future generations. Just as nutrients are transferable between mother and fetus, so are chemical contaminants. Studies find pesticide compounds in a mother’s blood can transfer to the fetus via the umbilical cord. A 2021 study finds pregnant women already have over 100 chemicals in blood and umbilical cord samples, including banned persistent organic pollutants.  

Despite the evidence, EPA continues to allow the use of pesticides causing spontaneous abortion and other reproductive effects. It is time to ban these pesticides. 

Tell EPA to ban pesticides that cause involuntary spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and other reproductive effects. Tell Congress to ensure that EPA does not permit the use of pesticides affecting reproduction.

Letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Despite the public attention to medical abortions, EPA continues to allow pesticides that cause involuntary spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and other reproductive effects in exposed women. 

Most spontaneous abortions occur during the first trimester. The most common cause of miscarriage during the first trimester is chromosomal abnormality. Pesticide-induced chromosomal abnormalities may be seen in a damaged egg or sperm cell. Female farmworkers are particularly at risk, though exposure of the father to pesticides also increases the risk of spontaneous abortion.

Pesticides are ubiquitous in the environment, with 90 percent of Americans having at least one pesticide compound in their body. Numerous studies indicate chemical exposure mainly stems from dietary exposure, like food and drinking water. Although many countries ban most organochlorine compounds, these chemicals remain in soils, water (solid and liquid), and the surrounding air at levels exceeding U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. These compounds have a global distribution, with evaporation and precipitation facilitating long-range atmospheric transport, deposition, and bioaccumulation of hazardous chemicals in the environment. Thus, exposure to these toxicants can cause many adverse environmental and biological health effects, including spontaneous abortions. The scientific literature demonstrates pesticides’ long history of severe adverse effects on human health (i.e., endocrine disruption, cancer, reproductive/birth problems, neurotoxicity, etc.) and wildlife, and biodiversity. With the increasing ubiquity of pesticides, current measures safeguarding against pesticide use and exposure must be improved.

The presence of pesticides in the body has implications for human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age. Pesticide exposure during pregnancy is of specific concern both because of the risk of spontaneous abortion and the health effects of those who survive, as well as to future generations.  Just as nutrients are transferable between mother and fetus, so are chemical contaminants. Studies find pesticide compounds in a mother’s blood can transfer to the fetus via the umbilical cord. A 2021 study finds pregnant women already have over 100 chemicals in blood and umbilical cord samples, including banned persistent organic pollutants. 

In spite of the evidence, EPA continues to allow the use of pesticides causing involuntary spontaneous abortion and other reproductive effects. It is time to ban these pesticides.

Thank you.

Letter to U.S. Members of Congress

Despite the public attention to medical abortions, EPA continues to allow pesticides that cause involuntary spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and other reproductive effects in exposed women. 

Most spontaneous abortions occur during the first trimester. The most common cause of miscarriage during the first trimester is chromosomal abnormality. Pesticide-induced chromosomal abnormalities may be seen in a damaged egg or sperm cell. Female farmworkers are particularly at risk, though exposure of the father to pesticides also increases the risk of spontaneous abortion.

Pesticides are ubiquitous in the environment, with 90 percent of Americans having at least one pesticide compound in their body. Numerous studies indicate chemical exposure mainly stems from dietary exposure, like food and drinking water. Although many countries ban most organochlorine compounds, these chemicals remain in soils, water (solid and liquid), and the surrounding air at levels exceeding U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. These compounds have a global distribution, with evaporation and precipitation facilitating long-range atmospheric transport, deposition, and bioaccumulation of hazardous chemicals in the environment. Thus, exposure to these toxicants can cause many adverse environmental and biological health effects, including spontaneous abortions. The scientific literature demonstrates pesticides’ long history of severe adverse effects on human health (i.e., endocrine disruption, cancer, reproductive/birth problems, neurotoxicity, etc.) and wildlife, and biodiversity. With the increasing ubiquity of pesticides, current measures safeguarding against pesticide use and exposure must be improved.

The presence of pesticides in the body has implications for human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age. Pesticide exposure during pregnancy is of specific concern both because of the risk of spontaneous abortion and the health effects of those who survive, as well as to future generations.  Just as nutrients are transferable between mother and fetus, so are chemical contaminants. Studies find pesticide compounds in a mother’s blood can transfer to the fetus via the umbilical cord. A 2021 study finds pregnant women already have over 100 chemicals in blood and umbilical cord samples, including banned persistent organic pollutants. 

In spite of the evidence, EPA continues to allow the use of pesticides causing involuntary spontaneous abortion and other reproductive effects. I request that you, in your oversight capacity, tell EPA that it is time to ban these pesticides.

Thank you.

(Beyond Pesticides, July 28, 2023) A study published in Science of the Total Environment finds glyphosate can adversely impact sensory and cognitive processes in bumblebees (Bombus terrestris). Glyphosate exposure impairs bees’ learning of aversive stimuli like electric shocks paired with specific color discrimination. Additionally, the pesticide reduces attraction to UV (ultraviolet) light, specifically the color blue, and temporarily impacts locomotion and phototaxis (movement in response to light). These impairments to sensory and cognitive processes render foraging difficult for these glyphosate-exposed pollinators and vulnerable to unavoidable predators. The study highlights that symptoms of widespread chemical exposure may reduce foraging efficiency and adversely affect ecosystems, especially those dependent on insect pollinators. 

Pollinator decline directly affects the environment, society, and the economy. Without pollinators, many plant species, both agricultural and nonagricultural, will decline or cease to exist as U.S. pollinator declines, particularly among native wild bees, limit 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. In a world where habitat loss and fragmentation show 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 these emphasize the need to establish monitoring and conservation to assess fluctuations in ecosystem services of essential species. The study notes, “The high-throughput paradigm presented in this study can be adapted to investigate sublethal effects of other agrochemicals on bumblebees or other important pollinator species, opening up a critical new avenue for the study of anthropogenic stressors.”

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) are the most common herbicides used globally. Previous studies evaluating chronic glyphosate or GBH exposure assessed the survival, development, physiology, colony thermoregulation, or gut microbiota specific to honey bees. However, few studies have tested field-realistic exposure to glyphosate on non-honey bees’ (i.e., bumble bees) cognitive performance. Thus, the study investigates how long-term glyphosate exposure affects locomotion, movement in response to light, and learning in bumblebees using an automated high-throughput assay with a control UV and green or blue light.

Control bumblebees in the study prefer UV light to blue light. Yet, glyphosate-treated bumblebees’ attraction to UV light decreases, with these treated bees having no preference between UV light or an alternative color. Additionally, control bees who experienced electric shocks when paired with blue wavelengths (CS+) v. UV light always chose UV light. In contrast, glyphosate-treated bees could not differentiate between blue and UV light regardless of electric shock when in blue light. The study highlights, “Our results raise the question of whether an impairment in the detection of the sky compass could also have played a role. Furthermore, UV reflectance and UV patterns are important parameters of flower coloration, strongly influencing the foraging efficiency and flower choices of bees. To sum up, even a slight shift in UV sensitivity could have broad implications for these pollinators.”

Clean air, water, and healthy soils are integral to ecosystem function, interacting between Earth’s four main spheres (i.e., hydrosphere, biosphere, lithosphere, and atmosphere) to support life. However, toxic pesticide residues readily contaminate these spheres, frequently in soils, water (solid and liquid), and the surrounding air at levels exceeding U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. The scientific literature demonstrates pesticides’ long history of adverse environmental effects, especially 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.).

