PAARL POST

Following an article that appeared in The Paarl Post of  26 November 2009 ( see on right hand side), Tatib had the following to say :

We refer to your article titled "Hay Fever Blues" as published in Paarl Post on 26 November 2009, and comment as follows :-

It is a well documented fact that exposure to pesticides causes "hay fever" symptoms - upper respiratory tract irritation / infection, sinus problems, asthma to name but a few.
Exposure to pesticides may also cause more serious problems like central nervous system damage, respiratory problems and even cancer.
It is unlawful, as per Act 36 of 1947, to spray your vineyards in such a way that spray drift ( of pesticides) is allowed to be blown into the residential areas.
The medical effects of unlawful spray drift have been well documented in the Western Cape and internationally.
Many of the pesticides that are used on the vineyards ( in Paarl , Stellenbosch, Franschhoek etc) have been banned in over 62 countries as they are considered to be highly toxic - yet in South Africa ( which is a 3rd World Country) they are still in use.
Every citizen has the right to live in an environment that is not harmful to his/her health and well being - this is enshrined in The Constitution.
Your reporter seems to feel "that this is a small price to pay for living in this magnificent valley". This statement is highly irresponsible and is an indication of the attitude that seems to be so prevalent. ie you either allow us to poison you with pesticides or you move back to Cape Town. Yes Paarl is beautiful and the vineyards do add to this beauty. But there should never be an attitude along the lines as people need to pay this small price . One cannot and should not peg a price on ones health, especially when it has been medically proven ( the research is there) that exposure to agricultural pesticides causes far more serious illnesses than "Hay Fever ".

If you would like more information and would like to engage in responsible reporting, then we suggest that you contact us and we will prepare a formal press release in which all the facts are clearly placed before you, so that you can enlighten your readers as to the dangers posed by the pesticides sprayed on the adjacent vineyards and then also their constitutional rights. Several doctors & medical practitioners actually attended TATIB's meeting and they too have confirmed that they have a large number of patients suffering from exposure to pesticides. You are sitting on a ticking time bomb. You need to alert your local Municipality for the sake of all your health, especially your children.

regards
Tatib Foundation

On 12 December, Tatib received an email from a Malcolm Gordon as follows :-

Pesticides can cause hay fever Paarl Post 10-12-2009
Can you provide me with any more information relating to your organisation and the abovementioned article.
 Thank you,

Malcolm Gordon

We replied to Malcolm and forwarded to him details of our launch , attaching "What's your Poison" to the email.  We never received a response from Malcolm, nor a request for further information.


On 14 January 2010, Paarl Post published the following letter :

Pesticide harmful or not?
 2010-01-14


I REFER to the letter from TATIB “Pesticides can cause hay fever” and the article “Hay fever blues”.

Every year around Spring time, reports surface about hay fever occurring amongst people staying in agricultural communities. These symptoms are often blamed on the application of pesticides.

At this time many grasses and other plants are flowering and the pollen generated, I would suggest, would be more likely to cause some of the symptoms such as hay fever, upper respiratory tract irritation, sinus problems and asthma mentioned by TATIB.

The Nocebo effect (cf Placebo) should also be considered. This effect manifests when a subject has a pessimistic belief and expectation that an inert substance will cause harmful consequences and results in the subject believing he or she is adversely affected.

I firmly believe that we need watchdog bodies in society who keep a critical eye open on all matters that could affect our health and well-being and who prevent unwanted practises going unseen in our communities. However, it is not helpful when sweeping statements are made by those seeking attention for their cause.

The suggestion that the application of pesticides in our farming areas will cause “central nervous system damage, respiratory problems and even cancer” is untrue and irresponsible.

The statement “Many of the pesticides that are used on the vineyards in places like Paarl, Stellenbosch, and Franschhoek have been banned in other countries as they are considered to be highly toxic” is false.

Farmers who export their wine, grapes or fruit are required to follow pest control programmes which are very strictly monitored down to farm level by our own authorities and the countries and their supermarkets that receive these products.

Products used for crop protection are developed by responsible international companies who take great care to ensure their safety when used as prescribed.

It takes ten years from the discovery of a new chemical up to commercial use. In this time the toxicology of the product is intensively researched and studies on toxicity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity and mammalian reproduction are done.

In addition, environmental studies are undertaken to determine e.g. the effect on beneficial organisms such as bees, naturally occurring predatory insects and micro-organisms. Approximately one third of the total cost of the development of a product (±150 million 1999) is spent on toxicology and environmental studies.

At the turn of the last century, Vine Sulphur dust was found to control the devastating powdery mildew on grapes.

Used at up to 20 kilograms a hectare it was extensively used for many years in the Cape winelands. Contact with this dust can cause extreme eye irritation, burning throat and other respiratory symptoms.

We have come a long way since then and well-researched products applied at a fraction of this rate give good pest control results with minimum effect on man and his environment.

Products used in crop protection today are generally increasingly safer to humans and the environment and this should be recognised.

This increasing emphasis on safety has been driven by the manufacturers’ own conscience and an ever watchful public eye.

