Pesticides and Your Health — A Family Physician's Perspective

British Columbia and Nova Scotia are considering potential bans on lawn and garden pesticides. "Cosmetic" pesticides are already prohibited in Quebec and Ontario and new restrictions will be in effect this summer in New Brunswick and PEI, too.

Ultimately, the controversy surrounding pesticide use comes down to health — if these chemicals are harmful, they should be banned; if they are safe they can be used widely and freely without restriction. However, determining whether a chemical is harmful or not is not always easy or straightforward. The studies that can be done on pesticides are mostly population studies looking at whether people with increased exposure to multiple pesticides develop illnesses more than the average. The studies have some limitations, and cannot always draw unequivocal conclusions.

In 2004, Dr. Vakil co-authored a scientific review of published research examining the human health effects of pesticides for the Ontario College of Family Physicians. They searched commonly used medical databases and reviewed 265 studies on cancer, and neurological, dermatological, reproductive and immunological/genotoxic disorders that met our strict criteria for methodological quality.

Unfortunately most studies examined occupational exposure of only adult males, with a paucity of studies looking at women and children. Yet the few studies available suggested that pregnant women and children are particularly vulnerable. Dr. Vakil and her colleagues concluded that there was enough evidence of the harmful effects of these chemicals that doctors should advise their patients to avoid all possible exposure. Here's a look at what they found.

There were 104 studies looking at a number of different cancers. Most of these found a link between pesticide exposure and cancer, many of them reaching statistical significance (meaning the associations found were unlikely to be by chance). Increases in Non-Hodgkin lymphoma were found in farmers, pesticide production workers and golf course superintendents, and one study in children found elevated rates of the cancer when pesticides were used in the home and when parents had occupational exposure.

One study found an increase in childhood leukemia with home exposure and prenatal exposure to pesticides. In this study children with a "poor metabolizer" genetic mutation increased the risk of leukemia with exposure to pesticides, indicating a possible genetic predisposition. Other studies showed that exposure to pesticides in early childhood, prenatally and even pre-conception may increase risk of leukemia.

All the studies on brain and kidney cancer showed increased risk with pesticide exposure even in the children of exposed workers. One study found a decreased risk of breast cancer in farming women, though risk was elevated for those women who reported being in the field during or shortly after pesticide application, as well as for those who reported not using protective clothing.

All eight papers on prostate cancer showed elevated incidence in workers who were exposed to pesticides, with one showing higher rates in exposed workers with a family history of prostate cancer.

Skin is the primary route of exposure to pesticides for workers. A few high-quality studies showed increases in rashes in agricultural labourers and pet groomers.

Thirty-nine of 41 studies on neurotoxicity found an association between pesticide exposure and one or more neurologic abnormalities such as mild cognitive dysfunction, neurobehavioural changes, depression, and even suicide. Only two studies examined children, finding significant neurodevelopmental effects in preschool children with pervasive agricultural exposure in Mexico. Previous pesticide poisonings were found to be related to impaired neurobehavioural function, and 15 out of 26 studies found associations between pesticide exposure and Parkinson's disease.

Fifteen studies from nine countries found increases in birth defects (limb, urogenital, central nervous system, orofacial and heart anomalies) with pesticide exposure of the mother. Results of the studies on fertility were mixed but several did find reduced fertility, sperm abnormalities and erectile dysfunction with increased pesticide exposure. Some studies showed that preconception and prenatal exposure to pesticides may increase low birth weight, prematurity, stillbirth, miscarriage and neonatal death.

Chromosome aberrations (genetic damage to cells which could present as miscarriage, birth defects, sperm abnormalities or cancer) were found in 11 of 14 studies, though other factors such as smoking, radiation, diet and alcohol consumption were not always accounted for.

Overall, this review on the health effects of pesticides provides clear evidence that pesticide exposure increases risk to human health. As a doctor, it's my role as health advocate to advise my patients to reduce exposure to all pesticides whenever possible, and to promote the passage of legislation banning non-essential pesticide use and sale. This would protect especially vulnerable populations such as women and men considering pregnancy, pregnant women, infants and children.