The agricultural industry relies on insect pollinators for plant pollination and crop productivity. Globally, the production of crops dependent on pollinators is worth between $253 and $577 billion yearly. Hence, pesticide use fails to support sustainability goals, decreasing agricultural and economic productivity and social (human/animal) and environmental well-being.

Almost five decades of extensive glyphosate use has put animal, human, and environmental health at risk as the chemical’s ubiquity threatens 93 percent of all U.S. endangered species. Although the direct effects of pesticides on pollinators are concerning, the indirect impacts on pollinator habitats are equally troublesome. Glyphosate use in mono-crop agriculture and genetically engineered crops can drift onto and destroy adjacent habitats. Habitat destruction results in the loss of species biodiversity and stable ecosystem processes integral to sustainability. 

When looking at pesticide exposure, glyphosate represents only one class out of thousands of agrichemicals that pollinators may encounter. Pesticide use poses one of the most significant threats to bumblebees and places their entire life cycle at risk. A 2018 study found that commonly used neonicotinoid insecticides begin to kill off bumblebees during their nest-building phase, as exposure makes it more difficult for a queen to establish a nest. Exposure to neonicotinoids results in bumblebee colonies that are much smaller than colonies not exposed to these systemic insecticides. Moreover, a 2017 study finds that neonicotinoid exposure decreases pollination frequency and results in fewer social interactions. That is likely because neonicotinoids alter bumblebee feeding behavior and degrade the effectiveness of bumblebee’s classic “buzz pollination” process. Research published in 2017 determined that fungicides also play an essential role in bumblebee declines by increasing susceptibility to pathogens. Moreover, EPA assesses the toxicity of individual active ingredients on bees through various testing methods when regulating pesticides. However, EPA does not require the testing of multiple active or inert ingredients to the same degree, despite evidence demonstrating these chemicals harm pollinators. 

While it is evident that factors like pesticides, parasites, habitat destruction, and poor nutrition contribute to the decline of the American bumblebee, the combined stressors can act together (synergistically) to increase the risk of bee mortality.

The study shows chronic exposure to glyphosate can reduce bumblebee’s ability to connect aversive stimuli like an electric shock with visual indications when partaking in learning tasks. The inability of bumblebees to learn these warnings puts these pollinators at risk of predation and disease when looking for food. However, this study only adds to the scientific literature on the adverse effects of chemical exposure on pollinator health, especially in sublethal concentrations. A lack of fine-color discrimination skills can threaten bumblebee survivability through a decrease in colony fitness and individual foraging success. Much research attributes the decline of insect pollinators (e.g., commercial and wild bees and monarch butterflies) over the last several decades to the interaction of multiple environmental stressors, from climate change to pesticide use, disease, habitat destruction, and other factors. In the U.S., an increasing number of pollinators, including the American bumblebee and monarch butterfly, are being added or in consideration for listing under the Endangered Species Act, with specific chemical classes like systemic neonicotinoid insecticides putting 89% or more of U.S. endangered species at risk.

Furthermore, this study shows the potential of a fully automated, high throughput assay for sublethal effects testing on wild and solitary bees for chemical exposure, not just honey bees. The study concludes, “Glyphosate exposure impacted bumblebee physiology and nervous system function in several ways, from sensory perception to cognition. This could result from a broad disruption of brain maturation or function. Further research will be needed to elucidate glyphosate’s mechanism of action on insect cognition, as well as to evaluate if this effect is temporary or permanent.”

Pollinator protection policies need improvements, to safeguard not only all pollinators but the crops they pollinate as well. 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 Forum website.

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

Source: Science of the Total Environment

(Beyond Pesticides, July 27, 2023) A study published in the Journal of Economic Entomology calls into question the scientific literature on protecting bees from pesticides. The study analyzes actions taken by pesticide users to reduce the risk of pesticides on nontarget organisms, known as “mitigation measures.” Ultimately, the study finds that there is insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of bee-protecting mitigation measures.   

“Almost all research was centered around protecting honey bees. However, honey bees are a managed species that is not endangered,” Edward Straw, Ph.D., a postdoctoral researcher in the School of Agriculture and Food Science at University College Dublin in Ireland and lead author on the study, says, “When we try to protect bees, we really want to be protecting wild, unmanaged bee species, as these are the species which are in decline.” 

The study includes a chart of mitigation methods that have been tested in the scientific literature. The mitigation measures under evaluation include: restricting pesticide application to certain times of day, restricting the application of pesticides during weather events, removing flowering weeds that attract pollinators, applying repellents to deter pollinators, and more. The researchers find that there are few empirical tests on the most widely used mitigation measures, and they recommend that more and stronger scientific evidence is required to justify existing mitigation measures to help reduce the impacts of pesticides on bees while maintaining crop protection. 

The study also finds that only one category of mitigation measure appears to be more thoroughly covered with 12 studies — repellents, which are used to repel bees from visiting crops recently treated with pesticides. “It is an interesting idea, but it is not yet ready to be used,” says Mr. Straw. “It would need to be tested on a diversity of bee and insect species, as if it is only repellent to one or two species, all the other bees would still be exposed to the pesticide.” 

However, the researchers caution that the number of studies alone is not a sufficient measure of the effectiveness of a mitigation measure. The quality of the research is also important, and evidence from multiple continents and multiple species is needed to determine whether a measure works. 

Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides says, “Even the most effective mitigation measures are not adequate to protect pollinators and human health.” Beyond Pesticides has documented drift through air and the migration of pesticides into groundwater with toxic runoff. 

With bees playing a crucial role in pollinating crops, it is important to ensure that they are adequately protected from the harmful effects of pesticides. Beyond Pesticides has long advocated to protect and enhance biodiversity, prevent crop loss, as well as protect pollinator populations, human health, and wildlife. Anything short of complete pesticide elimination in our agricultural system is inadequate. Eliminating synthetic pesticide use also helps to reduce the use of fossil fuels that contribute to the climate crisis and the spread of pests and diseases. See Beyond Pesticides’ organic agriculture page. Also, see Beyond Pesticides’ Bee Protective page. 

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

Source: Journal of Economic Entomology

(Beyond Pesticides, July 26, 2023) An exploratory study published in Environment International adds to the many studies demonstrating residential prenatal pesticide exposure can result in adverse birth outcomes. Residential exposure to five active pesticide ingredients (Ais) fluroxypyr-meptyl, glufosinate-ammonium, linuron, vinclozolin, and picoxystrobin has adverse effects on gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW), mortality after birth, child’s sex, premature development, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA), and large for gestational age (LGA). Pesticides’ presence in the body has implications for human health, especially during vulnerable life stages like childhood, puberty, pregnancy, and old age.

Pesticide exposure during pregnancy is of specific concern as health effects for all life stages can be long-lasting. Birth and reproductive complications are increasingly common among individuals exposed to environmental toxicants like pesticides. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports birth defects are the leading cause of infant mortality, with one in every 33 infants born with an abnormality that results in death. Therefore, studies like this can help government and health officials safeguard human health by assessing adverse effects following prevalent chemical exposure. 

