It has been a long time the endosulphan is playing the role of a newsmaker.

Definitely,
ENDOSULPHAN is more famous; may be more than the Indian prime minister. Still it is
being a horror that many parts of India is supporting endosulphan, despite seeing it’s
harmful effects a small district,Kasaragod, in Kerala.Definitely, this has prompted me
wright an article on this perspective.

WHAT IS ENDOSULPHAN
Endosulfan is an off-patent organochlorine insecticide and acaricide. This colourless
solid has emerged as a highly controversial agrichemical due to its acute toxicity,
potential for bioaccumulation, and role as an endocrine disruptor. Banned in more than
63 countries, including the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, and other Asian
and West African nations, and being phased out in the United States, Brazil and Canada.
It is still used extensively in many other countries including India and China. It is
produced by Bayer CropScience, Makhteshim Agan, and Government-of-India–owned
Hindustan Insecticides Limited among others.
(source-wikipedia)

USES OF ENDOSULPHAN
Endosulfan has been used in agriculture around the world to control insect pests
including whiteflys, aphids, leafhoppers, Colorado potato beetles and cabbage worms.
Because of its unique mode of action, it is useful in resistance management; however,
because it is non-specific, it can negatively impact populations of beneficial insects. It is,
however, considered to be moderately toxic to honey bees, and it is less toxic to bees than
organophosphate insecticides.
(source-wikipedia)

HISTORY
Early 1950s: Endosulfan was developed.
1954: Hoechst AG (now Bayer CropScience) won USDA approval for the use of
endosulfan in the United States.
2000: Home and garden use in the United States was terminated by agreement with the
EPA.
2002: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommended that endosulfan registration
should be cancelled, and the EPA determined that endosulfan residues on food and in
water pose unacceptable risks. The agency allowed endosulfan to stay on the US market,
but imposed restrictions on its agricultural uses.
2007: International steps were taken to restrict the use and trade of endosulfan. It is
recommended for inclusion in the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent, and
the European Union proposed inclusion in the list of chemicals banned under the
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. Such inclusion would ban all
use and manufacture of endosulfan globally. Meanwhile, the Canadian government
announced that endosulfan was under consideration for phase-out, and Bayer
CropScience voluntarily pulled its endosulfan products from the U.S. market but
continues to sell the products elsewhere.
2008: In February, environmental, consumer, and farm labor groups including the Natural
Resources Defense Council, Organic Consumers Association, and the United Farm
Workers called on the U.S. EPA to ban endosulfan. In May, coalitions of scientists,
environmental groups, and arctic tribes asked the EPA to cancel endosulfan, and in July a
coalition of environmental and workers groups filed a lawsuit against the EPA
challenging its 2002 decision to not ban it. In October, the Review Committee of the
Stockholm Convention moved endosulfan along in the procedure for listing under the
treaty,while India blocked its addition to the Rotterdam Convention.
2009: The Stockholm Convention’s Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee
(POPRC) agreed that endosulfan is a persistent organic pollutant and that “global action
is warranted”, setting the stage of a global ban. New Zealand banned endosulfan.
2010: The POPRC nominated endosulfan to be added to the Stockholm Convention at the
Conference of Parties (COP) in April 2011, which would result in a global ban.The EPA
announced that the registration of endosulfan in the U.S. will be cancelled and that it is in
negotiations with Makhteshim Agan of North America to phase the organochlorine
out.Australia banned the use of the chemical.
(source-wikipedia)

HEALTH EFFECTS

The Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations has concluded that long-term
intake of residues of endosulfan from uses that have been considered by the JMPR is
unlikely to present a public health concern. Endosulfan is one of the most toxic pesticides
on the market today, responsible for many fatal pesticide poisoning incidents around the
world. Endosulfan is also a xenoestrogen—a synthetic substance that imitates or
enhances the effect of estrogens—and it can act as an endocrine disruptor, causing
reproductive and developmental damage in both animals and humans. Whether
endosulfan can cause cancer is debated.

Toxicity

Endosulfan is acutely neurotoxic to both insects and mammals, including humans. The
US EPA classifies it as Category I: “Highly Acutely Toxic” based on a LD50 value of 30
mg/kg for female rats, while the World Health Organization classifies it as Class II
“Moderately Hazardous” based on a rat LD50 of 80 mg/kg. It is a GABA-gated chloride
channel antagonist, and a Ca2+, Mg2+ ATPase inhibitor. Both of these enzymes are
involved in the transfer of nerve impulses. Symptoms of acute poisoning include
hyperactivity, tremors, convulsions, lack of coordination, staggering, difficulty breathing,
nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, and in severe cases, unconsciousness. Doses as low as 35
mg/kg have been documented to cause death in humans, and many cases of sub-lethal
poisoning have resulted in permanent brain damage. Farm workers with chronic
endosulfan exposure are at risk of rashes and skin irritation.
EPA’s acute reference dose for dietary exposure to endosulfan is 0.015 mg/kg for adults
and 0.0015 mg/kg for children. For chronic dietary expsoure, the EPA references doses
are 0.006 mg/(kg·day) and 0.0006 mg/(kg·day) for adults and children, respectively.

