Pesticide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A cropduster spraying pesticide on a field

Pesticides are substances or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling or mitigating any pest.[1] A pesticide may be a chemical substance, biological agent (such as a virus or bacterium), antimicrobial, disinfectant or device used against any pest. Pests includeinsects, plant pathogens, weeds, molluscs, birds, mammals, fish, nematodes (roundworms), andmicrobes that destroy property, spread disease or are a vector for disease or cause a nuisance. Although there are benefits to the use of pesticides, there are also drawbacks, such as potential toxicity to humans and other animals. According to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 10 of the 12 most dangerous and persistent organic chemicals are pesticides.[2][3]
Contents
[hide]

1 Definition 2 Uses

2.1 Amounts

3 Costs

3.1 Environmental effect

3.2 Health effects

4 Benefits

o o o

4.1 Primary benefits 4.2 Secondary benefits 4.3 Monetary

5 Alternatives

o o

5.1 Push pull strategy 5.2 Effectiveness

6 Regulation

o o

6.1 International 6.2 United States

7 History 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading 11 External links

[edit]Definition

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has defined the term of pesticide as: any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying or controlling any pest, including vectors of human or animal disease, unwanted species of plants or animals causing harm during or otherwise interfering with the production, processing, storage, transport or marketing of food, agricultural commodities, wood and wood products or animal feedstuffs, or substances which may be administered to animals for the control of insects, arachnids or other pests in or on their bodies. The term includes substances intended for use as a plant growth regulator, defoliant, desiccant or agent for thinning fruit or preventing the premature fall of fruit. Also used as substances applied to crops either before or after harvest to protect the commodity from deterioration during storage and transport. [4]
Type of Pesticide Target Pest Group

Algicides or Algaecides

Algae

Avicides

Birds

Bactericides

Bacteria

Fungicides

Fungi and Oomycetes

Insecticides

Insects

Miticides or Acaricides

Mites

Molluscicides

Snails

Nematicides

Nematodes

Rodenticides

Rodents

Virucides

Viruses

Subclasses of pesticides include: herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, rodenticides,pediculicides, and biocides.[3][5] Pesticides can be classified by target organism, chemical structure, and physical state.[6] Pesticides can also be classed as inorganic, synthetic, or biologicals(biopesticides),[6] although the distinction can sometimes blur. Biopesticides include microbial pesticides and biochemical pesticides.[7] Plant-derived pesticides, or "botanicals", have been developing quickly. These include the pyrethroids, rotenoids,nicotinoids, and a fourth group that includes strychnine and scilliroside.[8]:15 Many pesticides can be grouped into chemical families. Prominent insecticide families include organochlorines, organophosphates, and carbamates. Organochlorinehydrocarbons (e.g. DDT) could be separated into dichlorodiphenylethanes, cyclodiene compounds, and other related compounds. They operate by disrupting the sodium/potassium balance of the nerve fiber, forcing the nerve to transmit continuously. Their toxicities vary greatly, but they have

been phased out because of their persistence and potential to bioaccumulate.[8]:239240

Organophosphate and carbamates largely replaced organochlorines. Both operate through

inhibiting the enzyme acetylcholinesterase, allowing acetylcholine to transfer nerve impulses indefinitely and causing a variety of symptoms such as weakness or paralysis. Organophosphates are quite toxic to vertebrates, and have in some cases been replaced by less toxic carbamates.[8]:136-137 Thiocarbamate and dithiocarbamates are subclasses of carbamates. Prominent families of herbicides include pheoxy and benzoic acid herbicides (e.g. 2,4-D), triazines (e.g. atrazine), ureas (e.g. diuron), and Chloroacetanilides (e.g. alachlor). Phenoxy compounds tend to selectively kill broadleaved weeds rather than grasses. The phenoxy and benzoic acid herbicides function similar to plant growth hormones, and grow cells without normal cell division, crushing the plants nutrient transport system.[8]:300 Triazines interfere with photsynthesis.[8]:335 Many commonly used pesticides are not included in these families, including glyphosate. Pesticides can be classified based upon their biological mechanism function or application method. Most pesticides work by poisoningpests.[9] A systemic pesticide moves inside a plant following absorption by the plant. With insecticides and most fungicides, this movement is usually upward (through the xylem) and outward. Increased efficiency may be a result. Systemic insecticides, which poison pollen andnectar in the flowers, may kill bees and other needed pollinators. In 2009, the development of a new class of fungicides called paldoxins was announced. These work by taking advantage of natural defense chemicals released by plants called phytoalexins, which fungi then detoxify using enzymes. The paldoxins inhibit the fungi's detoxification enzymes. They are believed to be safer and greener.[10]
[edit]Uses

Pesticides are used to control organisms considered harmful.[11] For example, they are used to kill mosquitoes that can transmit potentially deadly diseases like west nile virus, yellow fever, and malaria. They can also kill bees, wasps or ants that can cause allergic reactions. Insecticides can protect animals from illnesses that can be caused by parasites such as fleas.[11] Pesticides can prevent sickness in humans that could be caused by mouldy food or diseased produce. Herbicides can be used to clear roadside weeds, trees and brush. They can also kill invasive weeds that may cause environmental damage. Herbicides are commonly applied in ponds and lakes to control algaeand plants such as water grasses that can interfere with activities like swimming and fishing and cause the water to look or smell unpleasant.[12] Uncontrolled pests such as termites and mould can damage structures such as

houses.[11] Pesticides are used in grocery stores and food storage facilities to manage rodents and insects that infest food such as grain. Each use of a pesticide carries some associated risk. Proper pesticide use decreases these associated risks to a level deemed acceptable by pesticide regulatory agencies such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) of Canada. Pesticides can save farmers' money by preventing crop losses to insects and other pests; in the U.S., farmers get an estimated fourfold return on money they spend on pesticides. [13] One study found that not using pesticides reduced crop yields by about 10%. [14] Another study, conducted in 1999, found that a ban on pesticides in the United States may result in a rise of food prices, loss of jobs, and an increase in world hunger.[15] DDT, sprayed on the walls of houses, is an organochloride that has been used to fight malaria since the 1950s. Recent policy statements by the World Health Organization have given stronger support to this approach.[16] Dr. Arata Kochi, WHO's malaria chief, said, "One of the best tools we have against malaria is indoor residual house spraying. Of the dozen insecticides WHO has approved as safe for house spraying, the most effective is DDT."[16] However, since then, an October 2007 study has linked breast cancer from exposure to DDT prior to puberty.[17] Poisoning may also occur due to use of DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons by entering the human food chain when animal tissues are affected. Symptoms include nervous excitement, tremors, convulsions or death. Scientists estimate that DDT and other chemicals in the organophosphate class of pesticides have saved 7 million human lives since 1945 by preventing the transmission of diseases such as malaria, bubonic plague, sleeping sickness, and typhus.[18] However, DDT use is not always effective, as resistance to DDT was identified in Africa as early as 1955, and by 1972 nineteen species of mosquito worldwide were resistant to DDT.[19] A study for theWorld Health Organization in 2000 from Vietnam established that non-DDT malaria controls were significantly more effective than DDT use.[20] The ecological effect of DDT on organisms is an example of bioaccumulation.
[edit]Amounts

In 2006 and 2007,the world used approximately 5.2 billion pounds of pesticides with herbicides constituting the majority of the world pesticide use at 40% followed by insecticides and fungicides with totals of 17% and 10% respectively.[21] The U.S. in 2006 and 2007, used approximately 1.1 billion bounds of pesticides accounting for 22% of the world total. [21] For conventional pesticides which are used in the agricultural sector as well in industry, commercial, governmental and the home & garden sectors, the U.S. used at total of 857 million pounds, with the agricultural sector accounting for 80% of the conventional pesticide use

total.[21] Pesticides are also found in majority of U.S. households with 78 million out of the 105.5 million households indicating that they use some form of pesticide.[21] Currently,there are more than 1,055 active ingredients registered as pesticides,[22] which are put together to produce over 16,000 pesticide products that are being marketed in the United States
[edit]Costs
[23]

Harm

Annual Cost

Public Health

$1.1 billion

Pesticide Resistance in Pest

$1.5 billion

Crop Losses Caused by Pesticides $1.4 billion

Bird Losses due to Pesticides

$2.2 billion

Groundwater Contamination

$2.0 billion

Other Costs

$1.4 billion

Total Costs

$9.6 billion

On the cost side of pesticide use there can be a cost to the environment and human health, as well as the cost of the development and research of new pesticides. Human health and environmental cost from pesticides in the United States is a total of $9.6 billion:[24] Additional cost includes the registration process and the cost of purchase pesticides. The registration process can take several years to complete the 70 different types of field test and can cost between $5070 million for a single pesticide.[24] Annually the United States spends $10 billion on pesticides.[24]
[edit]Environmental

effect

Main article: Environmental effects of pesticides

Pesticide use raises a number of environmental concerns. Over 98% of sprayed insecticides and 95% of herbicides reach a destination other than their target species, including non-target species, air, water and soil.[18] Pesticide drift occurs when pesticides suspended in the air as particles are carried by wind to other areas, potentially contaminating them. Pesticides are one of the causes of water pollution, and some pesticides are persistent organic pollutants and contribute to soil contamination. In addition, pesticide use reduces biodiversity, reduces nitrogen fixation,[25] contributes to pollinator decline,[26][27][28][29] destroys habitat (especially for birds),[30] and threatens endangered species.[18] Pests can develop a resistance to the pesticide (pesticide resistance), necessitating a new pesticide. Alternatively a greater dose of the pesticide can be used to counteract the resistance, although this will cause a worsening of the ambient pollution problem.
[edit]Health

effects

A sign warning about potential pesticide exposure.

Main articles: Health effects of pesticides and Pesticide poisoning Pesticides may cause acute and delayed health effects in those who are exposed. [31] Pesticide exposure can cause a variety of adverse health effects. These effects can range from simple irritation of the skin and eyes to more severe effects such as affecting the nervous system, mimicking hormones causing reproductive problems, and also causing cancer.[32] A 2007systematic review found that "most studies on non-Hodgkin lymphoma and leukemia showed positive associations with pesticide exposure" and thus concluded that cosmetic use of pesticides should be decreased.[33] Strong evidence also exists for other negative outcomes from pesticide exposure including neurological, birth defects, fetal death,[34] and neurodevelopmental disorder.[35]

The American Medical Association recommends limiting exposure to pesticides and using safer alternatives:[6] "Particular uncertainty exists regarding the long-term effects of low-dose pesticide exposures. Current surveillance systems are inadequate to characterize potential exposure problems related either to pesticide usage or pesticide-related illnessesConsidering these data gaps, it is prudentto limit pesticide exposuresand to use the least toxic chemical pesticide or non-chemical alternative." The World Health Organization and the UN Environment Programme estimate that each year, 3 million workers in agriculture in the developing world experience severe poisoning from pesticides, about 18,000 of whom die.[18] According to one study, as many as 25 million workers in developing countries may suffer mild pesticide poisoning yearly. [36] One study found pesticide self-poisoning the method of choice in one third of suicides worldwide, and recommended, among other things, more restrictions on the types of pesticides that are most harmful to humans.[37]
[edit]Benefits

There are two levels of benefits for pesticide use, primary and secondary. Primary benefits are direct gains from the use of pesticides and secondary benefits are effects that are more longterm.[38]
[edit]Primary

benefits

1. Controlling pests and plant disease vectors

Improved crop/livestock yields Improved crop/livestock quality Invasive species controlled

2. Controlling human/livestock disease vectors and nuisance organisms

Human lives saved and suffering reduced Animal lives saved and suffering reduced Diseases contained geographically

3. Prevent of control organisms that harm other human activities and structures
Drivers view unobstructed Tree/brush/leaf hazards prevented Wooden structures protected
[38]

[edit]Secondary

benefits

1. Community benefits
Farm and agribusiness revenues Nutrition and health improved Food safety and security

2. National benefits
Workforce productivity increased Increased export revenues National agriculture economy

3. Global benefits
Assured safe and diverse food supply Less greenhouse gas Reduced civil unrest [edit]Monetary
[38]

For every dollar ($1) that is spent on pesticides for crops yields four dollars ($4) in crops saved.[39] This means based on the amount of money spent per year on pesticides, $10 billion, that there is an additional $40 billion savings in crop that would be lost due to damage by insects and weeds. Generally speaking, farmers benefit from having an increase crop yield and from being able to grow a variety of crops throughout the year. Consumers of agricultural products also benefit from being able to afford the vast quantities of produce available year round.[38] The general public also benefits from the use of pesticides for the control of insectborne diseases and illnesses, such as malaria.[38] The use of pesticides creates a large job market, which provides jobs for the all of the people who work within the industry.
[edit]Alternatives

Alternatives to pesticides are available and include methods of cultivation, use of biological pest controls (such as pheromones and microbial pesticides), genetic engineering, and methods of interfering with insect breeding.[18] Application of composted yard waste has also been used as a way of controlling pests.[40] These methods are becoming increasingly popular and often are safer than traditional chemical pesticides. In addition, EPA is registering reducedrisk conventional pesticides in increasing numbers.

Cultivation practices include polyculture (growing multiple types of plants), crop rotation, planting crops in areas where the pests that damage them do not live, timing planting according to when pests will be least problematic, and use of trap crops that attract pests away from the real crop.[18] In the U.S., farmers have had success controlling insects by spraying with hot water at a cost that is about the same as pesticide spraying.[18] Release of other organisms that fight the pest is another example of an alternative to pesticide use. These organisms can include naturalpredators or parasites of the pests.[18] Biological pesticides based on entomopathogenic fungi, bacteria and viruses cause disease in the pest species can also be used.[18] Interfering with insects' reproduction can be accomplished by sterilizing males of the target species and releasing them, so that they matewith females but do not produce offspring.[18] This technique was first used on the screwworm fly in 1958 and has since been used with themedfly, the tsetse fly,[41] and the gypsy moth.[42] However, this can be a costly, time consuming approach that only works on some types of insects. [18] Another alternative to pesticides is the thermal treatment of soil through steam. Soil steaming kills pest and increases soil health. citation needed. In India, traditional pest control methods include using Panchakavya, the "mixture of five products." The method has recently experienced a resurgence in popularity due in part to use by the organic farming community.[citation needed]
[edit]Push

pull strategy

The term "push-pull" was established in 1987 as an approach for integrated pest management (IPM). This strategy uses a mixture of behavior-modifying stimuli to manipulate the distribution and abundance of insects. "Push" means the insects are repelled or deterred away from whatever resource we are trying to protect. "Pull" means that we use certain stimuli (semiochemical stimuli, pheromones, food additives, visual stimuli, genetically altered plants, etc.) to attract pests to trap crops where they will be killed [43] There are numerous different components involved in order to implement a Push-Pull Strategy in IPM. Many case studies testing the effectiveness of the push-pull approach have been done across the world. The most successful push-pull strategy was developed in Africa for subsistence farming. Another successful case study was performed on the control of Helicoverpa in cotton crops in Australia. In Europe, the Middle East, and the United States, push-pull strategies were successfully used in the controlling ofSitona lineatus in bean fields.[43] Plus many more cases where this strategy was more beneficial than simply using pesticides on their crops.

