Health and environmental impact
In a section on the adverse effects of
pesticides, health effects are listed. For example, the herbicide 2,4-D is
identified as a “carcinogen in humans and dogs,” and the insecticide
acephate is a “mutagen, carcinogen, is foetotoxic, feminizes rats, and
kills birds.”
Overall, the report says
trends in the European agrochemical market have been influenced by: a
range of government policies; chemical substitution; climatic differences;
and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform affecting set-aside and
farm profitability.
National reduced use
initiatives and product substitution with new lower dose products have
resulted in reduced volume sales in Europe. The value of the market has
been maintained by increasing the costs of newer products. The use of
lower dose pesticides with more powerful active agents, however, is not
necessarily seen as more environmentally friendly.
The report also alludes to the increasingly
strong public opposition to the introduction of biotechnology into some
areas of agribusiness (see below).
Agrow
predicts that the agrochemical industry will continue to face strong
public reactions to business developments, and that the multinationals are
devising methods of dealing with these challenges. Each of the major
players is profiled for their health and environmental credentials.
The agrochemical industry has had a bad
reputation for secrecy— however this report says this is changing with
improved communications systems and more proactive points of view. Product
stewardship, a philosophy that means different things to different
companies, has led to a greater accountability for pesticide use.
The report says work still needs to be done
in terms of health and safety, and it mentions a “growing realisation that
industry needs to tackle its communication problem over the health risks
of certain agrochemicals in a different manner. In the future, industry
may need to be more open about the compromises that have to be made in
order to guarantee our food security.”
The European Union Drinking Water Directive, with its strict residue
limits, continues to pose a ‘major concern’ for the agrochemical industry.
The report cites a survey that estimated potential sales losses of US$
1,400 million per annum occur directly as result of the Directive.
Shaw, Katie, Environmental and Health
Strategies in the EU Crop Protection Industry (DS 127), Agrow Reports,
18-20 Hill Rise, Richmond, Surrey, TW10 6UA, UK, Fax +44 (0)181 332 8992,
1997, 151pp.
Industry report on transgenic
market
The main transgenic crops are maize,
cotton, tomatoes, potatoes and soybean for which farmers in the US and
Australia are willing to pay a premium. The main area of development has
involved the insect-specific transgenic crops. A number of genes have been
identified that show resistance to attack by insects. These genes usually
code for insecticidal proteins but some code for insect hormones, insect
pheromone enzymes or other secondary metabolism proteins that disrupt
feeding or prevent the insect from recognising the crop as a suitable food
source. This area dominates the use of genetic engineering in crop
protection, along with tolerance of non-selective herbicides (not
addressed in this report). However, the control of plant pathogens,
virus-mediated disease and nematodes are all opportunities for molecular
biological techniques.
A number of
companies are involved in the transgenic market. The report lists 13 of
which AgrEvo, Calgene, Cyanamid, Monsanto and Zeneca play an important
role.
The report outlines the main
points of contention such as: where herbicide-tolerance is used, the
escape of these genes will lead to the spread of herbicide-resistant
weeds; it is not possible to be certain of the effect that the release of
these transgenes will have on the environment and; customers should always
be offered a choice but the lack of labelling of transgenic crops in the
food processing industry removes the choice.
Agrow’s arguments in favour of genetic
engineering include: today’s agricultural systems are not natural but they
are essential for cost-effective food production; and agricultural
productivity will always depend on chemical inputs without the application
of molecular biology.
According to the
report’s author, Len Copping, “one thing is certain, genetic engineering
has the potential to revolutionise the ways pests are controlled.” He
adds: “The development of transgenic crops expressing Bt-toxins to control
Lepidopterous (moths and butterflies) and Coleopterous
(beetle) insects could completely change the face of insect control in
these crops assuming that the development of insect resistance can be
contained and managed successfully.”
Genetic Engineering for Pest Control makes a big assumption
concerning the resistance threat and the potential market may be
under-minded by the unknown risks associated with genetically modified
organisms.
Dr. Copping concludes: “Environmentalists have
turned their attention away from pesticides into genetically engineered
crops despite the fact that the use of transgenic crops will lead to a
reduction in pesticide use.” However, this may not be the case, especially
in relation to herbicide-tolerant crops. It may also be that greater media
attention on genetic engineering may mask a continued and strong interest
by environmentalists in the pesticide debate.
