Tag Archives: pesticides

Monsanto tastes defeat

Tom Philpott, Grist.Org, May 8, 2007
Monsanto has barreled its way toward dominance over the global seed market with strong-arm tactics and friends in high places.
As evidence of the former, the roguish company once threatened to sue me — then a neophyte blogger with 30 readers — on the most trivial grounds possible. As for the latter, software monopolist Bill Gates, evidently impressed with the way Monsanto tosses around its market girth, has tapped a former Monsanto exec to help lead his foundation’s “Green Revolution” in Africa.
The company wins plenty of battles, but it loses sometimes, too. In fact, it suffered two bitter defeats last week.

No GMO alfalfa for you

Last Thursday, a U.S. district judge upheld a ban on new plantings of a genetically modified alfalfa variety that’s designed to withstand copious lashings of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide.
Alfalfa is grown nationwide as a perennial fodder crop for livestock. If so-called Roundup Ready alfalfa becomes ubiquitous, farmers would be encouraged to dump huge quantities of Roundup on pastures — a direct attack on plant biodiversity. Worse, it could create “superweeds” resistant to Roundup — at best conjuring up the need for a new and even more fierce herbicide than Roundup, at worst creating an invasive weed that could take over pastures and other fields.
The decision delivers a firm rebuke to the USDA and its matador style of vetting applications for new GMO seed varieties. According to Reuters, the same judge responsible for Thursday’s ruling:
… had issued a preliminary injunction in March, ruling U.S. regulators improperly allowed the commercialization of the biotech alfalfa without a thorough examination of its effects. That marked the first time a federal court overturned USDA approval of a biotech seed and halted planting, according to the Center for Food Safety.
Meanwhile, over in Europe, Monsanto was getting clobbered by a Munich judge, who struck down the giant’s continent-wide patent on GM soybeans.
Hope Shand of the formidable ETC Group previewed the case on Gristmill last week.
It’s worth reading ETC’s report on the ruling in its entirety. The group says that although the patent was due to expire soon anyway, the rejection forms a useful precedent in fighting the seed giant’s attempts to declare ownership over huge swaths of the world’s agricultural genetic heritage.
On Wall Street, Monsanto’s share price has managed to shake off these setbacks, continuing its meteoric rise.
Why? These defeats are puny compared to the company’s long string of easy regulatory victories. Roundup Ready alfalfa may be out of commission for a while — though Reuters reports that 220,000 acres of it have already been planted — but Roundup Ready corn and soy are rampant in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere, and the biofuel craze is only ramping up demand. Continue reading Monsanto tastes defeat

Spray fight hits home: Plantation workers in Nicaragua to get day in U.S. court for pesticide they say ruined their health

LETTA TAYLER, NEWSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2006
For years, Francisco Antenor drove his tractor past the banana plantations of this tropical village as they were sprayed with pesticide. Droplets fell like dew on his copper-hued skin, which is now spotted like a Dalmatian’s.
Continue reading Spray fight hits home: Plantation workers in Nicaragua to get day in U.S. court for pesticide they say ruined their health

Thousands in human chain protests at Coke, Pepsi plants in India

MANDIDEEP, BHOPAL (AFP) Jan 20, 2005

Thousands of students and farmers on Thursday surrounded Pepsi and Coca-Cola factories in a “Quit India” campaign, accusing the US giants of selling soft drinks laced with pesticides.

They lined up shoulder-to-shoulder in a five-kilometre (three-mile) chain around a Pepsi bottling plant at this central Indian township, an AFP correspondent reported.

The Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology (RFSTE), which organised the protests, said nearly 100,000 people targeted more than 80 soft drink plants across India.

Villagers and onlookers joined in at Mandideep as several thousand protestors carried banners demanding the closure of both companies in India.

“The factories must close down as they are not only are guilty of uncertain standards in their drinks but they are also depleting groundwater,” said protester Vinay Sagar.

“We are very worried by the continuous degradation which the company has caused to the groundwater in the region,” said Sagar, saying Pepsi daily extracts 200,000 litres (40,000 gallons) of ground water from the parched region.

Mandideep is some 20 kilometres (12 miles) from the central Indian city of Bhopal, which 20 years ago was devastated by the world’s deadliest industrial disaster when toxic gas leaked from a Union Carbide pesticides plant killing thousands.