Malcolm Gordon

We responded via email to Malcolm, copied to the Paarl Post as follows :-

Dear Malcolm

In reaction to your letter in The Paarl Post :-

It is rather unfortunate that you have taken the approach that you have - but as the saying goes " there are none so blind as those who dont want to see"

Are you a medical practitioner or are you part of the farming  / agrochemical industry ?

We have attached the latest amendments to Act 36 of 1947 and then also details of what is sprayed on the average vineyard in the Western Cape (we have written notifications from farmers to back up the accuracy of this list ), together with a Synoptic List prepared by the LRC (UCT) after extensive research. You obviously did not take the time to read "whats your poison" which was included in the email that we sent to you after you made contact under the pretext of wanting to know more.If you do further research, you will quickly see that many of the products ( as per attached list) that are used in South Africa have indeed been banned in other countries. The reason that they have been banned is because they are dangerous to both human and environmental health. That is the reason why they have been banned.

We have also attached a few "Product Labels" which are the statutory documents that are dispatched (under act 36 of 1947) with each and every agricultural chemical that is registered for use in South Africa.  Go and take a look at the side effects ( and special warnings)  of Dichlorvos, Dicarzol & Thioflo. Thioflo, contains Endosulphan, which has been widely used in the vineyards of the Western Cape. After further research, following numerous incidents in which many people exposed to Endosluphan have died, the Manufacturers of this product have been told ( by the international agencies) to cease all manufacture of this product and to recall all stockpiles of it . Endosulphan has now, we have been told, been banned from being used  in Agriculture. Dichlorvos is an organophosphate poison, which happens also to be a known neurotoxin. It was developed during WWII as a chemical warfare agent. All 3 mentioned are classified as Class1b Highly Hazardous Compounds by both the WHO & National Dept of Agriculture ( their 1b classification is clearly printed on their product labels).  Take note of the withholding period of Dicarzol - ie how long it remains active on certain fruit after being sprayed and the clear warning that one must under no circumstances enter the vineyard within 2 days of the product being applied unless wearing protective clothing. Now what happens when this product gets blown into a residential garden or house?  We have seen several photos and videos showing spray drift blowing into the residential areas bordering vineyards and so there is no disputing the fact that spray drift does indeed occur.

The Registrar of Pesticides ( Nat Dept of Agriculture) after a recent conference-workshop in JHB between 6-8 Dec 2009, stated that pesticides are designed to kill and that changes are going to have to be made to the legislation in this country. If you would like his contact details please feel free to contact us.

To state that the "Placebo Effect"  is to blame for the high number of people suffering from pesticide related symptoms is grossly incorrect. There are many doctors and specialsts (even in Paarl) who believe that exposure to pesticides is causing health problems. Again many case studies have been done. You need to go back and do some more homework. We have attached an article written by Professor Leslie London that appeared in the Cape Times a few years ago. He has done several in depth studies on pesticide spray drift and resulting ill health.He has also written many books on the subject. We suggest that you contact him and allow him the opportunity to enlighten you further. We do not profess to be pesticide experts, nor do we profess to be medical experts - we are an organisation composed of concerned residents,parents, students & farmers. There also happen to be a number of doctors, specialists and medical practitioners as part of Tatib. There is still a lot of work to be done. We could put you in touch with many doctors/specialists in Paarl who will enlighten you to the fact that there are a large number of ill people as a result of spray drift. One of the  local doctors has stated that he regularly treats a farmer from Citrusdal, who ends up in a well known private clinic in Paarl ,with serious poisoning due to the pesticides that he sprays on his citrus orchards.

If you do some research into the "multinational chemical giants" you will soon realise that they have in many instances been fined and or found guilty after it has been shown that they have been misleading the public and or poisoning people by means of the spray drift from their products. This has been well documented and cannot be denied. The testing that they carry out is not on humans but rather on laboratory mice and rats, and more than often ( as many renowned professors will state) its more than often the cocktail of pesticides that is more harmful than the actual individual ones - which is why in the amended act there is  specific mention of  the mix /cocktail of pesticides.Also it has been proven that the so called "inert" ingredients or "carrier products" are often more toxic than the active ingredients.

Clearly the alleged "environmental studies" that you say are undertaken as part of the product development are just not good enough - if you do your research properly you will soon see that the dwindling honey bee population has been found ( and proven) to have been caused by the use of insecticides in agriculture. The persistent organic pollutants  ( like DDT, Lindane and many others) that were supposedly tried and tested and found to be safe for use and harmless to the environment, have now been found to be so toxic that they have been banned worldwide, and furthermore that they never break down ( hence the term Persistent Organic Pollutants) in the environment.

Vine Sulphur Dust - is still used in the vineyards to combat various fungal infections, and its used at a rate of a lot more than 20kg per hectare (we have been told)  - and according to the manufacturers, its totally harmless - this in contradiction to your statement that it causes extreme eye, throat and respiratory problems. Its also rated with a hazard 4 rating if our memory serves us correct.

Chlorpyriphos ( which you will probably know was used a lot in the domestic garden ) is now in the process of being banned for use ( in South Africa) in the garden, and will be severely restricted insofar its Agricultural use is concerned, because after decades of being on the market, it has been found to be extremly toxic - hence its imminent withdrawl from the South African market . Its already been banned in other countries.