Some advantages of using the push-pull method are less use of chemical or biological materials and better protection against insect habituation to this control method. Some disadvantages of the push-pull strategy is that if there is a lack of appropriate knowledge of behavioral and chemical ecology of the host-pest interactions then this method becomes unreliable. Furthermore, because the push-pull method is not a very popular method of IPM operational and registration costs are higher.[44]
[edit]Effectiveness

Some evidence shows that alternatives to pesticides can be equally effective as the use of chemicals. For example, Sweden has halved its use of pesticides with hardly any reduction in crops.[18] In Indonesia, farmers have reduced pesticide use on rice fields by 65% and experienced a 15% crop increase.[18] A study of Maize yields in northern Florida found that the application of composted yard waste with high carbon to nitrogen ratio to agricultural fields was highly effective at reducing the population of plant-parasitic nematodes and increasing crop yield, with yield increases ranging from 10% to 212%; the observed effects were long-term, often not appearing until the third season of the study.[40] However, pesticide resistance is increasing. In the 1940s, U.S. farmers lost only 7% of their crops to pests. Since the 1980s, loss has increased to 13%, even though more pesticides are being used. Between 500 and 1,000 insect and weed species have developed pesticide resistance since 1945.[45]
[edit]Regulation [edit]International

In Europe, recent EU legislation has been approved banning the use of highly toxic pesticides including those that are carcinogenic,mutagenic or toxic to reproduction, those that are endocrine-disrupting, and those that are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB).[citation needed] Measures were approved to improve the general safety of pesticides across all EU member states.[46] Though pesticide regulations differ from country to country, pesticides and products on which they were used are traded across international borders. To deal with inconsistencies in regulations among countries, delegates to a conference of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization adopted an International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides in 1985 to create voluntary standards of pesticide regulation for different countries.[47] The Code was updated in 1998 and 2002.[48] The FAO claims that the code has

raised awareness about pesticide hazards and decreased the number of countries without restrictions on pesticide use.[4] Three other efforts to improve regulation of international pesticide trade are the United Nations London Guidelines for the Exchange of Information on Chemicals in International Trade and the United Nations Codex Alimentarius Commission[citation needed]. The former seeks to implement procedures for ensuring that prior informed consent exists between countries buying and selling pesticides, while the latter seeks to create uniform standards for maximum levels of pesticide residues among participating countries.[49] Both initiatives operate on a voluntary basis.[49] Pesticide safety education and pesticide applicator regulation are designed to protect the public from pesticide misuse, but do not eliminate all misuse. Reducing the use of pesticides and choosing less toxic pesticides may reduce risks placed on society and the environment from pesticide use.[12] Integrated pest management, the use of multiple approaches to control pests, is becoming widespread and has been used with success in countries such as Indonesia, China, Bangladesh, the U.S., Australia, and Mexico.[18] IPM attempts to recognize the more widespread impacts of an action on an ecosystem, so that natural balances are not upset.[50] New pesticides are being developed, including biological and botanical derivatives and alternatives that are thought to reduce health and environmental risks. In addition, applicators are being encouraged to consider alternative controls and adopt methods that reduce the use of chemical pesticides. Pesticides can be created that are targeted to a specific pest's life cycle, which can be environmentally more friendly.[51] For example, potato cyst nematodes emerge from their protective cysts in response to a chemical excreted by potatoes; they feed on the potatoes and damage the crop.[51] A similar chemical can be applied to fields early, before the potatoes are planted, causing the nematodes to emerge early and starve in the absence of potatoes.[51]
[edit]United

States

Main article: Pesticide regulation in the United States

Preparation for an application of hazardous pesticide in USA.

In most countries, pesticides must be approved for sale and use by a government agency. [47] In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for regulating pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).[52] Complex and costly studies must be conducted to indicate whether the material is safe to use and effective against the intended pest. [citation needed] The EPA regulates pesticides to ensure that these products do not pose adverse effects to humans or the environment. Pesticides produced before November 1984 continue to be reassessed in order to meet the current scientific and regulatory standards. All registered pesticides are reviewed every 15 years to ensure they meet the proper standards. [52] During the registration process, a label is created. The label contains directions for proper use of the material. Based on acute toxicity, pesticides are assigned to a Toxicity Class. Some pesticides are considered too hazardous for sale to the general public and are designatedrestricted use pesticides. Only certified applicators, who have passed an exam, may purchase or supervise the application of restricted use pesticides.[47] Records of sales and use are required to be maintained and may be audited by government agencies charged with the enforcement of pesticide regulations.[citation needed] The EPA regulates pesticides under two under main acts, both of which were amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. In addition to the EPA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) set standards for the level of pesticide residue that is allowed on or in crops pesticide.[54] Additionally, the U.S. EPA uses the National Research Council's four-step process for human health risk assessment: (1) Hazard Identification, (2) Dose-Response Assessment, (3) Exposure Assessment, and (4) Risk Characterization.[55]
[edit]History
[53]

The EPA looks at what the

potential human health and environmental effects might be associated with the use of the

Since before 2000 BC, humans have utilized pesticides to protect their crops. The first known pesticide was elemental sulfur dusting used in ancient Sumer about 4,500 years ago in ancient Mesopotamia. By the 15th century, toxic chemicals such as arsenic, mercury and lead were being applied to crops to kill pests. In the 17th century, nicotine sulfate was extracted from tobacco leaves for use as an insecticide. The 19th century saw the introduction of two more natural pesticides, pyrethrum, which is derived from chrysanthemums, and rotenone,

which is derived from the roots of tropical vegetables.[56] Until the 1950s, arsenic-based pesticides were dominant.[57] Paul Mller discovered that DDTwas a very effective insecticide. Organochlorines such as DDT were dominant, but they were replaced in the U.S. by organophosphates and carbamates by 1975. Since then, pyrethrin compounds have become the dominant insecticide.[57] Herbicides became common in the 1960s, led by "triazine and other nitrogen-based compounds, carboxylic acids such as 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, and glyphosate".[57] The first legislation providing federal authority for regulating pesticides was enacted in 1910;[58] however, decades later during the 1940s manufacturers began to produce large amounts of synthetic pesticides and their use became widespread.[50] Some sources consider the 1940s and 1950s to have been the start of the "pesticide era."[59] Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was established in 1970 and amendments to the pesticide law in 1972,[60] pesticide use has increased 50-fold since 1950 and 2.3 million tonnes (2.5 million short tons) of industrial pesticides are now used each year.[56] Seventy-five percent of all pesticides in the world are used in developed countries, but use in developing countries is increasing.[18] In 2001 the EPA stopped reporting yearly pesticide use statistics. A study of USA pesticide use trends through 1997 was published in 2003 by the National Science Foundation's Center for Integrated Pest Management.[57][61] In the 1960s, it was discovered that DDT was preventing many fish-eating birds from reproducing, which was a serious threat to biodiversity.Rachel Carson wrote the best-selling book Silent Spring about biological magnification. The agricultural use of DDT is now banned under theStockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, but it is still used in some developing nations to prevent malaria and other tropical diseases by spraying on interior walls to kill or repel mosquitoes.[62]
[edit]See

also

Index of pesticide articles Agricultural spray adjuvant Agrochemicals Biological pesticides Green pesticide Gene silencing pesticide Pest control Integrated Pest Management

 List of environmental health hazards List of fungicides Non-pesticide management Nonpoint source pollution Pesticide application Pesticide control Pesticide poisoning Phytoremediation SENSOR-Pesticides Soil contamination Pushpull technology Bhopal disaster

Types of pesticides
Published: February 24, 2008, 7:20 pm Edited: February 24, 2008, 7:20 pm Lead Author: Topics: Risk Assessment, Consumer Issues, Anthropogenic Ecosystems, Ecology, Ecotoxicology, Animals & Society Toxicology, Human Health, Food,

Rate:

1 2 3 4 5

Content Source: EPA This article has been reviewed by the following Topic Editor: Sidney Draggan

Table of Contents 1 About EPA's Pesticides Program 2 Types of Pesticides 2.1 Chemical Pesticides 2.2 Biopesticides 3 Pest Types 4 Pest Control Devices 5 Further Reading

About EPA's Pesticides Program

Current as of April 2007 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the states (usually the State Department of Agriculture) register or license pesticides for use in the United States. In addition, anyone planning to import pesticides for use in the U.S. must notify EPA. EPA receives its authority to register pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

Types of Pesticides
Pesticides are often referred to according to the type of pest they control. Another way to think about pesticides is to consider those that are chemical pesticides or are derived from a common source or production method. Other categories include biopesticides, antimicrobials, and pest control devices.

Chemical Pesticides
Some examples of chemically-related pesticides follow. Other examples are available in sources such as Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings. Organophosphate Pesticides - These pesticides affect the nervous system by disrupting the enzyme that regulates acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter. Most organophosphates are insecticides. They were developed during the early 19th century, but their effects on insects, which are similar to their effects on humans, were discovered in 1932. Some are very poisonous (they were used in World War II as nerve agents). However, they usually are not persistent in the environment. Carbamate Pesticides affect the nervous system by disrupting an enzyme that regulates acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter. The enzyme effects are usually reversible. There are several subgroups within the carbamates. Organochlorine Insecticides were commonly used in the past, but many have been removed from the market due to their health and environmental effects and their persistence (e.g. DDT and chlordane). Pyrethroid Pesticides were developed as a synthetic version of the naturally occurring pesticide pyrethrin, which is found in chrysanthemums. They have been modified to increase their stability in the environment. Some synthetic pyrethroids are toxic to the nervous system.

Biopesticides
Biopesticides are certain types of pesticides derived from such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals. For example, canola oil and baking soda have pesticidal applications and are considered biopesticides. At the end of 2001, there were approximately 195 registered biopesticide active ingredients and 780 products. Biopesticides fall into three major classes: (1) Microbial pesticides consist of a microorganism (e.g., a bacterium, fungus, virus or protozoan) as the active ingredient. Microbial pesticides can control many different kinds of pests, although each separate active ingredient is relatively specific for its target pest[s]. For example, there are fungi that control certain weeds, and other fungi that kill specific insects. The most widely used microbial pesticides are subspecies and strains of Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt. Each strain of this bacterium produces a different mix of proteins, and specifically kills one or a few related species of insect larvae. While some Bt's control moth larvae found on plants, other Bt's are specific for larvae of flies and mosquitoes. The target insect species are determined by whether the particular Bt produces a protein that can bind to a larval gut receptor, thereby causing the insect larvae to starve (2) Plant-Incorporated-Protectants (PIPs) are pesticidal substances that plants produce from genetic material that has been added to the plant. For example, scientists can take the gene for the Bt pesticidal protein, and introduce the gene into the plant's own genetic material. Then the plant, instead of the Bt bacterium, manufactures the substance that destroys the pest. The protein and its genetic material, but not the plant itself, are regulated by EPA. (3) Biochemical pesticides are naturally occurring substances that control pests by non-toxic mechanisms. Conventional pesticides, by contrast, are generally synthetic materials that directly kill or inactivate the pest. Biochemical pesticides include substances, such as insect sex pheromones, that interfere with mating, as well as various scented plant extracts that attract insect pests to traps. Because it is sometimes difficult to determine whether a substance meets the criteria for classification as a biochemical pesticide, EPA has established a special committee to make such decisions.

Pest Types
Pesticides that are related because they address the same type of pests include: Algicides Control algae in lakes, canals, swimming pools, water tanks, and other sites. Antifouling agents Kill or repel organisms that attach to underwater surfaces, such as boat bottoms. Antimicrobials Antimicrobials Kill microorganisms (such as bacteria and viruses). Attractants Attract pests (for example, to lure an insect or rodent to a trap). (However, food is not considered a pesticide when used as an attractant.) Biopesticides Biopesticides are certain types of pesticides derived from such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals. Biocides Kill microorganisms. Disinfectants and sanitizers Kill or inactivate disease-producing microorganisms on inanimate objects.

Fungicides Kill fungi (including blights, mildews, molds, and rusts). Fumigants Produce gas or vapor intended to destroy pests in buildings or soil Herbicides Kill weeds and other plants that grow where they are not wanted. Insecticides Kill insects and other arthropods. Miticides (also called acaricides) Kill mites that feed on plants and animals. Microbial pesticides Microorganisms that kill, inhibit, or out compete pests, including insects or other microorganisms. Molluscicides Kill snails and slugs. Nematicides Kill nematodes (microscopic, worm-like organisms that feed on plant roots). Ovicides Kill eggs of insects and mites. Pheromones Biochemicals used to disrupt the mating behavior of insects. Repellents Repel pests, including insects (such as mosquitoes) and birds. Rodenticides Control mice and other rodents. The term pesticide also includes these substances: Defoliants Cause leaves or other foliage to drop from a plant, usually to facilitate harvest. Desiccants Promote drying of living tissues, such as unwanted plant tops. Insect growth regulators Disrupt the molting, maturity from pupal stage to adult, or other life processes of insects. Plant growth regulators Substances (excluding fertilizers or other plant nutrients) that alter the expected growth, flowering, or reproduction rate of plants.

Pest Control Devices

What about pest control devices? EPA also has a role in regulating devices used to control pests. More specifically, a "device" is any instrument or contrivance (other than a firearm) intended for trapping, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest. A mousetrap is an example of a device. Unlike pesticides, EPA does not require devices to be registered with the Agency. Devices are subject to certain labeling, packaging, record keeping, and import/export requirements, however. For more information on devices, see Pest Control Devices.

Further Reading
What is a Pesticide? Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The Encyclopedia of Earth article "Pesticide" relates to this article.

Disclaimer: This article is taken wholly from, or contains information that was originally published by, the Environmental Protection Agency. Topic editors and authors for the Encyclopedia of Earth may have edited its content or added new information. The use of information from the Environmental Protection Agency should not be construed as support for or endorsement by that organization for any new information added by EoE personnel, or for any editing of the original content.

Citation
EPA (Content Source);Sidney Draggan (Topic Editor) "Types of pesticides". In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment). [First published in the Encyclopedia of Earth February 24, 2008; Last revised Date February 24, 2008; Retrieved May 15, 2011 <http://www.eoearth.org/article/Types_of_pesticides>

The Author
ADD COMMENT

Comments

There are no comments.

Add Comment

Gains associated with pesticide use include:

1. Economics of pesticide production:$50 billion dollar business - about 40% is exported to other countries. 2. It has been estimated that millions of lives have been saved from death through malaria, yellow fever, sleeping sickness, Black plague and typhoid 3. With respect to agriculture- 35% lost before cropping and 20% post with pesticides ; without pesticide another 8% of additional damagewould occur. The psychological damage ( non perfect fruit and vegetables) would be even greater- 20-90% 4. Forestry - millions of acres have been sprayed; Spruce budworm and gypsy moth. some contend however that these insects cycle normally and would decrease without the use of pesticides.

