Pesticides: The Way Ahead
The Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK] and the Pesticides Exposure Group of Sufferers
(PEGS) held a conference on 14 June to promote dialogue on safe and sustainable
methods of food and fibre production. The conference condemned hazards to rural
communities from pesticide exposure. Worries included occupational exposure to
sheep dips, which have since been acknowledged as a serious problem by the
authorities. Designed primarily for UK non-governmental organisations and
concerned individuals, the conference, covering the health and environmental
effects of pesticides, attracted over 80 participants. By David Buffin.
 |
Conference speakers: Paul Tyler MP; Enfys Chapman, co-ordinator of PEGS; and Marlissa Campbell, toxicologist. Photo: Peter Adams |
Paul Tyler MP, as keynote speaker, gave a lay perspective. He
has been involved in the problems of sheep dipping which have emerged in his
Welsh constituency. He concluded that there was an overall need for the
long-term reduction of pesticide use; more effective information exchange for
GPs; more access to information on pesticides; and greater transparency in
decision making.
Oliver Doubleday, providing a farmers
perspective, suggested that pesticide withdrawals, pest resistance, consumer and
environmental concerns had led him, and an increasing number of farmers,
to adopt integrated pest management (IPM). This allows continued pesticide use,
but in a reduced fashion. He said that fewer broad spectrum pesticides should be
promoted, in order to protect non-target species.
He concluded that there is progress
towards IPM. However, more resources are needed to carry out pesticide
registration and to maintain lower costs for products used on minor crops. Not
enough information is available to farmers who want to apply pesticides at lower
rates. More is research is needed into biological alternatives and improvements
in application technology.
Marlissa Campbell, a toxicologist
formerly with the US Environmental Protection Agency, provided a background to
assessing the risks associated with pesticides. She contended that risk
assessment is only as good as the data provided. This is pertinent as pesticides
rely very heavily on animal experiments. Epidemiological studies which assess
human exposure, can be difficult to interpret, and can rarely be used to
identify clusters with great certainty. The current issue of benomyl was cited
as an example (see PN 19) where exposure has been suggested to cause birth
defects which may result in eye abnormalities. There are however no
epidemiological studies, the level of exposure is not known and, while the
situation is alarming, actual risk assessment is very difficult to resolve.
Maurice Frankel of the Campaign for
Freedom of Information pointed out that while the UK is moving towards a more
open system of decision-making about pesticides, there are still flaws. The
Ministry of Agriculture and the Health and Safety Executive make more
information available. But recipients of certain information must sign a
declaration that they will not discuss it with others. Better access covers only
new pesticides coming onto the market or, subject to a Ministerial veto, older
pesticides being reviewed. It does not include sheep dips, which come under the
Veterinary Medicine Directorate, where information sharing is prohibited and a
criminal offence.
Enfys Chapman, co-ordinator of PEGS
presented a background to this self-help group. It provides counselling, advice
and information in complete confidentiality. "People are not sufficiently
aware of the problems associated with exposure to pesticides," said Mrs
Chapman. In her case, she suffered acute exposure, and did establish a link
between it and ill health, after carrying out soil samples. This is very rare.
Dr Virginia Murray of the National
Poisons Unit (NPU) believes there is a communication block in on information
about pesticides for doctors. (Since this conference all doctors in the UK have
been sent specific information covering the effects of sheep dips on the health
of those exposed.) Toxicology, says Dr. Murray "is not sufficiently taught,
because, after 5 years of studies, medical students only receive between one and
12 hours of toxicology teaching." The NPU is not a big service, with four
phone lines and computer support manned 24 hours by information scientists. The
number of enquiries to the NPU has increased dramatically—by 10% this year.
The service is only available to doctors, but there have been requests to open
it to the public. In spite of the estimated quarter million enquiries a year, Dr
Murray cannot see where the extra resources would come from. Public enquiries
take twice as long to handle. In conclusion Dr Murray said that the UK still
needs a centralised reporting system, as recommended to the House of Commons
Agriculture Committee in 1986.
Alan Dalton, a lecturer at the
South Bank University, focused on the importance of campaigns on health and
environmental issues which support those affected and alert public opinion.
Three workshops covered:
- Agricultural policies to reduce pesticides use—discussed
policies to reduce the risks and hazards arising from intensive chemical
inputs, and to promote sustainable agriculture.
- Assessing pesticides risks—was an
introduction to and discussion of the impli
- Information and networking—involved a demonstration of electronic mail as a means of gaining easy access to databases, and for cheap communication with like-minded groups and individuals.
In summing up, Koy Thompson noted that the conference had brought together new groups: "There is a need in this post-UNCED period to work together for a national sustainable development strategy." In terms of pesticides this would include calling for the adoption of a pesticide reduction policy in the UK to reduce the risk that biologically active pesticides pose after their deliberate release into the environment. Participants called for improved research and monitoring, which would help promote non-chemical and integrated pest management.
For more details of the conference, contact The Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK]. (Those who attended will be sent a report.)