BRÜSSEL/Hamburg, 12. September 2023.

85 Gesellschafts- und Umweltorganisationen fordern Ursula von der Leyen und die Europäische Kommission auf, die im Rahmen des Europäischen Green Deals eingegangene Verpflichtung einzuhalten und dafür zu sorgen, dass gefährliche Chemikalien, die in der EU verboten sind, nicht mehr für den Export produziert werden [1].

Kommissionsbeamte haben Campaigner und Industrielobbyisten darüber informiert, dass die Kommission beschlossen habe, vor dem Ende ihrer Amtszeit keinen Legislativvorschlag vorzulegen. Umweltkommissar Virginijus Sinkevičius sagte jedoch am Montagabend vor dem Umweltausschuss des Europäischen Parlaments (ENVI), er hoffe, dass „wenn der Ehrgeiz noch da ist, [die Kommission] in der Lage sein wird, ihn in diesem Mandat vorzuschlagen“, und beantwortete damit eine Frage zu verbotenen Chemikalien. [2]

Eoin Dubsky, Kampagnenleiter bei Ekō, sagte: „Präsidentin von der Leyen, Vizepräsident Šefčovič und Kommissar Sinkevičius müssen ihren Teams und der Welt klarmachen, was vor sich geht, um Giftexporte zu stoppen. Hat die Kommission noch vor, in dieser Amtszeit mit gutem Beispiel voranzugehen, oder geht sie die letzte Runde im Schritttempo an?“

Angeliki Lysimachou, Leiterin des Bereichs Wissenschaft und Politik bei PAN Europe, fügte hinzu: „Die Kehrtwende der Kommission ist völlig inakzeptabel. Unternehmen erzielen Gewinne, indem sie verbotene Pestizide, die für die Verwendung in Europa als zu gefährlich gelten, an Drittländer verkaufen und deren laxe Umwelt- und Gesundheitsvorschriften ausnutzen. Diese Doppelmoral ist eine kriminelle Praxis, und die Kehrtwende der Kommission zeigt, dass sie es versäumt hat, den Menschen- und Umweltrechten Vorrang vor privaten Profiten einzuräumen.“

„Die EU riskiert, ihre Glaubwürdigkeit zu verlieren, wenn sie sich nicht an ihre Versprechen hält, gegen diese Giftexporte vorzugehen. Es ist jetzt an der Zeit, mutige Schritte zum Schutz der Menschen und ihrer Umwelt zu unternehmen und nicht zurückzuweichen. Alle Menschen haben das Recht auf eine gesunde Umwelt und körperliche Unversehrtheit – unabhängig davon, ob sie EU-Bürger*innen sind oder in Drittländern leben. Ein Zögern der EU sendet eine fatale Botschaft an die Hunderte von Millionen Menschen, die weltweit unter Pestizid-Vergiftungen leiden“, so Susan Haffmans, Referentin für Pestizide bei PAN Germany.

267.000 Menschen haben inzwischen eine Petition für ein Exportverbot unterzeichnet, und mehr als 2.400 EU-Bürger haben sich an der öffentlichen Konsultation Anfang des Jahres beteiligt [3].

Die EU hat eine der strengsten Gesetzgebungen der Welt für Pestizide. Doch giftige Chemikalien, die in der Union wegen ihrer Auswirkungen auf die menschliche Gesundheit und die Umwelt verboten sind, werden immer noch in andere, oft ärmere Länder exportiert, was verheerende Folgen hat.

Diese gefährlichen Chemikalien schaden nicht nur Menschen und Ökosystemen außerhalb der EU, sondern gelangen auch in Form von Rückständen in importierte Lebensmittel nach Europa.

Mehr als 326 zivilgesellschaftliche Organisationen aus der ganzen Welt, Institutionen und Gewerkschaften haben im Dezember 2022 eine gemeinsame Erklärung an die Europäische Kommission gerichtet, in der sie ein Verbot der Ausfuhr von gefährlichen Chemikalien fordern, die in der EU verboten sind. [4]

Englisches Original dieser Pressemitteilung

Pressekontakte:
Eoin Dubsky, eoin@eko.org Phone: +31 641 636 410
Angeliki Lysimachou, angeliki@pan-europe.info +32 2318 6255
Susan Haffmans, susan.haffmans@pan-germany.org, +49 157 315 640 17

Notes:
[1] Open letter of 12 September 2023 https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.sumofus.org/pdf/Letter_to_Commission_Protesting_Export_Ban_Delay_-_12_September_2023.pdf

[2] Video recording of Environment Commissioner at 20:51 minutes of 11 September 2023 https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/webstreaming/envi-committee-meeting_20230911-2000-COMMITTEE-ENVI

[3] Petition to Environment Commissioner, started November 2022 https://actions.eko.org/a/outlaw-exports-of-banned-chemicals

[4] Joint Statement by 326 civil society organisations, December 2022 https://eeb.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Joint-statement_EU-exports_1-december-2022.pdf

Press release
[07.09.2022]

After more than two years without a face-to-face meeting, representatives from governments, the private sector, industry and civil society from around the world met in Bucharest from August 29 to September 2 for one week of intensive work on a new framework for the sound management of chemicals, including pesticides and waste.

Since 2006 the Strategic Approach to International Chemical Management (SAICM) under the responsibility of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) strives for the sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle.

Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) were identified as “Issue of Concern” under this framework. SAICM had an ambitious goal that by the year 2020, chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on the environment and human health. However, this goal was not achieved. In the last decades, chemical production has increased exponentially and has created escalating problems of waste and pollution with millions of people suffering the effects. As a result, the international community has been engaged in drafting a new ambitious framework to address the problems and impacts of chemical and waste.