Endocrine disruption
Theo Colborn, an expert on endocrine disruption, lists endosulfan as a known endocrine
disruptor, and both the EPA and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
consider endosulfan to be a potential endocrine disruptor. Numerous in vitro studies have
documented its potential to disrupt hormones and animal studies have demonstrated its
reproductive and developmental toxicity, especially among males. A number of studies
have documented that it acts as an anti-androgen in animals. Environmentally relevant
doses of endosulfan equal to the EPA’s safe dose of 0.006 mg/kg/day have been found to
affect gene expression in female rats similarly to the effects of estrogen. It is not known
whether endosulfan is a human teratogen (an agent that causes birth defects), though it
has significant teratogenic effects in laboratory rats. A 2009 assessment concluded that
endocrine disruption occurs only at endosulfan doses that cause neurotoxicity.

Reproductive and developmental effects

Several studies have documented that endosulfan can also affect human development.
Researchers studying children from an isolated village in Kasargod Ditrict, Kerala, India
have linked endosulfan exposure to delays in sexual maturity among boys. Endosulfan
was the only pesticide applied to cashew plantations in the hills above the village for 20
years and had contaminated the village environment. The researchers compared the
villagers to a control group of boys from a demographically similar village that lacked a
history of endosulfan pollution. Relative to the control group, the exposed boys had high
levels of endosulfan in their bodies, lower levels of testosterone, and delays in reaching
sexual maturity. Birth defects of the male reproductive system including cryptorchidism
were also more prevalent in the study group. The researchers concluded that “our study
results suggest that endosulfan exposure in male children may delay sexual maturity and
interfere with sex hormone synthesis.” Increased incidences of cryptorchidism have been
observed in other studies of endosulfan exposed populations.
A 2007 study by the California Department of Public Health found that women who lived
near farm fields sprayed with endosulfan and the related organochloride pesticide dicofol
during the first eight weeks of pregnancy are several times more likely to give birth to
children with autism. This is the first study to look for an association between endosulfan
and autism, and additional study is needed to confirm the connection.
A 2009 assessment concluded that epidemiology and rodent studies that suggest male
reproductive and autism effects are open to other interpretations, and that developmental
or reproductive toxicity occurs only at endosulfan doses that cause neurotoxicity.

Endosulfan and cancer

Endosulfan is not listed as known, probable, or possible carcinogen by the EPA, IARC,
or other agencies. There are no epidemiological studies linking exposure to endosulfan
specifically to cancer in humans, but in vitro assays have shown that endosulfan can
promote proliferation of human breast cancer cells. Evidence of cancinogenicity in
animals is mixed.

Environmental fate
Endosulfan breaks down into endosulfan sulfate and endosulfan diol, both of which,
according to the EPA, have “structures similar to the parent compound and are also of
toxicological concern…The estimated half-lives for the combined toxic residues
(endosulfan plus endosulfan sulfate) [range] from roughly 9 months to 6 years.” The EPA
concluded that, “[b]ased on environmental fate laboratory studies, terrestrial field
dissipation studies, available models, monitoring studies, and published literature, it can
be concluded that endosulfan is a very persistent chemical which may stay in the
environment for lengthy periods of time, particularly in acid media.” The EPA also
concluded that “[e]ndosulfan has relatively high potential to bioaccumulate in fish.” It is
also toxic to amphibians: low levels have been found to kill tadpoles.
Endosulfan is subject to long range atmospheric transport, i.e. it can travel long distances
from where it is used. For example, a 2008 report by the National Park Service found that
endosulfan commonly contaminates air, water, plants and fish of national parks in the
U.S. Most of these parks are far from areas where endosulfan is used. Endosulfan has
also been detected in dust from the Sahara Desert collected in the Caribbean after being
blown across the Atlantic Ocean.In 2009, the committee of scientific experts of the
Stockholm Convention concluded that “endosulfan is likely, as a result of long range
environmental transport, to lead to significant adverse human health and environmental
effects such that global action is warranted.”
(source-wikipedia)

WHAT HAPPENED IN KASARAGOD

May I show some of the pictures of the victims of endosulphan, which helps you to
understand how deadly it is.
These are only some of the pictures, I could find. There are more pictures of the same and
can be found on google image search.

Endosulphan is a life hiller as these images clearly states. The problem of endosulphan
was known to public, when the people of Muliyar, a small panchayath in Kasaragod
district, has started protesting against the same. Due to it’s harmful effects, The Kerala
High Court has banned the same for a period of 10 years, in2002. Due to this only, many
countries in the world has banned endosulphan. Today there is being a convention going
on in Geneva for disscussing endosulphan related issues and for banning endosulphan. It
can be considered as a victory for the people of Muliyar. But the central Government has
taken a decision to support endosulphan.

The decision taken by the central government was so worse and it indirectly tells the
people of kasaragod to die simply just because of endosulphan. Even if the Indian
government supports endosulphan, the entire people is against it. This can be proved by
the hunger strike conducted by the kerala cheif minister, V S Achuthanandan, on 25-04-
2011 at Thiruvananthapuram.. Anyone viewing videos of the same can understand how
much people has come to participate in the same and it will count more than tens of a
thousand. On the same day, protest against the same was conducted on all the 14 district
head quarters of the state. Many unreported protests were also conducted. And those
reading this article can imagine how much the people of kerala participated for the same.
It may count trillions or more.