Cathy Vakil is a family doctor at the Department of Family Medicine at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario and has an interest in health and the environment. She is on the Environmental Health Committee of the Ontario College of Family Physicians and the Board of Directors of Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE). Her interests include the health effects of pesticides, urban sprawl, climate change, air pollution and nuclear energy.

* * *  

Source: DavidSuzuki.org

Jury Awards Millions For Pesticide Exposure

Jessica Pieklo of Care2.com reports that 14 years after Todd and Cynthia Ebling sued Prestwick Square Apartments and its management company alleging that pesticides used in their apartment caused sever neurological problems in two of their children, a southern Indiana jury awarded the couple $23.5 million in connection with the claim.  According to the lawsuit, the children suffered from seizures after coming in contact with the spray.

Shortly after moving into an apartment in 1994 the children were hospitalized with seizures and other neurological problems.  The family moved about a year later.

According to their attorney, the children’s health problems were caused by exposure to Creal-O, a chemical based on the pesticide Diazinon.  The pesticide was eventually banned for residential use in 2004 by the Environmental Protection Agency.

According to the suit, the chemical was applied in the wrong fashion, even though at the time it was legal to use in a residential context.  More was applied than should have been and it was applied in a careless manner.  The result was pesticide on the base boards, carpeting, and wall coverings.

Exposure resulted in tragic health effects on the children.  Their now 20 year old daughter is  developmentally stalled at two years old.  The other child, while not as severely injured as his sister, struggles academically and socially.  The family unit has been disrupted as a result.  Todd and Cynthia are now divorced and had been struggling to provide for the cost of care for their daughter.

The tragedy of the Ebling case is that it took so long for both the judicial system and the regulatory system to remedy the obvious wrong -- exposure to a toxic chemical.

* * * 

Environmental Links to Cancer [Pesticides]

"The cumulative effects of being exposed to many different pesticides over a lifetime represent an unquantified and unacceptable risk to all Canadian children." That unequivocal statement comes from the Environmental Standard Setting and Children's Health Report, released in 2000 by the Ontario College of Family Physicians and the Canadian Environmental Law Association part of the Children's Environmental Health Project.

CALGARY URGED TO BAN PESTICIDES

By The Calgary Herald May 23, 2008

The Canadian Cancer Society said that Calgary should move ahead with a ban on pesticides, arguing exposure to chemicals in the products are linked with leukemia and several other cancers. "The society says studies have linked pesticide exposure to several types of cancer, including leukemia, lung cancer, brain cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and pancreatic cancer."
Source: CalgaryHerald

* * *

THE TRUTH ABOUT PESTICIDES
The Quebec Poison Control Centre and the Quebec Ministry of Environment and Wildlife released statistics on pesticide poisoning in 1996. They reported a staggering 1,650 poisoning cases. 79.4% of the cases were in private homes, and 46.1% of the victims were children under age five. 31% of these cases were due to oral ingestion, and 34.9% followed a pesticide application (1) (Sierra Club.ca)

On June 28, 2001, the Supreme Court of Canada, in a landmark decision, upheld the town of Hudson, Quebec’s bylaw 207, which bans pesticide use on public and private property for aesthetic purposes. The bylaw had been challenged in the Quebec courts and then at the Supreme Court by lawn pesticide companies after they were charged with violating the ban. The court’s decision goes farther than simply upholding Hudson's bylaws. It points out that the relevant pieces of legislation in other provinces have wording that is comparable. Correctly worded bylaws in other parts of Canada could enjoy the same interpretation as the Hudson bylaw. The Sierra Club of Canada has drafted regionally specific bylaws that citizens can take to their local councils to ban or restrict pesticides.

Forty-eight communities across Canada have already established bylaws banning the use of cosmetic pesticides on public and private greenspaces. Parks in the resort municipality of Whistler are now "pesticide free". RMOW parks have long been pesticide free, what’s new is that the "high maintenance" planting boxes in the village are now also pesticide free. BC Rail will also respect Whistler as a "pesticide free" zone, due in large part to the efforts of the RMOW Engineering Department. A growing group of physicians, scientists and environmentalists worldwide have been emphatic in their warnings to governments and the public. Their warnings suggest that the vast majority of these chemicals are linked to a host of childhood and adult cancers as well as numerous other diseases and developmental problems. The Ontario College of Family Physicians, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, members of the Canada Health Advisory Council, Dr. David Suzuki and countless environmental groups are among the Canadians who support this position. If your community is not one of those that has banned the cosmetic use of pesticides on lawns, school grounds and parks, join with other like-minded folk and urge them to do so as soon as possible. The report Poisoned Schools: Invisible Threats, Visible Actions was released by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice in March 2001. It is available at Chej.org. Unthinkable Risk: How Children are Exposed and Harmed When Pesticides are Used at School released in April 2000 is available from the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP) at Pesticide.org.