“Pesticides contribute significantly to all the current global crises – climate disaster, biodiversity loss, pollution – that are threatening the survival of the planet as we know it. The most harmful pesticides, defined as Highly Hazardous Pesticides, are long recognised as a major global problem. With a lot of support from NGOs, progress in identifying and banning some HHPs at the national level has been made, but we are still far away from the coordinated global progress towards a global-phase out of HHPs in agriculture. A future mechanism must resolve this,” said Susan Haffmans, senior advisor of PAN (Pesticide Action Network) Germany.

“High income countries and regions produce Highly Hazardous Pesticides that have been banned and severely restricted because of human health and environmental harms, and these are exported to developing countries. These pesticides cause massive poisonings of vulnerable groups including peasants, women and children, workers and indigenous peoples. We would like to see a strong target for all countries to stop the production and exports of substances banned in their own countries or region,” said Sarojeni Rengam, executive director of PAN Asia Pacific.

María Cárcamo of RAPAL (Red de Acción en Plaguicidas y sus Alternativas de América Latina) Uruguay said, “Widespread pesticide use affect people’s daily lives, and cause contamination and destruction of the environment. Pesticides used in food, fibre, and energy production are in communal spaces, sprayed on the ground and by airplanes. Wherever you go, there are high levels of exposure. Coming from a Southern country, we receive pesticides that in many countries from other parts of the world are not used due to the impacts on human and environmental health. We would like to see stronger decisions and targets towards the elimination of these pesticides in the value chain.”

“Africa is the continent that suffers the most from the effects of pesticides, especially Highly Hazardous Pesticides. Their poor conditions of use are the cause of the emergence of certain non-communicable diseases such as cancer, congenital malformations, neurological disorders, diabetes, etc. At the end of the SAICM meeting, a glimmer of hope appeared in light of the commitment of civil society and the support of certain countries for a ban on HHPs in agriculture by 2030. Thus, we call on African governments to quickly commit to the implementation of national regulations for a total ban on HHPs in order to protect the health and environment of populations,” said Maimouna Diene, regional coordinator of PAN Africa.

For more information, read PAN International’s position paper to the SAICM IP4 Beyond 2020 Process

Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International is a network of 600 CSOs and institutions in over 90 countries working to eliminate the harm caused by pesticides and to replace them with agroecology and non-chemical alternatives.

Reference:

• Susan Haffmans, PAN Germany, susan.haffmans@pan-germany.org
• Sarojeni Rengam, PAN Asia Pacific, sarojeni.rengam@panap.net
• Maimouna Diene, PAN Africa, maimounadiene@pan-afrique.org
• María Cárcamo, RAPAL Uruguay, coord@rapaluruguay.org

Hundreds of civil society and Indigenous Peoples organizations call on the UN agency to renounce planned alliance with CropLife International

Rome – Today 350 organizations in 63 countries representing hundreds of thousands of farmers, fisherfolk, agricultural workers and other communities, as well as human rights, faith-based, environmental and economic justice institutions, delivered a letter to United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Director-General Qu Dongyu urging him to stop recently-announced plans to deepen collaboration with CropLife International by entering into a formal partnership.

CropLife is a global trade association representing the interests of companies that produce and promote pesticides, including highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs). According to the letter, HHPs “are responsible for a wide range of devastating health harms to farmers, agricultural workers and rural families around the world,” and these chemicals have “decimated pollinator populations and are wreaking havoc on biodiversity and fragile ecosystems” as well.

“This proposed alliance is deeply inappropriate and directly undermines FAO’s goals of supporting food systems that are healthy, resilient and productive while safeguarding the sustainability of the environment,” says Sarojeni Rengam, Director of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia Pacific. “CropLife’s purpose, on the other hand, is to advocate for continued use of the pesticides that its members sell. These hazardous and antiquated chemical solutions pose deadly obstacles to the urgently needed transition to innovative, knowledge-intensive ecological approaches to farming.”

Ms. Rengam delivered the letter today on behalf of PAN International, ten other co-sponsoring organizations and networks, and hundreds of signatories.

The letter highlights a recent analysis of industry records that documents that CropLife member companies BASF, Bayer Crop Science, Corteva Agriscience, FMC and Syngenta make more than one-third of their sales income from highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) — the pesticides that are most harmful to human health and the environment. The proportion of HHP sales is even higher in developing countries, the letter says, where safety regulations are often less robust and harms to human health and the environment are greater.

“So many of our Yaqui children have died and suffered lifelong disabilities from exposure to toxic pesticides that were banned by the countries that exported them to be used in our territories,” said Mariano Ochoa Millan, former Board member for the International Indian Treaty Council from Rio Yaqui Sonora, Mexico. Millan, who passed away from COVID-19 on August 31, made this statement in response to the July 9, 2020 statement by the UN Special Rapporteur on Toxics calling on wealthy nations to halt the practice of exporting banned pesticides. Many of CropLife’s member companies are strong proponents of this practice.

Today’s letter was co-sponsored by a broad-based group of global networks and international organizations: Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), FIAN International, Friends of the Earth International, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), International Indian Treaty Council (IITC), International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers‘ Associations (IUF), Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International, Public Eye and Third World Network.

Marcia Ishii, senior scientist at PAN North America, explained the serious implications of the proposed collaboration: “FAO’s decision to initiate a formal partnership with CropLife is bad news for the millions of farmers whose health and livelihoods have been devastated by the highly hazardous pesticides manufactured by CropLife member companies. Unfortunately, since Mr. Qu’s arrival at FAO, the institution appears to be opening up to deeper collaboration with pesticide companies, which are likely to exploit such a relationship for bluewashing, influencing policy development, and enhancing access to global markets. It is no surprise that FAO’s recently appointed Deputy Director General, Beth Bechdol, comes to FAO with a history of close financial ties to Corteva (formerly Dow/DuPont), a Croplife member headquartered in Bechdol’s home state of Indiana, USA.”