Still, the Indian government is taking an action which can support the company making
endosulphan only. If something is making more harmful than it’s beneficial side, then it
must be considered harmful. Here, endosulphan cannot be considered just harmful, but
deadly. It is very much understood for the central goverment. Many studies were
conducted by kerala government and state government and concluded that the essence of
endosulphan is still there in the farms, where endosulphan was sprayed. The interesting
fact is that the use endosulphan was gradually reduced from 1965 and by 1980, it’s use
has been minimized by the people themselves and by 2002, endosulphan isbanned by the
government. Still, the new born babies in the endosulphan victim areas is still having
physical and metal problems. Look, how much it affects. Kasargod is neither an
Hiroshima or Nagasaki nor America has attacked there, still the problem is just like an
nuclear bomb.

This is not a picture not only of Muliyar, but of 11 panchayaths of Kerala. Cases of
endosulphan were also reported from some areas of Kannur and Wayanad of Kerala. It
was heard that some areas of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka are also experiencing problems
due to endosulphan.

I am writing this article to show my strong protest against the indian government for
taking the decision to go against the ban of endosulfan in the Geneva conference. May
this be read by someone over the conference and may they will get the clear picture that
the people of endosulphan victim areas and people of kerala is not with the central
government and they still want to ban endosulphan.

Ban ENDOSULPHAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ndosulfan is insecticide and India is an important producer and exporter of endosulfan.

Some 60 countries including the 27 EU members States and 21 in Africa, have favoured
banning the endosulfan.

US and the EU have banned endosulfan. It is not approved to be used in rice fields in
several other countries. The use is severely restricted in others.

The Stockholm Convention, to which India is a signatory, requires parties to eliminate or

reduce the release of POPs into the environment. While a POP Review Committee of the
Convention agreed on categorising endosulfan as a POP, a final decision would,
however, be in the hands of a Conference of Parties.

The agitation against endosulfan has now reached a feverish pitch in India with the Chief
Minister of Kerala going to the extent of resorting to a day long fast, demanding that the
Government Of India should ban the use of endosulfan all over the country immediately.

The linkage between endosulfan and human miseries had come to the surface for the first
time in Kerala state in India in the 1980s, when several cases of ailments and deaths were
reported in the Kasargod district. .A few years back, the National Institute of
Occupational Health (NIOH) had presented a report to the Government of India linking
endosulfan to the prevalence of health disorders.

While there have been huge concern about the use of endosulfan in India amongst
environmentalists,. Indian pesticide industry have opposed listing of endosulfan as a
Persistant Organic Pollutant (POP) under the Stockholm Convention.

Perhaps, the argument of Indian pesticide industry is that endosulfan has been under use
for several decades in India and not many accidents have been reported. Obviously, the
problems is due to the indiscriminate spraying of endosulfan without following the
stipulated standards by the innocent farmers and failure of pesticide industry to instruct
and guide the farmers suitably.

The Government of India should follow the stand taken by several countries including
those in European Union and ban the use of endosulfan in India, particularly in the
present conditions, when the pesticide industry and the government agencies are unable
to restrict the use of endosulfan within the prescribed standards. There are other
pesticides which can be used to substitute for endosulfan and Indian pest control efforts
will not come to a halt with the ban on use of endosulfan.
Of course, the industries producing endosulfan in India would suffer. That is the price
that they have to pay for the environmental concer

Yesterday [25 April] Kerala witnessed a large scale protest that cut across political
parties of various hues. It was a protest against the use of a pesticide called Endosulfan.
Endosulfan is one of the cheapest pesticides used in horticulture crops. The activists who
demand the ban of the pesticide claim that “Endosulfan is a neuro-toxin, a carcinogen and
an endocrine disruptor.” Malayalam TV channels show regularly the pictures of many
victims who have been severely affected by the use of the pesticide in their localities.
The pictures are heart-rending; but not enough to move the hearts or brains of our
political leaders, it seems. Dr Manmohan Singh and his ministers like Jairam Ramesh are
waiting for more reports of casualties! The pesticide is already banned in Kerala.

Jairam Ramesh is of the opinion that there are lobbies working actively both for and
against the pesticide and he does not want to fall prey to any lobby. He wants to study
the effects of the pesticide scientifically before banning its use in the country. I would
like to believe Ramesh is honest.

The simple fact is that Endosulfan is banned in more than 63 countries, including the
European Union, Australia and New Zealand, and other Asian and West African nations,
as well as the United States of America. Why should India wait for more proof, one
wonders.

Today’s Business Standard reports that “Endosulfan formulators and manufacturers in

India allege that the move to ban its use is a conspiracy by the EU and US to push in their
costly products in India, as Indian companies manufacture and sell almost 70 per cent of
the global production of Endosulfan. The remaining 30 per cent is shared between
Brazilian and Israel-based companies.” Business Standard goes on to quote Pradeep
Dave, president, Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India: “The
truth is that the original manufacturer of Endosulfan, a German company, has not
supported its new registration because it had a competing high priced product ready. Due
to this, many European countries had stopped the use of Endosulfan. But there is no ban,
as is being claimed. This is a conspiracy by multinational crop protection companies to
push their costly products in India by the raising the bogey of health concerns.”
One litre of Endosulfan is priced at Rs 286, while its alternatives are priced between Rs
2,000 and Rs 13,000 a litre, according to Business Standard.