Cons associated with pesticide use:

1. Genetic resistance - every year the number of resistant species evolving increases Today, nearly 275 weeds and more than 500 insects are resistant to at least one pesticide. That's more than five times the amount in 1950. And farmers lose more crops to pests today than they did in the 1940s. 2. Most chemical pesticides arenonspecific - effect a large number of species, pest and non-pest 3. Pesticides treadmill: from 1940 --> 1984 crop loss has increased from 7 --> 13% while pesticide use increased 12X. Why? with spraying we have killed the predators of the pests, and once the pest species is released from natural controls ( both no predation and no competition) their populations escalate! 4. With aerial application, only 10% reaches the crop and only 0.1%-5% reaches the targeted pest. 5. Pesticide use has threatened and continues to impact wildlife negatively. 6. Each year WHO estimates 1-5 million people have acute poisoning and die. In the US, 20,000 are estimated to suffer from some form of pesticide poisoning

The pros and cons of pesticide use

By Dr. Mohd. Isa Abdul Majid FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, different natural substances have been used as pesticides. Initially, salts of metal, sulphur, natural oils and tobacco products were utilised. During the last 50 years or so, chemical synthesis of pesticides has increased considerably. Now, there are more than 55 classes and 1,500 individual substances produced in more than 100,00 formulations of pesticides. Basically, pesticides are created to control or destroy pests. Insecticides control insects, herbicides control weeds, fungicides control fungi such as mould and mildew and rodenticides control rodents. In additions, pesticides are also defined by their method of dispersal (such as fumigant) or mode of action (such as ovicide which kills eggs of pests). Some of these chemicals are applied to control pests that reduce crop yields or to protect the nutritional value of our food. Others are used for cosmetic purposes to enhance the appearance of fresh food. Pesticide use in agriculture, forestry, industry, public health and households make them one of the most common type of chemicals coming into contact with all groups of a population. They are widely used in all countries due to their proven effect in vector control and their effectiveness in agriculture. However, pesticides represent a very serious health and environmental problem. Preventing their eventual adverse effects is much more difficult than is the case with other substances used in industries. Benefits of pesticides The contribution of pesticides to health and the economy is closely interrelated. They contribute directly to our health through control of certain vector-borne diseases; they contribute directly to the economy through increased production of food and the production of many materials during storage. In some countries, greater and more dependable production of food has eliminated famine and thus pesticides contribute as much to health as to the economy. Health and comfort One of the main contributions of pesticides to the control of human diseases is in the control of diseases spread by arthropods and the other vectors. Outbreaks of malaria, louse-borne typhus, plague and urban yellow fever - four of the most important epidemic diseases in history are controlled by an organochlorine, DDT. Other diseases that have been controlled to some degree by this compound include filariasis, dengue, various virus encephalitides, louse-borne relapsing fever, trench fever, murine typhus, shigellosis amoebiasis, leishmanuasis, bartonellosis, onchocerciasis, sandfly fever, trypanosomiasis, yaws, infectious conjunctivitis, cholera. Chaga's disease, scrub thyphus, scabies, rickettsial pox and tick-borne relapsing

fever. Other pesticides have made some contribution, but the chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, especially DDT, are the most important in the control of insect-borne disease in humans. As the resistance of vectors and other factors began to interfere with the use of chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides, it became necessary to use several other classes of compounds. A variety of compounds ranging from DDT to pyrethrum have contributed greatly to human comfort through control of household insects which, although not known to carry disease, are an annoyance. Systemic use of rodenticides helps to prevent the transmission of diseases acquired by humans from rats and other rodents. However, any effort of an epidemic of plague may lead to increased spread of the disease. This is because infected fleas that have left dead rats may attack humans instead. During epidemics, DDT has proven valuable by killing fleas before they can leave rats or have a chance to contact humans. Agriculture and forestry Pesticide use is only one of several factors that have permitted maintenance of our food supply despite a continued increase of the population and decrease of area suitable for agriculture. The maintenance of our food and fibre supply is largely due to a reduction in the losses caused by pests. food and fibre are subject to damage by pests in every stage of production, transportation and storage. It has been reported that weeds cause average losses of 22% to 44% in the production of soybean, corn, small grain, flax and forage compared to weed-free or weed-controlled fields of the same crops. In developed countries in the temperate zone, an estimated 10% to 15% of the total value of agricultural and forest products is affected by weeds. The expense of chemicals and the measures to control weeds and actual losses in yield and quality are about equal. Losses from weeds are greatest in tropical countries. In some instances, weed control may tripple the yield of rice. Protection of stored products Some examples to indicated the extent of damage if control is not exercised include the damage inflicted by various grain insects to food, damage by moths to wool and damage by termites to wood. If we take the last example, houses will have to be rebuilt every few years because the damage caused by termites have made them unsafe. Through the use of preservatives, wood may be protected even if it is left in the open. This in turn results in lesser demand for sawn timber from our tropical forests. Problems arising from pesticide use When new pesticides as well as increased usage of them were introduced in the late 1970s, a fundamental shift in agricultural practice was also introduced. As an example, the practice of traditional crop rotation, used to maintain soil nutrients, was abandoned. A single crop rotation was practised instead.

The abandonment of rotations has many ramifications, including increased insecticide and chemical fertiliser dependence. Insecticide applications are often needed to kill the insect pests that are formerly easily controlled through rotations. In addition, the farmers must now depend on synthetic fertilisers rather than rotations to maintain soil nutrients. Herbicides also play a significant role in shifting tillage practices. The conventional practice of ploughing was changed due to the concern of soil erosion and new systems were developed based on herbicides. The use of alternative tillage systems such as "No-till" resulted in large amounts of herbicides used to replace mechanical cultivation. This is turn led to increasing reports of grounds water contamination by herbicides and health problems associated with the use of excessive herbicides. This is now a real problem in a number of countries. Other similar problem resulting from pesticide use is the phenomenon of pest resistance. In 1938, scientist knew mites that were resistant to pesticides. But by 1984, this number escalated to a a shocking 447 species of insects and mites. Similarly herbicide resistance in weeds was virtually unknown before 1970 by the 1984, at least 48 species of weeds had developed resistance against some herbicides. Resistance to pesticides has also been encountered in over 100 species of plant pathogens, two species of nematode worms and three species of rodents. This has led to the need for stronger pesticides applied in more frequent doses - a phenomenon known as the pesticide treadmill. Farmers find themselves forced to buy larger quantities of pesticides to ward off pests. As problems with broad scale use of pesticides as the sole method of control increased, a new ecologically oriented concept was introduced to lessen these problems. This concept, known as integrated pest management (IPM), relies on natural mortality factors such as utilising the natural enemies of pests to eliminate pest problems. This concept also allows the use of pesticides as a last resort when systematic monitoring of pest populations and natural control factors indicate a need. It is hoped that IPM, which has been implemented in certain agricultural sectors in Malaysia, will lead to a reduction in pesticide usage. In the next issue, a full description of the hazardous health effects of pesticides, especially occupationrelated health problems, will be highlighted.

The Pesticide Problem

In today's modern society, it is common to use chemical pesticides to control insect pests. In fact, their use throughout the

world has increased by 50% over the last 30 years, and 2.5 million tons of commercial pesticides are now applied annually. They are aggressively promoted by large companies and government groups making up a more than $35 billion a year industry. All is hunky dory, right? Guess again! The problem is, as our reliance on chemical pesticides increases (along with their cost), their effectiveness is declining. Crop yields lost to insects are greater now than they have ever been, even with increased toxicity. What could possibly be going on here? Pesticides create secondary pest problems. Chemical insecticides are rarely selective and kill a large number of insects, including the good ones. The environment created by indiscriminate insecticide use often allows other insects -- not the initial pest but different insects seeking out food -- to rapidly increase in number because no natural enemies (beneficial insects) remain to prevent the population explosion. In some instances, secondary pests cause greater damage than the insects that were initially the problem (see Are Pests the Problem -- or Pesticides?). Note: Less than 1% of the world's insects are considered pests. The other 99% play a pivotal role in our food chain and many are indispensable. Pesticides invoke resistance. Insect pests have an uncanny ability to develop resistance to conventional insecticides. Currently, there are more than 500 insect pest and mite species that have shown resistance. In fact, some of the most destructive pests found in the garden cannot be controlled with today's chemicals. For more information visit the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee. The economics of pesticide use. The combination of secondary pest outbreaks, insect resistance, government regulations, and legal battles over safety and the environment have caused the cost of chemical insecticides to rise dramatically. Environmental and social costs. In 1982, Dr. David Pimentel, a Cornell entomologist, led a study to determine the indirect, or hidden costs of pesticide use. He found, as reported in Bioscience magazine, that pesticides indirectly cost the U.S. at least $8 billion a year. This is in addition to the typical cost/benefit analyses performed by industry or government regulators (see The Pesticide Price Tag). Pimentel's research included factors like: Domestic animal deaths and contamination Honeybee and pollination losses Groundwater contamination Bird losses Fishery losses

Grow your own healthy produce with organic pest control available at Planet Natural. Many of their products are "OMRI Listed" for use in organic production.

A Common Sense Solution

Natural pest control is a safe, sane and cost-effective approach for protecting garden plants from insect damage. It is a concept that works with Mother Nature to optimize, not maximize, pest control and is best obtained by using a variety of techniques (see Integrated pest management). Before You Begin: Know thy enemy. Not all garden insects are pests. Do some research to correctly identify the insect. Also, get to know its' habits and life-cycle to properly select and time treatments. Set thresholds. Determine a level of acceptable damage. How much are you willing to put up with before seeking some sort of control? Remember: Not all pests will cause significant damage. Watch closely. When your observations have indicated that pest levels are high enough to cause significant damage, consider treatment. Time to act. If treatment is necessary, begin with control measures that are the least harmful to beneficial insects and the environment. For example: Cultural Control: Involves manipulation of the environment to favor beneficial insects, and/or inhibit pests (see Attracting Beneficial Insects). Changes can include adjusting soil pH, watering practices, amount of sunlight, or selecting pest-resistant plants. Mechanical Control: Includes a wide variety of tools that remove, trap or exclude garden pests. These methods include copper tape for slugs, yellow sticky traps for aphids, or even hand-picking. Beneficial Insects: Used in this country since the late 1880's, these predatory and parasitic insects attack and destroy only insects; they are harmless to people, plants and pets. Biological Pesticides: Usually pest specific, these are either living organisms (parasites, predators, and pathogens) or are the toxins produced by them. Biological pesticides have very little or no effect on beneficial insects, and are safe for the environment. Soaps, Oils and Abrasives: These controls are broad-based in their actions and include

products that dehydrate or smother pest insects (diatomaceous earth, insecticidal soap, horticultural oil). They are generally considered "natural" and degrade quickly in the environment. However, they are NOT selective. Take precautions when using around beneficial insects. Botanical Insecticides: Derived from plants, these organic pesticidesprovide a quick "knock down" to a large number of garden pests. They are powerful insecticides, but non-selective and will harm beneficial insects. A major advantage of botanical insecticides: they usually biodegrade much more quickly than their chemical cousins.

Pesticide Regulations
Pest Management is an integrated approach to tackling a pest problem, which includes control (either physical or chemical) and prevention. The professional pest manager needs knowledge and skills, along with the latest products and equipment, in order to provide effective solutions to customers. Knowledge of local and international Regulatory, Hygiene & Safety Standards and conforming to these, forms an integral part of every pest managers responsibility. Pesticide Regulations in India The Insecticides Act, 1968 and Insecticides Rules, 1971 regulate the import, registration process, manufacture, sale, transport, distribution and use of insecticides (pesticides) with a view to prevent risk to human beings or animals and for all connected matters, throughout India. All insecticides (pesticides) have to necessarily undergo the registration process with the Central Insecticides Board & Registration Committee (CIB & RC) before they can be made available for use or sale. Thus, technically all insecticides (pesticides) in India are those substances that are listed on the "Schedule" of the Insecticides Act, 1968. The Registration Certificate mandates that a label be put on the packaging, which clearly indicates the nature of the insecticide (Agricultural or Household use), composition, active ingredient, target pest(s), recommended dosage, caution sign and safety precautions. Therefore, a pesticide labeled for agriculture should not be used in a household.

Banned Pesticides in India: The CIB & RC scrutinizes and periodically reviews all pesticides and their usage - some are banned from registration itself. Sometimes a pesticide can be banned even after registration when it causes serious environmental and public health concerns. Some pesticides are meant for "Restricted Use" which means that they can be used only for prescribed purposes and by authorised personnel by obtaining the appropriate Government license. The entire list can be viewed at: List of Banned Pesticides in India.

LIST OF PESTICIDES / PESTICIDES FORMULATIONS BANNED IN INDIA

A. Pesticides Banned for manufacture, import and use (27 Nos.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Aldrin Benzene Hexachloride Calcium Cyanide Chlordane Copper Acetoarsenite CIbromochloropropane Endrin Ethyl Mercury Chloride Ethyl Parathion Heptachlor Menazone Nitrofen Paraquat Dimethyl Sulphate Pentachloro Nitrobenzene Pentachlorophenol Phenyl Mercury Acetate Sodium Methane Arsonate Tetradifon Toxafen Aldicarb Chlorobenzilate Dieldrine Maleic Hydrazide Ethylene Dibromide TCA (Trichloro acetic acid) Metoxuron

27. 28. B.

Chlorofenvinphos Lindane (Banned vide Gazette Notification No S.O. 637(E) Dated 25/03/2011)

Pesticide / Pesticide formulations banned for use but their manufacture is allowed for export (2 Nos.) 28. 29. Nicotin Sulfate Captafol 80% Powder Methomyl 24% L Methomyl 12.5% L Phosphamidon 85% SL Carbofuron 50% SP Dalapon Ferbam Formothion Nickel Chloride Paradichlorobenzene (PDCB) Simazine Warfarin

C.

Pesticide formulations banned for import, manufacture and use (4 Nos) 1. 2. 3. 4.

D.

Pesticide Withdrawn(7 Nos) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

LIST OF PESTICIDES REFUSED REGISTRATION

S.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. EPM Azinphos Methyl Lead Arsonate Mevinphos (Phosdrin) 2,4, 5-T Carbophenothion Vamidothion Mephosfolan Azinphos Ethyl Binapacryl Dicrotophos Thiodemeton / Disulfoton Fentin Acetate Name of Pesticides Calcium Arsonate

15. 16. 17. 18.

Fentin Hydroxide Chinomethionate (Morestan) Ammonium Sulphamate Leptophos (Phosvel)

PESTICIDES RESTRICTED FOR USE IN INDIA

S.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. DDT Lindane Methyl Bromide Methyl Parathion Sodium Cyanide Methoxy Ethyl Mercuric Chloride (MEMC) Monocrotophos Endosulfan Fenitrothion Diazinon Fenthion Dazomet Name of Pesticides Aluminium Phosphide

The use of pesticides in agriculture is widespread at the present time and can be considered beneficial, generally speaking, as it serves not only to raise productivity but also to reduce postharvest losses. However, pesticides are toxic substances to a greater or lesser degree, and their employment entails a definite risk to the health of humans, domestic animals and livestock, and can also lead to the pollution of the environment. For these reasons, most States have enacted legislation for the purpose of providing maximum safety to the user of pesticides, as well as to furnish due guarantees to the consumer of food products. Such legislation consists normally of a set of regulatory provisions governing the authorisation and registration of pesticides, marketing, labelling and so on, together with the necessary mechanisms of enforcement. Among all these provisions, particular importance attaches to those concerning labelling. Indeed, the correct labelling of pesticides ensures that the user is in possession of the necessary information, not only regarding the contents of the package (identity of the product, composition, net contents etc.), but also regarding the precautions to be taken for its application or handling, as well the measures to be adopted for avoiding risks to the health of humans, animals and plants, and to the environment. Pesticides on the market should therefore always have labels containing all the required information, including if necessary pictograms which can be easily understood by illiterates or persons of modest cultural level. The product label is often the only available means of

communicating to the user such data as the precautions to be taken, instructions for use, warnings as to how to avoid intoxication, and so on.