An international group of 286 scientists and researchers have also expressed concern about the proposed alliance, delivering a letter to Director-General Qu Dongyu today, urging him not to pursue a formalization of FAO’s collaboration with CropLife.

***

Resources:

Joint letter with full list of signatories (also available here as pdf)

PAN International list of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs)

Public Eye pesticide industry analysis

IAASTD report, 10 years later

FAO’s proposed formalization of partnership with CropLife 

Additional quotes from co-sponsoring partners:

Shiney Varghese, senior policy analyst with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, notes that while FAO says it wants to minimize the harms of pesticides worldwide, CropLife members made more than a third of their income from sales of highly hazardous pesticides in 2018. “In the context of this proposed FAO-CropLife partnership, what is even more important is that many of those sales were made to farmers in low- and middle-income countries like Brazil, India and Thailand, while only 27 percent were made in high income countries. It’s not surprising that CropLife International would want to have a partnership, but why would FAO want to put these low- and middle-income countries at risk?”

„We need a strong FAO, independent of the pesticide industry and free from the market interests of global corporations, committed to safe, healthy food and sustainable farming systems for the benefit of all people,” says Susan Haffmans from PAN Germany. “With its commitment to agroecology, FAO has embarked on this sustainable path. The FAO should not jeopardize its successes in agroecology nor its integrity by cooperating with precisely that branch of industry which is responsible for the production of highly hazardous pesticides and whose products contribute to poisoning people and their environment worldwide.“

“In Latin America, we need policies that support the phasing out Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) and scaling up of agroecology. The proposed partnership between FAO and CropLife would undermine this aim,“ said Fernando Bejarano,  Hub coordinator for the IPEN Latin America Office who supervised several HHPs country situation reports in the region.

„Green recovery“ from COVID-19 crisis demands healthy and sustainable food system

Press release from Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe, Brussels, Belgium, 20 April 2020.

Contact in the first instance:
Dr Angeliki Lyssimachou, PAN Europe +32 496392930; angeliki@pan-europe.info

A new peer-reviewed paper authored by a group of experts in law, policy, and toxicology has identified systemic failings in Europe’s pesticide risk assessment process.

The experts have proposed a comprehensive agenda for far-reaching reform after their paper outlined how these failings could seriously undermine ambitions for sustainable agriculture and a “green recovery” from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Calls for such a “green recovery” have arisen from 13 European climate and environment ministers, from 180 policy makers, business leaders, researchers and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and from WWF. On 16 April, Frans Timmermans, executive vice-president of the European Commission in charge of the European Green Deal, added his voice, demanding an end to old, polluting models of production and a shift to a “circular, sustainable and highly competitive economy”.

These thought leaders agree that business as usual is not an option.

Regulatory failings

According to the new paper, published in the European Journal of Risk Regulation, Europe is consistently failing to implement and enforce its own regulations on pesticides. While the EU’s pesticides Regulation 1107/2009 is, in theory, one of the most stringent in the world, it has yet to achieve its aim of “an independent, objective and transparent assessment of pesticides and achieve a high level of protection for health and environment”. The paper presents a series of recommendations to resolve these problems.

Focusing on glyphosate as a case study of scientific and regulatory controversy, the paper highlights:

• Widespread misuse and misinterpretation of scientific research, with cherry-picking of favorable studies, plagiarism and uncritical repetition of findings presented as independent validation, and misuse of statistical and analytical tools
• Ongoing failure to address mixture effects, including of additives which, even though they can change the toxicity profile of the active ingredient, are not part of the pesticide approval process
• Failure to properly address conflicts of interest within regulatory agencies, undermining the independence and objectivity of pesticide assessments.

As a result of these failings, multiple pesticides are passing through the regulatory process and being authorized in spite of their potential to harm human and animal health and the environment.

Proposed solutions

The authors find that for the most part, the law itself is not at fault. Instead, the problem lies with a failure on the part of regulatory bodies to implement or enforce the hard or „soft“ laws governing how pesticides are regulated.

The authors propose ways to improve the system, requiring changes in the way in which regulators carry out the risk assessment process, as well as in the way that current scientific knowledge and scientific analytical tools are applied.

These include:

• Wider use of “systematic review” methods to ensure objectivity and transparency in evaluating scientific research results
• Proper use of the “weight-of-evidence” approach to integrate different lines of evidence, so that, for example, different types of evidence indicating that a pesticide is carcinogenic are not evaluated and dismissed separately but are considered together in an integrated fashion
• Evaluating the toxicity of pesticide formulations as sold and used rather than just the isolated “active” ingredients that are tested and assessed for safety in regulatory purposes – since the formulations can be far more toxic

Details of the new paper

Achieving a High Level of Protection from Pesticides in Europe: Problems with the Current Risk Assessment Procedure and Solutions

Claire ROBINSON, Christopher J. PORTIER, Aleksandra ČAVOŠKI, Robin MESNAGE, Apolline ROGER, Peter CLAUSING, Paul WHALEY, Hans MUILERMAN and Angeliki LYSSIMACHOU

DOI: European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16 April 2020

The new paper is published as the EU Commission prepares to publish its Farm to Fork (F2F) Strategy as part of the European Green Deal. F2F aims to „secure a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system“ and will include „measures to significantly reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides“.

As well as the F2F, the Commission will publish its long overdue REFIT evaluation of the EU pesticide legislation assessing “if the regulations meet the needs of citizens, businesses and public institutions in an efficient manner“ and giving recommendations on future actions. Concerns have been raised that REFIT appears to be focused on making EU regulations „better“ for industry and that the pesticides regulations will be deliberately weakened as a result.

