Myths
and Facts
Every
infant born today carries a chemical body burden passed from mother
to child during pregnancy. This burden will grow throughout a lifetime
due to exposure to pesticides and other chemicals in our food, air,
water and everyday products.
The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention measure pesticides and other
chemicals in the bodies of Americans every few years. In the most recent
study, they tested for 212 chemicals, including
44 pesticides — and found most of them.
Scientists tell us that even in tiny doses, many pesticides can derail
the delicate systems that control our development, health and reproduction,
and the evidence continues to mount. We know more than enough to act.
All
too often, these chemicals are allowed onto the market before their
impacts are fully understood — and harms to our health and the
environment are discovered years later. The science is increasingly
clear that even low levels of exposure can harm human health, and children
are particularly vulnerable.
Our
national rules governing pesticide use are surprisingly weak. Yet as
public concern continues to grow, alternative approaches to managing
pests are increasingly available and gaining ground in homes, schools
and agricultural fields across the country.
All
too often, big biotech and pesticide corporations distort information
to make their products seem safe and necessary — but they’re
not.
Myths
about pesticides are a testimony to the power of advertising, marketing
and lobbying. Pesticide corporations, like big tobacco and the oil industry,
have systematically manufactured doubt about the science behind pesticides,
and fostered the myth that their products are essential to life as we
know it — and harmless if "used as directed." The
book Merchants of Doubt
calls it the Tobacco Strategy: orchestrated PR and legal campaigns to
deny the evidence, often using rogue scientists to invent controversy
around so-called "junk science" to deny everything —
from second-hand smoke causing cancer to global warming to the hazards
of DDT.
1.
Pesticides
are necessary to the feed the world
2.
Pesticides aren't that dangerous
3. The
dose makes the poison
4. The
government is protecting us
5. GMOs
reduce reliance on pesticides
6. We're
weaning ourselves off of pesticides
7. Pesticides
are the answer to global climate change
8. We
need DDT to end malaria, combat bedbugs, etc.
Myth #1: "Pesticides are necessary to the feed the world"
Reality:
The most comprehensive analysis
of world agriculture to date tells us that what can feed the world
— and what feeds most of the world now, in fact — is small-scale
agriculture that does not rely on pesticides.
DowDuPont,
Bayer (now merged with Monsanto), Syngenta and other pesticide producers
have marketed their products as necessary to feed the world. Yet as
insecticide use increased in the U.S. by a factor of 10 in the 50 years
following World War II, crop losses almost doubled. Corn is illustrative:
in place of crop rotations, most acreage was planted year after year
only with corn. Despite more than a 1,000-fold increase in use of organophosphate
insecticides, crop losses to insects has risen from 3.5% to 12% (D.
Pimental and M. Pimental, 2008).
More
to the point, hunger in an age of plenty isn't a problem of production
(or yields, as the pesticide industry claims), efficiency or even distribution.
It is a matter of priorities. If we were serious about feeding
people, we
wouldn't grow enough extra grain to feed 1/3 of the world's hungry —
and then pour it into gas tanks.
Myth
#2: "Pesticides aren't that dangerous"
Reality:
Pesticides
are dangerous by design. They are engineered to cause death. And
harms to human health are very well documented, with children especially
at risk. Here are a few recent examples from the news:
• An entire class of pesticides (organophosphates) has been linked
to higher rates of ADHD in children.
• The herbicide atrazine, found in 94% of our water supply, has
been linked to birth defects, infertility and cancer.
• Women exposed to the pesticide endosulfan during pregnancy are
more likely to have autistic children.
• Girls exposed to DDT before puberty are five times more likely
to develop breast cancer.
• The World Health Organization recently designated the key ingredient
in the widely used herbicide RoundUp a “probable human carcinogen.”
A large and growing body of peer-reviewed, scientific studies document
that pesticides are harmful to human health. The environmental damage
caused by pesticides is also clear; from male frogs becoming females
after exposure, to collapsing populations of bats and honeybees.
Myth
#3: "The dose makes the poison"
Reality:
If someone is exposed to an extremely small amount of one ingredient
from a single pesticide at a time, and it was a chemical of relatively
low toxicity and exposure occurred outside any window of biological
vulnerability, it might pose little danger. Unfortunately, that’s
an unlikely scenario.
First,
pesticide products typically contain several potentially dangerous ingredients
(including so-called “inerts” not listed on the label).
Second, we’re all exposed to a cocktail of pesticides in our air,
water, food and on the surfaces we touch. The combination of these chemicals
can be more toxic than any one of them acting alone. Third, many pesticides
are endocrine disruptors — and even extremely low doses can interfere
with the delicate human hormone system and cause lifechanging
damage.
Finally, the timing of exposure can be just as — if not more —
important than the dose. Even extremely low levels of pesticides can
cause irreversible, lifechanging harm if they occur at a moment when
organs or other systems are developing. One stark example from a recent
study using MRI technology illustrates the point: children exposed in
utero to the neurotoxic insecticide chlorpyrifos experienced lasting
changes in their brain
architecture.
It’s
also important to understand that research used to determine the safety
of a pesticide is funded and conducted by the corporations marketing
the product, often leading to distortion
of findings.
Myth #4: "The government is protecting us"
Reality:
Our regulatory system is not doing its job. More than 1 billion pounds
of pesticides are applied every year on U.S. farms, forests, golf courses
and lawns. Farmworkers
and rural communities suffer illness throughout the spray season
and beyond, and infants around the world are born with a mixture
of pesticides and other chemicals in their bodies.