* * *

EPA HED Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC) A Consultation on the EPA Health Effect Division's Proposed Classification of the Human Carcinogenic Potential of Malathion "...classified the organophosphate pesticide malathion as "suggestive" (Page 6 of this report). This is the final report from the August 2000 FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel Meeting"
HEDS is the Human Exposure Database System, an integrated database system that contains chemical measurements, questionnaire responses, documents, and other information related to EPA research studies of the exposure of people to Environmental contaminants.

* * *

HealthyLegacy.org reports that according to the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 95% of the pesticides used on lawns are classified as possible or probable carcinogens. Pesticide use has also been tied to brain tumors and fatal non-Hodgkins Lymphoma. Studies have shown that children raised in homes where pesticides are used regularly are six times more likely to develop childhood cancer than children who are not exposed.1 Pesticides are poisons and can harm organisms other than those targeted, including your children. By their very nature, pesticides are not safe; and it is illegal for a company to tell you otherwise.

NON-HODGKIN'S LYMPHOMA
ZeroWaste.ca reports that in 1999 European researchers found that Swedish sufferers of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma were 2.7 times more likely to have been exposed to the herbicide MCPA (found in weed and feed type products) and 2.3 times more likely to have been exposed to the herbicide glyphosate (Round-Up).

* * *

PESTICIDE-INDUCED DISEASE DATABASE

The common diseases affecting the public’s health are all too well-known in the 21st century: asthma, autism and learning disabilities, birth defects and reproductive dysfunction, diabetes, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, and several types of cancer. Their connection to pesticide exposure continues to strengthen despite efforts to restrict individual chemical exposure, or mitigate chemical risks, using risk assessment-based policy. Visit BeyondPeesticides.org for more information.

WHAT TO DO IN A PESTICIDE EMERGENCY -- PESTICIDE DRIFT AND INJURY
1. The first step is to notify people who might be spraying in your area that you are concerned about exposure to pesticides. Tell them you don't want to be exposed to pesticides through drift, runoff, or vaporization. You might tell people about any disabilities (chemical sensitivities, allergies, and asthma, for example) that might cause their spraying to deny you access to your own property and the use of public facilities. If you have a farm that is certified organic where the certification is in danger, some people respond to lost money. Similarly, bees are vulnerable to insecticides.

For more tips that could save your life in a pesticide exposure emergency visit BeyondPesticides.org


* * *

Blogpost by Olga Krywyj

Environmental Links to Cancer & Environmental Human Rights

The U.S. EPA classifies chemicals into five categories -- A through E -- to identify their carcinogenicity to humans, with A being known carcinogens, B the probable human carcinogens, C the possible, D the unknown due to lack of data, and E the noncarcinogens. "The fact that numerous chemicals with long-standing membership in Groups A through C are still allowed to be manufactured, sold, released, dumped, imported, exported, or otherwise used comes as a surprise to many knowledgeable people," states ecologist and cancer survivor Sandra Steingraber, an internationally recognized expert on the environmental links to cancer.

There are 60 possible carcinogens in the air we breath.

There are 66 possible carcinogens in the food we eat.

There are 40 possible carcinogens in the water we drink.

Its not just the dose that makes the poison and its not just the timing that makes the poison, its who you are that makes the poison.

The disconnect between what the scientific community know about carcinogens and what cancer patients are told is huge.

"We should become carcinogen abolitionists. These chemicals simply need to be phased out." says Steingraber. "When carcinogens are released into the environment some number of vulnerable persons are consigned to death. I don't have time to put a happy face on cancer. Cancer is a serial killer."