The publication of F2F as well as the REFIT of the pesticide Regulation has been postponed due to the COVID-19 crisis, and the farmers‘ association COPA-COGECA has lobbied for the publication to be delayed until autumn – or for an impact assessment to be carried out first.

But Claire Robinson, editor at GMWatch and first author of the new paper commented, „COVID-19 has shown us that human health must be the priority and that sustainable food production is crucial. We cannot afford more delays in implementing a healthy, sustainable, and resilient food system.“

This call is backed by an open letter signed by 40 NGOs, asking the Commission not to further delay the F2F publication and “to show that it is actively steering the EU towards a greener future, of which sustainable and resilient food systems are an essential part”.

Quotes from the authors

Dr Apolline Roger, Law and Policy Advisor, ClientEarth, Brussels, Belgium, said: „The pesticides Regulation has great elements. For the most part, it is not the law that needs to be reformed, but the way it is implemented. We detail the reforms that are needed in our recommendations.“

Prof Christopher Portier, Senior Contributing Scientist, Environmental Defense Fund, and former Director, US National Center for Environmental Health, USA, said: “Scientific rigour and complete transparency are critical to both the evaluation of data used in regulatory decision making and to the trust the public will have in those evaluations. This article describes improvements that will strengthen both scientific rigor and transparency.”

Paul Whaley, an academic at Lancaster University in the UK specializing in novel methods for evaluating health risks from chemical exposures, said: “The European Food Safety Authority has been a world-leading agency in proposing reforms to how scientific research is used in pesticide risk assessment, particularly in applying systematic review methods to analyze evidence of potential health risks. The problem is, these reforms are being implemented too slowly and too unevenly, leaving too many chemicals being assessed with methods which are obsolete, opaque, and produce unreliable results.”

Dr Peter Clausing, toxicologist at the Pesticide Action Network Germany, said: „The ‚weight-of-evidence‘ approach is an important concept to consolidate scientific data. Our paper shows that there is considerable room for improvement in the way the European authorities make use of this concept during risk assessment of pesticides.“

Professor Aleksandra Čavoški, University of Birmingham, said: “EFSA has made significant strides in improving its independence policy with the aim of preventing the revolving door effect. However, EFSA’s independence policy does not go far enough to prevent conflicts of interest that may result from the provision of research funding.”

Brussels, Hamburg, 17.10.2019. Press release. A new review of carcinogenicity assessments of pesticide active ingredients shows 40 percent of them are not carried out in compliance with existing European guidelines, leading to possible continued exposure of farmers and consumers to cancer-causing pesticides [1]. In 30 percent of the cases significant details were missing from the dossiers, raising uncertainties about how European authorities came to a conclusion.

The report ‘Chronically underrated – A review of the EU carcinogenic hazard assessment of 10 pesticides’, released today by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Germany and the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) analysed the carcinogenicity sections of the draft Renewal Assessments Reports (RARs) of ten pesticides [2]. The review, performed by senior toxicologist Peter Clausing, focused on how the sections describing carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice in the EU assessment documents complied with the applicable guidelines and guidance documents of the EU and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

“After discovering a considerable number of flaws in the carcinogenicity assessment of glyphosate, it was the logical next step to investigate whether similar problems occurred with other pesticides. Analysing these ten RARs has made it clear that at least three of the pesticides should have been classified as ‘presumed’ human carcinogens, rather than just ‘suspected’ human carcinogens”, explained Susan Haffmans, Senior Advisor on Pesticides at PAN Germany.

The carcinogenicity classification triggers the regulatory fate of a pesticide active ingredient. Pesticides classified as ‘suspected’ human carcinogens can be marketed, while those classified as ‘presumed’ human carcinogens cannot or must be withdrawn [3].

Our report shows that:
– For three pesticides, the outcome of our review was similar to that of the European authorities: chlorothalonil, diuron, forchlorfenuron;
– For three pesticides, the outcome of our review differed from that of the European authorities and we found that the classification should be upgraded: folpet, pirimicarb and thiacloprid;
– For one pesticide, our review found that severe data gap should have been identified by the European authorities and a flawed decisive carcinogenicity should not have been accepted: phosmet;
– For three pesticides, our review found that reports were not sufficiently informed to allow any conclusive external review: captan, chlorpropham, dimoxystrobin.

“The current rise of non-communicable diseases including cancer means that Europe cannot afford the health price of flawed pesticides classifications”, commented Genon K. Jensen, Executive Director of the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL). “Committing to a rigorous implementation of European laws should be a founding block of reaching Europe’s zero-pollution objective to prevent diseases and protect people, starting with farmers, from substances toxic to their health.”

PAN Germany and HEAL call on the European Commission President-elect Ursula von der Leyen to pay particular attention to a more rigorous application of existing pesticide legislation and guidance documents. In her recent confirmation hearing at the European Parliament, the Commissioner-designate for Health Stella Kyriakides already agreed Europe needs to reduce dependency on pesticides and stimulate the take-up of low-risk and non-chemical alternatives [4].