So, the games are for pushing costlier pesticides and not for promoting the well-being of
the people or the environment! Or, are countries like India trying to give cheap pesticides
to their farmers? But what will be the long term impact of the cheap pesticide on the
health of the people and that of the environment?

How many centuries more should we wait for a human civilisation to bloom, a
civilisation that will care for the welfare of all the creatures on the earth rather than that
of a few policy makers whose concerns revolve round their bank balances?

Is India too joining those self-aggrandising policy makers? The Hindu reports [26 April]
that “India is seeking a postponement of the decision on a global ban on Endosulfan to
the next meeting of the conference of the parties to the Stockholm Convention in 2013.”
India want to promote the interests of certain parties for one more year – but whose? The
people’s or the industrialists’?

As the world watches, India takes a stand against the ban on Endosulfan proposed at
thePersistent Organic Pollutants' Review Committee of the Stockholm Convention in
Geneva. This is despite the requests from the Kerala government to ban the killing
pesticide, that has left about 15 villages of its Kasaragod district on the doorstep of death.
Reasons laid by India before the Committee include the fact that Endosulfan has not been
"proved" to be the cause of the disaster in Kerala.

Aren't the faces of the dying kids, the cries of the deformed newborns, the pleading
voices of a billion reason enough to ban the pesticide?! Wherein lies the senses of our
leaders! Can they not hear the struggles of men who fell victim to the sustained use of
endosulfan, and the consequences of the malicious "bio-weapon"?

There are many young minds working to help the victims make their two ends meet.
They have dedicated their lives to the consolation of these kids and their parents. Will
their work have no meaning in the eyes of the feudal lords who say no to the ban? Surely
what has happened cannot be erased, unless from our minds. But we can, rather we must,
learn from our past mistakes, and rectify them for the betterment of our future
generations.
 All of us must be aware about the pressing need to ban
Endosulfan, and thus, in our own ways, try and oppose the stand our country has taken at
an international level, which is totally unacceptable in the court of human justice,
especially when there are people 'midst us, who have suffered the pangs of the deadly
Endosulfan!
Just a few weeks ago, amidst the heat and the dust generated by the World Cup tamasha,
a 72 year old ex-army jawan; a school drop out hailing from a poor family in
Ahmednagar district in Maharashtra became the toast of the country. Our headlines
hungry media pounced upon this man's crusade for probity in public life, and overnight,
Kisan Bapat Baburao Hazare, aka Anna Hazare, was heralded as the New Messiah, a
sort of Hercules come to clean the Augean stables of Indian sleaze and corruption.

Our media mavens were not slow to realize that the World Cup fever was evanescent,
and that the heroics of Dhoni and his men in blue could be written about only thus far.
They needed new grist for the mill, something that could guarantee headlines and TRPs
during the coming weeks. Hazare fit the bill perfectly. So they went to town on this one.
And how !

Here was a situation that was resonated with today's generation - Munnabhai at Jantar
Mantar, with Page 3 fashionistas in attendance. At last, (whew !) India's own Tahrir
Square. What more could journos hope for? Added to this was the mandatory and rapidly
growing presence of the people's movement on social media. The Support Anna Hazare
Against Corruption page on Facebook, quickly garnered almost 2 lakhs members, and
Twitter was abuzz with tweets. Even our Bollywood diva Piggy Chops, that queen of
Indian twitters, added her "leee'l bit of support" for the fasting crusader with her tweet:
"what's remarkable is the uprising of the youth of the country in support of Anna Hazare.
I pledge my support to this cause." There, even the Queen Bee had thrown in her weight
behind the aging warrior. Could one ask for more?

Also, the questions that Anna Hazare was raising were headline grabbing. A lone man
taking on the political might of the UPA machinery in a fight against corruption made for
sexy copy and tantalizing sound bytes. Particularly, in a nation that was reeling and
roiling under the impact of a slew of scams. In a "season of extraordinary
revelations," the time was ripe for reporting a new revolution. 3 G, Raja, Tata and the
Radia tapes were, frankly, getting a bit tedious. And the Commonwealth Games scam and
the Shunglu report were passe. We all knew where that one is headed for.

And so the media re-discovered and feted Anna Hazare. He became the face of India's
fight against corruption. Through his organization, the Bhrastachar Virodhi Jan Andolan
(People's Movement Against Corruption), he became a new age Gandhi who was using
the age old tool of hunger strikes against his favorite targets - politicians. Our
hysterical TV channels ensured that Hazare's fast at the Jantar Mantar quickly became
the stuff of legend. Here was a classic standoff between the all powerful Government and
the vox-pop as represented by a solitary, frail individual who was threatening to fast to
death. Who would blink first, was the question.

And as anticipated, it was the Government that blinked by agreeing to Hazare's demand
for a joint committe to draft the Jan Lokpal Bill. And as soon as that happened, the mood
changed. The very media that had been lionizing Hazare, begain to question his
antecedents and his motives. Sly headlines lampooning the Anna Hazare Show and the
Anna Carnival began appearing in the national media.

Was it morally and ethically proper to blackmail a ruling government ? Why did he
praise Narendra Modi of all people? Is he a closet knicker wallah? Does he have a hidden
agenda co-terminous with the communal tendencies of the Hindu Right ? Is he a
supporter of Raj Thackeray? Would his authoritarian approach to social problems result
in the creation of a Lokpal (Ombudsman) who would undermine the existing judicial
system? Would the proposed Lokpal end up as a "super monster?" How to make sure
the Cure isn't worse than the Disease ?