Copping, Dr. Len, Genetic Engineering
for Pest Control, Agrow PJB Publications, 18-20 Hill Rise, Richmond,
Surrey, TW10 6UA, UK, Fax +44 (0)181 332 8992, 1997, 113pp.
 |
Order direct from Amazon.co.uk |
Pesticide
reduction
He recalls that pest
insects, diseases and weeds destroy about 40% of all potential food
production world-wide. This major food loss occurs despite the application
of 2.5 million tons of pesticides at a cost of US $30 billion each year.
Pesticides provide many benefits in pest control returning about $4 for
every $1 invested. However, this cost/benefit ratio does not include the
annual environmental and public health costs of pesticides which include 3
million human poisonings per year world-wide.
Reports from around the world show
technologies now exist to reduce pesticide use by at least 50%, without
reducing crop yields or substantially altering the cosmetic standards of
fresh fruit and vegetables. Reducing pesticide use will lower the economic
costs of pest control, protect public health, and improve the stability of
the natural environment.
Pimentel, D (Ed.) Techniques for
Reducing Pesticide Use, Economic and Environmental Benefits, Wiley,
Baffins Lane, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1UD, UK, 1997, Fax, +44
(0)1243 820 250, 444pp.
Indian
pollution
Anil Agarwal concludes by saying, “the
government is praying for rapid economic growth and that is how it should
be. But unless it ensures a balance with environmental conservation, this
toxic dream of western-style economic growth will only kill us in the
process.”
Anil Agarwal (Ed.), Homicide by
Pesticides, Centre for Science and Environment, 41 Tughlakabad
Institutional Area, New Delhi, India, 1997, 128pp.
IPM promotion in New York State
The
New York State Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program has produced its
eleventh annual report for the year 1996. During the year eight
Excellence in IPM awards were given to growers, consultants, a
scientist, a food processing company, and an extension office.
The New York programme has meant that
IPM-labelled canned and frozen vegetables were made available for the
first time in the US. The IPM-labels that go with the vegetables state:
“Through IPM, growers use less pesticide over time by taking other steps
to reduce pest damage. Your purchase supports the efforts of growers who
truly care about the environment.”
The IPM Program aims to
develop pest management methods that:
reduce or replace the use of synthetic
organic pesticides;
are environmentally sound;
pose minimal risk to human health;
enable growers to obtain a reasonable
return on investment;
ensure consumers a supply of
high-quality, safe, and economical foods and other agriculturally
related products.
According to Donald Davidson of the
Department of Agriculture, “a dynamic partnership of growers, a food
retailer, a food processor, and IPM experts at Cornell University made it
all possible.” This partnership has formulated lists of protocols called
‘elements of IPM’ that serve to define IPM more
precisely. Fresh market sweet corn was the crop chosen for the first set of IPM
elements. The sweet corn model was then used to develop elements for six
processing vegetables in New York State—beets, carrots, kraut cabbage,
snap beans, sweet corn and peas.
In
1996, the state provided US $837,000 for 44 research projects in five
commodity areas—fruit, livestock, field crops, ornamentals crops, and
vegetables.
New York State Integrated Pest
Management Program, Annual report, NYS Agricultural Experiment Station,
Geneva, NY, 14456, US, 60pp.
VMD
residue results
The
1996 annual report from the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD)
highlights results of the surveillance of meat and animal products for the
residues of veterinary medicines—which includes organochlorine and
organophosphate (OP) pesticides. Analysis showed none of the pesticide
residues exceeded the Action Level which is the same as the Maximum
Residue Limit (if one exists).
During
1996 the statutory surveillance survey analysed 835 samples of cattle,
sheep and pigs for a range of organochlorine and OP residues. Most of the
residues found were banned organochlorines such as dieldrin, DDT and
endrin which has most likely occurred due to persistent environmental
contamination. Diazinon (used in sheep dips), the only OP found, occurred
in sheep kidney fat.
Annual Report on Surveillance for
Veterinary Residues in 1996, Veterinary Medicines Directorate, 1997,
84pp.
World-wide reduction round-up
Pesticides Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific has made a
good effort at summarising the wide-ranging main features of pesticides
reduction programmes and possibilities in nearly 30 countries in Europe,
North America and Asia.
PAN researchers
say that pesticide reduction programmes, especially the volume reduction
portion, have been widely criticised by environmentalists because many
factors confound the measure, including a decrease in farmed area, change
in cropping patterns, yearly variation in pest problems, or change in
formulations.
Watts, Meriel and Ronald Macfarlane,
Reducing Reliance: A Review of Pesticide Reduction Initiatives, Pesticides
Action Network Asia and the Pacific, PO Box 1170, 10850, Penang, Malaysia,
1997, 93pp.