Most of the protestors then moved to Pilukhedi, some 40 kilometresmiles) the other side of Bhopal, where they surrounded a Coca-Cola factory — one of the biggest bottling plants in the country.

RFSTE reported similar protests at Pepsi and Coke plants in cities such as Bombay, capital of western Maharastra state, But a Pepsi spokeswoman said about 20 schoolchildren turned up at one of the company’s 37 plants in western India.

In December the Supreme Court upheld a lower court judgement ordering Pepsi and Coca-Cola to print warnings on their bottles in India that the drinks may contain pesticide residues.

The US firms deny their drinks pose health hazards.

The cola rivals, which account for 99 percent of India’s huge soft drinks market, have joined forces in the two-year legal battle that rumbles on.

Their lawyers said use of pesticides in agriculture resulted in trace residues in sugar.

The US drinks manufacturers are not only under fire over pesticide residues but also over allegations they are draining areas of groundwater.

Attempts to close a Coca-Cola plant in drought-hit Plachimada village in southern Kerala state have become an environmental cause celebre.

Environmentalists charge it is extracting groundwater and parching the region where farmers have been badly hit, but the companies say they use a miniscule amount of water.

The “Quit India” slogan used by the environmentalists was coined by Mahatma Gandhi in 1942 during the struggle against British colonial rule.

Dec 3rd is ‘No Pesticides Day’: PAN calls for Paraquat ban

STOP Paraquat! On the occasion of global “No Pesticides Use Day” this December 3, the international Pesticide Action Network (PAN) calls for the global ban and phase out of the production and use of paraquat, one of the most dangerous and controversial herbicides in the world.

The international Pesticide Action-Network launched December 3 as the global “No Pesticides Use Day“ in commemoration of the world’s worst chemical disaster in 1984. Every year on December 3 campaigns are initiated in many countries to remind of the hazardous effects of pesticides on human health and environment.

This year, PAN AP and several partners are undertaking activities on December 3 to commemorate the Bhopal tragedy,and these are in solidarity with the BHOPAL DAY OF ACTION AGAINST CORPORATE CRIME.

PIC1

Joint PAN Press Release
December 2, 2003

STOP Paraquat!
On the occasion of global “No Pesticides Use Day” this December 3, the international Pesticide Action Network (PAN) calls for the global ban and phase out of the production and use of paraquat, one of the most dangerous and controversial herbicides in the world.

The non-selective herbicide paraquat is sold by Syngenta and other producers in more than 100 countries. Gramoxone(TN), manufactured by Syngenta, is the most common trade name for paraquat. Paraquat is extensively used on bananas, cocoa, coffee, cotton, palm oil, pineapple, rubber and sugar cane, both on plantations and by small-scale farmers.

Paraquat has been heavily criticized for the adverse impacts on workers since the 1960s. Globally, workers and farmers, who are regularly exposed to paraquat experience serious problems with their health. Paraquat is an extremely hazardous substance: it has been known to damage the lungs, heart, kidneys, adrenal glands, central nervous system, liver, muscles and spleen, causing multi-organ failure. The herbicide causes severe acute and long-term health problems such as severe dermatitis, second degree burns, nosebleeds, rapid heart rate, kidney failure, and respiratory failure. Some chronic effects have also been identified: an association with developmental and reproductive effects, as well as links to skin cancer and there is mounting evidence linking it to Parkinson’s disease. The high toxicity and lack of antidote leads to serious ill health, and even death, from exposure.

Studies have also indicated that paraquat has lethal effects on hares and birds, and is embryotoxic and teratogenic to frogs. It poses a risk to non-target terrestrial and aquatic plants, and readily binds to soil particles and hence accumulates in soils.

Due to these facts the notorious occupational poison paraquat has been on the PAN international list of “Dirty Dozen“ pesticides since 1985.

Conditions of use and realities in developing countries of the South—high temperature and humidity, lack of protective clothing, leaking knapsack sprayers, illiteracy, lack of facilities for washing, or medical treatment, and repeated exposure—compounds the concern that safe use of paraquat is not possible in these countries, in spite of ‘safety’ claims by the industry.