Using a Dutch birth registry from 2009 to 2013, the researchers selected pregnant mothers over 16 years who were living in non-urban areas (who have never moved addresses or only moved once) as participants. Researchers estimated how many kg of the 139 active ingredients are used within 50, 100, 250, and 500 meters of the mother’s home during pregnancy. To determine the association between evidence of reproductive toxicity and gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW), perinatal mortality, child’s sex, prematurity, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA) and large for gestational age (LGA) among select active ingredients, the study employed generalized linear models, adjusting for individual and area-level confounders. The results demonstrate maternal residential exposure to fluroxypyr-meptyl and vinclozolin has associations with longer GA, exposure to glufosinate-ammonium increases the risk of LBW, and linuron exposure has an association with higher BW and higher probabilities of LGA. Additionally, picoxystrobin has associations with a higher likelihood of LGA.

Environmental contaminants like pesticides are ubiquitous in the environment, with 90 percent of Americans having at least one pesticide compound in their body. Numerous studies indicate chemical exposure mainly stems from dietary exposure, like food and drinking water, and researchers caution that there are hundreds to thousands of chemicals that humans are likely to encounter. Just as nutrients are transferable between mother and fetus, so are chemical contaminants. Studies find pesticide compounds in the mother’s blood can transfer to the fetus via the umbilical cord. A 2021 study finds pregnant women already have over 100 detectable chemicals in blood and umbilical cord samples, including banned chemicals. However, 89 percent of these chemical contaminants are from unidentified sources, lack adequate information, or were not previously detectable in humans. Considering the first few weeks of pregnancy are the most vulnerable periods of fetal development, exposure to toxicants can have much more severe implications. A 2020 study finds prenatal pesticide exposure can increase the risk of the rare fetal disorder holoprosencephaly. This disorder prevents the embryonic forebrain from developing into two separate hemispheres. Moreover, women living near agricultural areas experience higher pesticide exposure rates, increasing the risk of birthing a baby with abnormalities. These birth abnormalities can include acute lymphoblastic leukemia and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Even common household pesticide use during pregnancy can increase nephroblastoma (kidney cancer) and brain tumor risk in children. Therefore, prenatal and early-life exposure to environmental toxicants like pesticides increases susceptibility to disease for both mother and child’s health.

The rates of preterm births, miscarriages/stillbirths, and birth malformations are increasing. Additionally, many current-use pesticides and metabolites (or breakdown products) of many long-banned pesticides still impart negative effects on human health that can continue into childhood and adulthood and may have multigenerational consequences. Thus, pesticide exposure poses a risk to mothers, their subsequent offspring, and future generations. Researchers at Drexel University report that higher levels of some organochlorine compounds, like DDT, during pregnancy are associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and intellectual disability (ID). Although the U.S. bans many organochlorine compounds, the ongoing poisoning and contamination underscore how pervasive and persistent these chemicals are and their continued adverse impact on human health. 

This study amplifies the growing body of scientific research evaluating pesticides’ effects on newborns. Exposure to specific pesticides can increase the risk of higher BW, LGA, and longer GA, indicating an association between these neonatal complications and increased risk of obesity and cardiovascular diseases later in life. Although fluroxypyr-meptyl is one of the only pesticides in the study still approved for use in the European Union (EU), imported products can contain contamination from the remaining active ingredients via countries where use is possible. Moreover, some current-use pesticides share similar modes of action with the active ingredients in this study, suggesting future research on the effects of maternal pesticide exposure can use these findings as models. The study concludes, “The underlying mechanism driving these effects are unclear, but the findings warrant more research into the effects of (non-occupational) exposure to these pesticides on human health, especially in the vulnerable population of pregnant women and their babies. [Active ingredients] that were correlated or that share the same modes of action with the identified in this study may also be considered as leads for further research.”

Such ubiquitous exposure to environmental chemicals is of growing concern. But even more concerning are the multiple studies pinpointing the adverse health outcomes that are linked directly to the chemical exposures.  With the range of ever-present environmental hazards, advocates argue that it should be incumbent upon regulators to act quickly and embrace a precautionary approach. In the absence of protective regulations from the widespread use of pesticides, U.S. residents, particularly sensitive populations like pregnant mothers, are encouraged to take precautions.

There is a growing consensus that exposure to environmental toxicants before pregnancy can impair fertility, pregnancy, and fetal development. Thus, doctors and pediatricians strongly agree that pregnant mothers should avoid pesticide exposure during critical developmental periods. Exposure concerns about pesticides and other environmental toxicants are increasing significantly, especially for adults and children more vulnerable to their toxic effects. Moreover, many pollutants are subject to regulatory standards that do not fully evaluate exposure-associated disease risks. Advocates say that addressing the manufacturing and use of pesticides is essential to mitigate risks from chemical exposure to toxic pesticides. Therefore, advocates urge that policies strengthen pesticide regulations and increase research on the long-term impacts of pesticide exposure.

Beyond Pesticides tracks the most recent studies related to pesticide exposure through the Pesticide Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). This database supports the clear need for strategic action to shift away from pesticide dependency. For more information on the multiple harms of pesticide exposure, see PIDD pages on Birth/Fetal Effects, Sexual and Reproductive Dysfunction, Body Burdens, and other diseases. To learn more about how inadequate pesticide regulations can adversely affect human and environmental health, see Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticides and You article “Highly Destructive Pesticide Effects Unregulated.”

Human and environmental contamination from pesticides can be reduced through the buying, growing, and supporting organic. Study after study finds that making the switch to an all-organic diet significantly reduces pesticide metabolite levels in urine. Furthermore, given the wide availability of non-pesticidal alternative strategies, families and agroindustry workers can apply these methods to promote a safe and healthy environment, especially among vulnerable population groups. For more information on how organic is the right choice for consumers, see the Beyond Pesticides webpage, Health Benefits of Organic Agriculture.

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

Source: Environment International

(Beyond Pesticides, July 25, 2023) How can scientists fight the elimination of national pesticide data? More data! A new report surveys 58 academic institutions, nongovernmental organizations, government officials, and businesses to measure the scientific, educational, and policy use of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Pesticide National Synthesis Project (PNSP), a database that is getting phased out by the current administration.  

According to the report authors, Maggie Douglas, PhD, Bill Freese, Joseph G. Grzywacz, PhD, and Nathan Donley, PhD, the PNSP is the “most comprehensive public description of pesticide use in U.S. agriculture.” Despite its widespread use across the government and 348 citations since 2010, the database has been degraded in recent years, including a shift from monitoring 400 pesticides to 72 pesticides in 2019. Moreover, starting in 2024, estimates of agricultural pesticide use will be released every five years (instead of annually). Advocates believe the loss of PNSP data could further hinder the ability to manage pesticide impacts on humans, agriculture, and the environment. These concerns are outlined in a letter to USGS and the Department of Interior, signed by more than 250 scientists. 