1.3.6 Protection of the environment There is no need to insist here on the great importance of maintaining a sound and healthy environment, i.e. soil, water and the atmosphere. Acute contamination of these basic natural resources due to the action of pesticide residues or other contaminants may affect not only the safety of food products but also other ecological values such as waterways, the preservation of wildlife and recreational activities in the open air. Thus, to quote an example, it is essential to pay special attention to such a valuable resource as water16/. Pesticide residues that can be carried over great distances, such as those persisting in running water, are a serious danger to the drinking water supply, while herbicides, defoliants, etc., endanger water used for irrigation 17/. Fish from contaminated waters, especially lakes, can also accumulate pesticides and be found to contain such high residue levels as to render them unfit for human consumption 18/. It is obvious that, at a time when most countries are concerned with the protection and management of such resources in order to enhance the living standards and security of mankind, not only pesticide legislation but also that referring specifically to water, fisheries, food products, or concerning the environment in general, must take these considerations into account, since they are interrelated

Information to be carried on the label

2.4.1 Classification 2.4.1.1 Directions for use The information on pesticide labels must include indications that can be classified under the following four headings: (i) Indications for identifying the product One of the most obvious aims of information on pesticide labels is to enable both purchasers and users to identify its contents, composition, quality, etc., and distinguish it from other available products. Such information includes: - The "product name": the label must contain the "descriptive name" (trade name of the product, together with a description of its use) "Declaration of the active ingredients": the names of all active ingredients using, as far as possible 32/, common names approved by the International Standards Organization (ISO), together with the minimum guaranteed amount of each active ingredient.

- "Declaration of the solvent": where a solvent is present, the concentration should be stated if the solvent significantly contributes either to the hazards inherent in its use, or to the flammability of the product 33/. - "Summary of uses": consisting of a brief statement summarizing the use of the product 34/. - "The net weight or volume of the product in the container". - "Name and address of manufacturer, distributor or agent". - "Identification number of the batch or consignment of the product". - "Official register": in countries with legislation so requiring, a reference to, or the number of, the approval of the product must be included. (ii) How, when and where to use the product Directions for use on pesticide labels must clearly indicate how the product can be effectively and safely used. Such information should include; - "Instructions": these must clearly indicate how, when and where the product can be legally and safely used with maximum efficiency and minimum risk. They must include any warnings intended to prevent incorrect or inappropriate use of the product 35/; crop, situation, pests, weeds or diseases for which the product has been officially approved and registered; and also application dosage and explanatory notes on the effective use of the product on each crop, situation,, pest, weed or disease, including timing and method of application.

The "safety interval" refers to a statement of the period which should elapse between the last application of the production and: harvest of plant products; grazing of treated areas; slaughter of treated animals for consumption; feeding produce to domestic animals; conservation, preserving, or sale or utilisation of treated products; preserving or sale or utilisation of produce for human use such as milk, honey or eggs; and the sowing or planting of new crops. - "Date of formulation" and/or "expiry date" 36/: is necessary only in the case of products that may deteriorate under likely storage conditions. - "General instructions" include information essential to the proper use of the product in all the circumstances listed in the Instructions. They give practical advice on preparing, mixing and applying the product; storage and disposal of surplus or unwanted chemicals; mention of compatibility of the product with other products, where appropriate; and any special recommendations on storage conditions for the container and product. References to good agricultural practice can also be included under this heading 37/. (iii) Information on potential hazards The suggestions under this heading are designed to provide clear information to users on handling products with the minimum of hazard, and include: - "Hazard symbols" which must appear on the label, using the appropriate graphic symbols that warn of danger, together with clear and concise indications as to the degree and kind of such danger. Such indications shall comply with a classification of pesticides according to their inherent hazards, preferably based on that proposed by WHO. - "Safety precautions": labels must include standard statements designed to inform the user clearly how to handle the product with a minimum of hazard 38/ (e.g. the protective clothing to be worn, what to do in case of contamination, etc.). Warnings": as to the steps to be taken to avoid harmful effects on beneficial insects such as bees, and on beneficial organisms which may be utilized in an integrated pest

management programme, etc. - "First-aid instructions and advice to doctors": these statements should indicate what to do in case of poisoning 39/. Appropriate special additional information regarding symptoms, special tests and antidotal measures are to be added where necessary for particular products. (iv) Legal requirements and other mandatory information Included in this final section is a further quotation from the already frequently mentioned "Guidelines on Good Labelling Practice for Pesticides" (FAO, Rome, March 1985): - "Legal liability": certain products or active constituents may come within the scope of national legislation regarding control and safe use of hazardous or poisonous substances. The label may therefore have to state this, and also include other legislative requirement, e.g.: "THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE... (LAW)... APPLY TO THIS PRODUCT" 40/. It should also be added that regulations may sometimes require additional information on transport by road, rail, sea or air. Certain countries have specific regulations or codes of practice for aerial use of pesticides, and such regulations usually lay down that, in addition to information on the special ways of making such applications (which must be clearly stated in the general instructions section) there shall also be a reference on the label to the special authorizations that are needed and the relevant legal requirements. 2.4.1.2 Mandatory and additional information A distinction may be made between: (i) "mandatory information": i.e. that which, according to the legislation in force, must of necessity appear on the label of all pesticides; and - 18 (ii) "additional information": besides the information prescribed in the relevant regulations, the manufacturer or distributor may wish to add further items to the label 41/. In such cases, great care must be taken to ensure key information is not cramped, reduced in print size, or overwhelmed by other information not essential to the needs of the user.

Trouble on the Farm

Growing Up with Pesticides in Agricultural Communities

Top of Report

Chapter 1 HEALTH HAZARDS OF PESTICIDES "Late in the afternoon of April 1, 1990, a three-year-old girl playing in front of her trailer home in California's San Joaquin Valley suddenly lost control of her body and began foaming at the mouth. By the time the girl arrived at the local emergency room, she was near death. She recovered eventually. A report filed with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation concluded the child had been poisoned by aldicarb, a highly toxic insecticide that works the same way on people as it does on bugs -- like nerve gas. Somebody had parked a tractor with pesticide material on it right in front of the play area,' said Michael O'Malley, the author of the report and a physician at the University of California, Davis." -- Matt Crenson, Associated Press, December 9, 1997

Pesticides are specifically formulated to be toxic to living organisms, and as such, are usually hazardous to humans. Most pesticides used today are acutely toxic to humans. Pesticides cause poisonings and deaths every year and are responsible for about one out of every sixteen calls to poison control centers.[18] Chronic health effects have also been reported from pesticides, including neurological effects, reproductive problems, interference with infant development, and cancer.

Acute Impacts Acute pesticide poisonings frequently involve organophosphate pesticides, or sometimes their close relatives, the n-methyl carbamates. These pesticides were originally derived from chemical warfare agents developed during World War II. Some common organophosphates in use today include chlorpyrifos (Dursban), diazinon, azinphosmethyl (Guthion), malathion, and methyl-parathion. Aldicarb (Temik) and carbaryl (Sevin) are common nmethyl carbamates. They kill by blocking the enzyme that breaks down a critical nerve-impulse-transmitting chemical known as acetylcholine. The result is that certain nerve impulses are over-expressed, resulting in an array of acute toxic symptoms. Symptoms of organophosphate or carbamate poisoning include blurred vision, salivation, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, wheezing, and sometimes seizures, coma, and death. Mild to moderate pesticide poisoning mimics gastroenteritis, bronchitis, or intrinsic asthma, and even astute clinicians may not link these symptoms to pesticides. The American Association of Poison Control Centers reported 97,278 calls about pesticide poisonings in 1996. Half of the reported poisonings involved children under six years of age. [18]Occupational pesticide poisonings are required to be reported in California, and there are approximately 1,500 reported cases per year. [19], [20] Efforts to extrapolate to national occupational pesticide poisonings result in estimates of anywhere between 10,000 and 40,000 physician-diagnosed pesticide illnesses and injuries annually among agricultural workers. [21]These estimates do not include children of agricultural workers. Research has shown that current estimates based on occupational surveillance or poison control centers may greatly underestimate the problem of pesticide poisonings. A study in California that involved active surveillance, with extensive physician education and recruitment, revealed that this intervention significantly increases the number of reports of pesticide illness. A follow-up evaluation of poisoned workers discovered that 40 percent of the exposure incidents also involved co-workers who did not seek medical treatment for various reasons, suggesting that the total burden of illness is grossly underreported.[19] Poison control centers are commonly called after accidental ingestions or spills of pesticides in the home, but are less frequently called when illnesses occur after routine agricultural pesticide exposures. Mild signs of acute pesticide poisoning, such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, or wheezing are often not recognized as being potentially linked to pesticide toxicity. Rashes and other skin reactions are another major manifestation of pesticide toxicity that is often misdiagnosed.[22]Even Dr. Lynn Goldman, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances of the U.S. EPA, has publicly admitted, "Medical problems caused by pesticide exposure are often overlooked or misdiagnosed by health care providers."[23] Even severe pesticide poisoning is frequently misdiagnosed. In one review of the medical records of 20 severely pesticide-poisoned infants and children transferred to a major medical center from other hospitals, 16 of the 20 children had been wrongly diagnosed at the time of the transfer. Diagnoses of the children's symptoms included brain hemorrhage, head trauma, diabetic acidosis, severe bacterial gastroenteritis, pneumonia, and whooping cough, although all of the children later turned out to have pesticide poisoning.[24] In this series, five of the children, all infants, were poisoned after home application of a pesticide. Another child was poisoned after mowing a lawn that had recently been sprayed with an organophosphate. Although these cases did not involve farm children, they demonstrate that all children can be overexposed to pesticides in their home environment. Among infants, only a small dose is required to have potentially devastating health consequences. Furthermore, there is some evidence

from animal studies that undernourished individuals are more vulnerable to poisoning by organophosphates, implying that poor and undernourished children may be at greater risk.[25]

Chronic Impacts "Twenty-two years that I have been working in the fields, I've seen more illnesses, more children being born ill, more families that miss work because every day they have more problems, headaches. Sometimes their children are sick and they have to miss work. . . . We live in a depression. We don't know if it's because of the chemicals." -- Laura Caballero, Lideres Campesinas (Salinas, CA Public Meeting July 25, 1996)

Chronic effects of pesticide exposure may include adverse effects on neurological function, cancer, reproductive harm, reduced growth and development, and birth defects. Much of the evidence of chronic effects is based on studies of adult workers who are exposed to a mixture of chemicals every day, making it difficult to pinpoint specific pesticides. The effects of individual pesticides during specific periods of fetal life, infancy, and early development have been studied in laboratory animals. Little research on the chronic effects of pesticides has been done directly on children, and even less on farm children.

Neurological Effects In adults, exposures to insecticides and herbicides have been reported to confer an approximately fourfold increased risk of early-onset Parkinson's disease.[26], [27] Other long-term neurological problems, particularly shortened attention span and reduced coordination, have been reported in adults overexposed to organophosphate pesticides.[28] Although such studies have not been done in human children, animal studies have revealed that some pesticides appear to target the developing brain during the critical period of cell division, thereby leading to lasting behavioral aberrations.[29], [30] Not only do organophosphate pesticides interfere with a critical nerve-impulse transmitter, but they also can permanently change the number of receptors in the brain for this neurotransmitter. This mechanism may explain the subtle, permanent effects observed in animals. [31] Subtle neurological effects may also occur in human children. A recent study compared preschool children in two farming communities in Mexico, one with heavy pesticide use and one with little or no pesticide use. The children living in the area with heavy pesticide use had strikingly impaired hand-eye coordination, decreased physical stamina, short-term memory impairment, and difficulty drawing, compared with the less exposed children. Furthermore, observers of the exposed children noticed increased aggressive and anti-social behavior compared to their less exposed counterparts.[32] Studies have shown that lead, a known neurotoxicant, has lasting effects on attention span, intelligence, and behavior. Infants and children are more susceptible to the toxic effects of lead than are adults, probably because their brains are still developing. [33][35] Similarly, it appears that infants and children are also more susceptible to other neurotoxicants, including pesticides.

Childhood Cancer "There were three funerals in a row here in this neighborhood for children that died of cancer. There was a day when some of the children got together [across from] our house. They were playing with the Barbies. They were picking flowers . . . and they were burying the Barbie. I said What are you kids doing?' Cause they were buryin g the Barbie and they were crying and crying and crying . . . they said that Barbie died of cancer. It had cancer in the leg and it died. . . . I was always wondering Is my daughter going to be next after having her so ill?' . . . When I went to the room, she was having another seizure and she kept saying, My dollies are dying of cancer mom,

please help me, please help me.'" -- Marta Salinas, McFarland, CA[14]

According to Dr. Lynn Goldman of the U.S. EPA, at least 101 pesticides in current use are probable or possible human carcinogens.[36] Examples of pesticides which are known carcinogens in animals and are still used around humans today include pentachlorophenol, 1,3-dichloropropene (Telone II), and dichlorvos (DDVP).[37] Studies of farm populations indicate that adults exposed to pesticides may be at increased risk for cancers of the lymphatics and blood, stomach, prostate, testes, brain, and soft tissues.[37], [38] Several human studies and studies of household dogs have consistently reported a particular association between exposure to the common herbicide 2,4dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.[39][41] There is evidence of associations between parental or infant exposures to pesticides and childhood brain tumors, leukemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, sarcoma, and Wilm's tumor.[42][46] In many of the reports, children's increased cancer risks were of greater magnitude than the risks reported in studies of adults. [47] Five of the nine human studies that evaluated the risk of childhood leukemia after parental exposures to pesticides found an increased risk, while four out of five studies looking at postnatal exposures to pesticides also found a link with acute leukemia.[48] In one California study, children with leukemia were three to nine times more likely to have a parent who reported using pesticides in the home or garden during pregnancy or lactation. [49] Eight of the nine studies evaluating the link between childhood brain tumors and pesticide use showed an association, with three reaching statistical significance.[48]

Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity Numerous pesticides are known or suspected reproductive toxicants. Examples include the fungicides benomyl (Benlate) and vinclozolin (Ronilan), as well as the fumigants methyl bromide and metam sodium. [50] People who live in agricultural regions or undergo occupational exposure to pesticides are at increased risk of a variety of adverse reproductive outcomes. An investigation of stillbirths and neonatal deaths in California reported that maternal occupational exposure to pesticides was associated with more than a doubling of the risk of stillbirth due to congenital anomalies, and a slightly increased overall risk of all types of stillbirth.[51] Numerous types of birth defects, particularly limb-reduction defects, have been associated with pesticide exposures in human studies. [52] [54] A Minnesota study indicated an association between paternal employment as a pesticide applicator and a variety of birth defects in offspring, including abnormalities of the lungs, heart, musculoskeletal system, and urogenital system. Furthermore, the general population of agricultural regions of the state had an increase of birth defects, with the peak incidence among children conceived in the spring, when spraying is most intense.[55]

Endocrine Disruption Many currently used pesticides are now known to interfere with normal hormonal function in animals. For example, vinclozolin and iprodione, popular fungicides, both break down into a metabolite that interferes with testosterone and other androgens.[56] Several organochlorine pesticides, including DDT, methoxychlor, endosulfan, and dicofol, mimic estrogen.[57], [58]Lindane, which is sometimes used to treat head lice in children, acts as an anti-estrogen, and is also toxic to the nervous system.[59], [60] Atrazine, a popular herbicide, can disrupt ovarian function, cause mammary (breast) tumors in animals, and interferes with the binding of steroid hormones and the breakdown pathway of estrogen.[61][63] Although no human studies have been done involving the endocrine effects of these chemicals, the endocrine system in animals is nearly identical with the human, making it likely that effects observed may be relevant to human health. In humans and animals, the endocrine system is critical to life. Disruption of hormone function can permanently alter normal development of the fetus and child. [64] Some pesticides have also been reported to be toxic to the immune system in animals. [65]