Because of its high toxicity, paraquat is already either banned, severely restricted or restricted in fourteen countries, including five EU member states and the United States of America.

“Last year Malaysia was the first Asian country to ban and phase out the use of paraquat. To prioritise global protection of human health and the environment, a world wide ban of the toxic herbicide paraquat has to follow now“, asserts Sarojeni V. Rengam, Executive Director of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Asia and the Pacific.

Unfortunately, the EU decided in October 2003 not to ban Paraquat. The European Commission is aware of the dangers of Paraquat, but nevertheless had approved its use, ignoring growing number of member states who openly rejected an EU-wide approval of paraquat, postponing a vote at the last four committee meetings. PAN has emphasised that this controversial decision was made in the European context, and therefore cannot have any implication for other regions, especially developing countries.

On November 24, 2003, Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe, PAN Asia and the Pacific and the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, sent an official ‘Open Letter’ of protest to the European Commission, calling on the Standing Committee to take urgent action following the inclusion of paraquat to the Annex 1 of the Pesticides Authorization Directive 91/414. The Commission’s authorisation of 3 October 2003 is being used to challenge regulatory decisions taken to protect human health in other countries, and to demand registration even when local conditions will pose significant risks to pesticide users.

Due to the serious health and ecological threats from paraquat use, on the occasion of the global “No Pesticide Use Day”, December 3, the international Pesticide Action Network (PAN) demands that:

 Syngenta, the main producer of paraquat, stops the production of paraquat
 Syngenta takes full responsibility and assumes liability for the severe health effects on communities resulting from paraquat use
 The authorities in all countries ban the use of paraquat
 Paraquat be replaced with safer and more sustainable pest control methods

Note:

• For the international PAN Position Paper on paraquat please see: http://www.panap.net

It is also available here: DOC1

• To view the joint Open Letter to the European Commission see: http://www.panap.net

December 3 – Reminder of the pesticide catastrophe 1984 in Bhopal
The international Pesticide Action-Network launched December 3 as the global “No Pesticides Use Day“ in commemoration of the world’s worst chemical disaster in 1984. That day in Bhopal (India) a pesticide factory exploded, releasing a toxic gas that caused more than 500,000 injured and 20,000 deaths in the years since. Every year on December 3 campaigns are initiated in many countries to remind of the hazardous effects of pesticides on human health and environment.

This year, PAN AP and several partners are undertaking activities on December 3 to commemorate the Bhopal tragedy,and these are in solidarity with the BHOPAL DAY OF ACTION AGAINST CORPORATE CRIME also taking palce on December 3, 2003, to Take Action Against Corporate Crime on the 19th anniversary of the Bhopal disaster. For more information visit: https://www.bhopal.net or Email: globalaction@bhopal.net

For more information, contact:

PAN Africa : Abou Thiam, panafrica@pan-africa.sn, tel: 00221-825-49-14

PAN Asia – Pacific (www.panap.net ): Sarojeni Rengam, panap@panap.net, tel: 0060-4-657-0271

PAN Germany (www.pan-germany.org): Carina Weber, presse@pan-germany.org, tel: 0049-40-3991910-0

PAN Latin America – RAPAL (www.rap-al.org): Maria-Elena Rozas, rapal@rapal.cl, tel: 0056-2-3416742

PAN North America (www.panna.org): Monica Moore, panna@igc.org, tel: 001-415-981-1771

PAN UK (www.pan-uk.org): Barbara Dinham, admin@pan-uk.org, tel: 0044-207-274-88-95

"Clean is a relative word", says Indian Pepsi chief

CLEAN IS A RELATIVE WORD

By: Anil Thakraney
August 17, 2003

It’s one war they aren’t fighting with each other. PepsiCo and Coca-Cola – who between them enjoy a whopping $1.2 billion market in India, selling about 6.5 billion bottles annually – have been hit with a frightening report that questions the purity of their contents.

On one side are allegations, counter allegations, lawsuits, blinding scientific data and a plethora of confusing norms. And on the other, the enormously worried mom, whose son loads his water bottle with Pepsi.

To gauge what’s going on in this unusual cola war, let’s get up-close with Rajeev Bakshi, PepsiCo’s chairman, South Asia. Bakshi passed out from St Stephen’s in 1976, followed by IIM-B in 1979. His previous assignments have been GM – sales and marketing with Lakme, and MD, Cadbury India.