Beyond Pesticides extensively tracks USGS data and resulting findings to inform local and state action to take restrictive action on pesticides for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has failed to act. For example, Beyond Pesticides has cited in its Daily News and databases (Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management and Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database) USGS data on issues including the following:  

• Harming Wildlife, Pesticides in Waterways Run into the Great Lakes Year-Round;  
• 45% of U.S. Tap Water Is Contaminated with PFAS, According to USGS Survey;  
• Ecosystem-Killer Fipronil More Toxic Than Previously Thought, Found in Waterways Throughout the U.S.;  
• USGS Report Shows Dozens of Pesticides Consistently Found in Midwestern Streams, Underscoring the Need for Organic Practices;   
• USGS Documents Threat of Pesticides to Waterways; Farm Bill Amendment Undermines Clean Water Act;   
• Levels of Pesticides Still a Concern for Aquatic Life in U.S. Rivers and Streams;  
• Native Bees Found to Have Residues of Pesticides Linked to Their Steep Decline;  
• USGS Survey Finds Pesticides, Fertilizers in Well Water;  
• USGS Finds Atrazine Herbicide Adversely Affects Fish Reproduction;  
• USGS Survey Finds Low-Level Pesticides in Drinking Water;  
• USGS Identifies Contaminants in Potomac River Possibly Linked to Intersex Fish;  
• Pesticides and Degradates Widely Detected in USGS Chesapeake Bay Study 
• and more, including citations of USDA data in factsheets, testimony, regulatory comments, and Action of the Week. 

Key findings from the report’s questionnaire highlight the critical role of USGS in providing pesticide use data, graphs, and maps. After compiling over 100 responses, the report finds that the PNSP is widely used in scientific research and policy analysis for “environmental integrity, agriculture, and human health.” Across federal and state governments, PNSP is frequently utilized in agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Center for Disease Control, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and USGS. Notably, many of the data from PNSP are not publicly available elsewhere. There is another national pesticide database from the USDA called QuickStats, but the report says the coverage over time, space, and pesticide compounds is not as widespread as the data in the USGS’s PNSP database.  

The report surveyed 111 people at 58 organizations with the following breakdown in representation: 60% academia, 24% nonprofits, 6% federal agencies, and 6% private sector. Among the scientists who completed the questionnaire, the PNSP was used in 65 of their collective number of scientific journal articles. The survey respondents used the database on topics including pesticide effects on wildlife or ecosystems, agricultural or pest management, the fate of the environment, and pesticide effects on humans. The themes from the survey include uses for informing research design, patterns of pesticide contamination, effects of organisms, pesticide regulation or policy, and educating farmers or the public. For more information, see a full summary of the report and talking points by the report’s lead author. 

The reasons behind these aforementioned cutbacks remain unclear, as the cost of the program—$90,000 to $150,000 per year (not including staff time)—pales in comparison to the USGS’s annual budget of $1.7 billion. Moreover, Dr. Douglas says that the changes to PNSP were made without consulting other divisions within USGS or other agencies that use the data.  

According to the report, the PNSP’s comprehensive and accessible dataset has played a pivotal role in research and policymaking. With the high stakes of biodiversity loss and public health becoming increasingly widespread, the need for reliable pesticide data is more crucial than ever. The report authors are part are calling on the USGS to:  

• Restore the dataset to its full scope of 400 pesticides or more every year and retroactively estimate the missing data 
• Gather input from stakeholders about the past and planned changes to the PNSP 
• Restore data about seeds being treated with pesticides
• Updating the estimates in the PNSP every year and posting preliminary estimates as needed 

At Beyond Pesticides, we believe the preservation of the USGS Pesticide National Synthesis Project is essential to safeguard public health, support organic agriculture practices, and protect the environment from the impacts of pesticide use. Contact your elected officials today about improving transparency about pesticides and ask them how they plan to create or enforce “science-based” regulations of toxic chemicals without data.  

Tell your U.S. Representative and Senators to help keep the USGS’ Pesticide National Synthesis Project. Tell Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland and EPA Administrator that USGS mapping of pesticide use and monitoring of waterways is critical to good decision making and pesticides shown to contaminate rivers and streams must be banned. 

Letter to U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators 

I am writing to ask you to advocate for the retention of the Pesticide National Synthesis Project at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This important program for data collection is slated to be phased out.  

A recent study by the USGS shows that waterways that flow into the Great Lakes are experiencing year-round pesticide contamination that exceeds benchmarks meant to protect aquatic life. This is only one of many studies based on USGS monitoring of 110 stream and river sites, combined with mapping of annual agricultural chemical use. Other recent studies by USGS have discovered dozens of pesticides that are consistently found in midwestern streams; 88 percent of water samples in U.S. rivers and streams contain at least five or more different pesticides; 41% of public water supply wells are contaminated with pesticides or their degradates; and degradation of rivers from pesticide pollution continues unabated. 

The studies relating pesticide use and contamination of waterways can and should be used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in pesticide registration decisions. “What you use makes it into the water,” Sam Oliver, PhD, coauthor of the most recent study, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. As important as the existing monitoring network is, a joint study by USGS and EPA shows that it underestimates the problem—more frequent sampling detects twice as many pesticides, at higher concentrations. 

The USGS Water Resources Mission Area (WMA) researches pesticide use, trends in pesticide occurrence in streams, concentrations of pesticides in water of potential human health concern, pesticide toxicity to aquatic organisms, pesticides and stream ecology, and pesticides and lake sediment. While agricultural practices appear to correlate with peaking pesticide contamination during the growing season, urban runoff represents a larger overall proportion of the contamination flowing into waterways. With little to no natural soil to filter contamination, and impervious surfaces creating massive outflows of polluted water, this finding is unsurprising. Research conducted by USGS and EPA on urban runoff across the country in 2019 found 215 of 438 sampled toxic compounds present in the water. The sheer number of different chemicals and thus potential for even more toxic mixtures presents significant risks to health and the environment.   

The toxic soup in many U.S. waterways is unsustainable and threatens the foundation of many food chains. Imbalances in aquatic environments can ripple throughout the food web, creating trophic cascades that further exacerbate health and environmental damage. The data on water contamination has become one of the compelling reasons to abandon reliance on toxic chemicals in favor of organic land management can eliminate these threats. 

Scientific research by USGS is essential to evaluating the impacts of pesticides and must be included in EPA’s pesticide registration decisions. USGS needs your continued support to elevate, not eliminate or reduce, its role in uncovering and documenting the contamination caused by registered pesticide use. In addition, please urge EPA to cancel pesticides that pollute waterways and groundwater. No contamination is reasonable under federal pesticide law, given the availability of cost-effective alternative practices and products certified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program. 

Thank you. 

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

Source: An Essential Resource at Risk: Stakeholder Perspectives on the USGS Pesticide National Synthesis Project 

(Beyond Pesticides, July 24, 2023) Sewage sludge, also known as biosolids, is a byproduct of sewage treatment and is used as a source of organic matter for amending soil in nonorganic agriculture and landscaping. EPA has published a list of 726 chemicals found in biosolids in the National Sewage Sludge Surveys. This list does not include the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are emerging contaminants of biosolids.

Tell your Governor and local officials to ban the use of biosolids in farms and parks, until there is adequate testing of toxic residues—which does not currently exist.

In addition to PFAS (also referred to as “forever chemicals”), persistent toxic pollutants found in biosolids include: inorganic chemicals such as metals and trace elements; organic chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls or PCBs, dioxins, pharmaceuticals, and surfactants; and pathogens including bacteria, viruses, and parasites. Regulation of biosolids by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been found by the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG), in its report EPA Unable to Assess the Impact of Hundreds of Unregulated Pollutants in Land-Applied Biosolids on Human Health and the Environment, to be inadequate. Lacking sufficient oversight at the federal level, action to protect health and the environment falls to the states and local jurisdictions.