Nearly all of the epidemiological studies on children's health and pesticide exposures were done on the general, non-farming population. These studies would likely underestimate the health impacts that would be expected for highly exposed subpopulations of children such as farm children. Some studies did look at children of parents who work in jobs that may involve pesticide exposure; however the child's exposure was almost never directly assessed, but was indirectly estimated based only on the parent's job title. Such a technique is likely to lead to misclassification of exposures and underestimation of the health impact. Thus health impacts among farm children are likely much greater than those described in most of the scientific research to date. Because of the health impacts of pesticides, it is important to identify the sources and levels of exposure to these chemicals in order to protect the most highly exposed children from these dangerous substances

Pesticides are chemicals that are formulated to kill or prevent reproduction in a variety of pests such as insects, rodents, weeds, and microbes. All pesticides are required to be registered by the EPA. In New York State, in 1995, the Attorney General surveyed hospitals in the state and found all but three of them used pesticides. The science regarding health effects and pesticide exposures is creating mounting evidence that we must proceed with much caution when trying to control pests. From 'Environmental Health in the Healthcare Setting,' by Barbara Sattler, DrPH, RN

Human Health Effects Associated With Pesticides

Acute Effects Irritation of eyes, nose, throat and skin Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea Coughing, wheezing, and asthma events Headaches, dizziness, and loss of consciousness Chronic Effects Cancer Reproductive and developmental dysfunction Endocrine disruption Immunological and neurological dysfunction Respiratory disease Behavioral impairment Skin conditions

Public health risks associated with pesticides and natural toxins in foods

D. Pimentel1, T. W. Culliney2, and T. Bashore1

1

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

Cornell University, Comstock Hall Ithaca, New York 14853-0901

2

Hawaii Department of Agriculture

Division of Plant Industry Honolulu, Hawaii 96814

Apunte aqu para versin en Espaol [X]

Introduction
Chemical technology has expanded tremendously during the past fifty years. For example, approximately 70,000 different chemicals are currently used and released into the environment in the United States alone (Newton and Dillingham 1994). An estimated 100,000 chemicals are used worldwide (Nash 1993). In the US, nearly 10% of the approximately 3 billion kg of toxic chemicals released per year is known to be carcinogenic (USBC 1994). More than 500,000 kg of approximately 600 different pesticide chemicals are applied annually in the US, while approximately 2.5 million tons are applied throughout the world (Pimentel 1996). Additionally, the World Health Organization (1992) reports that roughly three million pesticide poisonings occur annually and result in 220,000 deaths worldwide. Both economically and in terms of human life, these poisonings represent an enormous cost for society. Some investigators, however, claim that the health risks from natural chemicals in foods are even greater than the risks from pesticide residues (see Pimentel and Greiner 1996). They maintain that some constituents of commonly consumed vegetables like cabbage and broccoli are more toxic to

humans than chemical pesticides in foods, although this has not been conclusively proven (see Pimentel and Greiner 1996). Not only do such alarming claims muddle the food choices the public can safely make, but they also run contrary to the latest advice given by nutritional authorities. The importance of a nutritious food supply to human health has been emphasized in reports which recommend a diet high in complete carbohydrates, fruits, and vegetables-- particularly those vegetables high in carotene like cabbage, broccoli, and other brassicas. These are, as previously mentioned, a few of the same foods which some investigators believe to contain natural chemicals that pose a risk to human health. Therefore, the aim of this discussion is to assess the known public health risks of pesticides and naturally occurring toxins in foods.

Pesticides and Public Health

Human poisonings and their related illnesses are clearly the highest price paid for pesticide use. About 67,000 pesticide poisonings resulting in an estimated twenty-seven accidental fatalities are reported each year in the US (Litovitz et al. 1990). Due to gaps in the demographic data, however, this figure may represent only 73% of the total number of poisonings (Pimentel and Greiner 1996). Although it is impossible to place a precise monetary value on human life, the cost of human pesticide poisonings has been estimated. Insurance industry studies have computed monetary ranges between $1.6 and $8.5 million for the value of a "statistical life" (Nash 1994). Alternatively, the conservative estimate of $2.2 million per human life-- the average value that the surviving spouse of a slain New York City policeman receives-- may be used (Nash 1994). Based on this figure and the available data, human pesticide poisonings and related illnesses in the US are estimated to total about $933 million each year (Pimentel 1996). The situation is even worse in other regions of the world. Approximately 80% of the pesticides produced annually in the world are used in developed countries (WRI/UNEP/UNDP 1994), but less than half of all pesticide-induced deaths occur in these countries (Pimentel and Greiner 1996). A higher proportion of pesticide poisonings and deaths occur in developing countries where there are inadequate occupational safety standards, protective clothing, and washing facilities; insufficient enforcement; poor labeling of pesticides; illiteracy; and insufficient knowledge of pesticide hazards (Pimentel and Greiner 1996). Additionally, average pesticide residue levels in food are often higher in developing countries than in developed nations. For example, a study in Egypt reported that a majority of assayed milk samples, when tested for fifteen different pesticides, contained residue levels between 60% and 80%

(Dogheim et al. 1990). By way of contrast, 50% of the milk samples analyzed in a US milk study had pesticide residues, all in trace quantities well below EPA and FDA regulatory limits (Trotter and Dickerson 1993). About 35% of the foods purchased by American consumers, however, do have detectable levels of pesticide residues (FDA 1990). Between 1-3% of these foods have pesticide residue levels that are above the legal tolerance level (FDA 1990). Residue levels may be even higher than this because the analytical methods now employed in the US detect only about one-third of the pesticides in use (Minyard and Roberts 1991). The contamination rate is undoubtedly higher for fruits and vegetables because these foods receive the highest dosage of pesticides. In fact, one USDA study has shown that some pesticide residue remains in fruits and vegatables even after they have been washed, peeled, or cored (Wiles and Campbell 1994). Consequently, there are many justifiable reasons why 97% of the public is concerned about pesticide residues in its food (Pimentel and Greiner 1996). Throughout the world, the highest levels of pesticide exposure are found in farm workers, pesticide applicators, and people who live adjacent to heavily treated agricultural land. Because farmers and farm workers directly handle 70-80% of the pesticides they use, they are at the greatest risk of exposure (McDuffie 1994). The epidemiological evidence suggests a significantly higher rate of cancer incidence among farmers and farm workers in the US and Europe than among non-farm workers in some areas (Cantor et al. 1992). In these high-risk populations, there is strong evidence for associations between lymphomas and soft-tissue sarcomas and certain herbicides (Zahm et al. 1990), as well as between lung cancer and exposure to organochlorine insecticides (Pesatori et al. 1994). Consequently, both the acute and chronic health effects of pesticides warrant attention and concern. While the acute toxicity of most pesticides is well documented (Ecobichon et al. 1990), information on chronic human illnesses such as cancer is not as sound. For example, based on animal studies, the International Agency for Research on Cancer found "sufficient" evidence of carcinogenicity in eighteen pesticides and "limited" evidence in an additional sixteen pesticides (WHO/UNEP 1989). Similarly, studies have reported an increased prevalence of certain cancers in farmers (Cantor et al. 1992). However, a recent study in Saskatchewan found no significant difference in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma mortality between farmers and nonfarmers (Wigle et al. 1990). In addition, D. Schottenfeld of the University of Michigan (Pimentel and Greiner 1996) estimates that fewer than 1% of the human cancer cases in the US are attributable to pesticide exposure. Since there are approximately 1.2 million cancer cases annually (USBC 1995), Schottenfeld's assessment suggests that less than 12,000 cases of cancer per year are due to pesticides.

However, there is evidence to suggest that many other acute and chronic maladies are associated with pesticide use. For example, the recently banned pesticide dibromochloropropane (DBCP), which is used for plant pathogen control, was found to cause testicular dysfunction in animal studies (Shemi et al. 1989) and was linked to infertility in human workers who had been exposed to the chemical (Potashnik and Yanai-Inbar 1987). Also, a large body of evidence obtained from animal studies suggests that pesticides can produce immune dysfunction (Thomas and House 1989). In a study of women who had chronically ingested groundwater contaminated with low levels (mean of 16.6 ppb) of aldicarb, Fiore et al. (1986) reported evidence of significantly reduced immune response, although these women did not exhibit any overt health problems. There is also growing evidence of sterility in humans and various other animals, particularly in males, due to various chemicals and pesticides in the environment. Sperm counts in Europe have declined by about 50% and continue to decrease an additional 2% per year. Young male river otters in the lower Columbia River and male alligators in Florida's Lake Apopka have smaller reproductive organs than males in unpolluted regions of their respective habitats (Colborn et al. 1996). Although it is often difficult to determine the impact of individual pesticides and other chemicals, the chronic health problems associated with organophosphorus pesticides-- which have largely replaced the banned organocholorines-- are of particular concern (Ecobichon et al. 1990). The malady Organophosphate Induced Delayed Polyneuropathy (OPIDP) is well-documented and is marked by irreversible neurological defects (Lotti 1992). The deterioration of memory, moods, and the capacity for abstract thought have been observed in some cases (Savage et al. 1988), while other cases indicate that persistent neurotoxic effects may result even after the termination of an acute organophosphorus poisoning incident (Ecobichon et al. 1990). Chronic conditions such as OPIDP constitute an important public health issue because of their potential cost to society. For example, the effect of pesticides on children has become a growing concern. Children can be exposed to pesticides on a daily basis in a variety of ways: through the foods they eat, in the houses where they live, or in the communities where they play (Pimentel and Greiner 1996). With the increased realization of the distinct physiological differences between adults and children, it has become obvious that the present pesticide tolerance and regulatory system, as it relates to children, is severely lacking. All of the regulations to date have been based on adult tolerances. Children have much higher metabolic rates than adults, and their ability to activate, detoxify, and excrete xenobiotic compounds is different than that of adults. Also, because of their smaller physical size, children are exposed to higher levels of pesticides per unit of body weight. Evidence of this is found in a study which reported that 50% of all pesticide poisonings in England

and Wales involved children under the age of ten (Casey and Vale 1994). The use of pesticides in the home has also been linked to childhood cancer (Leiss and Savitz 1995). In general, the realization that children's sensitivities to toxins are much different than those of adults has provided the impetus for the movement towards setting specific pesticide regulations with children in mind (Wiles and Campbell 1994).

Natural Toxins in Foods

All human food is a complex mixture of chemicals including carbohydrates, amino acids, fats, oils, and vitamins, some of which may be toxic if consumed in large quantities (Strong 1974). Plants contain some chemicals that are known to be toxic to both animals and humans. Some of these chemicals evolved in plants to protect them from insects, plant pathogens, and other organisms (Pimentel 1988). A small number of these chemicals, such as the hydrazines found in a few mushrooms, are highly carcinogenic. In general, however, the adverse effects of toxic chemicals in plants are related to interference with nutrient availability, metabolic processes, detoxification mechanisms, and allergic reactions in particular animals and humans. Many natural toxins are found in staple foods of the human diet such as grains and legumes. Some of these are discussed below. Lectin proteins (phytohemagglutinins) are present in varying amounts in legumes and cereals, and in very small amounts in tomatoes, raw vegetables, fruits, and nuts. Ricin, a lectin which is extremely toxic and can be fatal to humans, was used as an insecticide at one time. When untreated lectins are eaten, they agglutinate red blood cells and bind to the epithelial cells of the intestinal tract, impairing nutrient absorption. Fortunately, heat destroys the toxicity of lectins. Lathyrogens, found in legumes such as chick peas and vetch, are derivatives of amino acids that act as metabolic antagonists of glutamic acid, a neurotransmitter in the brain (NAS 1973). When foods containing these chemicals are eaten in large amounts by humans or other animals, they cause a crippling paralysis of the lower limbs and may result in death. Lathyrism is primarily a problem in some areas of India. Protease inhibitors are widely distributed throughout the plant kingdom, particularly in the Leguminosae and, to a lesser extent, in cereal grains and tubers. These substances inhibit the digestive enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin (Bender 1987). For example, raw soybeans contain a protein that inactivates trypsin and results in a characteristic enlargement of the pancreas and an increase in its secretory activity. It is this latter effect, mediated by trypsin inhibition, that depresses growth. Clearly, soybeans and other related legumes should be properly cooked and processed before being eaten.

Potatoes-- which contain two major glycoalkaloid fractions, alpha-solanine and alpha-chaconine-that have been exposed to sunlight show a significant increase in their alkaloid content (NAS 1973). Solanine is a cholinesterase inhibitor and can cause neurologic and gastrointestinal symptoms (Oser 1978), potentially including the fatal depression of the activity of the central nervous system. Cyanogenic glycosides occur in many food plants like cassava, lima beans, and the seeds of some fruits-- peaches, for example. Because of their cyanide content, ingestion of large amounts of cassava and, to a lesser extent, lima beans can be fatal if these foods are eaten raw or are not prepared correctly (Strong 1974). Cassava toxicity is much reduced by peeling, washing in running water to remove the cyanogen, and then cooking and/or fermenting to inactivate the enzymes and to volatilize the cyanide. In regions like Africa where cassava is a staple food, care is taken in its preparation for human consumption. Goitrogens (glucosinolates), which inhibit the uptake of iodine by the thyroid, are present in many commonly consumed plants. They are estimated to contribute approximately 4% to the worldwide incidence of goiters in humans (Liener 1986). Cabbage, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts, broccoli, kale, kohlrabi, turnips, radish, mustard, rutabaga, and oil seed meals from rape and turnip all possess some goitrogenic activity (Coon 1975). Effects of thyroid inhibition are not counteracted by the consumption of dietary iodine. The nature and extent of toxicity of glucosinolates are still the subject of debate. Although there are few, if any, acute human illnesses caused by glucosinolates, chronic and subchronic effects remain a possibility (Heaney and Fenwick 1987). Additional foods with the potential for antithyroid activity include plants in the genus Allium (onion group); other vegetables such as chard, spinach, lettuce, celery, green pepper, beets, carrots, and radishes; legumes such as soybeans, peas, lentils, beans, and peanuts; nuts such as filberts and walnuts; fruits such as pears, peaches, apricots, strawberries, and raisins; and animal products such as milk, clams, oysters, and liver (Coon 1975). However, it has not been proven that a diet of these foods would be goitrogenic unless they comprised an excessively high proportion of the diet, a substantial amount of them were eaten raw, or they were not well cooked. Although goitrogens in foods are largely destroyed by thorough cooking, it must be acknowledged that many of the foods listed above are eaten uncooked (Coon 1975). The most potent natural toxins responsible for human health risks are the mycotoxins. These are not strictly plant compounds but toxic metabolites produced by fungi infesting foodstuffs, especially cereals and nuts, which have been stored under conditions of elevated temperature and high humidity (NAS 1989). Among the ailments caused by these mycotoxins, the most notable

historically is ergotism, or "St. Anthony's Fire," which afflicted people centuries ago. This was caused by ergot alkaloids produced by Claviceps purpurea growing on cereal grains (NAS 1973). Although some mycotoxins have been identified as potent liver carcinogens in experimental animals, their role as human carcinogens has not been established. In addition to microbes, other potentially dangerous contaminants in plants used as food can originate from the uptake of such chemicals as nitrate from soil and drinking water (Coon 1975). Nitrate is not considered a human carcinogen, but nitrosamines which are formed from nitrates and nitrites (such as those used in curing meats) are carcinogenic in animals (NAS 1989). Other hazardous chemicals like lead, iodine, mercury, zinc, arsenic, copper, and selenium are found in varying quantities in foods, and if consumed in large amounts, can cause human health problems or death. The extent of the risks to human health associated with ingesting naturally occurring toxins remains a scientifically contentious matter (Watson 1987). Debate on this subject has been clouded by the absence of a systematic approach to defining and, in particular, quantifying human hazards. Although data have been assembled on the chemical properties and biological sources of most of these compounds, their long-term risks to public health have not been established. In fact, the National Research Council has concluded that the current data on human dietary exposure is insufficient and has underscored the need for new studies with larger sample sizes and refined testing methods (NAS 1996). Above all, it is important to emphasize that there is presently no firm evidence to demonstrate a link between long-term ingestion of natural toxins in commonly eaten foods and any type of chronic human illness (NAS 1989; NAS 1996).

