skip to Main Content

Bibliography Tag: policy and politics

EPA, 1999d

Environmental Protection Agency, “Reassessed Group 3 Tolerances By Pesticide,” 1999.

ABSTRACT:

Lists the tolerances for multiple pesticides that were re-assessed between 1997-1999, including glyphosate.  FULL TEXT

EPA, 1992a

Code of Federal Regulations, “Pesticide Tolerances and Food and Feed Additive Regulations for Glyphosate” (Summary), 40 CFR §§ 180-186, 1992

ABSTRACT:

SUMMARY: This document establishes tolerances and food and feed additive regulations for the combined residues of the herbicide glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) and its metabolite aminomethyl phosphonic acid. The specific proposals are: an amended tolerance in or on the raw agricultural commodities (RACs) soybeans from 6 parts per million (ppm) to 20 ppm; a tolerance on soybean straw at 20 ppm; a food additive regulation proposing increases in tolerances for the processed human food instant tea from 4.0 ppm to 7.0 ppm; a feed additive regulation for citrus molasses at 1 ppm; and amended feed additive tolerances for dried citrus pulp from 0.4 ppm to 1 ppm and soybean hulls from 20 ppm to 100 ppm. These regulations were requested by the Monsanto Co. and would establish the maximum permissible residues of the herbicide in or on these RACs, this processed human food, and these animal feed commodities.  FULL TEXT

 

Schafer et al., 2004

Kristin S. Schafer, Margaret Reeves, Skip Spitzer, Susan E. Kegley, “Chemical Trespass: Pesticides in Our Bodies and Corporate Accountability,” Report by the Pesticide Action Network North America, May 2004.

ABSTRACT:

Not Available

FULL TEXT

EPA, 2016

Code of Federal Regulations, “Glyphosate; tolerances for residues,” 40 CFR § 180.364, 2016.

ABSTRACT:

Tolerances are established for residues of glyphosate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities listed below resulting from the application of glyphosate, the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, the dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the potassium salt of glyphosate. Compliance with the following tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine).

FULL TEXT

Reigart and Roberts, 2013

Reigart, Routt, Roberts, James,  “Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisoning,” US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, 2013, Sixth Edition.

ABSTRACT:

Not Available

FULL TEXT

Reigart and Roberts, 2001

Reigart, Routt, Roberts, James, “Pesticides in Children,” Pediatric Clinics of North America, 2001, 48:5, DOI: 10.1016/S0031-3955(05)70368-0.

ABSTRACT:

The term pesticide includes various agents devised to control a wide range of pests. Although the public perception of pesticides is often that pesticide is synonymous with insecticide, most pesticide usage and much acute and chronic toxicity from pesticides are not related to insecticidal agents. Other important classes of pesticide agents are herbicides (for plants), fungicides (for fungi), nematocides (for nematodes), and rodenticides (for rodents). An additional important class is the fumigants, highly toxic volatile agents or gases that are used as broad-spectrum killing agents for many forms of plant and animal life. Although most pesticide agents are synthetic chemical toxicants, a significant and increasing proportion are biologic agents, such as Bacillus thuringiensis, a microbial insecticide. In addition, sulfur and other elemental chemicals have been used as pest-control agents but usually are not considered as “conventional” pesticides.

The most recent (1997) US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimate of pesticide usage in the United States was 443 million kg (975 million lb) of active ingredient.3 Of this enormous total, approximately 66% were herbicides and fungicides, which tend to have low acute toxicity in humans but may be persistent in the environment and in the human body. Some of these agents, including, for instance, vinclozolin, a fungicide, and atrazine, an herbicide, also are thought to be endocrine disruptor agents.

Children in the United States and elsewhere are exposed to enormous quantities of pesticides of various types, by multiple routes. Although some of this exposure is by ingestion of food and water—routes that are considered by the public to be primary—much exposure occurs in homes, gardens, and schools. A total of 34.5 million kg (76 million lb) of active pesticide ingredients were used in home and garden settings in this survey. Approximately 75% of home and garden pesticides are herbicides and fungicides, and approximately 22% are insecticides. The insecticides most used in homes and gardens are diazinon and chlorpyrifos, both organophosphates, and carbaryl, an anticholinesterase carbamate. Recent decisions by the EPA to remove the approval for usage of diazinon and chlorpyrifos in homes and gardens is likely to cause a significant shift in patterns of insecticide usage. It is likely that there will be significant increases in the use of pyrethroid compounds, requiring more intense evaluation of the risks of these compounds to infants and children.

Although there is considerable public concern over pesticide usage and exposure, the quantity of pesticides used each year has remained relatively constant over the past 20 years. The concerns shared by the public, environmental activists, and many scientists have not resulted in appreciable decreases in usage of pesticides or in children’s exposure to pesticides.

In considering pediatric pesticide effects, it is essential to attend to issues of exposure and effect. Because children differ from adults in behavior, physiology, and physical configuration, their patterns of exposure are dramatically different. Likewise, differences in the biology of children, particularly as related to developmental effects, result in quantitatively and qualitatively different responses to pesticide exposure. In the case of children, a further important complication is the need to assess the risks for subclinical effects that may lead to lifetime morbidity. This morbidity may occur in the absence of the acute poisoning symptoms that often have dominated the consideration of pesticide effects on children.