Contact:

Dr. Peter Clausing, Executive board member Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Germany, peter.clausing@pan-germany.org

Yannick Vicaire, Chemicals and Health Policy campaigner Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) , yannick@env-health.org

Notes to editor:

[1] Chronically Underrated, Peter Clausing, October 2019.
[2] The ten pesticides reviewed included Captan, Chlorotalonil, Chlorpropham, Dimoxystrobin, Diuron, Folpet, Forchlorfenuron, Phosmet, Pirimicarb and Thiacloprid.
[3] Article 3.6.3 of regulation 11/072009 states: “An active substance, safener or synergist shall only be approved, if, on the basis of assessment of carcinogenicity testing carried out in accordance with the data requirements for the active substances, safener or synergist and other available data and information, including a review of the scientific literature, reviewed by the Authority, it is not or has not to be classified, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, as carcinogen category 1A or 1B…”
[4] Answers to the European Parliament questionnaire to the Commissioner-Designate Stella Kyriakides, Commissioner-designate for health

Other publications on this topic from Dr. Peter Clausing include:
– Clausing et al. (2018): Pesticides and public health: a review of the regulatory approach to assessing the carcinogenicity of glyphosate in the European Union. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 72, 668–672
– Pesticide Action Network Europe (2018): Ensuring a higher level of protection from pesticides in Europe

The Pesticide Action Network Germany (PAN Germany) is a nongovernmental organisation informing about the negative consequences of pesticide use and promoting environment-friendly and socially fair alternatives. PAN Germany is part of the PAN International network. Our work comprises critical analyses of pesticides and their use, policy advice practical advice for farmers and consumers.

The Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) is the leading not-for-profit organisation addressing how the environment affects human health in the European Union (EU) and beyond. HEAL works to shape laws and policies that promote planetary and human health and protect those most affected by pollution, and raise awareness on the benefits of environmental action for health.

CHRONICALLY UNDERRATED? A review of the European carcinogenic hazard assessment of 10 pesticides

Datum: 21. Oktober 2019 289.03 KB

This report, commissioned by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Germany and by the Health and Environment...

Download

.well.c2a3 .btn.wpdm-download-link{ padding: 11px 30px;font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .media-body{ font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .wpdm_icon{ height: 42px; width: auto; }

Summary: CHRONICALLY UNDERRATED? A review of the European carcinogenic hazard assessment of 10 pesticides

Datum: 21. Oktober 2019 80.39 KB

Glyphosate, one of the world’s most widely used pesticides that has been linked to multiple negative...

Download

.well.c2a3 .btn.wpdm-download-link{ padding: 11px 30px;font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .media-body{ font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .wpdm_icon{ height: 42px; width: auto; }

Zusammenfassung: CHRONISCH UNTERBEWERTET? Eine Überprüfung des EU-Bewertungsverfahrens zur Krebsgefahr von 10 Pestiziden

Datum: 21. Oktober 2019 88.71 KB

Glyphosat, eines der meistverwendeten Pestizide der Welt, das mit verschiedenen negativen Auswirkungen...

Download

.well.c2a3 .btn.wpdm-download-link{ padding: 11px 30px;font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .media-body{ font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .wpdm_icon{ height: 42px; width: auto; }

Resumen: ¿INFRAVALORACIÓN CRÓNICA? Una revisión de la evaluación de la Unión Europea sobre el riesgo carcinogénico de 10 pesticidas

Datum: 21. Oktober 2019 273.16 KB

El glifosato, uno de los pesticidas más utilizados en el mundo y que ha sido relacionado con múltiples...

Download

.well.c2a3 .btn.wpdm-download-link{ padding: 11px 30px;font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .media-body{ font-size: 11pt; } .well.c2a3 .wpdm_icon{ height: 42px; width: auto; }

Brussels, 19.06.2019. Common press release.

Chlorpyrifos, a pesticide known for its damaging effects on children’s brain development, is among the top 15 active substances most frequently found in European unprocessed food and prominently present in fruit. This is the conclusion of a new briefing published today, bringing together all official EU data on the analysis of 791 different pesticide residues [1].

Chlorpyrifos is most often detected in citrus fruits: more than 1 out of 3 sampled grapefruits (39%) and lemons (36%), and 1 out of 4 sampled oranges (29%) and mandarins (25%) contained chlorpyrifos residues.

The current authorisation of chlorpyrifos in the European Union is set to expire on 31 January 2020. Member States in charge of the safety assessment of this pesticide are among those countries where residues of the pesticide were most frequently detected in fruits. Spain, where roughly 1 in 5 sampled fruit, including 40% of oranges and 35% of mandarins, are contaminated with chlorpyrifos, is the rapporteur Member State assigned to oversee the re-authorisation dossier. Poland, acting as co-rapporteur, tops the charts as the country with the highest contamination of chlorpyrifos in apples.

Earlier this week, a series of investigative articles published by media outlets across Europe highlighted that the previous European market approval process of chlorpyrifos ignored hundreds of independent studies showing evidence of brain-harming effects [2]. The investigation also found that the EU approval was based on just one single study, that was commissioned by industry [3].

Exposure to chlorpyrifos, even in small doses, can harm children’s brain development and hormonal systems. Scientists have linked it to decreases of IQ in children, working memory loss, endocrine disruption, autism and Parkinson’s Disease [4].

Close to 200,000 have already raised their voices to demand a toxic-free future for farming and food [5]. This #BanChlorpyrifos petition – launched by international consumer watchdog SumOfUs, the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), Générations Futures, Ecologistas en Acción, and the European and German branches of the Pesticide Action Network – is pressuring European governments and the Commission to ban chlorpyrifos for good.

QUOTES:

Génon K. Jensen, Executive Director at the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) says: “Parents should not have to worry about harming their children’s health when feeding them fruits like oranges or mandarins, which show the highest levels of chlorpyrifos residues. The body of evidence on neurotoxicity of chlorpyrifos and chlorpyrifos-methyl is compelling. Chronic exposure to low doses such as residues in fruit is linked to a decrease in IQ and working memory loss in children, there should be zero tolerance. We call on national governments and the EU institutions to make the withdrawal of both substances a public health priority.”