Methyl bromide in Nordic countries
This
report produced for the Nordic Council of Ministers describes the current
use of methyl bromide in the Nordic countries for ship and aircraft
fumigation. It also evaluates the future needs for this pesticide, in
light of its strong impact on the ozone layer.
There is no single alternative fumigant that
is currently available which meets all the required specifications.
Sulfuryl fluoride comes closest, but it is not registered for use on food
or feed crops. Hydrogen cyanide and phosphine are not considered as
suitable alternatives. Experience from Sweden indicates that existing
quarantine regulations to prevent the spread of diseases may only require
fumigation in some rare and extreme cases.
The report concludes that no alternative
fumigant is needed or recommended for these uses, except in very extreme
conditions.
Alternatives to Methyl Bromide—Control
of Rodents on Ship and Aircraft, Nordic Council of Ministers, Nordic
Publishing House, 1997, 30pp.
Biotechnology handbook
This
handbook of information sources provides biotechnology references
understandable to the lay reader. It contains details of publications,
organisations and on-line information available via the Internet.
The first section
contains a list of references to information world-wide, but with a strong
focus on European countries, especially Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark,
Switzerland and the UK. The majority of references are publications
specifically aimed at a non-specialist audience. Although generalist in
nature, the handbook does refer to a number of pest control issues as they
relate to biotechnology. The second section contains a directory of key
organisations involved in biotechnology.
Paula, L, (Ed.) Biotechnology for
Non-Specialists, European Federation of Biotechnology, Task Group on
Public Perceptions of Biotechnology, Schuytstraat 12, NL 2517 XE, Den
Haag, Netherlands, Fax +31 70 365 3857, 1997, 268pp.
Environmental medicine
Direct acute exposure to pesticides causes illness, but the
adverse effects resulting from long-term low dose exposure are less easy
to establish and account for. Very often patients suffering from acute or
chronic effects find their condition aggravated by exposure to other
chemicals. Because of the wide range of chemicals we are all exposed to,
cause and effect is difficult to demonstrate. This important text is the
first comprehensive source book on the practice of environmental medicine.
Although pesticides are only a small part of the range of chemicals
covered, sufferers will welcome the collected experience presented by the
authors and the British Society for Allergy, Environmental and Nutritional
Medicine.
Environmental Medicine in General
Practice, H. Anthony, S. Birtwistle, K. Eaton and J. Maberley, BSAENM
Publications, PO Box 28, Totton, Southampton SO40 2ZA, UK,
483pp.
 |
Order direct from Amazon.co.uk |
Insecticides that are not
insecticides
Microbial insecticides are living organisms that kill
insects, rather than synthetic chemicals. An increasing range of microbial
pesticides are being developed. This volume represents the proceedings of
a symposium on the subject organised by British Crop Protection Council
(BCPC) at Warwick University in April 1997. It moves from a review of some
of the successes of microbials, to focusing on the technical problems of
modes of action and production. There are interesting contributions from,
among others, Jeff Waage of IIBC and Keith Jones of NRI suggesting that
microbials need to be developed and used in a different way from the way
that commercial synthetic pesticides are marketed. The commercial model
may not be appropriate.
Microbial Insecticides; Novelty or
Necessity? BCPC Symposium Proceedings 68, BCPC, 49 Downing Street, Farnham, Surrey GU9 7PH, UK, Fax +44 (0)1252 727 194, 1997, 302
pp.
International directory
Research
Information has produced its annual global directory of pesticide
suppliers and their products. There is a separate list of products with a
brief description of their function and/or use, followed by a reference to
the main supplying countries. A comprehensive list of active ingredients
is also provided.
1997 International Pesticide Directory,
Research International Ltd., 222 Maylands Ave, Hemel Hempstead, Herts, HP2
7TD, UK, Fax +44 (0)1442 259395, 126pp.
A-Z of
pesticides
The
Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK] has updated its A-Z of Pesticides that contains
references, and a brief description, to books and reports reviewed in
Pesticides News since issue No. 1 (1988). A range of
pesticide-related issues are reviewed including—biotechnology,
environment, food, health, integrated pest management, non-agricultural
use, reference books, sustainable agriculture, Third World and water.
A-Z of Pesticides, Pesticides Trust [now PAN UK], see back cover for details, 1997, 10pp.
[This article first appeared in
Pesticides News No. 37, September 1997, pages 22-23]