Victims of Endosulfan or Imperialism?

Among the first anti-endosulfan reports was Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) report titled “End of the Road for Endosulfan” – A call for action against a dangerous pesticide, first published in 2002.

Is it a simple coincidence that it was published just a year after the European Multinational manufacturer’s decision to phase out Endosulfan?

Who were the donors for EJF? The report featured the face of an Indian girl child Shruti, a gruesome photograph of a beautiful child with deformed fingers. Soon the internet was flooded with negative reports of Endosulfan.

In 2001 Pesticides Action Network (PAN) donated US$ 3250 to Thanal, a Kerala NGO based out of Kasargod, to educate citizens on the negative effects of persistent organic pollutants on public health, the environment and local communities.

Is it a simple coincidence that this grant was given to Thanal in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

What was the source of funds of PAN? How much of their funding is from European Union? Did Thanal have the approval of regulatory authorities to officially receive funding for such purposes? Was it known to the authorities?

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), an Indian environmental NGO in a report in its magazine Down To Earth issue of February 28, 2001 titled “Children of Endosulfan” reported that “several unusual diseases afflict a Kerala village. Residents blame aerial spraying of the pesticide Endosulfan by the Plantation Corporation of Kerala”. Endosulfan has been aerially sprayed world over without any health effects.

Who would question Sunita Narain the Director of CSE? After all Sunita Narain, has been awarded the Padma Shri in 2005 by the Govt. of India for her commitment to environment protection.

Is it a simple coincidence that the CSE report was published in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Analysis of samples from Padre village from Kasaragod district of Kerala for endosulfan residues (A report by Padma S Vankar et al, for the Pesticide Residue Monitoring Study of the CSE, New Delhi, 2001). This report damned endosulfan for the problems in Kerala and was used by CSE to discredit endosulfan. This report and its conclusions were later found to be fraudulent by a peer review of expert scientists.

Is it a simple coincidence that the report by Dr Padma S Vankar was published in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) a Govt. of India health laboratory published in 2002 a report titled “Report of the investigations of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre Village, of Kasargod district (N. Kerala)”. This report was published soon after a CSE report on Endosulfan.

Although the report was published in 2002, it was only in 2010 through the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) that raw data obtained from NIOH through intervention of the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) provided conclusive evidence that the data and analysis of the report and its results were based on false readings.

Is it a simple coincidence that the NIOH report was published one year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Environmental Health Perspectives in a report in December 2003 under the section Children’s Health published a report titled “Effect of Endosulfan on Male Reproductive Development” generated by Dr Habibullah Saiyed of National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) and his team of scientists. Dr Sayed was then the Director of NIOH and the report was published early in 2003.

Is it a simple coincidence that the NIOH report of Dr Saiyed was published one year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Dr Habibullah Saiyed is now Regional Advisor Occupational Environmental and Health Sustainable Development and Healthy Environments WHO regional office.

The current Director of NIOH is Dr Nag. He has had to appear before the Central Information Commissioner who hauled the NIOH Director for refusing to provide raw data on the endosulfan study under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).

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.