Laborde et al., 2015

Laborde A, Tomasina F, Bianchi F, Bruné MN, Buka I, Comba P, Corra L, Cori L, Duffert CM, Harari R, Iavarone I, McDiarmid MA, Gray KA, Sly PD, Soares A, Suk WA, Landrigan PJ, “Children’s Health in Latin America: The Influence of Environmental Exposures,” Environmental Health Perspectives,  2015 Mar; 123(3), DOI: 10.1289/EHP.1408292.

ABSTRACT:

BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases are increasing among children in Latin America.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: To examine environmental risk factors for chronic disease in Latin American children and to develop a strategic initiative for control of these exposures, the World Health Organization (WHO) including the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Collegium Ramazzini, and Latin American scientists reviewed regional and relevant global data.

RESULTS: Industrial development and urbanization are proceeding rapidly in Latin America, and environmental pollution has become widespread. Environmental threats to children’s health include traditional hazards such as indoor air pollution and drinking-water contamination; the newer hazards of urban air pollution; toxic chemicals such as lead, asbestos, mercury, arsenic, and pesticides; hazardous and electronic waste; and climate change. The mix of traditional and modern hazards varies greatly across and within countries reflecting industrialization, urbanization, and socioeconomic forces.

CONCLUSIONS: To control environmental threats to children’s health in Latin America, WHO, including PAHO, will focus on the most highly prevalent and serious hazards—indoor and outdoor air pollution, water pollution, and toxic chemicals. Strategies for controlling these hazards include developing tracking data on regional trends in children’s environmental health (CEH), building a network of Collaborating Centres, promoting biomedical research in CEH, building regional capacity, supporting development of evidence-based prevention policies, studying the economic costs of chronic diseases in children, and developing platforms for dialogue with relevant stakeholders.  FULL TEXT

 

Jackson et al., 2009

Jackson RJ, Minjares R, Naumoff KS, Patel BS, Martin LK, “Agriculture Policy is Health Policy,” Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition,  2009; 4(3): 393-408, DOI: 10.1080/19320240903321367.

ABSTRACT:

The Farm Bill is meant to supplement and secure farm incomes, ensure a stable food supply, and support the American farm economy. Over time, however, it has evolved into a system that creates substantial health impacts, both directly and indirectly. By generating more profit for food producers and less for family farmers; by effectively subsidizing the production of lower-cost fats, sugars, and oils that intensify the health-destroying obesity epidemic; by amplifying environmentally destructive agricultural practices that impact air, water, and other resources, the Farm Bill influences the health of Americans more than is immediately apparent. In this article, we outline three major public health issues influenced by American farm policy. These are (1) rising obesity; (2) food safety; and (3) environmental health impacts, especially exposure to toxic substances and pesticides.   FULL TEXT

Benbrook, 2016c

John Peterson Myers, Michael N. Antoniou, Bruce Blumberg, Lynn Carroll, Theo Colborn, Lorne G. Everett, Michael Hansen, Philip J. Landrigan, Bruce P. Lanphear, Robin Mesnage, Laura N. Vandenberg, Frederick S. vom Saal, Wade V. Welshons and Charles M. Benbrook. “Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement,” Environmental Health, 2016, 15:19, DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0117-0.

ABSTRACT:

The broad-spectrum herbicide glyphosate (common trade name “Roundup”) was first sold to farmers in 1974. Since the late 1970s, the volume of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) applied has increased approximately 100-fold. Further increases in the volume applied are likely due to more and higher rates of application in response to the widespread emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds and new, pre-harvest, dessicant use patterns. GBHs were developed to replace or reduce reliance on herbicides causing well-documented problems associated with drift and crop damage, slipping efficacy, and human health risks. Initial industry toxicity testing suggested that GBHs posed relatively low risks to non-target species, including mammals, leading regulatory authorities worldwide to set high acceptable exposure limits. To accommodate changes in GBH use patterns associated with genetically engineered, herbicide-tolerant crops, regulators have dramatically increased tolerance levels in maize, oilseed (soybeans and canola), and alfalfa crops and related livestock feeds. Animal and epidemiology studies published in the last decade, however, point to the need for a fresh look at glyphosate toxicity. Furthermore, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer recently concluded that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” In response to changing GBH use patterns and advances in scientific understanding of their potential hazards, we have produced a Statement of Concern drawing on emerging science relevant to the safety of GBHs. Our Statement of Concern considers current published literature describing GBH uses, mechanisms of action, toxicity in laboratory animals, and epidemiological studies. It also examines the derivation of current human safety standards. We conclude that: (1) GBHs are the most heavily applied herbicide in the world and usage continues to rise; (2) Worldwide, GBHs often contaminate drinking water sources, precipitation, and air, especially in agricultural regions; (3) The half-life of glyphosate in water and soil is longer than previously recognized; (4) Glyphosate and its metabolites are widely present in the global soybean supply; (5) Human exposures to GBHs are rising; (6) Glyphosate is now authoritatively classified as a probable human carcinogen; (7) Regulatory estimates of tolerable daily intakes for glyphosate in the United States and European Union are based on outdated science. We offer a series of recommendations related to the need for new investments in epidemiological studies, biomonitoring, and toxicology studies that draw on the principles of endocrinology to determine whether the effects of GBHs are due to endocrine disrupting activities. We suggest that common commercial formulations of GBHs should be prioritized for inclusion in government-led toxicology testing programs such as the U.S. National Toxicology Program, as well as for biomonitoring as conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  FULL TEXT

Back To Top