Conclusion
Most individuals feel that they have little or no choice other than depending on the integrity of scientists and government agencies to ban dangerous pesticides and regulate the dosages and application procedures of those pesticides that are permitted. The last decade has witnessed a growing awareness in the public sector about the chemicals it is exposed to in food, air, and water. Although these are perceived as risks over which the individual has no control, some of the public's concerns are being translated into action in order to eliminate the most toxic pesticides. On an individual level, some consumers are buying pesticide-free foods, while collectively-- as in the "Big Green" initiative in California-- they are voicing their opinions through the ballot box. As pest control research focuses on the ecology of pests and on the agroecosystem as a whole, results from different regions of the world indicate that pesticide use can be reduced substantially.

Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the Canadian province of Ontario have all adopted effective programs to reduce pesticide use by 50-75%. In Indonesia, for example, the investment of $1 million per year in ecological research in conjunction with extension programs that train farmers to conserve natural enemies is paying large dividends. Pesticide use for rice in Indonesia has been reduced 65%, while rice yields have increased by 12%. As a consequence, the Indonesian government has been able to eliminate $20 million in pesticide subsidies to farmers (Pimentel 1996). In the US, it is estimated that pesticide use can be reduced by as much as 50% at an estimated savings of at least $500 million per year without reducing crop yields or substantially reducing the "cosmetic standards" of fresh fruits and vegetables. By implementing IPM programs in the state of New York, for example, sweet corn processors saved $500,000 per year and maintained high yields while reducing pesticide treatments 55-65%. Pesticide use has been reduced on other crops in New York as well (Pimentel 1996). Nevertheless, pesticides will continue to be used on certain crops, and individuals must determine the degree of risk they are willing to accept. With food selection, most individuals have the option of making personal choices. However, the acknowledged health benefits of the foods recommended by nutritional authorities are such that consumers should not be frightened into eliminating them from their diets because of the implied danger from naturally occurring toxins. Risk from naturally occurring toxins in foods-- as well as from pesticide residues-- depends on the dosage of the chemical, the time of exposure, and the susceptibility of the individual human. These data, along with the sound experimental investigation of particular pesticides or natural toxins, are essential in estimating the potential risks to humans of various toxic chemical exposure in human foods. Plants do contain many chemicals-- hydrazines and mycotoxins, for example-- that are highly toxic to animals and humans. While these compounds may play important roles in influencing the incidence of certain types of human cancer, the exact proportion of cancers that are due to "natural" versus synthetic carcinogens is not known (Perera et al. 1991). However, there is evidence to suggest that synthetic chemicals present in food may increase cancer risk over that which may be posed by the presence of natural toxins alone. For example, laboratory rodent diets also contain many of the same naturally-occurring toxins present in the human diet. Nevertheless, compounds such as aflatoxin, TCDD, and DBCP, when added to the diet of mice and rats, significantly increase tumor incidence, even when present at very low levels. This suggests that, in several cases, the risk of tumorigenesis from certain synthetic food contaminants is increased in the animal over any risk presented by the background level of "natural pesticides" (Weinstein 1991). Lacking contrary

evidence, there is no reason to assume a difference in humans. However, important caveats should be noted in drawing conclusions from risk analyses of dietary exposure to toxins. Short-term screens such as the "Ames test", whether for genetic damage or increased cell proliferation, are far from 100% accurate in predicting carcinogenicity and are not a replacement for long-term bioassays (Cohen and Ellwein 1991). Also, no matter how suggestive epidemiological or experimental studies may be, they cannot provide unequivocal proof that a certain diet will increase the risk of cancer. No study has directly demonstrated that implementing dietary changes in a given individual inhibited the onset of cancer or kept an established cancer from spreading. Furthermore, unlike animal experimentation, humans cannot be kept physically isolated for long periods of time and fed diets containing possibly toxic substances. Nor can heredity or environmental factors be controlled. Data from laboratory animal tests and epidemiological studies with humans must serve as guides for assessing the safety of the food supply. Ultimately, it is extremely difficult in the absence of further information to predict the sensitivity of humans to the tumor-promoting, mitogenic, or cytotoxic potential of a given compound. Thus, risk extrapolation under conditions in which individuals are exposed to multiple factors and in heterogeneous populations (the situation in the real world) is much more complicated than envisioned by some authors, e.g. Ames and Gold 1990. The causes of chronic illnesses, including cancers, are extremely complex. In their lifetime, individuals who differ in genetic make-up and susceptibility are exposed to a wide variety of carcinogens. Some chemicals by themselves are safe but may act as synergists or promoters in concert with other chemicals to cause illness. Future research as to how human health is affected by increasing exposure to all chemicals is of prime importance. The public is skeptical of what it reads and hears, and it is becoming more wary of being exposed to pesticides and other chemicals.

Discussion The use of a wide range of pesticides mostly of moderately hazardous to highly hazardous categoryamong our study farmers is worrisome. Above 75% of the farmers use pesticides, which are in these above mentioned categories. Food and Agriculture Organization recommends that WHO Ia (extremely hazardous) and Ib (Highly hazardous) pesticides should not be used in developing countries. 11 It also suggests that class II (Moderately hazardous) pesticides be avoided. But the practice of spraying these powerful pesticides continues. Preliminary results of environmental sampling tests done in the study area support this statement. Large chemical industries reinforce the myth by adopting aggressive

marketing strategies that more potent pesticides are necessary to prevent crop loss. This scenario has been reported from other countries also 12 . Most farmers in our study were not aware of the health hazards caused by the inappropriate handling of pesticides. The use of cotton apparel as protective clothing was common among them. Studies show that wet cotton clothing and cotton cloth masks in fact increase the per sons personal absorption rate of pesticides 8 The practise of chewing or smoking while spraying to reduce the nauseating feeling is also .hazardous to health. This may also indicate that the farmers were symptomatic enough to selfmedicate during a pesticide spraying session. But many are unwilling to follow the necessary precautions attributing non-availability and high cost of personal protection products, and the prevailing hot and humid weather conditions. These reasons were similar to experiences of other developing countries like Indonesia 13 .Combining more than one pesticide together, many of which are duplicates (different trade names but the same common name and thus the same active ingredient) should be discouraged. This could be a dangerous concoction, because mixing of pesticides can alter their chemical properties, thereby increasing its detrimental effects. The combination of use of hazardous pesticides and the absence of appropriate precautions are detrimental to the farmers health 14 The re-entry of farmers into the field for work after pesticides is sometimes less than 24 hours. The continuation of pesticides spraying and other farming activities concurrently in the field, can lead to direct exposure to pesticides as they may be still dispersed in air 19.3% of women in our study reported . that they continue to work while pesticides are being sprayed. This exposure to pesticides could cause a variety of reproductive health problems in the women of the reproductive age group. This unexpected though direct exposure to pesticides due to their proximity to source of exposure needs to be studied further. This aspect of women being prone to various ways of exposure to pesticides has been highlighted in the study done among the cotton growers of India by Mancini et al. 6 Farmers spraying pesticides for more than a decade was 161 (37.2%), which implies that a large number of farmers get exposed to pesticides over long duration. This may cause chronic health impacts to the farmers. Young people seem to be engaged in pesticides spraying more than the older people, which may be due to possible attrition of the elderly workforce due to past exposure to pesticides. Data is scare in relating pesticide exposure to chronic disease like diabetes, hypertension, ophthalmic disorders etc. Asthma, a chronic disease, was prevalent among the farmers (2.2%), which is associated with pesticides exposure 15 Our data showed a higher prevalence of reduced vision (13.9%) among the farmers . which could be associated with a prolonged exposure to pesticides, but establishing such a link would be out of scope of the study, as it would require a different analytical framework 16 The farmers may not be .. aware whether they have other chronic diseases like diabetes, hypertension etc. because they may not have been tested for it. The prevalence of these diseases was computed on the basis of selfreported data so there could be underestimation of these numbers. In accordance with the previous literature 17

, farmers experienced a variety the signs and symptoms related to pesticide. Among men, the prevalence of signs and symptoms related to pesticide exposure was higher among the sprayers. In contrast, the higher percentage of some signs and symptoms among the nonsprayers could be due to their direct exposure to pesticides or due to previous exposure to pesticides. Awareness needs to be created on use of personal protective measures among farmers, while handling pesticides. Farmers needs to be encouraged to reduce, if not eliminate the use of pesticides, with the introduction of incentives to the farmers to help them shift from synthetic pesticides to bio pesticides and organic farming.

HAZARDS OF PESTICIDE
That the quality of the country's surface water has markedly deteriorated is a matter of great concern. But the nature and extent of the fall in quality was not precisely known. Now the Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC) has determined through laboratory tests that surface water of different regions is contaminated enough to cause our anxiety. The culprit is none other than toxic chemical pesticides. In some areas the level of chemical particles, including DDT, present in the water is quite alarming.

The water collected from Begumganj has a DDT contamination much higher than the permissible level adjudged by WHO. The presence of other types of chemical particles too has been found to be very high. Even the BAEC's survey is not comprehensive because it has not tested water samples from all across the country. But at least it is indicative enough. So what is the message? Residues of extremely toxic pesticides in surface water show that such pest-controlling agents are either used indiscriminately, or they are simply the banned types. We suspect some brands of chemical fertiliser can also contribute to the contamination of water. So there is a need for bringing an end to the marketing of such harmful toxic pesticides and fertiliser in the first place. Contaminated surface water is known to have adversely affected all kinds of water species, the fish in particular. What is, again, lacking is a scientifically established proof of the damage caused to the water bodies, the living beings there, and the environment. No such attempt has ever been made to determine how long we can continue using the chemical fertiliser and pesticide without inviting an environmental disaster for us. A comprehensive test of the country's water sources can be a first step in that direction. Surely, we need to control pests, but this has to be environmentfriendly. Already arsenic contamination of underground water has posed a serious health problem in some areas of the country and if we pollute the surface water beyond any remedy, we shall be permanently endangering the future of millions. Only a few natural pest management options are known but when the danger from chemical agents is so great, those limited options have to be extended through research and experiments.(Source: The Independent, 21 December 1997.)

Indian probe confirms Coke, Pepsi contain pesticide

A parliamentary probe said Wednesday (4. 02. 04) that soft drinks sold in India by US beverage giants Coca-Cola and Pepsi contained pesticide residue and urged tougher national health standards. The investigation was ordered after a private New Delhi-based environmental group, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), reported in July that 12 of the companies' soft drinks had such high pesticide levels they could lead to cancer and other diseases. "The committee has concluded that CSE stands corroborated on its finding pesticide residues in the soft drinks," the investigation said. But the 184-page report stopped short of telling Indians to avoid the soft drinks and instead called for the country to adopt more stringent safety standards. It said the "eventual goal" should be to eliminate any trace of pesticides in soft drinks sold in India. "It is prudent to seek complete freedom from pesticide residues in sweetened aereated waters," it added. "The committee has appreciated the whistle-blowing act of CSE in alerting the nation to an issue with major implications." Coca-Cola and Pepsi both deny their drinks pose any health hazards. "Our products manufactured in India are world-class and safe. We follow one quality system across the world," CocaCola India said in a statement. The CSE report, which said the fizzy drinks carried a "deadly cocktail of pesticide residues," triggered nationwide protests against Pepsi and Coca-Cola and even a temporary ban

on the 12 beverages at the parliament's canteen. An initial government probe released August 21 found that the 12 soft drinks were "well within the safety limits" of India. But opposition lawmakers demanded a more thorough investigation, leading to the latest study in which two government laboratories researched 36 soft drink samples. India's growing 500 million-dollar-a-year soft drink industry saw sales slide by as much as 15 percent in the month after the CSE report. But the parliamentary probe noted that the billion-plus country still had one of the lowest rates of soft drink consumption at six bottles per person each year compared with 800 in the United States. (AFP, NEW DELHI, February 6, 2004).

Application and Health Effects of Pesticides Commonly Used in India

By Manoj Kumar and Ashok Kumar
May 2007

1. PhD, Research Associate, School of Public Health, Department of Community Medicine & Department of Anesthesia, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh 2. PhD, Research Fellow, Department of Botany, DAV College, Dehradun, Uttranchal

Abstract Pesticides are widely used throughout the world in agriculture to protect crops and in public health to control diseases. Nevertheless exposure to pesticides can represent a potential risk to humans. Pesticide manufacturing unit workers are prone to possible occupational pesticide exposure. The relationship between extent of pesticide use and signs and symptoms of illnesses due to exposure was assessed in several cross-sectional surveys. Use of pesticides in India began in 1948 when DDT was imported for malaria control and BHC for locust control. India started pesticide production with manufacturing plant for DDT and benzene hexachloride (BHC) (HCH) in the year 1952. In 1958, India was producing over 5000 metric tonnes of pesticides. Currently, there are approximately 145 pesticides registered for use, and production has increased to approximately 85,000 metric tonnes. Rampant use of these chemicals has given rise to several short-term and long-term adverse effects of these chemicals. The first report of poisoning due to pesticides in India came from Kerala in 1958 where, over 100 people died after consuming wheat flour contaminated with parathion. Subsequently several cases of pesticide-poisoning including the Bhopal disaster have been reported. Despite the fact that the consumption of pesticides in India is still very low, about 0.5 kg/ha of pesticides against 6.60 and 12.0 kg/ha in Korea and Japan, respectively, there has been a widespread contamination of food commodities with pesticide residues, basically due to non-judicious use of pesticides. In India, 51% of food commodities are contaminated with pesticide residues and out of these, 20% have pesticides residues above the maximum residue level values on a worldwide basis. It has been observed that their long-term, low-dose exposure are increasingly linked to human health effects such as immune-suppression, hormone disruption, diminished intelligence, reproductive abnormalities, and cancer. In this light, problems of pesticide safety, regulation of pesticide use, use of biotechnology, and biopesticides, and use of pesticides obtained from natural plant sources such as neem extracts are some of the future strategies for minimizing human exposure to pesticides.

Application and health effects of pesticides commonly used in India are concluded in the followin
Pesticide DDT Application Effective against wide variety of insects, including domestic insects and mosquitoes It is used as a broad spectrum non systemic, contact and stomach insecticide, and Health Effects Chronic liver damage cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis, endocrine and reproductive cytogenic effects, breast cancer, Non hodkins lymphoma, polyneuritis.