In addition, the Empire also decided to strike back. Congress General Secretary Digvijay
SIngh himself led the shouting brigade that launched a malicious smear campaign
against the leaders of the anti-corruption movement. The appearance of a mysterious CD
that cast aspersions on the credentials of the public figures who had associated
themselves with the pro Lokpal Bill movement muddied the waters further. There were
widely publicized reports of dissensions amongst the five representatives of civil society
in the proposed Committee entrusted with drafting the bill, with some of them threatening
to quit.

All these attempts at derailing Anna Hazare's campaign may prove futile in the long run.
Of course, any intelligent Indian is aware of the fact that there is a lot of ground that
needs to be covered before the Jan Lokpal Bill becomes a reality. It is equally simplistic
to believe that the anti-corruption movement, in its current form, would be the panacea
for all our social and political ills. Also, the initial mass hysteria created by Hazare needs
to be counter balanced by legislative and constitutional sanction and prudence before
anything productive can come out of it. However, one cannot and should not miss the
obvious point that Hazare, single handedly, has managed to unite the nation in a
common cause. What he has succeeded in doing is to open up a national debate on a
subject of utmost importance.. For once, all the constituencies with vested interests in the
matter - polticians, bureaucrats, law makers, and the aam admi - seem to have been
finally forced to acknowledge the need for probity in public life as a matter of natural
right, and the might of the citizens of the land to insist upon legislation to enforce such a
right. As Hazare said, "my fast was not with any prejudice against any government or an
individual, but against corruption which has burdened the common man."
So, spare us the sophistry and the snide remarks, please. The least we can do is to
support

After a long and herculean struggle, the people of Kasaragod district succeeded in
getting the Kerala government to ban the deadly pesticide Endosulfan. In the meantime,
400 lives have been lost according to government figures, hundreds have been maimed
and a much greater number are bedridden.

So imagine our surprise when we recently found that the Union Ministry of Agriculture
appointed yet another fact-finding committee to establish the link between Endosulfan
and mass ill-health in Kasaragod.

Even more shocking to us was the holding of a conference in Delhi just weeks ago
sponsored by a pesticide manufacturer. The conference was inaugurated by the President
of India and presided over by the Union Agriculture Minister as chief guest.

Do you need a better example than this to understand with whom the sympathies of our
political leaders actually lie?

Here is the true story of Endosulfan and our agony.

Reality and denial: In 2001, when we realized there was a link between Endosulfan and
mass ill-health in our district we approached the agriculture minister in the Left-led
Nayanar government in Kerala, the late Krishnan Kaniyamparambil.

We showed him an album full of tragic pictures of victims. Our simple request to him
was to stop the spraying of Endosulfan over cashew plantations.

He replied: “In this matter there is no scientific body more superior in the whole world
than the Central Plantation Crops Research Institute (CPCRI) in Kasaragod. They say
Endosulfan is absolutely harmless. I can't believe you. If you have a memorandum, give
it and go.”

It took another 10 years, thousands of lives and the painful display of immobile children
on camera to make the political leadership melt. Thanks to the very active Kerala media
and the state's Chief Minister, VS Achyutanandan's sympathetic attitude, the cry to ban
the deadly pesticide gained momentum. Of course, Assembly elections were also around
the corner.

In its magnitude, the Kasaragod Endosulfan tragedy is next only to the Bhopal Gas
Tragedy. Like Bhopal it has been a continuous saga of suffering by the people and denial
by the State.

In 1979, Somaje Mahalinga Bhat, a local farmer invited me to his farm. He had an
unusual problem. All four calves born recently in his cattle shed had deformed limbs. The
fourth one was just about surviving. Somaje's farm adjoins the cashew plantations of the
Plantation Corporation of Kerala (PCK). His cows used to drink water from a nearby tank
and graze in the hills. Endosulfan was being sprayed here aerially.

After studying all the details, I approached two veterinary doctors. They suspected that
the pesticide Endosulfan had something to do with the condition of Somaje's calves.

Endosulfan was sprayed very negligently. I wrote a feature story titled, ‘Life cheaper
than cashew,' for an English periodical. I also published stories in Kannada and
Malayalam. Years later, Somaje Mahalinga Bhat succumbed to cancer. And 30 years
after that, my district has 8,000 suspected Endosulfan victims. Hundreds are bedridden,
many more seriously ill. They have lost the ability to earn their livelihood.

In 1979, it didn't occur to me that the inborn deformities of cattle might show up in
human beings too. If a mass alert had been initiated then could we have reduced the
damage? I doubt it. The pesticide lobby's nexus with the powers that be is very strong. To
convince people about the ‘inside truth' of poisons is a Herculean task!

For nearly 25 years Kasarogod received 60 to 70 showers of ‘poison rain.' No other

region in the world has endured that. The question being asked is: “Why only in
Kasaragod?” The Plantation Corporation of Kerala, a public sector company, has flouted
every precautionary measure stipulated by the insecticide rules of the Government of
India.

Despite very serious health complaints, the corporation never cared to check onsite. Their
only argument was about the ‘well being' of their own labourers. Now media reports
inform us of a very high rate of disease and death among their own labourers.