As the President’s Cancer panel concluded in 2010:
The
prevailing regulatory approach in the United States is reactionary rather
than precautionary. Instead of requiring industry to prove their safety,
the public bears the burden of proving that a given environmental exposure
is harmful.
The
cornerstone of pesticide regulation is a fundamentally flawed process
of "risk assessment" that cannot begin to capture the realities
of pesticide exposure and the health hazards they pose. EPA officials
remain reliant on research data submitted by pesticide manufacturers,
who do everything they can to drag out reviews of their products, often
for decades. Lawsuits are pending to force the EPA to abide by the law
and speed up their reviews.
A
better, common sense precautionary approach to protecting us would assess
alternatives to highly hazardous pesticides rather than accepting
public exposure to pesticides as a necessary evil. Such a shift will
require fundamental federal policy reform. Meanwhile, state
and local authorities are pressing for rules that better protect
their communities.
Myth
#5: "GMOs reduce reliance on pesticides"
Reality:
Genetically modified organisms are driving up pesticide use, and no
surprise: the biggest GMO seed sellers are the pesticide
corporations themselves. The goal of introducing GMO seed is simple:
increase corporate control of global agriculture. More than 80 percent
of the GMO crops grown worldwide are designed to tolerate increased
herbicide use, not reduce pesticide use.
Bayer
(Monsanto), the world leader in patented engineered seed, would have
us believe that its GMOs will increase yields, reduce environmental
impact and mitigate climate change — and that farmers use fewer
pesticides when they plant the corporation’s seeds. None of this
is true.
On
average, Bayer's (Monsanto) biotech seeds reduce yield. In 2009, Monsanto
(now Bayer) admitted that its “Bollguard” GMO cotton attracted
pink bollworm — the very pest it was designed to control —
in areas of Gujarat, India’s primary cotton-growing state. Introduced
in 1996, Bollguard seeds, which include toxic traits from the soil bacterium
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), now account for half the cotton grown worldwide.
In India, the productivity of Bt cotton has fallen while pesticide costs
have risen by almost 25%, contributing to the tragic suicide epidemic
among India’s debt-ridden farmers.
In
2009, 93% of U.S. GMO soybeans and 80% of GMO corn was grown from Monsanto’s
(now Bayer) patented seeds. “RoundUp Ready” corn and soybeans
were designed for use with Bayer's (Monsanto) weed killer, which mostly
feed animals and cars rather than people. Now that weeds have developed
resistance to RoundUp, DowDuPont and Bayer (Monsanto) are introducing
GMO corn that includes tolerance of dicamba and 2,4-D, antiquated and
dangerous herbicides prone to drift from where they’re applied
on neighboring non-GMO fields and into neighboring communities.
Myth
#6: "We're weaning ourselves off of pesticides"
Reality:
After 20 years of market stagnation, the pesticide industry entered
a period of vigorous growth in 2004. The global pesticide market was
worth approximately $46 billion in 2012 and continues to grow. It is
expected to reach $65 billion by 2017, with the U.S. accounting for
53% of global use.
About
80 percent of the market is for agricultural use, but non-agricultural
sales and profit margins are growing faster, driven by the rise of a
global middle class adopting chemically reliant lawns and landscapes.
In addition, the industry strategy of promoting GMO seeds, most of which
are engineered to tolerate higher applications of herbicides, has driven
increased sales of weed killers.
Myth
#7: "Pesticides are the answer to global climate change"
Reality:
Multinational corporations are working hard to increase their market
share by exploiting climate change as a sales opportunity. As of 2008,
Bayer (previously Monsanto), Syngenta, DuPont, BASF and others had filed
532 patents for “climate-related genes,” touting the imminent
arrival of a new generation of seeds engineered to withstand heat and
drought. Their approach will further restrict the age-old practice of
farmers saving seeds with desirable traits — a practice that may
prove even more important as the climate changes in unpredictable ways
and demands more, not less, farm-scale diversity.
In
fact, evidence is showing that sustainable
farming provides
important solutions to climate change, with resilient systems that create
far fewer greenhouse gases, promote on-farm biodiversity and create
carbon sinks to offset warming.
Despite
this latest gene-grab, none of these companies have yet been able to
engineer any kind of yield-increasing or “climate-ready”
seeds. Their promises to end world hunger through drought-, heat- and
salt-tolerant seeds and crops with enhanced nutrition have proven empty.
Myth
#8: "We need DDT to end malaria, combat bedbugs, etc."
Reality:
The resurgence of bedbugs in recent years has nothing to do with the
1972 ban of DDT. Bedbugs, like many mosquitos, are resistant to DDT
— and they were decades ago, when DDT was still in use. In some
cases DDT even makes bedbug infestations worse, since instead of killing
them it just irritates them, making them more active.
Resistance
is also an issue for malaria-carrying mosquitoes. DDT had been abandoned
as a solution to malaria in the U.S. long before it was banned for agriculture
use.
Around
the world, practitioners battling the deadly disease on the ground report
that DDT is less effective in controlling malaria than many other tools.
A small cadre of chemical advocates continue to aggressively promote
widespread use of DDT to combat malaria, bedbugs — even West Nile
Virus — despite its lack of effectiveness and growing evidence
of damage to human health, even at low levels of exposure.
Myths
and Facts