Endosulfan

Effects kidneys, developing foetus, and liver Immuno-suppression, decrease in th testicular and prostate cancer, increase in defects in male sex organs, and increa is also mutatagenic

acaricide against insect pests on various crops Aldrin Dieldrin Effective against wireworms and Lung cancer, liver diseases to control termites Used against ectoparasites such Liver diseases, Parkinson's & Alzheimer's diseases as blowflies, ticks, lice and widely employed in cattle and sheep dips. Also used to protect fabrics from moths, beetles and against carrot and cabbage root flies/ Also used as seed dressing against wheat and bulbfly It controls soil inhibiting pests. Reproductive disorders, blood dyscariasis It is a contact, stomach and Reproductive disorders, blood dyscariasis, brain cancer, Non Hodkins lymphoma respiratory poison suitable for the control of soil pests, white grubs and termites. It is used against sucking and Chronic liver damage-cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis, endocrine and reproductive biting pest and as smoke for breast cancer, Non hodkins lymphoma, polyneuritis. control of pests in grain sores. It is used as dust to control various soil pests.such as flea beetles and mushroom flies. It is effective as soil dressing against the attack of soil insects

Heptachlor Chlordane

Lindane

Fenitrothion

It is a broad spectrum contact Human epidemiological evidence indicates fenitrothion causes eye effects such a insecticide effective for the myopia. Chronic exposure to Fenitrothion can cause frontal lobe impairment. Org control of chewing and sucking causing neurologic deficits. pests- locusts aphids, caterpillars and leaf hoppers. It is also used against domestic insects and mosquitoes It is a persistent contact insecticide valuable against fruitflies, leaf hoppers, cereal bugs, and weaverbirds in the tropics Fenthion may be mutagenic: causing genetic aberrations. It may be a carcinogen

Fenthion

Parathion

A contact insecticide and Parathion is a possible carcinogen acaricide with some fumigant action. Very effective against soil insects with high mammalian toxicity

Profenofos

Used for control of important Cholinesterase inhibition and the associated neurological and neuromuscular effe cotton and vegetable pests. Used against chewing and sucking insects and mites, cotton bollworms, aphids, cabbage looper and thrips A systemic and contact insecticide employed for the

Phorate

Cholinesterase inhibition and the associated neurological and neuromuscular effe

control of aphids, carrot fly, fruit fly and wireworm in potatoes Malathion Widely used insecticide and acaricide used for the control of aphids thrips, red spider mites, leafhoppers and thrips

Malathion and its oxygen analog malaoxon are both quite carcinogenic and have incidence of leukemia in mammals. Chronic health effects include: suspected mut neurotoxin, allergic reactions, behavioral effects, ulcers, eye damage, abnormal b suppression

Monocrotofos A powerful contact and systemic Monocrotophos has also been shown to cause delayed neuropathy insecticide and acaricide with a broad spectrum of activity used to control pests on crops like cotton, rice, soyabean, maize, coffee, citrus and potatoes Dimethoate.

A systemic and contact Dimethoate might have carcinogenicity, birth defects, reproductive toxicity and mu insecticide and acaricide, effective against red spider mites and thrips on most agricultural and horticultural crops

Chlorpyrifos

A broad spectrum insecticide Chlorpyrifos has chronic neurobehavioral effects like persistent headaches, blurre used against mosquitoes, fly muscle weakness, and problems with mental function including memory, concentr larvae, cabbage root fly, aphids, codling and winter moths on fruit trees. It is also used in homes, restaurants against cockroaches and other domestic pests. It is also used for the control of termites A contact insecticide effective against a number of soil, fruit, vegetable and rice pests e.g. cabbage root, carrot and mushroom flies, aphids, spidermites, thrips and scale insects domestic pests and livestock pests A broad spectrum contact and systemic insecticides applied as a spray to control pests in cereals, brassicas and other vegetables Non Hodkins lymphoma

Diazinon

Quinalphos

Anti-choline esterase

Triazophos

Used against flies and insect Anti choline esterase pests of cerealos, maize, oilseed rape, brassicas, carrots, weevils in peas and cut worms in potatoes and other crops Used for the control of aphids and mites It is a systemic insecticide effective against chewing and sucking pests.

Ethion

Impaired memory and concentration, disorientation, severe depression, irritability, difficulties, delayed reaction times, nightmares, sleepwalking, and drowsiness or i condition with headache, nausea, weakness, loss of appetite, and malaise

Acephate

It is a possible human carcinogen and evidence of mutagenic effects and reprodu

Fenvalerate

It act contact and stomach poison. It controls the pests on crops of cotton, vegetables and fruits. It is a stomach and contact insecticide effective against broad range of pests of cotton, fruit and vegetable crops. It is a stomach and contact insecticide effective against broad range of pests of cotton, fruit and vegetable crops.

Reduction in weight.

Permethrin

Health risks found include genetic damage - cancer potential - neurotoxic dangers marine life.

Cypermethrin

Cypermethrin is a possible human carcinogen.

Deltamethrin

It is a potent insecticide effective Potential endocrine disrupter as a contact and stomach poison against broad range of pests of cotton, fruit and vegetable crops and store products.

Carbaryl

It is a contact insecticide and fruit Carbaryl may cause mutations (genetic changes) in living cells. It is a possible ter thinner with a broad spectrum of kidneys and nervous systems. Within the stomach produces N-nitrocarbaryl, a we activity effective against many hodkins Lymphoma, brain cancer. pests of fruits, vegetables and cotton. It is also used to control earthworms and leather jackets in turf.

Carbofuran

It is a broad spectrum systemic Carbofuran causes cholinesterase inhibition in both humans and animals, affectin insecticide, acaricide and nematicide used against insects, mites and incorporated in soil for control of soil insects and nematodes.

Aldicab

It is a systemic insecticide, Aldicarb is a cholinesterase inhibitor and so can result in a variety of symptoms in acaricide and nematicide which headache, nausea, tearing, sweating, and tremors. is formulated as granules for soil incorporation. It is effective for control of aphids, nematodes,flea beetles, leaf miners, thrips and white flies on a wide range of crops.

Methomyl

It is used as a soil and seed Inhibition of cholinesterase, resulting in flu-like symptoms, such as weakness, lac systemic insecticide applied as a foliar spray to control aphids. It is a selective systemic post emergence herbicide used for the control of many annual broadleaf weeds in cereals, sugarcane and plantation crops.

2, 4-D

Twofold excess of all cancers in Swedish railway workers, Non Hodkins Lymphom

Butachlor

It controls annual grasses and Weight loss, weight changes in internal organs, reduced brain size together with l some broad leaved weeds in transplant and direct seeded rice. It is applied as pre-emergence in EC formulations and as early

post emergence in the form of granules. Paraquat Simazine &Atrazine It is used as a plant desiccant effective against grasses. Parkinson's & Alzheimer's diseases.

It is a persistent soil acting Cancer of testes herbicide which in high concentrations acts as total weed killer and in lower concentrations is used for selective control of germinating weeds in a variety of crops - maize, sugarcane, pineapple, sorghum. It is also used for long term control of annual grass and broad-leaved weeds in crops like citrus, coffee, tea and cocoa. It is a potent non-selective post No adverse effects. emergence herbicide which kills mono and dicotyledonous annual and perennial weeds It is used to control annual grass Isoproturon appears to be a tumour promoter rather than a complete carcinogen. weeds in wheat rye and barley.

Glyphosate

Isoproturon Trifluralin

It is used for the control of annual Prolonged or repeated skin contact with trifluralin may cause allergic dermatitis. O grasses and broad leaved weeds red blood cell counts and increases in methemoglobin, total serum lipids, triglycer in a wide range of crops cotton, shown to cause liver and kidney damage in other studies of chronic oral exposure groundnuts, soyabeans, brassica, beans and cereals.

Mancozeb

It is a protective fungicide, Ethylenethiourea (ETU) in the course of mancozeb metabolism and production ha effective against a wide range of condition in which the thyroid gland is enlarged, this metabolite has produced birth foliage disease. experimental animals It is a foliage fungicide with protective action . It is mainly used for seed treatment and soil fungicide. It is a protective, wide spectrum foliage and soil fungicide. Captan is a possible carcinogen and mutagen

Captan

Captafol Carbendazim

Captafol has oncogenic potential (potential to cause cancer)

It is a systemic fungicide which It disrupts the production of sperm and damages testicular development in adult r controls wide range of pathogens teratogen damaging development of mammals in the womb. of cereals, fruits, grapes ornamentals and vegetables. It is very effective against leaf and ear disease of wheat.

References:

Effects on the Terrestrial Environment

Pesticides are biocides designed to be toxic to particular groups of organisms. They can have considerable adverse environmental effects, which may be extremely diverse: sometimes relatively obvious but often extremely subtle and complex. Some pesticides are highly specific and others broad spectrum; both types can affect terrestrial wildlife, soil, water systems, and humans. Pesticides have had some of their most striking effects on birds, particularly those in the higher trophic levels of food chains, such as bald eagles, hawks, and owls. These birds are often rare, endangered, and susceptible to pesticide residues such as those occurring from the bioconcentration of organochlorine insecticides through terrestrial food chains. Pesticides may kill grain- and plant-feeding birds, and the elimination of many rare species of ducks and geese has been reported. Populations of insect-eating birds such as partridges, grouse, and pheasants have decreased due to the loss of their insect food in agricultural fields through the use of insecticides. Bees are extremely important in the pollination of crops and wild plants, and although pesticides are screened for toxicity to bees, and the use of pesticides toxic to bees is permitted only under stringent conditions, many bees are killed by pesticides, resulting in the considerably reduced yield of crops dependent on bee pollination. The literature on pest control lists many examples of new pest species that have developed when their natural enemies are killed by pesticides. This has created a further dependence on pesticides not dissimilar to drug dependence. Finally, the effects of pesticides on the biodiversity of plants and animals in agricultural landscapes, whether caused directly or indirectly by pesticides, constitute a major adverse environmental impact of pesticides.

Effects on the Aquatic Environment

The movement of pesticides into surface and groundwater is well documented. Wildlife is affected, and human drinking water is sometimes contaminated beyond acceptable safety levels. Sediments dredged from U.S. waterways are often so heavily contaminated with persistent and other pesticide residues that it becomes problematic to safely dispose of them on land. A major environmental impact has been the widespread mortality of fish and marine invertebrates due to the contamination of aquatic systems by pesticides. This has resulted from the agricultural contamination of waterways through fallout, drainage, or runoff erosion, and from the discharge of industrial effluents containing pesticides into waterways. Historically, most of the fish in Europe's Rhine River were killed by the discharge of pesticides, and at one time fish populations in the Great Lakes became very low due to pesticide contamination. Additionally, many of the organisms that provide food for fish are extremely susceptible to pesticides, so the indirect effects of pesticides on the fish food supply may have an even greater effect on fish populations. Some pesticides, such as pyrethroid insecticides, are extremely toxic to most aquatic organisms. It is evident that pesticides cause major losses in global fish production.

Effects on Humans
The most important aspect of pesticides is how they affect humans. There is increasing anxiety about the importance of small residues of pesticides, often suspected of being carcinogens or disrupting endocrine activities, in drinking water and food. In spite of stringent regulations by international and national regulatory agencies, reports of pesticide residues in human foods, both imported and home-produced, are numerous. Over the last fifty years many human illnesses and deaths have occurred as a result of exposure to pesticides, with up to 20,000 deaths reported annually. Some of these are suicides, but most involve some form of accidental exposure to pesticides, particularly among farmers and spray operators in developing countries, who are careless in handling pesticides or wear insufficient protective clothing and equipment. Moreover, there have been major accidents involving pesticides that have led to the death or illness of many

thousands. One instance occurred in Bhopal, India, where more than 5,000 deaths resulted from exposure to accidental emissions of methyl isocyanate from a pesticide factory.

Testing and Reclassification

New pesticides require extensive laboratory and field testing and may take about five years to reach market. A pesticide company has to identify uses, test effectiveness, and provide data on chemical structure, production, formulation, fate, persistence, and environmental impacts. The product is tested in the laboratory, greenhouse, and field under different environmental conditions. After several years of testing, the company submits a registration data package to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Data include studies on acute, chronic, reproductive, and developmental toxicity to mammals, birds, and fish, the pesticide's environmental fate, rates of degradation, translocations to other sites, and ecological studies on its harmful effects to, and on, nontarget plants and animals. After its review by government and other scientists, the EPA grants registration of the product for certain uses, with agreed label data and directions for use. About 1 in 35,000 chemicals survives from initial laboratory testing to the market, a process that generally takes several years, and involves more than 140 tests. The continued use of a pesticide is supervised by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), enacted in 1947 and modified many times since. A review may be called for when new evidence indicates possible unreasonable risks to human health or the environment, including toxicity or ill health to humans or animals, hazards to nontarget organisms, and risks to endangered species and suggests that the risks may outweigh the benefits of continued registration. After review, the EPA may take no action, alter the pesticide label to minimize risk, reclassify the approved uses or eliminate specific uses, or cancel or suspend the pesticide's registration entirely.

Pesticides and Food Safety

Pesticides are used on food crops and meat produced from domestic animals. The residues contained within domestically produced food are monitored closely by the EPA, whereas those for imported food are tracked by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Scientists determine the highest dose of a pesticide that might be ingested by animals (birds and mammals, including humans) to cause adverse health effects but not death; this is called the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). They also determine the no-observable-effect level (NOEL) and identify the amount of pesticides that may be safely consumed by humans, in terms of milligrams per kilogram of body weight, over a seventy-year lifetime. In calculating an acceptable exposure for a pesticide, scientists usually include a safety factor of one hundred below the NOEL, assuming a lifetime of exposure to the pesticide. Such calculations take for granted that a pesticide is applied to all labeled crops, at recommended rates, and that the treated food will be consumed daily for a lifetime. Pesticides that have been demonstrated to cause cancer in laboratory animals are not granted tolerance, or approved for application to food crops, based on legislation from Section 409, the socalled Delaney clause, of the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and USDA, in addition to many states, have monitoring programs for pesticide residues in food. They sample approximately 1 percent of the national food supply. For every pesticide, the FDA conducts a total diet study (a marketbased survey) to more accurately assess the exposure of the human population to pesticides. Similar calculations are made for exposure to pesticides that may reach drinking water through percolation into groundwater or runoff into waterways. These adverse effects of pesticides on humans and wildlife have resulted in research into ways of reducing pesticide use. The most important of these is the concept of integrated pest management (IPM), first introduced in 1959. This combines minimal use of the least harmful pesticides, integrated with biological and cultural methods of minimizing pest losses. It is linked with using pesticides only when threshold levels of pest attacks have been identified. There is also a move toward sustainable agriculture which aims to minimize use of pesticides and fertilizers based on a systems approach.

HC sets up panel to probe pesticide levels in fruits and veggies

Abhinav Garg, TNN, Mar 10, 2011, 01.59am IST

NEW DELHI: Concerned about the pesticide levels in fruits and vegetables being consumed by city residents, the Delhi high court on Wednesday set up a panel to purchase these eatables at random and subject them to lab testing. Hearing a matter it took up suo moto on a TOI report highlighting rampant use of banned pesticides in fruits and vegetables, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna appointed the panel entrusted with the task of getting tests in approved laboratories. "We would like to find out as to whether pesticides are there in the vegetables sold in Delhi or not. It would be appropriate that the vegetables be purchased randomly and sent for test at laboratories, certified by National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL)," a bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said.

The court asked a panel comprising Additional Solicitor General A S Chandiok, standing counsel for Delhi government Najmi Waziri, Delhi Legal Services Authority member secretary Asha Menon, central government counsel Meera Bhatia and a senior advocate who is the amicus curiae in the case to buy vegetables at random from different shops or mandis in the capital and then get them tested to verify if there are excessive or banned pesticides in them. The bench also allowed two representatives of NGO Consumer Voice to accompany the lawyers. It said the tests be conducted at laboratories at Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) or other places which were approved by NABL. Earlier after taking cognizance, HC had demanded a response from the government on a study on use of banned pesticides, conducted by NGO Consumer Voice which said the amount of pesticides used in Indiawas as much as 750 times the European standards. Out of five internationally banned pesticides, four were found to be common in vegetables and fruits, the study said, adding that these pesticides cause headache and affect fertility and can damage the kidney and liver. "It is difficult to perceive how the community would react to such a situation when it is asserted that there has been an authentic research which shows that vegetables and fruits have become highly toxic because of the process of growing and preservation," the bench had then observed. The NGO said the tests conducted on vegetables at a government-approved and NABL-accredited laboratory revealed that the Indian ladies finger contained captan, a toxic pesticide, up to 15,000 parts per billion (ppb). The vegetables covered by the study included potato, tomato, snake gourd, pumpkin, cabbage, cucumber and bottle gourd, among others.