Flood of committees: Starting with the Dr Banerjee committee in 1991, three other
committees clearly warned that use of Endosulfan near rivers, lakes, ponds and the sea
would pollute their waters. They recommended putting this warning in the certificate of
registration as a condition. They said it should also be placed on labels and leaflets in the
containers. Both warnings were totally ignored.

For aerial spraying of pesticides, permission from the Central Bureau of Insecticides
(CBI) is necessary. But the CBI states it hasn't given permission to any agency for aerial
spraying after 1992. Therefore, aerial spraying done after 1993 is illegal and punishable.
Though the Plantation Corporation pretends to be innocent, it can't escape the
responsibility of this genocide.

In fact, the Endosulfan tragedy is an act of genocide by many state agencies – the
indifferent agriculture department of Kerala, the district collectors who gave permission
without checking precautionary measures, the pesticide company, the CBI which comes
under the Union Agriculture Ministry and failed to act against the Plantation Corporation
– all have blood on their hands. None of them took action to protect public health.
Instead we have had one committee after another visiting Kasaragod.

According to media reports 17 fact -finding committees have come here. We have lost
count! Ironically, except for the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH)
committee, the rest reached their conclusion after just one flying visit. There was no
thorough investigation, no blood, water and soil analyses! Just one sitting at Kasaragod
was deemed sufficient. Interestingly, many ‘experts' who vouched that Endosulfan is
safe, refused to drink water from our area.

Dr Shripathy Kajampady, my fellow activist, often jokes: “We can even tolerate
Endosulfan but not these committees.” Couldn't this huge sum of money have been spent
on the poor victims? How many times will our mothers have to give their breast milk for
testing? When will this saga of ‘recommending for a thorough study' end? We fear the
committees because in the past we have seen quite a few pesticide industry agents
arriving here in the guise of experts.

The NIOH committee concluded that: “The most probable cause for the health problems
could be relatively high and continued exposures to Endosulfan.”

And the Dr P K Sivaraman Committee stated: “Since the committee couldn't find any
other reason that could explain the health hazards in the area, this may be attributed to
aerial spraying of Endosulfan.”

No awareness: Even today, agriculture and medical students graduate without

knowledge about pesticide abuse and the ill-effects of dangerous pesticides. Even so
called experts are ignorant about chronic poisoning. We were surprised to come across a
few leading doctors who believed that ‘thorough washing' will clear vegetables of all
pesticide residues. They weren't aware of systemic insecticides at all.

Go to any state in India, everybody, including agriculture graduates call poisons as

‘medicine.' This is a classic example of the discreet brainwash done by pesticide
companies.

Sixty-three countries have already banned Endosulfan. The Kasaragod tragedy was also
responsible for the Endosulfan ban in Cambodia. But for many people in power, “there is
no conclusive proof to accuse Endosulfan.” The fact that 400 people have already died as
per government records, that humans and animals have been deformed, were not reason
enough to call for a ban.

If you have a child who has been reduced to a cabbage, a relative with deformed limbs,
would you act so mercilessly? Would you speak in an inhuman way and say that you
require more proof to keep a deadly pesticide away?

We, the residents of the ill-fated area of Kasaragod, have just one question. If there is
doubt about this tragedy whom will you give the benefit of the doubt to? Would you
choose the scores of suffering people or the pesticide industries?
You don't need an expert to answer that question. If anyone with common sense and an
open mind visits a dozen families in the affected area, he or she will have a ready answer

What is Endosulfan?
Endosulfan is a non systemic insecticide with acaricidal properties that has been in
commercial use for over 50 years. It is recommended and used for control of insects,
pests and mites on fruits, vegetables, coffee, tea, spices, flowers, forage crops and non
food crops such as cotton & tobacco. In addition to it’s agricultural use, Endosulfan has
recently been allowed in USA (since year 2006) as a veterinary insecticide -- to be used
as ear tag in both lactating and beef cattle for control of ecto-parasites.

Current global usage of Endosulfan is estimated to be in the range of 35 million litres –

bringing it the position of top five generic ‘off-patent’ agricultural insecticides in the
world. Countries such as China, India, USA, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, Canada,
Mexico, Israel, Nigeria and Sudan which account for more than 50% of world's arable
area -- relay on Endosulfan for protecting their agriculture produce.

Addressing world population needs for food grains and optimize existing farms – contain
arable land and conserve forests – we need effective use of our natural resources to strike
this balance. Knowledge sharing and implementation of integrated crop management is
necessary. Routine crop care includes pest management and this is imperative for
maintaining the quality of farm produce. However, lack of knowledge with regards to
usage and the applications has created a lot of confusion amongst people in general. The
literature that has been published against Endosulfan lacks truth. Numerous stories
related to Endosulfan which found origin in Kerala are not true. Other regions such as
Punjab, Gujarat or Maharashtra in India or countries as such as USA, China, Australia,
Nigeria, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico have used Endosulfan without any reports of ill
effects. Endosulfan has been in use for over 50 years and as agriculturists we understand
the properties of this pesticide. Based on studies conducted on Endosulfan and experience
of half a decade we have arrived at some strong facts which are listed here.
Frequently Propagated MYTHS About Endosulfan
Myth 1: Endosulfan is a highly hazardous pesticide
TRUTH: WHO classifies Endosulfan under Class II (Moderately hazardous). Other
pesticides that belong the same class include Copper Sulphate, Deltamethrin,
Cypermethrin, Imidachlorpid, Propoxur, Permethrin etc.