Here are the conclusions of OIG:

“The EPA’s controls over the land application of sewage sludge (biosolids) were incomplete or had weaknesses and may not fully protect human health and the environment. The EPA consistently monitored biosolids for nine regulated pollutants. However, it lacked the data or risk assessment tools needed to make a determination on the safety of 352 pollutants found in biosolids. The EPA identified these pollutants in a variety of studies from 1989 through 2015. Our analysis determined that the 352 pollutants include 61 designated as acutely hazardous, hazardous or priority pollutants in other programs.

The Clean Water Act requires the EPA to review biosolids regulations at least every 2 years to identify additional toxic pollutants and promulgate regulations for such pollutants. Existing controls based on the Clean Water Act and the EPA’s Biosolids Rule include testing for nine pollutants (all heavy metals), researching for additional pollutants that may need regulation, reducing pathogens and the attractiveness of biosolids to potential disease-carrying organisms, and conducting compliance monitoring activities. The EPA’s risk communication regarding biosolids should also be transparent.

The EPA has reduced staff and resources in the biosolids program over time, creating barriers to addressing control weaknesses identified in the program. Past reviews showed that the EPA needed more information to fully examine the health effects and ecological impacts of land-applied biosolids. Although the EPA could obtain additional data to complete biosolids risk assessments, it is not required to do so. Without such data, the agency cannot determine whether biosolids pollutants with incomplete risk assessments are safe. The EPA’s website, public documents and biosolids labels do not explain the full spectrum of pollutants in biosolids and the uncertainty regarding their safety. Consequently, the biosolids program is at risk of not achieving its goal to protect public health and the environment.”

Despite OIG’s recommendation that EPA disclose to the public the fact that the chemicals in biosolids are not fully evaluated for safety and therefore safety claims, or implications of safety, are fraudulent, EPA continues to mislead the public. The OIG’s recommendation stated, “Change the website response to the question “Are biosolids safe?” to include that the EPA cannot make a determination on the safety of biosolids because there are unregulated pollutants found in the biosolids that still need to have risk assessments completed. This change should stay in place until the EPA can assess the risk of all unregulated pollutants found in biosolids.” However, EPA’s website does just the opposite with the following language: “Pollutants found in biosolids will vary depending upon inputs to individual wastewater treatment facilities over time. The presence of a pollutant in biosolids alone does not mean that the biosolids pose harm to human health and the environment.” Rather than alerting the public to the fact that full information is not available on the hazard of toxic chemical residues in biosolids, as recommended by OIG, the agency is telling the public that findings of residues does not indicate a threat to health.

Land application of biosolids to farms and landscapes is considered the standard means of “disposal.” Chemicals such as PFAS have been found to migrate into food when grown in farms using contaminated biosolids. Over 60% of biosolids are used in crops, and the contaminants in them make their way to our food and water. But if biosolids are used in landscaping, the contaminants pose a hazard to landscapers and those using athletic fields. In view of EPA’s failure to provide comprehensive identification, regulation, and elimination of potential contaminants, the biosolids themselves must be tested to ensure safety. Biosolids should be tested to ensure that they do not cause acute toxicity, cancer, genetic mutations, birth defects, reproductive or developmental effects, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption, or immune system effects. Otherwise, they should not be used on farms or landscapes.

Tell your Governor and local officials to ban the use of biosolids in farms and parks, until there is adequate testing of toxic residues—which does not currently exist.

Letter to Governors and [local officials:

Sewage sludge, also known as biosolids, is a byproduct of sewage treatment and is used as a source of organic matter for amending soil in nonorganic agriculture and landscaping. EPA has published a list of 726 chemicals found in biosolids in the National Sewage Sludge Surveys. This list does not include the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are emerging contaminants of biosolids.

In addition to PFAS (also referred to as “forever chemicals”), persistent toxic pollutants found in biosolids include inorganic chemicals such as metals and trace elements; organic chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls or PCBs, dioxins, pharmaceuticals, and surfactants; and pathogens including bacteria, viruses, and parasites. Regulation of biosolids by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been found by the EPA Office of Inspector General (OIG) to be inadequate. Lacking sufficient oversight at the federal level, states and local jurisdictions must act to eliminate the hazards created by these contaminants.

Land application of biosolids to farms and landscapes is considered the standard means of “disposal.” Chemicals such as PFAS have been found to migrate into food when grown in farms using contaminated biosolids. Over 60% of biosolids are used in crops, and the contaminants in them make their way to our food and water. But if biosolids are used in landscaping, the contaminants pose a hazard to landscapers and those using athletic fields. In view of EPA’s failure to provide comprehensive identification, regulation, and elimination of potential contaminants, the biosolids themselves must be tested to ensure safety. Biosolids must be tested to ensure that they do not cause acute toxicity, cancer, genetic mutations, birth defects, reproductive or developmental effects, neurotoxicity, endocrine disruption, or immune system effects. Otherwise, they should not be used on farms or landscapes.

Thank you for your attention to this urgent issue.

(Beyond Pesticides, July 21, 2023) A comprehensive and scathing report, “Neonicotinoid insecticides: Failing to come to grips with a predictable environmental disaster,” issued by American Bird Conservancy (ABC)in June, lays out the dire consequences of neonicotinoid (neonic) pesticides’ continued use. The report is an update of an earlier review from 2013, which warned of the risks to birds, stating starkly: “A single corn kernel coated with a neonicotinoid can kill a songbird. Even a tiny grain of wheat or canola treated with the oldest neonicotinoid, imidacloprid, can poison a bird. As little as 1/10th of a corn seed per day during egg-laying season is all that is needed to affect reproduction with any of the neonicotinoids registered to date.”

The story of neonic harm is one that has been repeated for generations with different pesticides. Pesticide manufacturers claim every new generation of their products is safer and more environmentally benign than the previous one. This is seldom true. There is ample evidence that pesticides pose threats to nearly every class of organism on Earth, from earthworms to elephants.

The neonicotinoids, introduced in the early 1990s, have been marketed as safe for vertebrates, non-bioaccumulative, and, because of their flexible application methods and long persistence in soils, requiring fewer applications than previous pesticide groups.

Neonics are now the most widely used insecticide globally in agriculture. The chemical group includes acetamiprid, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, clothianidin and thiamethoxam, as well as the minor compounds dinotefuran, nitenpyram and nithiazine. Neonics are often used to pretreat seeds before planting but are also sprayed on leaves and applied in what’s called “soil drenching.”

Because of neonics’ devastating harms to bees, the general public is likely now aware of the damage they cause to pollinators, but perhaps not so alert to their harms to birds. Despite the manufacturers’ assurances, residues left on seeds remain at levels that can harm nontarget insects and birds, many of which flock to agricultural fields expressly to eat seeds and insects. Thus, both seed-eating and insect-eating birds are often exposed to neonics. In fact, regardless of adult diet, it is estimated that 96% of birds feed insects to their young.

Neonics are useful because they are water soluble and thus can travel through all of a plant’s cells to kill plant predators. But this also means they are consumed not only by seed-eating birds but also by pollinating insects and hummingbirds, and they travel rapidly through aquatic environments. Even though manufacturers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assumed when the neonics were registered that their water solubility would prevent bioaccumulation, their residues have been found even in seabirds.