I meet the much-admired suit at his lush farmhouse in Delhi. It’s August 15. But Bakshi is seeking another form of freedom: liberation from the damning charges.

In this interview, are you representing Pepsi, or both, Coke and Pepsi?

As of now, I am speaking from the category’s point of view, but more specifically, Pepsi.

What’s the next step? Defamation case against the CSE?

We are going ahead with the process of clearing our name in a step-by-step manner. When we went to court, we made an above-board and well-intentioned plea to the judge. The plea was based on scientific grounds. We said we have been wronged… there has been a report that has been put up in the public domain, and that report has a problem. That, we are meeting the WHO standards, we are meeting the Indian law by a far margin. That, this report is alleging we are not meeting the EU standards, which is a new benchmark, and which is never measured across the world for soft drinks. Still, we said we’d contest that as well. Because we believe their testing methodology itself is faulty. That methodology is actually used for testing water, not soft drinks. And two, there are discrepancies in their report.

Except that the High Court dismissed your plea. So you must be disappointed.

No. Our first strategy was that given that there is a discrepancy, we asked the judge if this report can be suppressed. While arguing this with the judge, we withdrew that particular plea, because it was already in the public domain… the judge said it was not a key issue.

If you had to withdraw, why did you enter the plea in the first instance?

It is the way of putting the entire case in a court. Basically, our lawyers said we had to do it in three steps. One, ask to withdraw the complaint, because it’s wrong. Two, request the judge to get an independent scientific body to enquire into the issue, and then, come to a conclusion as to what this is all about. And the third step: let an independent report come out, and at that point of time, we reserve the right to press charges, or whatever else, depending on the outcome. We felt it was unwise for us to press charges upfront. Because that would have meant prejudging the entire issue.

Don’t you think asking the courts for suppression of the report is unethical? It is a public interest report, after all. Isn’t this a case of SLAPPing? (In the US, this controversial practice is termed, ‘Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation’.)

What the SLAPP says is, if anybody makes an allegation like this in America, ‘withdraw it from the public domain, have a private conversation, and then arrive at a judgement’. Since there is no law to that effect out here, we are saying, ‘the report is wrong, so can they withdraw the report itself’.

Except that the plea got dismissed. What is your next step?

As far as we are concerned, the health ministry is looking into the matter. The judge has ordered an independent evaluation. It’s not clear to me what the modus operandi of that is. So we have to wait for that to happen.

Do you believe the CSE has a hidden agenda against Coke and Pepsi?

As far as I am concerned, I am taking everything at face value. So, in public, I am not going into what their motivations could be.

Do you think if you were a desi company, this may not have happened?

My only problem as far as the CSE is concerned, is the process.

I am talking of the intent.

I cannot comment on that.

But can you rule out evil intent?

(Pause.) At this stage, I don’t know. It could be either way, but I don’t know. Once the results come out, I guess all will get cleared.

Talking of technique… during the same tests, they did also check the American samples… and they emerged fine.

Look, I am well within the law, even as per the results declared by them. I am also well within WHO standards.

The study indicates you have contamination that, for Pepsi, is as high as 35 times the EU norms.

That’s comparison with the water norms of EU. There are no standards for pesticides in soft drinks anywhere in the world. It is assumed that the water you use will have this sort of pesticides. Even if I assume that figure to be correct, though that figure has been blown out of proportion, if I tell you the number for juices, you will jump! But if you look at the norms we have been following till January 2003, which are the US standards, the WHO standards, and the BIS standards, we are well within that. Suddenly if you change the goalpost, and the reference of comparison, then you have to respond to that. I am saying, I am absolutely safe, and within the norms, even as per their report, which I am contesting.

So why aren’t you following the EU norms?

Very honestly, till January this year, we have been following the BIS norms, and the US norms, for water. Suddenly, in January, came a report from the same organisation, which said ‘these people are 1.5 times out of EU norms’. So we said, “Oh, what’s this benchmark now?” That process had not been mandated yet. Then when we tested internally, we found we anyway follow the EU norms, by default.

How can you not be aware of the EU norms… you are a global company operating across the world?