"An environmental human rights movement is the vision under which I labor and which may if we all work together in concert become a self fulfilling prophesy. May it be so."

Sandra Steingraber explores the links between human rights and the environment, with a focus on chemical contamination. She takes a personal and scientific look at these issues and offers insights into how we can protect our environment and ourselves.

A Bridge to Somewhere - Responding to the President's Cancer Panel Report (Part 3)

Dr. Sandra Steingraber

Authority on environmental links to health

Posted: July 7, 2010

The Panel was particularly concerned to find that the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated. The President's Cancer Panel urges President Obama "to use the power of [his] office to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our Nation's productivity, and devastate American lives." reports Steingraber. Visit Livingdownstream.com for more information on cancer survivor Sandra Steingraber's book and documentary.

HOW MUCH EVIDENCE DO YOU WANT? 

CHEMICAL EXPOSURE & CANCER

Environmental Links to Cancer

Interview with Dr. Sandra Steingraber, biologist, poet, and survivor of cancer in her twenties, brings all three perspectives to bear on the most important health and human rights issue of our time: the growing body of evidence linking cancer to environmental contamination. "Living Downstream" (book and documentary) is a scientist's personal investigation of cancer and the environment.

10:00 Pesticides don't just stay on the plants they evaporate and drift into the air, they fall as "rain", they're found in snowflakes, in fog, in wind, in clouds and backyard swimming pools. So why do so many farmers feel that they still have to use pesticides? And do they not know how persistent they are in the environment.

Dr. Sandra Steingraber's documentary Living Downstream is now available for theatrical and festival screenings. Fifteen new screenings have been added.

Preview

* * *

Posted by Olga Krywyj

Groups Call for Full Ban of Insecticide 'Chlorpyrifos'(Dursban): Pesticide Once Widely Used in Homes

On October 13, over 13,000 organizations and individuals - consumers, parents, health advocates, farmworkers and others- from across the U.S. sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday calling for a ban on the insecticide chlorpyrifos (active ingredient in specialty insecticides Dursban & Lorsban) and a phase out of other organophosphate (OP) pesticides. Chlorpyrifos was phased out for residential use under a 2000 agreement between EPA and Dow Agrosciences, but continues to expose farmworkers and consumers through its use in agriculture.

Also on October 13, the Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX), led by renowned scientist Theo Colborn, PhD,  announced the addition of chlorpyrifos to its online database, Critical Windows of Development, spotlighting research that links prenatal, low dose chlorpyrifos exposure to altered health outcomes in the brain and other organs. “Human studies have now linked prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos with mental and developmental delays emphasizing even more the urgency to remove the product from the market,” said Dr. Colborn, President of TEDX and a signatory on the letter. “Chlorpyrifos illustrates the urgent need to be cautious, prevent further exposure and protect our children from the time they are conceived onward.”

Beyond Pesticides calls EPA’s 2000 chlorpyrifos settlement with Dow a classic failure of the risk assessment process under the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) –a failure that is repeated over and over again in agency chemical regulation decisions. Advocates have pointed to chlorpyrifos as the "poster child for why risk assessment does not work to protect the public, workers and the environment, even with safer practices and products available in the marketplace. " EPA’s decision in 2000 and subsequent action removed chlorpyrifos’ residential uses and retains all agricultural uses except tomatoes (allowable residues on apples and grapes were adjusted), golf course and public health mosquito spraying. The agency argued at the time of its decision that it had adequately mitigated risks through the removal of high exposure uses to children in the residential setting, but ignored the special risks to farmworker children’s exposure as well as the availability of alternative agricultural practices and products that made chlorpyrifos unnecessary and therefore its risks unreasonable. The decision at the time was hailed as a victory for the public because it eliminated high hazard exposures and showed that EPA could remove uses of a widely used chemical. Except, it did not do the job. The risk assessment process does not force a consideration of those who suffer disproportionate risk or groups of people (such as those with neurological diseases in this case who are disproportionately affected).