Angeliki Lyssimachou, Science Policy Officer at Pesticide Action Network Europe says: “It’s outrageous that our regulatory system allows for neurotoxic chlorpyrifos, known to harm children’s brains, to be used on open fields and its residues to be present in our food. We call upon Regulators to ban chlorpyrifos at once and improve our pesticide authorisation system, which currently promotes dependency on toxic pesticides in agriculture threatening -rather than protecting- human health and the environment.”

Nabil Berbour, Campaign Manager at SumOfUs says: “This toxic pesticide is harmful to children’s brain development and should have been banned a long time ago in Europe as revealed by a series of investigative pieces in the European press this week. It’s time for EU governments to put people’s health before the pesticide industry’s profits. In a petition launched by the #StopChlorpyrifos group, more than 191,000 EU citizens urge them to do so.”

Peter Clausing, Board member of Pesticide Action Network Germany says: “Chlorpyrifos represents a bold example that the EU’s risk assessment for neurotoxic effects is outdated and insufficient.”

Contact:

Yannick Vicaire, Chemicals and Health Policy Campaigner at the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), yannick@env-health.org, tel.: 0033 (0) 608 755 015

Angeliki Lyssimachou, Science Policy Officer at Pesticide Action Network Europe, angeliki@pan-europe.org, tel.: +32 496 39 29 30

Nabil Berbour, Campaign Manager at SumOfUs, nabil@sumofus.org, tel.: +33 7 56 82 06 55

Notes:

[1] “Chlorpyrifos residues in fruits, the case for a EU-wide ban to protect consumers”, published June 2019 by the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) and Pesticide Action Network Europe. https://www.env-health.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/June-2019-PAN-HEAL-Briefing-chlorpyrifos_web.pdf

[2] This series of articles includes:

–      Main portal (English): Investigative Reporting Denmark (https://www.ir-d.dk/chlorpyrifos/)

–      In English: the EU Observer (https://euobserver.com/health/145146)

–      In French:  Le Monde (https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2019/06/17/chlorpyrifos-les-dangers-ignores-d-un-pesticide-toxique_5477084_3244.html)

–      In Dutch: Knack (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/belgie/europa-onderzoekt-verbod-op-insectenvergif-dat-in-onze-voeding-opduikt/article-longread-1477255.html)

–       In Spanish: El Confidencial (https://www.elconfidencial.com/tecnologia/ciencia/2019-06-17/pesticia-agricultura-espana-peligro-ue-prohibicion_2073403/)

[3] Safety of Safety Evaluation of Pesticides: developmental neurotoxicity of chlorpyrifos and chlorpyrifos-methyl. Mie, Rudén, Grandjean. Environ Health. 2018 Nov 16;17(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s12940-018-0421-y https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30442131

[4] Factsheet ‘EU should ban brain-harming chlorpyrifos to protect health’ (published August 2018 by the HEAL, PAN Europe, Générations Futures and PAN Germany).

[5] SumOfUs petition: No more toxic chlorpyrifos in our food: https://actions.sumofus.org/a/chlorpyrifos (also available in German, Spanish and French). Campaign video: https://twitter.com/SumOfUs/status/1140606268157157376

Infographic ‘Ban the toxic pesticide chlorpyrifos from our plates’ (published June 2019 by HEAL) https://www.env-health.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Ban-Chlorpyrifos-Infographic-v2.png

Montevideo, 26.03.2019. Press release.

On the eve of the upcoming 3^rd Open Ended Working Group  of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), PAN redoubles its call for a global legally binding mechanism for the lifecycle management of pesticides, either as a new standalone treaty or as a legally binding protocol within a new overarching chemicals framework to phase out Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs).

PAN expresses its deep concern that SAICM has failed to achieve sound management of pesticides and that pesticide poisoning continues in countries all around the world. PAN is releasing updated versions of two documents underlining the strong need for a legally binding treaty to ban HHPs. These are a PAN International List of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (1) and a PAN International Consolidated List of Banned Pesticides. These two documents together show the large numbers of hazardous pesticides used around the world and the very uneven nature of regulation of hazardous pesticides around the globe.

An example illustrating such uneven regulation of pesticides is the highly toxic pesticide monocrotophos. Of the 154 countries for which information was available for the Consolidated List of Banned Pesticides, at least 112 have banned the insecticide monocrotophos, but its use in other countries continues to harm many people. It was responsible for killing 23 school children in India in 2013, implicated in the deaths of cotton growers in India in 2018, and in numerous other poisonings – despite the WHO calling on India to ban it 10 years ago. This is just one example of a HHP that should have been banned long ago, but remains in use and continues to poison people in countries where it is still used. PAN asks that companies still manufacturing monocrotophos should stop its manufacture and all remaining countries should ban it.

This situation occurs in many countries around the world, and Ms. Maimouna Diene, Director of PAN Africa says, “In many African countries we see high rates of poisonings of farmers and communities by HHPs. It is not possible to adequately protect communities, as well as their air, soil and water unless a legally binding mechanism for regulating HHPs is developed.”

Ms. Sarojeni Rengam, Executive Director of PAN Asia Pacific (PANAP) echoes this frustration and says  “The continued use of HHPs in Asian countries causes widespread poisonings of children, farmers, women and agricultural workers.  Recently PANAP and partners interviewed 2025 respondents in 7 countries, and found that 7 out of 10 people interviewed were poisoned by pesticides (3).  Rural people are poisoned by pesticides such as paraquat, lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorpyrifos and glyphosate.” She expressed dismay at the lack of action to prevent occupational poisonings and said “Continuing the sad saga of occupational pesticide poisonings of agricultural workers, a record number of such cases were reported last year in the Yavatmal district in Maharashtra state of India.”