But internationally the specification is American norms, which we thought was good enough, and more than safe.

So then how come the American samples tested clean?

Clean is a relative word.

Relative? We have been given the exact degree of contamination and the names of contaminants.

Point is, you will find pesticides in 100 per cent of the products that you eat or drink. The question is, what is the safe amount?

And yours is 35 times higher!

You are saying that figure is a big deal? Let me give you other figures. In the EU, on milk, the overall pesticides standard is 7,000 times over what it is for water! And they consider this safe! So this 35 times is a marketing figure… it won’t impact your health at all. Even if you take their report to be correct, it’s one-sixth of the Indian legal norm.

Do you think it’s the fault of our water in India…. that it sucks?

I think we need to lay this water thing to rest. I have checked the raw water, across all my plants, and except for four plants, it’s within the EU standards even when it emerges from the earth. The reason could also be that we locate our plants quite carefully. Speaking in general, there is no generic data on pesticides in ground water.

Next. What percentage of Pepsi’s consumers are minors?

About 30 per cent.

Why should worried parents believe you, not CSE? What would you like to say to them?

First, the emotional reason. We have been around for many years, we operate in many countries, we have been offering quality products, so it is very difficult to imagine we’d offer substandard products. Two, even if you think that these people have done their work rightly, with honesty, and we take their figures at face value, I can tell your readers that this level of pesticides is perfectly safe. It is still not harmful. Because, if you take the EU standard for water, and compare it with the Indian standard for milk, the DDT in milk is twelve-and-a-half thousand times over the EU standard.

So if it’s okay to drink the colas, despite the CSE findings, why are you contesting their report?

Because there is a public perception that has been created, through damaging press reports, which has made us look very irresponsible. A public perception has been created that this ’35 times’ is bad, and I am saying, even if it’s correct, it’s okay. You won’t get cancer. Still, we are contesting the report, and saying we are much safer than that.

Nothing will happen to the kids over a period of time?

No way!

The big question. Suppose the study ordered by the health ministry, using the technique that you believe in, vindicates the CSE’s findings, what will you do?

(Long pause) It’s a hypothetical question. So we’ll take it as it comes. However, as far as tightening of processes goes, it’s an inward process. So if that happens, we’ll tighten our standards even more.

Next. A number of people were disappointed at yours and Sanjeev Gupta’s [boss of Coca Cola] reaction to the study. There was no show of concern at all. Rather, you were busy threatening legal action.

I didn’t talk of legal action.

Of course you did… we saw it on TV.

Sanjeev Gupta said it on his own volition, I didn’t.

Yeah, but that evening, both of you were on the same side of the fence.

We were on the same dais. And giving out own points of view.

Why didn’t you even attempt to reassure nervous parents? Promise them that you will get to the bottom of this issue.

When the water controversy broke out earlier this year, our response was precisely what you are saying. We came out with a very defensive response at that time. We said, ‘we are meeting the norms, still, let’s study this and get back to you’. We went back to the media after 15 days, and they refused to publish it. Because the story was dead by then. Now, after we’ve been had once, when our part of the story never came across, and because we were confident about our data, we went to the public with it.

People out there don’t understand tests and techniques… they are worried parents, looking for assurance.

Yeah, but 24 hours later, I would have had to come back to the same point: the data. The stance would have still been aggressive. Because the decibel level of the attack was very high. It was almost a personal attack.

Have you registered a drop in sales since August 5?

Yes, sales have been affected.

How much?

I cannot reveal the figures. (See this report.)

How did your kids react when they heard the CSE story?

(Slight pause.) They asked me if this was correct, and I said ‘no’. They believed it.

They still drink Pepsi?

The elder one drinks Diet Pepsi, the younger one is slightly more fussy.

She drinks Coke?

(Laughs.)

Rajeev has every reason to laugh. Later, at a papdi-chaat joint in Dilli’s Bengali Market, I spot a Hindu Undivided Family devouring gallons of Pepsi. I ask the patriarch if he isn’t worried. Ratan Lal Khurana says he sure is, but he can’t help it. “Ki karen. Bachiano gussa chadega.” [What to do? The kids will get angry.]

Tests show Pepsi, Coke to be contamined with poisons