Chlorpyrifos is a neurotoxic insecticide whose use was found to exceed acceptable rates of illness, especially to children. By focusing on risk reduction strategies to come up with “acceptable,” but unnecessary, rates of illness across the population, EPA virtually ignored the chemical’s widespread use in agriculture, resulting in exposure to farmworkers, farm families and others living near agricultural areas. It is also a frequent water contaminant and a long range contaminant, exposing communities and contaminating pristine areas far from where it was applied. Short term effects of exposure to chlorpyrifos include chest tightness, blurred vision, headaches, coughing and wheezing, weakness, nausea and vomiting, coma, seizures, and even death. Prenatal and early childhood exposure has been linked to low birth weights, developmental delays, ADHD and other health effects.

David Carpenter, M.D., Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany (State University of New York) said, “It is unacceptable that farmworker children, and children in the general population continue to be exposed to these neurotoxins.”

“As more families cope with the suffering and costs of learning and developmental disabilities and attention problems, EPA must prevent further exposures to neurotoxic pesticides,” said Maureen Swanson of the Learning Disabilities Association of America. “EPA needs to protect people, especially children and pregnant women, from any chemical that threatens brain development. In addition to banning neurotoxic pesticides, we must reform the Toxic Substance Control Act to require EPA to address the many neurotoxic chemicals in our everyday products.”

“The last time EPA reviewed these pesticides, its own scientists complained that the Agency was not assuring adequate protection of the nation’s children, and that it was unduly influenced by those it regulates,” said William Hirzy, Ph.D., a professor at American University in Washington D.C. and a former EPA chemist. While at EPA, Dr. Hirzy was involved in a letter raising these concerns sent to management by six unions representing 9000 EPA scientists and other staff, as the Agency was finalizing its Cumulative Risk Assessment for organophosphates in 2006. “Five years later, with even more sobering studies in hand, will EPA finally act to protect children?,” Dr. Hirzy asked.

Chlorpyrifos is used widely on corn, orchard, and vegetable row crops all over the country. While it is known to contaminate dozens of fruits and vegetables with detectable residues, Beyond Pesticides’ Eating with a Conscience database reveals that chlorpyrifos is also registered for use on more than half of the 15 “cleanest” fruits and vegetables, or those with the lowest pesticide residues (asparagus, cabbage, corn, grapefruit, kiwi fruit, onion, peas and sweet potatoes). So while there may be little residue remaining by the time it reaches your store shelf, these crops may be grown with hazardous pesticides that get into waterways and groundwater, contaminate nearby communities, poison farmworkers, and kill wildlife, while not all showing up at detectable levels on our food. An estimated 8 to 10 million pounds of chlorpyrifos are applied to U.S. crops each year (see a U.S. Geological Survey map showing where chlorpyrifos is used.)

“The warning signs have been obvious for decades, yet EPA has allowed generation after generation to suffer exposures and consequences,” said Carol Dansereau, Executive Director of the Farm Worker Pesticide Project, a Washington State farmworker organization that initiated the letter to EPA. “EPA is promising to better protect children and other vulnerable people, but that promise is meaningless as long as it keeps reregistering chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates, ” she said. FWPP and others are asking the public to contact EPA and join in demanding a ban, and precaution-based policies.

“Unfortunately chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates do not stay where sprayed. They evaporate and move with wind and fog. That’s how they contaminated our fields,” said Larry Jacobs of Jacobs Farm/Del Cabo, an organic grower in California. “There are better ways to manage insect pests than depending on organophosphates like chlorpyrifos. We signed onto the letter to EPA to protect our health and to protect our farm.”

EPA is in the process of considering re-registration for chlorpyrifos, one of the most widely used pesticides in agriculture in the US and worldwide.

Beyond Pesticides advocates for the national conversion to organic systems planning, which moves chemicals off the market quickly and replaces them with green management practices. The chlorpyrifos story, in addition to untold damage it has caused families across the U.S., is testimony to the need to adopt alternatives assessments that force chemicals off the market that can be replaced by safer or green practices.  Despite agency efforts to use failed risk assessment decision making to claim that the food supply is safe and the environment protected, an informed public is driving the growth of organic production in the marketplace, choosing health and environmental protection over risk assessment. It is a process that can be supported through purchasing decisions everyday in the grocery store and advocacy that effects a conversion of land and building management in parks, schools, lawns and gardens, health care facilities, indoor and outdoor spaces to nontoxic and least-toxic methods. Whether it is agriculture, schools, lawns and gardens, health care facilities, or community insect management, turn to Beyond Pesticides for the latest on science, policy, safe management practices, and activism.