Mr. Javier Souza, Regional Coordinator of PAN Latin America says „The use of HHPs in agriculture has led to frequent exposure and accidental poisoning of children throughout Latin America, for example when pesticide applications are made near schools or homes. Empty pesticide containers are discarded in the fields and rivers, contaminating the drinking water and increasing the plastic pollution of the sea because the users do not return them to their manufacturers, often violating current regulations.”

The lack of accountability of transnational pesticide corporations for the HHPs they produce and sell, especially in the Global South, led Ms. Susan Haffmans of PAN Germany to say “It is absolutely unethical that European countries like Germany, Switzerland, France and U.K. continue to export pesticides banned for use in these countries due to their toxicity. The exports to countries in the Global South continue to put communities there in danger from the hazards of exposure to HHPs.”

Ms. Kristin Schafer, Executive Director of PAN North America added “The consolidation of the pesticide industry has created giant corporations that have no interest in voluntary control measures, and put profits above all else. Years of evidence show us that these corporate actors aggressively undermine policies that protect public health and the environment. It’s time for the global community to act.”

PAN International calls on the global community to step up to the challenge and protect people across the world from HHPs by putting in place a legally binding treaty against HHPs.

Available for interview:

Dr. Meriel Watts, PAN Asia Pacific +64-21-1807830; meriel@merielwatts.net

Ms. Susan Haffmans, PAN Germany susan.haffmans@pan-germany.org, +49(0)40-3991910-25

Ms. Sarojeni Rengam, PAN Asia Pacific, sarojeni.rengam@panap.net
Javier Souza Casadinho, PAN Latin America, javierrapal@yahoo.com.ar ,+11 15 3617 1782

Ms. Kristin Schafer, PAN North America kristins@panna.org

Ms. Maimouna Diene, PAN Africa maimounadiene@pan-afrique.org

(1) The PAN International List of Highly Hazardous Pesticides is available at: http://pan-international.org/wp-content/uploads/PAN_HHP_List.pdf

(2) The PAN International Consolidated List of Banned Pesticide is available at: http://pan-international.org/pan-international-consolidated-list-of-banned-pesticides/

(3) Rights and Poisons is available at: https://panap.net/2018/10/of-rights-and-poisons-accountability-of-the-agrochemical-industry/

PAN International calls for investment in agroecology

Press release.

April 30, 2018. On May 2, experts from around the world will gather in Rome for a global symposium on soil pollution. The event, organised jointly by several UN agencies, offers an important opportunity to highlight the urgent need to invest in soil health, according to the leaders of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International.

PAN leaders from all of the network’s regional centers participated in the recent UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Symposium on Agroecology, and note the important connections between the two events. Specifically, PAN applauds the concept note for the Soil Pollution symposium, which highlights pesticide use as an important cause of soil pollution: “The three major pathways responsible for the introduction of diffuse pollutants into soil are (i) atmospheric deposition, (ii) agricultural inputs, and (iii) flood events. Causes of pollution tend to be dominated by the transport of pollutants by erosion processes (wind and water erosion and sedimentation), and excessive nutrient and pesticide applications, heavy metals, POPs and inorganic pollutants.” (FAO and ITPS, 2015a).

The Global Symposium on Soil Pollution is being organised by FAO’s Global Soil Partnership, along with the Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils (ITPS), the Secretariats of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, the UN Environment Program and the World Health Organization.

It aims to provide scientific evidence to support action to prevent and reduce soil pollution for increased food safety, food security and nutrition and ecosystem services. It also calls for the restoration of polluted sites, with the first step being implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines for Sustainable Soil Management.

PAN International welcomes the joint initiative, and urges participants to fully recognize the damaging effects of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs), and calls on those developing the voluntary soil guidelines to include an overall objective of phasing out HHPs and reducing dependency on agricultural pesticides.

“This month marks the 10-year anniversary of release of the UN and World Bank-sponsored International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge Science & Technology for Development report,” notes Henriette Christensen of PAN Europe. “This pathbreaking report was approved by all participating European, Asian, African and Latin American countries, and called for increased investment in agro-ecological approaches to pest management and action to reduce pesticide dependence.”

“Since the 2015 international year of soils, public awareness has grown about the fundamental importance of healthy soil,” says Dr. Margaret Reeves, senior scientist at PAN North America. “Vibrant, diverse soil biology is a critical driver of soil function — ensuring plant access to nutrients, air and water, and resistance to pests and diseases. There’s a growing body of scientific evidence showing the harmful impacts of petroleum-derived pesticides and fertilizers on this critical soil biology.” (1)

“FAO is working with countries to phase out HHPs, which are defined according to a set of criteria established by the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Management,” adds Sarojeni Rengam of PAN Asia and the Pacific. “In 2015, the 4th International Conference on Chemicals Management recommended that in taking action on HHPs, emphasis should be on promoting agroecologically based approaches. There should therefore be close collaboration between these two areas of work.”

“We must see coordination among international agreements to avoid the continuous contamination of soils with pesticides and other chemicals, and proceed rapidly with the soil remediation,” agrees Javier Souza, the Regional Coordinator for PAN Latin America. “The science of agroecology reminds us that healthy soils are integral to resilient and sustainable agroecosystems — which in turn enable the feeding and development of healthy people.”

Ndéye Maïmouna Diene, PAN Africa’s director, highlights the particular importance of effective decontamination of polluted sites. “Africa is a continent that faces pollution problems due mainly to ongoing use and abuse of extremely dangerous pesticides,” says Diene. “We call for the establishment of policies that preserve the health of our people, our soil and the environment. We are convinced that agroecology is the safest way to fight pollution in the continent.”