Further, researchers have found harmful reproductive effects at concentrations much lower than the thresholds set by regulators. The ABC authors write, “Based on recent studies, we have increasing concerns over reproductive and sub-lethal effects resulting from low exposures in farm fields. In particular, impacts on sperm quality have been seen at dose levels a fraction of our calculated MATC [an average of no-effect and low-effect levels]….Given that exposure is often season-long, this raises the specter of significant effects on a large number of bird species.”

The industry and the government also appear to rely on some assumptions about bird behavior that appear to be specious. According to the ABC authors, EPA believes birds develop “learned avoidance,” that is, birds will be repelled by the neonics and will not eat enough seeds or insects treated with neonics to make them sick. But as the authors also note, “Learned avoidance in laboratory settings has been found to be highly variable and dependant [sic] on test conditions,” and if symptoms occur after a delay, a bird will not connect the symptoms to the food and will not learn avoidance. Wild birds can also be exposed to neonics via their drinking water, dermal contact, or inhalation, exposure pathways they cannot control. Birds may also be incapacitated enough that they quit eating, fail to reproduce, fail to migrate, become paralyzed or experience seizures.

The European Union banned three neonics in flowering crops pollinated by honeybees in 2013 and in 2018 expanded the ban to all field crops (but not permanent greenhouses). By contrast, EPA has ignored the advice of its own scientists. According to the ABC authors, “As early as 1994, EPA scientists had warned that both acute and chronic aquatic risk triggers had been exceeded for both non-endangered and endangered species exposed to imidacloprid….In 2007, USEPA scientists also extended concerns to vertebrate wildlife citing potential risks from low chronic exposures [references omitted].”

In May 2019, EPA obliged a request from Syngenta, Valent, and Bayer to cancel the registrations of 12 out of 59 pesticide products containing clothianidin and thiamethoxam. The request derived from a settlement in December 2018 of a lawsuit brought by beekeepers and NGOs. EPA is also supposed to revisit the whole class of neonics to assess their effects on endangered species.

But in the meantime, perhaps the most egregious regulatory failure is that neonics used as seed coatings escape regulation, falling under the “Treated Item Exemption” of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which means the vast majority of applications of neonics are not even counted in usage estimates, according to the ABC authors. In 2017 a number of progressive organizations including the Center for Food Safety petitioned EPA to remove seed treatments from this exemption. EPA took five years to deny the petition, although it promised to “review labeling instructions for pesticides registered for seed treatments.” Earlier this year the groups sued EPA.

The federal government is also reducing the amount of data available to scientists and the public about pesticide use and spread. This year the U.S. Geological Survey slashed the amount of data it collects in its National Pesticide Use Map and is planning to release its report only every five years instead of yearly, starting in 2024. It has reduced the number of pesticides it tracks from 400 to 72, in part because the USGS buys data from a private company, Kynetec, which stopped including seed treatments in its usage statistics in 2015. The ABC authors add that the USGS also omits this category in its National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) maps, as the “seed coatings are too difficult to reliably source information on and, therefore, are not included in national pesticide-use estimates.”

Thus, no one really knows how much neonicotinoids are used on seeds. Claims that usage has declined reflect only that seed treatments are omitted from usage estimates. For example, a USGS graph of clothianidin usage in the ABC report shows that in 2014 more than 3.5 million pounds were used—the vast majority of it on corn—and the next year it was just over half a million pounds. This means only that 2015 was the first year seed treatments were dropped from usage estimates, not that less clothianidin was used. A paper published in 2015 in Environmental Science & Technology observes that, “It is remarkable that almost the entire area of the most widely grown crop in the U.S. (i.e., maize) is now treated with an insecticide, yet we have no public survey data reflecting this trend (USGS data are based on proprietary surveys and do not report the key metric of percent area treated).”

This kind of head-in-the-sand avoidance by regulators and agencies is dragging ecosystems into an abyss. Here’s what you can do to pull it back out:

• If you use neonics on outdoor plants, stop immediately. Buy organic fruits, vegetables, and seeds. Beyond Pesticides has a directory of organic retailers of these items. There are alternatives to neonics, as detailed here. If you feed wild birds, the ABC has looked into the question of whether commercial bird seed for wild birds contains neonic residues, and in 2019 concluded there is little risk of exposure to birds by this route so far.
• Write to your elected representatives in support of the Migratory Bird Protection Act. A sample letter is available from Beyond Pesticides. First introduced in 2020, the bill failed to reach a vote, and during the Trump administration the bill was altered drastically to absolve industry and agriculture from liability for bird kills. It was reintroduced in 2021 with restored protections to modify the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by banning the “unauthorized take or killing of migratory birds includ[ing] incidental take by commercial activities.” This would include birds killed by pesticides.
• As Beyond Pesticides has previously urged, “Learn more about what you can do in your community to protect pollinators and other species impacted by pesticides, and by neonicotinoids, in particular, via the short video, ‘Seeds that Poison’. More broadly, organic solutions to pest management and land management are the best ways to protect bird and non-target wildlife populations….For more information on organic land management see the recent article in Pesticides and You titled ‘Thinking Holistically When Making Land Management Decisions.’”

Beyond Pesticides collaborates with people and local organizations to advance changes that eliminate petrochemicals and fertilizers. See the Tools for Change page and become an advocate for Parks for a Sustainable Future.

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

Source: Neonicotinoid insecticides: Failing to come to grips with a predictable environmental disaster, American Bird Conservancy, June 2023, https://abcbirds.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2023-Neonic-Report.pdf.

(Beyond Pesticides, July 20, 2023) Despite evidence of toxicity to pets from Seresto pet collars (manufactured with the neurotoxic insecticide flumethrin, as well as the notorious neonicotinoid imidacloprid), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) has announced that the popular flea and tick collars will remain on the market, but with new mitigation measures. However, advocates say that these measures will do little to protect people and pets from chemical exposure using these collars. The agency will require Elanco — the manufacturer of Seresto — to conduct enhanced reporting for various factors, including adverse symptoms, veterinary community outreach, and warnings on the product’s label. Seresto, developed by Bayer and sold by Elanco, has been linked to nearly 1,700 pet deaths, injuries to tens of thousands of animals, and harm to hundreds of people. There are nontoxic ways to protect pets from fleas and other pests while protecting human family members.

Children Ignored by the Agency
EPA has a history of ignoring the exposure patterns to children who come into close contact with pets and their flea collars and the potential adverse health threats, opting for warnings instead of regulatory action. In 2017, EPA issued a warning for tetrachlorvinphos (TCVP) flea collars that advised: “not allowing children to play with [the] pet collars; keeping  [the] spray and power products out of reach of children; and, washing hands thoroughly with soap and water after handling.” Advocates point to the unrealistic nature of the precautions being advised, given that children come into contact with collars and other toxins sprayed on pets when they play and sleep with their pets and through hands (exposure) to mouth contact (ingestion). With TCVP pet collars (not pump/trigger liquid sprays), EPA announced a Notice of Intent to Cancel in October 2022 pending additional manufacturer data. In the case of Seresto collars and the synthetic pyrethoid ingredient, EPA is ignoring a plethora of studies in the independent scientific literature on adverse effects to children, including a 2022 study on prenatal and infant daily exposure effects.

