 |
 |
Pesticide decision a victory for Canadians Friday, July 06, 2001 By David Suzuki Last week the Canadian Supreme Court gave all Canadians a present just in time for Canada Day. The court upheld a decision allowing the town of Hudson, Quebec, to ban the cosmetic use of pesticides and herbicides. The decision opens the doors for other municipalities across the country to consider such legislation, which would reduce our exposure to these chemicals and help build healthier communities. In the past few decades, the use of pesticides and herbicides for cosmetic purposes has become ubiquitous throughout North America. They are inexpensive, readily available, and easy to use. And because we often mix these chemicals with fertilizers, we end up using large quantities unnecessarily, spreading them over entire lawns and gardens regardless of whether or not weeds or pests are present. But our reliance on these chemicals has a downside. Approximately 7,000 different herbicide and pesticide products are currently on the market in Canada. These products contain hundreds of different active agents, a large number of which were approved before 1960 when their long-term effects were not well known. Many are potent neurological or metabolic poisons. Only a handful has been fully tested for carcinogenic or mutagenic effects. In addition to active agents, they contain some 5,000 other ingredients, some of which have also been linked to cancer and other illnesses. The pesticide industry argues that their chemicals are safe and represent little health risk. And they point out that few studies have exclusively implicated their products with illness in humans. That's partly true; the connections between pesticides and health problems in humans are not always clear cut. For example, more than 15 scientific studies have linked Parkinson's disease in people to environmental conditions such as working in the agricultural or chemical industries or living in farming communities that regularly use pesticides. But there are no definitive studies showing that any particular pesticide currently in use in Canada can actually cause Parkinson's. Proving a direct causal link between pesticides and disease in humans can be very difficult because there are so many factors involved. The amount of a pesticide, the duration of exposure, whether the pesticide was combined with other chemicals, the age of the exposed individual, and his or her genetic predisposition all play a role. But there is a great deal of evidence that many of these pesticides, either alone or in combination, are factors in many diseases, including Parkinson's, cancers such as non-Hodgkins lymphoma (which has risen by 73 percent since 1973), asthma, and others. For example, two years ago, 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). Some of these products may also be more detrimental to the health of children because of their smaller size and developing organs. A study by the Ontario College of Family Physicians last year, for example, concluded that children face undeniable risks from pesticide exposure. Humans today face a barrage of industrial chemicals, from pesticides and herbicides to motor vehicle and diesel exhaust, PCBs, cleaning agents, solvents, and more. We breathe combinations of these chemicals in the air, drink them in our water, and eat them in our food. Yet when we test them, we do it individually because studying combinations quickly escalates into an impossible number of variables. Given our valid suspicions, shouldn't the burden of proof be on the manufacturers to prove that their products are safe rather than on the public to prove that they are not? People tend to associate beautiful, lush gardens with health and vitality. But with the increasing use of pesticides, our gardens have become a paradox. They look beautiful, but they may harbor chemicals that are decidedly unhealthy. A lawn or garden does not require the constant input of herbicides and pesticides to remain beautiful. Hopefully the recent court decision will start a new trend. Copyright 2001, Environmental News Network http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/07/07062001/science_pesticide_44163.asp * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn