Endosulfan: Safe on Human Beings

Endosulfan has been certified by World Health Organisation (Switzerland) and Food & Agriculture Organisation (Italy) to not cause cancer, birth defects, or any hormonal imbalance on contact.

It is also the opinion of the United Nations Environment Programme, International Labour Organisation, Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority and the US Environmental Protection Agency and California Department of Pesticide Registration, that Endosulfan has no carcinogenic potential.

The pesticide does not persist in the environment, and its degeneration is faster in tropical and sub-tropical climates. It degenerates from consumption by micro-organisms in soil, in sunlight, as well as in water. It is unlikely to persist in the human body as it is continually degraded by metabolism to a lesser state of hazard.

New Zealand Food Safety Authority noted on its website, “Endosulfan has shown no potential to accumulate over time in animals. It is more water soluble than other organo-chlorines… and is less persistent in the body because it metabolises quickly. The chemical is extremely unlikely to have an effect in humans at any level of intake that is likely to occur through food residues.” Endosulfan was even introduced in USA for veterinary purposes in 2006 to stop parasite problems in cattle bred for meat and milk.

A study was conducted in Kasargod, Kerala by the Fredrick Institute of Plant Protection and Toxicology (FIPPAT) of Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu in 2001. Mr Pradeep Dave, President, Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India announced the finding that except for marginal deposition in soil (0.001–0.012 mcg/gm) and leaf (0.040–2.893 mcg/gm), no residue was found in samples of human blood, cow milk, fish or water. 112 samples of residents from the age group of 3–70 years were collected along with 90 leaf, soil and water samples, and transported to the FIPPAT facility under strict supervision. The residue estimation was conducted as per Good Laboratory Practices.

In a study conducted by TS Kathpal of the Haryana Agricultural University, India, it was found that Endosulfan dissipates in soil to an extent of 92–97 per cent during the first four weeks after its application (Pesticide Science, 1997, 50 21-27). Endosulfan degrades rather faster in tropical and subtropical environment. It degrades through consumption by micro-organisms present in soil, chemical breakdown under the impact of sunlight (photolysis) and chemical reaction with water (hydrolysis).

According to a ‘Pesticide Information Project’ of Cornell University, Michigan State University, Oregon State University and University of California at Davis, transport of Endosulfan is most likely to occur if it is attached to soil particles in surface runoff. However, it is not expected to pose a threat to groundwater. Their study also revealed that in raw river water at room temperature exposed to light, both of Endosulfan’s isomers disappeared in four weeks.

Source: http://whybanendosulfan.org/human-health.htm

Trade body opposes ban on Endosulfan

The killer pesticide Endosulfan is in news again. With `1,300-crore market in the country, Endosulfan has been facing the wrath of environmentalists and NGOs who are demanding a ban on the pesticide. But a trade body representing pesticide manufacturers has opposed the ban, saying the chemical was not responsible for the deaths it is accused of.

The Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) on Friday said Endosulfan was not responsible for the deaths and sufferings of people in Kerala’s Kasaragod. Talking to the media here, president of PMFAI Pradeep Dave alleged the environmental groups campaigning against Endosulfan were funded by the multinationals in Europe who wanted to ensure a ban on the affordable and generic pesticide to push their patented and expensive alternatives.

However, he said several expert committees were set up by the Union Government and all of them concluded that there was ‘no link established’ between Endosulfan and the alleged reports of health problems in Kasargod. Dave blamed the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) study, which was the root cause of demand for ban on Endosulfan, but it contained “unscientific and implausible” aspects.

He said, “Endosulfan was cheap at `250 a litre compared to the cost of patented alternatives that ranged from `2,000 to `8,000 a litre.”

However, India produces over 80 per cent of global production and uses 12 million litre of this pesticide. It also exported 18 million litres of this pesticide last year.

In a related development, MP and environmentalist Maneka Gandhi has urged all the State Governments to ban the pesticide. She said recently at Hubli that the use of Endosulfan has proved fatal in many cases. “It is causing huge damage to soil fertility and crops, besides severely affecting the health of people who consume crops sprayed with endosulfan,” she remarked.

SK Handa, fellow of National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, said as per international norms prescribed by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), it was mandatory for residues to be reported as identified only after performing ‘confirmatory test of each sample’.

“Endosulfan cannot be blamed for diseases in Kerala. It is due to other reasons. Genetic variations in certain groups of people in Kerala could be responsible for these diseases. There are such health problems reported in other parts of Kerala where Endosulfan is not used,'” he claimed.

However, R Hariharan, chairman of Washington-based International Stewardship Centre, said the proposed listing of Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP) was to serve European trade interest. “If generics are banned through regulatory mechanisms it becomes easier for patented molecules to expand their market share. These contentions are being exploited by the vested interest,” he alleged. 

NIOH failed to verify the final analysis of Endosulfan residues

PMFAI defends Indian government’s position on Endosulfan

At a media briefing held by the PMFAI, speakers questioned the flawed study conducted and published by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad. The study titled “The Final Report of the investigation of unusual illness allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre Village of Kasargod district (N. Kerala)”, has been the root cause for the demand for a ban on the pesticide Endosulfan.  An expert panel examined the unscientific and implausible aspects of the NIOH’s study. The flaws have been exposed through the RTI query and the masked raw data evoked public outrage when ten thousand people drew a rally in Gujarat seeking withdrawal of the flawed report. Over thousand workers in Kochi held a rally recently to seek justice for the unfairly stigmatized staff at the government run HIL plant in Kerala.

As per the international norms prescribed by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), it is mandatory for residues to be reported as identified only after performing “confirmatory test” of each sample. “Different chemicals may appear in the same peak due to similar retention time leading to wrong reporting. However, in the NIOH study in Padre Village in Kerala no confirmatory data was generated, thus NIOH report on Endosulfan is incorrect and misleading. No decisions can be taken based on this report.” said Dr S K Handa. He further added “since there was no confirmation referring to presence of Endosulfan in the report made by scientists at NIOH, Endosulfan cannot be blamed for diseases in Kerala.”    Dr. S K Handa pointed out that Endosulfan is a safe molecule and as per World Health Organisation (WHO) and does not possess properties to cause cancer or diseases as reported in Kasargod, Kerala. Dr Handa is a Fellow of National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, has over 35 years of research experience in pesticide residues and was former WHO consultant, Ministry of Health, Government of India. He was All India Coordinator for pesticide residues, has authored several books on pesticide residue analysis and has published 120 research papers.

Mr. Pradip Dave, President, Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) indicated that several expert committees were set up by the Government of India and all of them concluded that there is no link established between Endosulfan and the alleged reports of health problems in Kasargod, Kerala. He added, “Even Government of Karnataka constituted an expert committee of very senior scientists. A detailed report was submitted in October 2004 stating that the use of Endosulfan was not responsible for the reported health problems. The report was table in the Karnataka Assembly on April 14, 2005 and accepted.”

Based on a proposal by the European Union, Endosulfan is being considered at the Stockholm Convention, to be listed as a Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP). India has rejected listing of Endosulfan as a POP due to lapse in proceedings, gaps in scientific data and lack of transparency which have been observed, reported and protested by India and other member countries. Endosulfan was invented in Europe and was manufactured and used across the entire region for over 55 years.

Clarifying the status of Endosulfan in USA, Mr. Charles Hanson – Executive Director, International Stewardship Centre clarified that “Endosulfan is not banned in the USA. It was a voluntary withdrawal by the manufacturer and sole registrants and a fall out of a congressional mandate to conduct cost prohibitive product testing for over 64 chemicals, one of which is Endosulfan. Citing small user market in USA, huge investment in research, mounting pressure and uncertainty at the international conventions, the manufacturer chose to avoid any further studies and opted for a voluntary withdrawal of Endosulfan.” There is concern amongst the farmers as USA has not found alternatives for all uses of Endosulfan. While various alternatives have been suggested as a possible replacement, many of these are known carcinogens, toxic to pollinators such as honey bees and are banned in countries like Germany and France.

European Union's strategy in banning Endosulfan

European Union had produced and used Endsoulfan for 55 years until they discontinued it due to low profitability. In order to replace the undisputed demand in the global endosulfan markets with their patented products, they played up a strategy which even went to the extent of creating fradulent scientific studies to funding NGO's to create noise against endosulfan.
It's high time we raise our voice against the super powers and prove the power of truth!
http://www.whybanendosulfan.org/