World Health Organization (WHO) classifies pesticides into the following categories
based on their intrinsic hazard.
Classification
Class : Extremely hazardous
Ia
Class : Highly hazardous
Ib
Class : Moderately hazardous
II
Class : Slightly hazardous
III

Myth 2: Endosulfan is banned across the world

TRUTH: Endosulfan is currently sprayed in crop fields across China, India, USA, Brazil,
Argentina, Australia, Canada, Mexico, Sudan, Israel and Nigeria etc. These countries
have more than 50% of world's arable land. It must be mentioned that use of a particular
pesticide in a country / region is crop & pest specific. Presence or absence of target crop /
pest often make the difference between registration and de-registration of pesticides. No
pesticide is registered / used universally in all the countries around the world. This is
applicable to traditional as well as latest pesticide compounds. For example, recently
introduced pesticide compounds such as Imidaclorpid and other neo-necotinoids have
already been banned / restricted in several countries. Endosulfan, with an estimated
consumption of 35 Million liters, ranks among the top 5 generic insecticides in the world.

Myth 3: Endosulfan is a typical Organochlorine Pesticide

TRUTH: Endosulfan is not a typical Organochlorine pesticide. In fact in 1988, WHO
reclassified Endosulfan as "sulfurous ester of a chlorinated cyclic diol". In the hand book
of International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) and the Chemical
Abstracts (CA), Endosulfan is designated as a dioxathiepin.

Unlike conventional organochlorine pesticides, Endosulfan, neither persists for long nor
significantly bio-accumulates in human beings and animals.

Myth 4: Endosulfan persists for long in the environment

TRUTH: In a study conducted by T.S. Kathpal of Haryana Agricultural University, India
– it was found that dissipation of Endosulfan occurred in the soil to an extent of 92-97%
in the first four weeks following the application (Pesticide Science, 1997, 50 21-27)
Endosulfan does not persist for long in the environment. In tropical and subtropical
environment degradation of Endosulfan is rather faster. It is degraded by the following
process.
• Consumption by soil micro-organisms
• Chemical breakdown in reaction to sunlight
(Photolysis)
• Chemical reaction with water (Hydrolysis)
Myth 5: Endosulfan bioaccumulates in Human & Animal bodies
TRUTH: One significant property of Endosulfan is that it quickly leaves the body and
does not bio-accumulate. As recently as 2006, WHO had observed "Endosulfan and
Endosulfan Sulfate do not bio-accumulate in organisms due to the extensive metabolism
with enzymatic hydrolysis of Endosulfan and Endosulfan Sulfate forming more polar
metabolites.

Myth 6: Exposure to Endosulfan causes cancer

TRUTH: Endosulfan is not a carcinogen (cancer causing agent). International Agency
for Research on Cancer (IARC, a body of WHO) does not classify Endosulfan to be a
carcinogen. United States - Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) also supports
this conclusion. Several other research publications also confirm this.

Myth 7: Exposure to Endosulfan causes birth defects

TRUTH: Evaluations by WHO / FAO / JMPR, 1998 on Endosulfan have placed on
record that “no genotoxic activity was observed in an adequate battery of tests for
mutagenecity and clastogenecity.” Birth defects are triggered by substances that have
following characteristics:
Mutagenic : A substance capable of introducing changes in cells.
Genotoxic : A substance capable of damaging DNA of an organism.
Clastogenic : A substance that can cause break in chromosomes resulting is loss or gain
or rearrangement of chromosomal segments.

Myth 8: Endosulfan causes hormone imbalance

TRUTH: WHO / FAO / JMPR, 1998 had categorically stated that there was no evidence
to estrogenic activity involving Endosulfan. Besides, US- EPA, in the year 2007,
concluded that Endosulfan is not an anti-androgen, i.e. it does not affect sperm
production, sperm count, motility etc

Myth 9: Endosulfan exposure killed and maimed many people in the state of Kerala,
India
TRUTH: Further to the reports that surfaced about mal effects of Endosulfan in Kerala -
investigations have revealed that the incidents were particularly generated and propagated
by Center for Science & Environment (CSE), an environmental NGO that receives heavy
funds from Europe. As per CSE's claims -- alarming levels of Endosulfan was found in
blood samples of people. It was a scientific fraud hatched by CSE. The team at CSE
alleged that an activist - Dr. Mohan Kumar's blood sample had shown Endosulfan
residues to the level of 119 ppm -- it is scientifically impossible as 0.86 ppm of
Endosulfan residues in blood can prove very fatal. Mohan Kumar continues to live
healthy life. When an explanation was demanded to support their theory and prove their
case the CSE was silent.
Still dependent on traditional farming practices, countries like India and China must
evaluate how a move to ban Endosulfan by the Stockholm Convention will augur for
them, especially when it has no substitutes

This week will see a milestone in the journey of the debated pesticide Endosulfan, the use
and benefits of which have been argued the world over. The Stockholm Convention is
now estimated to seal the fate of the active ingredient used globally for more than half a
century. The premise of this ban will be the persistence of Endosulfan in the
environment. It is being enlisted as a persistent organic pollutant (POP) although the
World Health Organization classifies Endosulfan as ‘moderately hazardous.’ This
development is estimated to ensure its global eradication. Developing nations with
similar stakes in the outcome of the Convention for agriculture, such as China and India
silently mull what the future will holds for them in the absence of Endosulfan.