EPA Opts for Warnings and More Information and Monitoring, Not Regulatory Action
EPA’s multi-year scientific review of Seresto-related incidents analyzes all reports of death and injury associated with these collars from 2016 to 2020. Although EPA highlights two percent of Seresto-related incidents resulted in death, death-related incidents are missing critical details that prevent EPA from determining the cause. Sublethal exposure to chemicals in these pet collars can cause severe adverse effects—from pruritus (itchy skin) and dermal lesions and changes in fur to lethargy, anorexia, and neurological symptoms. Since the removal of the collar can alleviate moderate to severe clinical signs of adverse health incidence, and reapplication of the collar results in a reoccurrence of clinal symptoms, EPA will require the registrant of Seresto to implement the following measures:

 “To alert veterinarians and consumers of potential risks, the terms of continued registration require Elanco to include label warnings on Seresto products that describe common adverse effects that have been reported, along with instructions to remove the collar if those effects occur and instructions on how to report the incident. Elanco also must develop an outreach program to more effectively communicate with veterinarians and the public on the risks of using the product and other similar pesticides on pets.

• To improve the quality of data reported when receiving reported incidents from consumers, Elanco must pursue additional information to the greatest extent possible to ensure that complete details of each event are captured. This information includes whether the pet had any pre-existing conditions or previous history of the reported condition. The Seresto pet collar registration has also been split into two registrations, one for cats and one for dogs, to make comparison of incident data across products easier in the future. Elanco must report incident and sales data to EPA on an annual basis.
• To reduce the risk of strangulation, Elanco must evaluate potential changes to the emergency release mechanism of Seresto pet collars to prevent death by strangulation or choking. The company must submit a report detailing the data and analysis collected and performed in pursuit of this effort within one year. Based on this evaluation, EPA may require a modified release mechanism for the Seresto collar.
• To allow for the continued evaluation of reported incidents, EPA has limited its current approval of Seresto collar registrations to five years. EPA will continue to evaluate Seresto incident data over that period.”

Background
Seresto collars are plastic pet collars embedded with pesticides designed to kill fleas, ticks, and lice; they contain the active ingredients flumethrin and imidacloprid. Flumethrin, a chemical in the pyrethroid class of synthetic neurotoxic insecticides, has been linked repeatedly to neurological issues, such as seizures and learning disabilities in children, to gastrointestinal distress, and to damage to invertebrates, according to EPA’s own analysis. However, this is not the first-time tick and flea pet products have garnered negative attention regarding pet health, as numerous flea and tick prevention products (e.g., collars, topical treatments, sprays, and dust) include pesticides such as (TCVP (mentioned above), propoxur, synthetic pyrethroids, and fipronil are toxic, not just to pets and non-target organisms, but to humans, as well.

Moreover, the agency fails to evaluate the synergistic effects of pesticides as these pest collars can contain more than one active ingredient that can work in tandem with another to exacerbate the adverse health symptoms. For instance, USA Today reports, “A 2012 Bayer study found [flumethrin and imidacloprid] have a ‘synergistic effect,’ meaning they are more toxic together on fleas….” However, a 2016 EPA bulletin concluded, “The risk of the combination of the two active ingredients, flumethrin, and imidacloprid, was not assessed because the two chemicals act in completely different ways.” Therefore, the EPA does not adequately evaluate the risks and harms of exposure to multiple pesticide compounds and “inert” or “other” pesticide ingredients.

EPA’s review of these Seresto-related incidents highlights the agency’s failure to thoroughly evaluate these products for animal safety with ongoing monitoring. In fact, in 2021, internal emails at EPA show that career scientists at the agency expressed concern about pesticide-laced pet collars, such as the notorious Seresto flea and tick collars, but that EPA managers “instructed them to avoid documenting those worries in publicly accessible records.” Additionally, the 2021 internal email revelations are further and unfortunate evidence of the state of EPA’s function in carrying out its fundamental mission “to protect human health and the environment.” However, for EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, this means protection from the broadly damaging impacts of synthetic pesticides. Beyond Pesticides has chronicled EPA’s “capture” by industry influence and the corruption that has marked both agrichemical industry behavior and, occasionally, internal EPA actions, as well as specific instances of EPA failures, such as those (like the pesticide pet collars) that put children at risk, and those that continue to allow the devastation of critical species (such as pollinators), ecosystems, and fragile habitats.

Furthermore, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) notes that EPA has received more than 75,000 complaints about these pet collars, associating their use with problems ranging from skin irritation to death. Gizmodo puts the current count of complaints to the EPA about Seresto, since 2012, at more than 86,000 — with 2,340 of those relating to pet deaths. CBD’s environmental health director, Lori Ann Burd, commented that — given EPA’s estimate of the ratio of pesticide incidents “in the real world” to complaints filed with EPA as roughly 5:1 — a sensible extrapolation is that many more pets wearing Seresto collars have been hurt or have died than are represented by reports filed with the agency. Karen McCormack, a retired EPA scientist and communications officer, notes that these collars have generated the greatest number of incident reports of any pesticide product in her long experience. She says, “EPA appears to be turning a blind eye to this problem, and after seven years of an increasing number of incidents, they are telling the public that they are continuing to monitor the situation. But I think this is a significant problem that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later.”

Until EPA acts to protect pets by canceling the registration for Seresto flea and tick collars, dog and cat families can take steps to ensure their beloved pets are not negatively affected by these products (insecticide dust, sprays, or shampoos). Certainly, veterinarians may be able to suggest alternatives. In addition, check out Beyond Pesticides’ page on Keeping Our Companions Safe, its guide to least-toxic controls for fleas, and its comprehensive guide to keeping pets safe. NRDC also offers guidance on its website: Non-toxic Ways to Protect Your Pet.

Safely kill flea and tick larvae with non-toxic solutions: vacuum daily during flea season (changing bag often); groom pet daily with a flea comb (cleaning comb with soap-water between brushes); frequently bathe pets with soap and water; and frequently wash pet bedding, restricting pet to only one bed. Learn more about how to protect your pet from pesticides and the least-toxic controls for flea and tick infestation. 

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

Source: EPA, USA TODAY; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(Beyond Pesticides, July 19, 2023) A study in Environment International (August issue) by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) finds that almost half of U.S. tap water is contaminated with PFAS chemicals, with measured concentrations in both private wells and public water sources. Authors of the study “estimate that at least one PFAS could be detected in about 45% of U.S. drinking-water samples.” Although there are more than 12,000 different types of PFAS, only 32 are detectable by USGS lab tests, so 45% is likely a low estimate. 

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of chemicals found in a variety of common household products such as nonstick pans and stain resistant carpeting, as well as pesticides and biosolids used as fertilizer. Long-chain PFAS, such as PFOA and PFOS, are more widely known because of their high toxicity and controversial use in the past. Today, long-chain PFAS are often replaced with short-chain PFAS, as the latter are not as bioaccumulative; however, short-chained PFAS also pose a significant threat because they remain highly persistent in the environment. Past Beyond Pesticides’ articles have described the prevalence of PFAS in products as well as their negative health consequences, including cancer, decreased fertility, obesity, and hormone suppression. 

PFAS are concerning because of their persistence in the environment alongside their contamination of food and water. “The quality and sustainability of drinking-water are rising concerns in the United States  because of population-driven water demands, increasing contamination of drinking-water resources, and a growing understanding of potential human-health consequences associated with exposures to contaminants,” according to the study’s authors. PFAS can contaminate drinking water sources as a result of biosolids application, outdoor pesticide use, industrial and wastewater treatment discharges, firefighting foams, and septic or landfill system contamination. 