For more information, contact:

* Carol Dansereau, Farm Worker Pesticide Project, 206-729-0498; cdansereaufwpp@earthlink.net
* Stephenie Hendricks, 415-258-9151, stephdh@earthlink.net
* Ana Duncan Pardo, Toxic-Free North Carolina, 919-818-5933, ana@toxicfreenc.org
* John Kepner, Beyond Pesticides, 202-543-5450, jkepner@beyondpesticides.org

* * *  

Source: BeyondPesticides.org

United Nations Science Panel Urges Ban on Toxic Pesticide

A key U.N. science panel is urging governments worldwide to ban the widely used pesticide called endosulfan. The pesticide is used on fruits and vegetables as well as cotton. Endosulfan is known to cause nerve damage to both humans and wildlife. Evidence also shows it can harm the environment through spray drift and run off. 60 countries have already banned the use of the pesticide including the United States. Scientists say use of the pesticide should be phased out completely. A spokesman for the U.N. Environment Program says governments will decide whether to follow the recommendations at a meeting of leaders at the so-called Stockholm Convention on harmful chemicals in April 2011. 31 scientists make up the U.N. panel called the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee.

* * *  

Source:  DoYourPart.com

Australian Government Bans Toxic Pesticide 'Endosulfan'

Reversing previous rulings that claimed that the toxic pesticide endosulfan was “safe,” the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) announced its decision Tuesday to finally cancel the registration of the highly hazardous chemical. Recent assessments by the Australian government’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) concluded that the prolonged use of endosulfan is likely to lead to adverse environmental effects via spray drift and run-off, and that these long-term risks could not be mitigated merely through use restrictions or label changes. Australia joins over 60 countries, including to the U.S. to have banned endosulfan.

 

Endosulfan is an organochlorine insecticide that was first registered for use in the U.S. in the 1950s. It is an endocrine disruptor and exposure in male children may delay sexual maturity and interfere with sex hormone synthesis. Endosulfan also decreases semen quality, sperm count, spermatogonial cells, and sperm morphology, and contributes to other defects in male sex hormones. It is volatile, persistent, and has a high potential to bio-accumulate in aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Two-headed bass, for example, were found in the Noosa River resulting from surrounding pesticide drift from neighboring farms in Queensland, Australia. The pesticides, endosulfan and carbendazim, were implicated in the contamination of the river, which has yielded thousands of chronically deformed fish.

In December 2009, the Stockholm Convention Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC) recommended that urgent “global action” was needed to address health and environmental impacts of the toxic pesticide. Scientific experts at the POPRC concluded that endosulfan is likely to cause significant adverse human health and environmental effects as a result of the chemical’s medium- and long-range transport on a global scale and subsequent accumulation in nearly all environmental media.

In June, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it would take action to end all uses of the insecticide endosulfan, deciding that new data presented to the agency in response to its 2002 Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED), which shows that risks faced by workers are greater than previously known. In completing revised assessments, EPA concluded that endosulfan’s significant risks to wildlife and agricultural workers outweigh its limited benefits to growers and consumers. EPA also found that there are risks above the agency’s level of concern to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife, as well as to birds and mammals that consume aquatic prey which have ingested endosulfan.

EPA’s decision followed a lawsuit that was filed on behalf of environmental and farmworker groups, including Beyond Pesticides, on July 24, 2008. The suit cited a glaring omission in the EPA’s decision in its failure to consider risks to children: a 2007 study found that children exposed to endosulfan in the first trimester of pregnancy had a significantly greater risk for developing autism spectrum disorders. It also poses risks to school children in agricultural communities where it has been detected at unsafe levels in the air. In addition, endosulfan has been found in food supplies, drinking water, and in the tissues and breast milk of pregnant mothers.

According to APVMA, endosulfan will be discussed in October 2010 at a scientific advisory meeting of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. This meeting will determine whether to recommend to the Conference of the Parties meeting in April 2011 to globally ban or restrict endosulfan. For more information on APVMA’s decision, see the agency’s Chemicals in the News page.

* * *  

Source: BeyondPesticides.org