A group of 172 nations will partake in this decision, even as a fraction of them are
significant users of Endosulfan, or benefit from it at all. Of the 60 countries to have
banned the pesticide, 27 are EU members. Nations that have been indirectly compelled to
ban the pesticide include among others, 21 African countries that depend heavily on
European exports. Recent global news reports have suggested that the move to enlist
Endosulfan as a POP at the Convention is only a legal offensive in eliminating its global
use for replacement with patented substitutes. But if this assertion is considered far-
fetched and dismissed, the issue that still needs considerable thought is what farmers in
developing nations like India and China will use as alternatives in light of such a ban.

The US Environmental Protection Agency has stated that Endosulfan ‘poses unacceptable
risks to agricultural workers and wildlife’ and has linked the pesticide to cancer and long-
term impact on the immune and reproductive systems. Countering this view, the
Shanghai Daily reported that Mr. Chen Zongmao, a professor at Tea Research Institute
and Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences states that extensive soil residue tests
performed by them found no problems at all. In India, these results have been
corroborated by several government committees, such as those led by Mr. OP Dubey, CD
Mayee and Dr. Achyutan, among numerous independent studies. China has benefited
from Endosulfan’s use on cotton since 1994, as well as on wheat, tea, tobacco and apples,
among other fruits since 1998.

In China, Endosulfan is sold for the extremely affordable price of 25–32 yuan (USD
3.84–4.91) per litre. As per Mr. Li Maoqing, a quality control director at Jiangsu Anpon
Electrochemical Co Ltd, a ban on the pesticide could therefore hurt Chinese cultivators to
the tune of almost 100 million yuan (USD 15 million) per year. Since analysis in Europe
and America have been conducted on Endosulfan’s effects on birds, rabbits and fish, their
assessment is impractical for China where it is used largely on crops like tea which are
not exported. In the past, several tests have already suggested that Endosulfan degrades
much faster in tropical climates; but this scientific truth has been omitted from common
knowledge on the issue.
Endosulfan has been manufactured, used and exported by Europe for 55 years and has
since caught on in developing economies such as India, China, Argentina and Brazil due
to its precise pest control relevance in these climates. In fact, Italy consented to
Endosulfan use during a pest attack on their hazelnut crops in 2008 due to lack of an
appropriate alternative pesticide to tackle the problem. China’s Tea Research Institute
and Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences is already looking at developing its
alternatives for the tea industry. But Mr. Li asserted that such a product is projected to be
five times costlier than Endosulfan.

If health and ecology were really prime concerns for the ban of Endosulfan, it is strange
that suggested alternatives are harsher. Neonicotinoids, which are blamed for causing
massive honeybee deaths and degrading the natural ecological balance, are among the
substitutes suggested for Endosulfan. Alternatives could be found in organic farming, but
its only drawback lies in scalability of use when it comes to feed billions. With
inadequate replacements in place, developing countries like China, India and Argentina
must now decide whether the risk from Endosulfan can outweigh the risks of food
shortage and additional cost burdens on farming

Vested interests in demanding ban on endosulfan: PMFAI

We observed this update from Press Trust of India (PTI) today on Wednesday, December
22, 2010. Voice of Keralam has been a staunch supporter of farmers and workers in
India. The recent Endosulfan controversy and public calls to ban Endosulfan, an
immensely useful insecticide did not go down well with us, after we looked into the real
scientific facts and data. This story validates that Voice of Keralam is the true voice of
the people of God's own country. We will continue to watch development on Endosulfan
as they unfold and ensure that the truth is presented in its originality from all sides, to
give cut through the noise and bring you the reality.

New Delhi: Domestic pesticide makers today said that the demand for banning
endosulfan pesticide in India is being driven by vested interests of Multinational firms.

"The demand for banning Endosulfan in India, is motivated by the vested interest of
European pesticide makers, who are interested in promoting their patented products in the
country," Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI)
President Pradeep Dave told reporters here.

European companies, which have vested business interests are lobbying for imposing an
international ban on endosulfan as the ban would create a market for their products in the
third world countries, he said.
Endosulfan Workers oppose ban.
Endosulfan is being used for the last 50
years
in India with no negative health effects.
The replacement pesticide will be at least
10 times costlier than Endosulfan.
Dave added that endosulfan is being used in the country for the last 50 years and there
has been no such scientific records available, which indicate that the use of this chemical
has resulted into serious health hazards of any kind.

International Stewardship Centre, an NGO working for chemical industry, said that
replacing endosulfan with any other chemical would be at least 10 times costlier for the
Indian farmers.

"A litre of endosulfan costs Rs 250 to Indian farmers whereas any chemical manufactured
by multinational would cost more than Rs 2,500 per litre thus making the use of
pesticides 10 times costlier," International Stewardship Centre Chairman R Hariharan
said.

He said that India is the largest producer, user and exporter of endosulfan. The total
market in India for the pesticide is around USD 60 million and the country exports
around another USD 40 million worth endosulfan.