Anyone Who Eats Vegetables in India

BY: SUMITHRA KRISHNA DAS (JPS) Mar 20, 2011 INDIA (SUN) Volume 5, Issue 3. Anyone who eats vegetables in India should read these articles, which highlight the urgent need to follow Srila Prabhupada's advice and grow our own food.

Indian veggies, fruits remain highly toxic Durgesh Nandan Jha Times of India, New Delhi "Rampant use of banned pesticides in fruits and vegetables continues to put at risk the life of the common man. Farmers apply pesticides such as chlordane, endrin and heptachor that can cause serious neurological problems, kidney damage and skin diseases. A study conducted by Delhi-based NGO Consumer-Voice reveals that the amount of pesticides used in eatables in India is as much as 750 times the European standards. The survey collected sample data from various wholesale and retail shops in Delhi, Bangalore and Kolkata. "Out of five internationally-banned pesticides, four were found to be common in vegetables sold in the Indian markets. Banned pesticides were found in bitter gourd and spinach,'' said Sisir Ghosh, head of Consumer-Voice. The banned chemicals included chlordane, a potent central nervous system toxin, endrin, which can cause headache nausea and dizziness, and heptachor that can damage the liver and decrease fertility. Officials said the tests conducted on vegetables at the government-approved and NABL-accredited laboratory, Arbro Analytical Division, revealed that the Indian ladies finger contained captan, a toxic pesticide, up to 15,000 parts per billion (ppb) whereas ladies finger in the EU has captan only up to 20 ppb. "Indian cauliflower can have malathion pesticide up to 150 times higher than the European standards,'' said an official. The vegetables studied included potato, tomato, snake gourd, pumpkin, cabbage, cucumber and bottle gourd, among others. "We have informed the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India about the excessive use of pesticides in fruits and vegetables that pose serious health hazards,'' said Ghosh. He added that strict monitoring from government agencies is required to check manufacture, import and use of banned pesticides. The pesticide residue limits have not been reviewed for the past 30 years, said Ghosh. Earlier this month, the consumer organisation had conducted tests on fruits sold in Indian markets which again showed that 12 fruits, including bananas, apple and grapes, had high quantity of pesticides, violating both Indian and European Union standards. The chemical contents found in fruits were endosuplhan, captan, thiacloprid, parathion and DDT residues."

Article: NEW DELHI

"It is time to get careful while consuming fruits or vegetables. The lush and leafy green cabbage and the ''fresh'' apple may contain colours and chemicals that can lead to serious health problems. Even after Delhi high court pulled up the state government on the issue, few steps have been taken to curb the use of harmful chemicals at vegetable markets. ''The chemicals can cause gastric ulcer, liver problems and kidney failure. People must be careful and wash fruits and vegetables properly before use,'' said Dr M P Sharma of Rockland Hospital. Experts said bottle gourd is often injected with chemical like oxytocin for faster growth that can cause abnormal growth and other complications in human beings. ''Fruits and vegetables are brought to Delhi from several parts of the country. To maintain their 'freshness' and get a better deal out of them, suppliers and hawkers apply synthetic colours on vegetables and fruits which contain heavy metals like mercury and lead. Vendors and hawkers apply these colours particularly on vegetables like okra, beans and bitter gourd,'' said Sugriv Dubey. He filed a PIL in HC on the issue following which the court sought explanation from the government on Thursday. Fruit sellers use chemicals like copper sulphate and calcium carbide to ripen bananas and mangoes. Sources added that in farms, pesticides and herbicides are used to excess to get better yield. A few sellers admit some of them put chemicals in vegetables. ''We have no other option. We purchase fruits and vegetables at high price. If we sell the over-ripened or dried up vegetables, no one will buy them,'' said a vendor. When contacted, Delhi health minister Kiran Walia said the prevention of food and adulteration department has collected samples of fruits and vegetables from markets and those found guilty would be punished. The minister did not comment on the alleged shortage of field officers in the department. The department recently purchased more than 20 refrigerators to preserve samples collected during raids. Sudesh T Sachdeva, a fruit merchant at the Azadpur Mandi, claimed fruit sellers here do not use chemicals to ripen fruit. ''At mandi, we do not apply any chemicals or colours. May be the farmers or the hawkers do it,'' he said. The news of chemicals in vegetables and fruits has left Delhiites worried. ''I soak all fruits and vegetables in lukewarm water before use. We often find a ripe fruit with bitter pulp. This is definitely because chemicals are being used,'' said Promila Badhwar, a housewife."

Article: NEW DELHI "How fresh and healthy are the vegetables that you consume daily? Not much, according to the Union health ministry. In a bid to make them look garden fresh and ensure that they grow faster to reach markets, farmers are using chemicals at random that threaten to cause serious health hazards to consumers.

Expressing concern, minister of state for health Dinesh Trivedi has said, "Eating vegetables -- a must for good health -- may pose serious threat to health, causing nervous breakdowns, sterility and various neurotic complications because of their chemical content." In a letter to Union health secretary K Sujatha Rao, Trivedi has called for immediate action against farmers involved in such unscrupulous acts. The letter outlines that the health benefits of consuming green vegetables as a staple diet finds "a sharp contradiction in the present day context". Farmers are blatantly using hormone shots to help vegetables at a faster rate. "These hormones may cause irreparable damage to our health, if consumed over a period of time," Trivedi wrote. Oxytocin is the most commonly-used hormone, which was earlier primarily prescribed for pregnant women. However, the Schedule H drug has been banned since then. "The hormone can be used only on animals, leave alone vegetables. The even more shocking element is that the public/authorities may also be aware of this Oxytocin. In local parlance, it has got many names starting from cocin and 'paani to dawai', and is available at almost all the general stores," the letter said. Oxytocin is a mammalian hormone, which also acts as a neurotransmitter in brain. The hormone is used clinically to help begin or to continue labour, to control bleeding after delivery and to stimulate the secretion of breast milk. "Researchers have proved that the indiscriminate use of Oxytocin injections by farmers has been causing health hazards. Oxytocin is being used by fruit and vegetable growers, who administer it to the plants and climbers which grow faster and get ready for sale," warned the letter. The injection is mainly being administered to vegetables like pumpkin, watermelon, brinjal, gourd and cucumber. Trivedi also pointed to the rampant use of chemicals like copper sulphates for artificially colouring both fruits and vegetables. The minister hoped that the adverse effects of these toxins are scrutinised and their wanton usuage monitored and looked into immediately. Milch cows are also administered Oxytocin to augment production of milk. Calcium carbide is used in fruits for ripening, but can harm eyes and lungs, besides causing severe irritating and burning sensation of skin. Also, it may lead to irritation in mouth and throat, and if inhaled can cause both coughing and wheezing."

DELHI

HC sets up panel to probe pesticide levels in fruits and veggies

March 10, 2011 | By Abhinav Garg and TNN

NEW DELHI: Concerned about the pesticide levels in fruits and vegetables being consumed by city residents, the Delhi high court on Wednesday set up a panel to purchase these eatables at random and subject them to lab testing. Hearing a matter it took up suo moto on a TOI report highlighting rampant use of banned pesticides in fruits and vegetables, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna appointed the panel...

INDIA

SC bans sale and use of toxic pesticide endosulfan

May 13, 2011 | By Dhananjay Mahapatra

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday banned manufacture, sale and use of toxic pesticide endosulfan in the country. The apex court said the ban would remain effective for 8 weeks during which an expert committee headed by DG, ICMR, will give an interim report to the court about the harmful effect of the widely used pesticide.

Ads by Google

ALLAHABAD

Fish lovers, beware of pesticides

October 14, 2009 | By Rajiv Mani and TNN

ALLAHABAD: If you are a fish lover, here's a word of warning. The accumulation and toxicity of pesticides percolating in various edible fish is increasing at an alarming rate. This has been found in a study conducted by a research scholar of Allahabad University. Talking to TOI, Amit Modi, research scholar from the department of zoology who has done study, said the data and information accumulated in his work would be helpful in deciding the lethal doses of pesticides which ultimately... VARANASI

Workshop on microbial pesticides held

October 8, 2010 | By TNN

VARANASI: The country needs a 'back-up system' for microbial pesticides to curb their side-effects, said professor Appa Rao Podile from the University of Hyderabad while inaugurating a one-day workshop on 'microbial pesticides and intellectual

property rights' at Banaras Hindu University (BHU) on Friday. He added that the 'back-up system' should be in the form of molecules which are effective against different phytopathogens released by microbial pesticides.... INDIA

SC interim order on pesticide Endosulfam likely on Friday

May 11, 2011

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court would decide on Friday whether to impose an interim ban on the production and sale of controversial pesticide Endosulfan in the country, pending an elaborate hearing and its decision over a plea for it. A bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia today directed the petitioner, CPIM's youth wing Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) and other parties to the plea to file their respective replies by Friday to assist the court in... INDIA

Kerala orders manufacturer of 'killer' pesticide to shut shop

May 11, 2011

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Kerala's pollution control board on Tuesday ordered immediate closure of Hindustan Insecticides Ltd's Ernakulam unit that manufactures controversial endosulfan pesticide allegedly responsible for several deaths and genetic disorders in Kasargode district. HIL is the only public sector firm in the country manufacturing the pesticide. The unit also produces other pesticides such as DDT and Dicofol. The board's order said the... SCIENCE

Brain cancer linked to pesticides

June 5, 2007 | By AGENCIES

PARIS: Farmworkers exposed to high levels of pesticides, as well as home gardeners who use these chemicals to kill insects and fungus on their house plants, run a higher risk of brain cancer, according to a study to be released on Tuesday. Researchers in southwestern France looked at 221 cases of brain tumours and matched those cases with 442 healthy individuals of similar age and background from the general population. They found that all agriculture workers exposed to... THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

'Test tender coconuts for pesticides'

September 7, 2003 | By PTI

KOCHI: The Bharatiya Rationalist Association on Sunday urged food authorities to test the samples of tender coconuts, which are flowing in from Tamil Nadu every day to Kerala, for likely pesticide contents. In a statement here, the association president, C I Oomen, said certain studies conducted by it indicated the presence of pesticides in tender coconuts. The age-old reluctance of the Kerala farming community to sell tender coconuts must go and the farmers'... COIMBATORE

Farmers under the scanner for use of pesticide

April 28, 2011 | By Nandhu Sundaram

COIMBATORE: Delicious grapes often come laced with toxic pesticides, say experts. Farmers spray organo phospate pesticides such as Parathion, Dichlorvas and Chlorpyrifos. The controversial endosulfan is also being used by farmers to keep away the

insects. Experts say that there is no control over the amount of pesticide sprayed on fruits, including grapes. Consumers and non-government organisations should come together to create awareness about the indiscriminate use of... INDIA

Punjab admits pesticide perils

August 28, 2007 | By TNN

CHANDIGARH: A day after TOI detailed how hopes for better harvest was pushing farmers in Punjab towards unsupervised and unfettered use of pesticides, which is playing havoc with the health of villagers and leading to young children losing eyesight and growing grey hair, Punjab State Council for Science acknowledged the dangerous trend in its State of the Environment (2007) report released on Monday. In the study, the government said Punjab, which consumes 17% of the total... HEALTH

Pesticides causes attention problems

August 20, 2010 | By ANI

A new study has found that kids who were exposed to organophosphate pesticides while still in mother's womb are more likely to develop attention disorders later in life. Researchers at the University of California , Berkeley, found that prenatal levels of the pesticides were related to attention problems at age 5, with the effects apparently stronger among boys. "We were especially interested in prenatal exposure because that is the period when a baby's... FAITH-AND-RITUAL

Shashwat yogic farming

May 5, 2011 | By Priti Agrawal

India was once the sone ki chirya (golden bird) a land where people knew how to live with nature and for nature. To get back to that golden era we need to respect nature and live in harmony with it. Today's farms are mechanised, technology-driven and have record land yields. But this increased output has been achieved at a great cost: harmful chemicals and pesticides have made our food toxic and are leading to health complications. The Rajyoga Education and Research... COIMBATORE

Farmers under the scanner for use of pesticide

April 28, 2011 | By Nandhu Sundaram

COIMBATORE: Delicious grapes often come laced with toxic pesticides, say experts. Farmers spray organo phospate pesticides such as Parathion, Dichlorvas and Chlorpyrifos. The controversial endosulfan is also being used by farmers to keep away the insects. Experts say that there is no control over the amount of pesticide sprayed on fruits, including grapes. Consumers and non-government organisations should come together to create awareness about the... INDIA

Now, the pesticide row: Kerala CM blames Centre

April 23, 2011 | By TNN

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The controversy over endosulfan pesticide , allegedly responsible for many deaths and genetic disorders in Kasargod district, has flared up again. Hitting out at the Centre, CM V S Achuthanandan said on Saturday that it

was cruel to say that a fresh study was needed before the pesticide was banned. "Both the Centre and Congress are proendosulfan, leaving the people at the mercy of corporates," said Achuthanandan and termed Union... SCIENCE

Exposure to pesticides prior to birth results in lower IQs

April 22, 2011 | By Reuters

CHICAGO: Babies exposed to pesticides before birth may have significantly lower intelligence scores by age 7 than children who were not exposed, three separate studies published on Thursday said. Results from the studies two in New York and one in an agricultural community in California suggest prenatal exposure to pesticides can have a lasting effect on intelligence. In one study, a team at the University of California Berkeley ... INDIA

Uranium research varsitys top priority

April 20, 2011 | By Priya Yadav and TNN

CHANDIGARH: For Baba Farid University of Health Sciences , which has become the second health university in the country to get University Grants Commission recognition, a research project on problems pertaining to uranium, which affects many areas in Punjab, has become the top priority for seeking central grants from UGC and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). The UGC sent a letter of approval on Tuesday. An elated vice-chancellor S S Gill told TOI from...

Ads by Google

CHANDIGARH

Pesticides: Reaping a bitter harvest

March 21, 2004 | By TNN

PATIALA: Increase in cancer cases, skin problems in women cotton pluckers and asthma among children. These are some of the findings of a study carried out in the cotton belt of Punjab which shows that excessive use of pesticides has caused serious health problems. The study was conducted in three villages ? Jajjal, Mahi Nangal and Bangi Nihal Singh of Bathinda district ? by Mandeep Inder Kaur and Anjali Saini of Punjabi University for Kheti Virasat Punjab on behalf on Green Peace India. CHANDIGARH

No dark corner for firefly smiles to flash

April 18, 2011 | By Vikram Jit Singh and TNN

CHANDIGARH: Just a generation ago, kids buzzed around city's fabled bungalow gardens collecting ladybirds and butterflies during day and fireflies on hot midsummer nights. Fireflies, iconic insects of the nocturnal environment, are steadily becoming another footnote to the city's natural history. The biggest factor leading to the dulling of the fireflies' flash -apart from the usual culprits of pesticides and habitat loss -is millions of wattage of artificial power that light up the skyline.