Community responses to pesticides

A community meeting in Lincolnshire this autumn posed questions on whether perceived high levels of breast cancer locally might be linked with pesticides use. But proving a link can be difficult and new approaches in epidemiology may help concerned communities. The following pages 5 to 9 examine some of the problems faced by individuals and communities in gathering evidence. Lincolnshire County Council is considering the part it can play in relation to the largely agricultural use of pesticide in its region.

Many rural communities believe their health suffers as a result of exposure to pesticides, but face problems in proving a link. In Lincolnshire, where agriculture is the dominant land use, and tilled land is over three times the national average, residents are increasingly expressing their concern about effects of pesticide use. While there is a growing sympathy amongst local authorities and parts of the medical profession, proving these links is not easy.
    Dr. Kenneth Muir of the University of Nottingham Medical School shows how the limitations of population and exposure statistics at present make it difficult to establish whether clusters of ill-health really do exist, but also points to solutions (page 6). Some communities are considering how to gather better data in a structured manner. Dr. Andrew Watterson of De Montfort University explains a new concept and practice of lay epidemiology, where communities and residents can work with medical authorities and regulators both to research and define the problem and to document accurate information for analysis (page 8).
    Better data would be assisted by better reporting mechanisms. As long ago as 1987, the House of Commons Select Committee on Agriculture report, published on the authority of Sir Richard Body, the Chairman, recommended a system to monitor adverse reactions to pesticides. The Poisons Unit at Birmingham was commissioned to advise on this in 1990. While it reported in 1993 to Health and Safety Executive (HSE), its recommendations have not been made public. A new Select Committee on Agriculture report strongly criticises the lack of adverse reaction reporting (see box 1). Meantime, pesticide incidents have increased this year and the latest HSE report shows the total number investigated increased to the highest level in four years from 196 in 1993-94 to 251 in 1994-95(1).

Box 1. Agriculture Committee demands better reporting
The House of Commons Agriculture Committee has criticised the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) over its approach to safety issues and organophosphate (OP) sheep dips. It has called for:
  • greater dissemination of information about the suspected adverse reactions scheme to the farming and the medical communities to improve the reporting rate (see this page);
  • responsibility for monitoring and investigating human suspect adverse reactions to veterinary medicines to be removed from the VMD and given to an independent research institute or university department;
  • the Veterinary Products Committee's Appraisal Panel to have an independent Chair and make public the names of members;
  • OP sheep dips to be classified as prescription-only products until the outcome of the government research project into possible chronic effects of OP sheep dips on humans is known.

The main focus of the Committee was the costs to industry of the agencies and the effectiveness of the services they provide and the report makes recommendations concerning these issues.

Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK] response
The Pesticides Trust welcomes the Committee's recommendations that there should be greater access to information, particularly for doctors and farmers, on veterinary medicines-including OP sheep dips. The Committee's desire to restrict access to sheep dips by prescription procedures may seem on the surface to be a positive move, but it is difficult to see how this could work in practice. OP sheep dips will always remain too dangerous for sensitive individuals.
    The fact that the Committee chose not to address the issue of the overall policy on pesticide usage and safety was a missed opportunity, especially as the Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food and the Department of the Environment are now considering pesticide minimisation strategies (see p. 14).

House of Commons, Agriculture Committee, Fifth Report, Pesticides Safety Directorate and VMD, Vol.I Report and Proceedings of the Committee, HMSO, £11, 42pp. and Vol II Minutes of Evidence and Appendices, 1995, £28.50, 301pp.

Cancer in rural counties
 In October, residents in Lincolnshire held a meeting to discuss their exposure to pesticides. While many felt there was an unreasonably high level of cancer in the area, the statisticians and doctors present argued that there was no significantly higher level of breast cancer than elsewhere in the country. The UK as a whole has a high level of breast cancer. Lincolnshire County Council is sympathetic, and the meeting highlighted the possible roles of a rural county, even when it has little control over pesticide usage (see box 2).

Box 2. Council actions supporting community concern
Following the 1992 Earth Summit, local authorities are taking action at a local level to address global sustainability. Many have prepared Local Agenda 21 plans. In the UK, Lincolnshire is one of the counties that has pioneered State of the Environment reporting. It is assisted by the Lincolnshire Environment Forum, which includes district authorities and representatives from the local business community, voluntary sector and community groups. Pesticides play an important part in the County's Report.

What can authorities do?
County and district councils are themselves important pesticide users and can lead by example and produce their own pesticide policy. The Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK] already works with a number of authorities(2) to help them reduce their own pesticide use. Through State of the environment reports, councils can demonstrate the need for:

  • a forum where health and environmental interests can meet those of agriculture;
  • information on local pesticide usage;
  • a help line to reassure those concerned about possible effects of pesticide usage;
  • a means to highlight areas of pesticide usage or practice that are causing concern to particular counties, and highlight areas that need research targeting.
  • Councils are becoming more innovative, and other issues they could consider are:
  • Demonstration farms. Many counties own agricultural smallholdings or farms. Some of these could become demonstration farms, going beyond current good agricultural practice to promote integrated pest management and sustainable practices
  • Information to farmers. Counties often work with conservation and water authorities on pesticide issues. Farmers can make safer pesticide choices, given the right information
  • Representations to government. Counties can make representations to central government on sustainable agricultural initiatives, including the recent initiatives on agriculture, health and land use (see p. 14)
  • Political links. Counties where a large proportion of land use is in agriculture can develop links with each other and make representations through local authority associations.

PEGS documents effects
 The Pesticide Exposure Group of Sufferers (PEGS) is one of the groups which has done most in the UK to document pesticide impacts on health and support those exposed. At its annual conference in London(3), participants discussed the difficulty in obtaining information about products used, and the reluctance of some medical authorities to consider the problems. In what could become an example of the lay epidemiology outlined on pages 8-9, PEGS has begun documentation of exposure, on a confidential basis. At the meeting, Andrew Watterson observed how many early concerns sufferers raised about the effects of pesticides which were rejected now, years later, are in the mainstream of medical research. (PB)

1. Pesticide incidents investigated in 1994/95 HSE.
2. See for example Local Authority Focus, PN27
 3. Proceedings available shortly: PEGS, 4 Lloyds House, Regent Terrace, Cambridge CB2 1AA.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 30, December 1995, page5]