The EPA recently issued health advisories on PFAS, emphasizing that it failed to adequately regulate this group of dangerous chemicals. Industrial chemical giants Dupont, Chemours, and Corteva are currently embroiled in a multi-billion dollar settlement over their role in PFAS water contamination. Although, as the study’s authors point out, “newly proposed MCLs for PFOA (4 ng/L) and PFOS (4 ng/L) were released in March 2023 by EPA as part of the National Primary Drinking-water Standards Rule,” these standards are not yet enforceable, so contamination remains a pressing issue. 

The aim of this study is to compare water samples from private and public wells, highlight in aggregate the consequences of PFAS on human health, and determine the primary drivers of PFAS contamination of drinking water. Water samples from all 50 states, Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands were collected from 716 point-of-use tap water locations (269 private wells and 447 public water sources) between 2016 and 2021, with PFAS concentration measurements assessed by three different laboratories.  Researchers collected data through a standardized analytical survey with the help of a volunteer network. New data was examined in combination with tap water samples collected by the research team in past years. Although there are more records of water contaminants from samples gathered directly after treatment and before distribution, there are limited measurements of PFAS contamination at point-of-use (water that directly comes out of household faucets). This trend holds especially true for private wells, as they are often poorly monitored. As highlighted by authors of the study, testing before distribution does not account for contamination through “plumbing material with PFAS or sorption/degradation in the supply network.”  

After analysis, similar PFAS concentrations were identified in private and public water sources, but increased contamination levels were measured near urban centers, as well as industrial manufacturing and waste facilities that actively use PFAS. Types of PFAS identified per water source ranged from one to nine, and the corresponding amount of PFAS detected ranged from 0.348 to 346 ng/L. Seventeen different types of PFAS were detected in at least one source and as mentioned above, 45% of the water sources measured contained at least one type of PFAS. Exposure to PFOA and PFOS are believed to pose the greatest risk to human health, considering their well-documented carcinogenic capacity. 

Given the growing body of evidence on the dangers and prevalence of PFAS in our homes, outdoor spaces, and human bodies, methods are needed to clean and remediate drinking water sources—and immediately eliminating these toxic chemicals from production and use to protect people and the environment. More research is needed to investigate how PFAS interact with other organic and inorganic contaminants. Additionally, research must identify, and address, the geographical regions and subpopulations most affected by PFAS water contamination, as well as ensure that sample monitoring continues for both heavily used public systems and the more sparsely used public and private wells. 

Beyond Pesticides offers a variety of articles in the archives detailing the dangers of PFAS and prevalence of PFAS in pesticides. Check out Threatened Waters: Turning the Tide on Pesticide Contamination to learn more about the health and safety of water sources. Click here and here to take action against the widespread contamination of PFAS and explore Beyond Pesticides’ Tools for Change webpage to get involved in community action.  

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

Source: Environment International 

(Beyond Pesticides, July 18, 2023) The Global Environment Facility (GEF) Council, the governing body for the world’s largest source of multilateral funding for biodiversity loss and climate change, has authorized $34 million USD to support the new high seas treaty agreement announced on March 4. The move marks a significant step toward safeguarding the delicate ecosystems of the world’s oceans and promoting sustainable practices on a global scale. The oceans suffer from severe pollution caused by various substances, including pesticides, agricultural runoff, industrial and petrochemical waste, and synthetic chemicals found in plastics. These pollutants pose a significant threat to human health. The ecological consequences of ocean pollution have long been highlighted by Beyond Pesticides.

The March draft agreement was approved by 193 countries under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). Then in June, the BBNJ agreement was adopted by consensus at the United Nations meeting in New York. The agreement will be open for countries to sign on September 20, 2023, after the Sustainable Development Goal Summit. In order for the treaty to be entered into force, sixty countries must ratify the BBNJ. In the United States, President Biden can ratify the treaty if two-thirds of the U.S. Senate approves a resolution of ratification.

The BBNJ is a legally binding agreement that establishes a framework for managing activities such as fishing, shipping, resource extraction, and pollution in the high seas. Critics of the agreement are concerned that the U.S. will not ratify the new high seas treaty because it was developed under the auspices of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which was not ratified by the U.S.

The $34 million allocation by the GEF Council will provide financial support to countries and organizations working toward the effective implementation of the BBNJ treaty. These funds will be utilized for capacity-building efforts, technical assistance, and the development of innovative tools and approaches to monitor and conserve marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The funds will be used to support various initiatives, including the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) in high seas regions, the development of scientific research programs to enhance our understanding of marine biodiversity, and the creation of partnerships and networks to facilitate international cooperation on sustainable ocean management. In addition to the aforementioned benefits, the treaty includes the following principles:

• The Precautionary Principle
• Polluter pays
• The common heritage of humankind
• Equity, including the fair and equitable sharing of benefits integrated, ecosystemic approaches
• Recognition of the special circumstances of small island developing states and least-developed countries

GEF CEO and Chairperson Carlos Manuel Rodríguez said, “The Global Environment Facility is honored to serve this important new convention. We are ready to continue and intensify support for biodiversity protection and ocean health on the high seas.” According to its website, GEF is governed by a body of 32 (14 for developed countries, 16 for developing countries, and 2 for economies in transition) appointed by the 185 member countries, and funding is made available to developing countries that are seeking to comply with international environmental agreements. The website notes, “Financial contributions by donor countries are provided via several trust funds administered by the World Bank acting as the GEF Trustee and serviced by a functionally independent Secretariat housed at the World Bank.”

The GEF Council’s decision has been met with widespread acclaim from environmental organizations, scientific communities, and governments worldwide. Cassandra Worthington, community and policy manager at Beyond Pesticides, said, “The allocation of funds from the GEF not only signifies a financial commitment but also sends a strong message of collective responsibility towards the protection and conservation of marine biodiversity beyond national boundaries.”

Though many climate activists have historically focused on the carbon in the atmosphere, there is a growing concern about the accumulation in the Earth’s oceans. Oceans play a vital role in regulating the Earth’s climate, holding 50% more carbon than the atmosphere. In the face of catastrophic climate change, prioritizing the health of Earth’s oceans can help stabilize global temperatures and weather patterns.

Moreover, protecting the health of the oceans ensures the preservation of diverse ecosystems and safeguards countless species from extinction. The same chemicals responsible for the decline of insects on land also contribute to the loss of vital aquatic and marine organisms, disrupting entire ecosystems. Healthy marine ecosystems contribute to the overall biodiversity of the planet. Beyond Pesticides reported neonicotinoid insecticides, detected in rivers, streams, and lakes across 29 states, which have detrimental effects on crucial aquatic organisms and ecosystems.

With the climate crisis upon us, international collaboration to take action is critical to a sustainable future. Healthy oceans are a critical element of any plan to mitigate the threats of the climate crisis. Beyond Pesticides is urging people and organizations to: Tell President Biden to sign the UN high seas treaty. Tell EPA and Congress to protect the ocean from toxic pollution. In your community, advocate for Parks for a Sustainable Future and work with Beyond Pesticides to put organic land management practices in place.

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

Source: GEF press release