“Healthy soils underpin all agricultural production,” adds Keith Tyrell, director of PAN-UK. “Excessive use of agrochemicals is damaging soil quality and undermining our ability to feed ourselves in the long term. We need to switch to more sustainable, agroecological farming systems that conserve and improve soil quality, now.”

PAN leaders also note that actions under three existing global instruments focused on chemicals have significant potential to address soil pollution:

• The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade;
• The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs); and
• The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.

In addition, the Third Session of the United Nations Environmental Assembly adopted a resolution in 2017 calling for accelerated collaboration to address and manage soil pollution, The declaration aims to work towards a pollution- free world.’

Note (1):  For instance does a recent EU wide study show that glyphosate persists

For more information:

PAN Africa, Ndéye Maïmouna DIENE, maimounadiene@pan-afrique.org, 221775449689

PAN Asia Pacific, Sarojeni Rengam, sarojeni.rengam@panap.net

PAN Latin America, Javier Souza Casadinho, javierrapal@yahoo.com.ar, 11 15 3617 1782

PAN North America, Kristin Schafer, kristins@panna.org, 10119165883100

PAN Germany, Susan Haffmans, susan.haffmans@pan-germany.org, 49(0)40-3991910-25

PAN United Kingdom, Keith Tyrell, keithtyrell@pan-uk.org, 447588706224

PAN Europe, Henriette Christensen, henriette@pan-europe.info, +3223186255

Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International is a network of over 600 participating nongovernmental organizations, institutions and individuals in over 90 countries working to replace the use of hazardous pesticides with ecologically sound and socially just alternatives. PAN was founded in 1982 and has five independent, collaborating Regional Centers that implement its projects and campaigns.

PAN International Press Release

Stockholm, March 15, 2018
Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International released an updated version of its List of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) to coincide with a key meeting in Stockholm of the Strategic Approach for International Chemicals Management (SAICM) process. The expanded list now includes 306 chemicals.

These hazardous pesticides (HHPs) threaten people and the environment around the world. The global community must act to stop the continuing exposure of people and the planet to these HHPs. PAN calls on the global community for an internationally binding treaty on pesticides.

Among the nine newly listed pesticides in the updated version of the HHP list are carbetamide for being classified as a presumed human reproductive toxicant according to the EU, cyanamide for its hormone disrupting properties and emamectin benzoate for its threat to the environment and bees.

Following the addition of a new criterion, the list now includes pesticides which are recognised by the UN Rotterdam Convention as meeting the Convention’s criteria for global trade restrictions. These pesticides have however not yet been officially listed in the Rotterdam Convention for political reasons.

Pesticides are the only toxic chemicals that are intentionally released into the environment. Today pesticides contaminate every environmental medium even in locations remote from their use. Susan Haffmans of PAN Germany says „These pesticides are having a devastating effect on biodiversity, including on beneficial insects. They are undermining the sustainability of food production systems and harm an unknown number of farmers, workers, children and animals every year.“

„We are deeply concerned about the negative impact of hazardous pesticides on the health of children around the world, especially from rural and farming communities. There is a critical need for global action to curtail the use of the worst pesticides to protect the wellbeing of children.“ says Kristin Schafer of PAN North America.

Keith Tyrell from PAN UK adds „Though pesticides have been recognized as a global threat to health, development and the environment, and despite a variety of pesticide Conventions and agreements, global governance of pesticides is weak, leaving large gaps in overall management.“

In the Global South there is daily proof of the devasting effects of pesticides on families and their livelihoods. Maimouna Diene of PAN Africa says „If SAICM wants to fulfill its goal of achieving sound management of chemicals throughout their whole lifecycle and to protect human health and ecosystems, it has to intensify its actions on HHPs and provide trainings to farmers, including women farmers, on agroecological practices. The past few years have shown that the global pesticides problem cannot be tackled adequately with voluntary agreements.“

PAN Asia Pacific’s Sarojeni Rengam says „The Sustainable Development Goals, in particular to end hunger, achieve food security and promote sustainable agriculture; to ensure healthy lives and to halt and reverse land degradation and biodiversity loss cannot be achieved until the widespread use of HHPs is replaced by agroecological practices“.

From the experience of longstanding work in Latin America on agroecological practices, Javier Souza of PAN Latin America says „It is time for undertaking concerted efforts to phase out HHPs and replace their use with agroecology. In Argentina we have shown that by replacing HHPs with agroecology we can decrease costs of inputs, improve incomes and community health, bolster food security and climate resilience, improve gender equity, enhance biodiversity, and reduce pollution.“

The PAN HHP list includes pesticides with high levels of acute or chronic hazards to health or environment according to internationally accepted classification systems. With the HHP list, PAN provides authorities, cultivation organisations, advisers, farmers and other interested parties with a tool to identify highly dangerous pesticides and then to replace them with safer and more sustainable alternatives.

For the PAN HHP list, visit http://www.pan-germany.org/download/PAN_HHP_List.pdf

For more about PAN International and the 500+ organizations in more than 100 countries that have joined the global call to ban highly hazardous pesticides and replace them with agroecological alternatives, visit http://pan-international.org/.

Available for interview:

Maimouna Diene, PAN Africa, maimounadiene@pan-afrique.org; +223 64898163
Sarojeni Rengam, PAN Asia Pacific, sarojeni.rengam@panap.net
Susan Haffmans, PAN Germany, susan.haffmans@pan-germany.org , +49(0)40-3991910-25
Javier Souza Casadinho, PAN Latin America, javierrapal@yahoo.com.ar ,+11 15 3617 1782
Kristin Schafer, PAN North America, kristins@panna.org , +10119165883100
Keith Tyrell, PAN United Kingdom, keith@pan-uk.org , +447588706224