Endosulfan is a highly toxic, persistent pesticide used in the U.S. on tomatoes, cotton and other crops. Although it has been banned in the European Union and 20 other countries, it continues to be used in rural areas in North America, South Asia, China, and many other countries. Endosulfan was the chemical blamed for the horrendous birth defects seen in communities near cashew plantations in northern Kerala, India, where a state ban is now in effect.
In November 2007, U.S. EPA studies confirmed that endosulfan cannot be used safely in most situations for which it is currently approved. Even with the best technology and protective equipment, farmers applying endosulfan are exposed to unacceptably high levels. In 2000, EPA banned endosulfan from home and garden use and invited public comment on the future use of the pesticide. Yet, despite evidence presented by PAN, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and others, the agency refused to ban agricultural uses.
On February 19, 2008, Pesticide Action Network sent EPA a petition signed by more than 13,300 citizens calling for phasing out all remaining uses of endosulfan. The petition was also circulated by Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), Beyond Pesticides, Breast Cancer Action, Farmworker Association of Florida, Organic Consumers Association, Pesticide Education Project (North Carolina), United Farm Workers and other groups. PAN, ACAT and NRDC submitted extensive technical comments urging that registration be canceled.
Endosulfan harms the hormone system and low levels of exposure in the womb have been linked to autism and birth defects. Acute poisoning can cause a host of problems ranging from headaches to convulsions and death. ACAT Director Pam Miller points out that, because it persists in the environment, endosulfan can migrate northwards on air and ocean currents where it “threatens the health of Indigenous peoples in the Arctic region.”
“Endosulfan should be off the market,” says PAN North America Staff Scientist Karl Tupper. “Any perceived economic benefits are far outweighed by the dangers this old chemical poses to the health of workers, pesticide applicators, consumers, and the environment.” Tupper was the lead author of PAN’s technical comment letter submitted to the EPA. As the coordinator of PAN’s Drift Catcher pesticide-monitoring program, Tupper notes “recent Drift Catcher projects in Hastings, Florida, add evidence that school children and people living near fields where endosulfan is applied are exposed above levels of concern.”
Bayer Agrochemical, one of the world’s largest endosulfan producers, recently failed to renew its registration of endosulfan products in the U.S., but other companies continue to market the pesticide domestically. The chemical has been nominated for inclusion in the Stockholm Convention that bans persistent chemicals from global use.
“It is time for EPA to take the health of communities seriously and get this dangerous chemical out of U.S. agriculture,” said Medha Chandra, International Campaigner at Pesticide Action Network. EPA decisions typically are announced several months following the close of a public comment period.