Another well known product  , Dithane, used in most rose gardens (and on vineyards to control powdery mildew) , is only rated 3 on the hazard list. Yet its on a number of international carcinogen lists ( ie its been tested and studied and found to be a carcinogen). Its also on a number of endocrine disruptor and reproductive/developmental toxin lists ( again after extensive research and case studies).  Professor Leslie London, of UCT, is studying this product because it contains Manganese, which is a known Neurotoxin.

Yes, farmers who export their fruit and wine are required to, for example, be EurepGap/ GlobalGap certified. However this does not mean that when they spray they are (a) not using harmful pesticides  (b) spraying according to the law and according to product label. What EurepGap/GlobalGap looks at are the farmer's spray records so as to ensure that the proper "withholding periods" are adhered to. Now bear in mind that this is only for export produce. The Pesticide Action Network (PANNA) of Europe, tested 40 bottles of wine from across the world. According to the press release, one bottle of wine ( from Stellenbosch) was found to contain 2 toxic and banned pesticides.  In another study, done by Professor Leslie London, on the farms around Stellenbosch, large quantities of banned POPs were found - for example over 2 tonnes of DTT, Endosulphan etc.  The certification by the international bodies does NOT look at the method of application nor does it look at whether or not any innocent residents were sprayed in the process. And so for a farmer to say that he must be doing things right, as he is GlobalGap certified means nothing.

In closing however, we do agree that the chemical companies are starting to become more and more aware of the safety aspects of these products and we are happy to see that they are developing safer alternatives, largely due to the concerns raised by the public.  We firmly believe that the "precautionery principle" be applied to all chemicals - and that is that one must assume that a chemical is toxic until such time as it has been proven to be safe, and not the other way round. Too many chemicals that were considered to be safe for use, ended up being highly toxic after reasearch done years after they were released. The case studies are there. Look at DDT , Thalidomide, Lindane, Endosulphan to name but a few.

We invite you to attend the next meeting where you will be free to ask as many questions as you like.

Kind regards

Tatib

Tatib followed up with another email sent to both Malcolm & Paarl post on 16 January 2010 :-


Dear Malcolm,

Now that we know, you are Bayer's Regional Manager for Product Development, we understand your opinion  ( we "googled" you !!)

But then, Bayer of course is in the business of making money from the sale of pesticides.

Were you acting in your personal capacity when you wrote the article, or on behalf of Bayer ?

Does Bayer advertise in the Paarl Post ?

Perhaps you could confirm the accuracy of the  following  that we found via "Google "  ( and then post your reply in the Paarl Post ) :-


BAYER ORDERED TO SETTLE AFTER 24 CHILDREN DIED FROM PESTICIDES : http://www.panna.org/resources/documents/bayerSettlement20070411.dv.html


BAYER EXPOSED (HIV CONTAMINATED VACCINE)  : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg-52mHIjhs

FDA WARNS BAYER :  http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/201001121837DOWJONESDJONLINE000455_FORTUNE5.htm

BAYER URGED TO WITHDRAW  WORST PESTICIDES : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3226.html

BAYER TO STOP SELLING ENDOSULFAN:  http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3030.html   &  http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3010.html

TAKE GLUFOSINATE OFF THE MARKET IMMEDIATELY : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2785.html

BAYER ORDERED TO PAY 2 MILLION US$ COMPENSATION/DAMAGES : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3169.html

BAYER CITED FOR MIC TANK VIOLATIONS :   http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3231.html

BAYER BLAST COULD HAVE ECLIPSED BHOPAL : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2877.html

BAYER UNDER PRESSURE : 128 LAWSUITS IN THE USA : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3122.html

FDA WARNS BAYER : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3082.html

BAYER BEATEN IN COURT OVER PATENT LAW : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3038.html

BAYER BLAMED FOR BEE DEATHS :   http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2821.html &       http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2845.html

CHARGE AGAINST BAYER FOR BEE DEATHS : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2596.html

GERMANY BANS CHEMICALS LINKS TO  BEE DEVASTATION: http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2518.html

BIG WIN FOR BEES: JUDGE PULLS PESTICIDE : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3190.html

BAYER FINED 10.34 MILLION EUROS : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2521.html

BAYER AGREES TO PLEAD GUILTY AND PAYS $66 MILLION FINE : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2521.html

BAYER : TOP CORPORATE AIR POLLUTERS NAMED : http://www.cbgnetwork.org/2427.html

 There appear to be many, many more lawsuits , judgements against Bayer and the above may just the tip of the iceberg.  We cannot of course confirm that all the above are correct - we only came across these details after doing a "Google search" on "Bayer" . It does however appear that Bayer are not alone, other chemical giants (who also produce pesticides) seem to have long lists of lawsuits & judgements against them.

Perhaps this should all be published so that the public ( those being poisoned) can do their own research ?


On 27 January 2010, Tatib received a copy of a letter sent to The Paarl Post :-

The Editor
Paarl Post

Friday, 22 January 2010

Dear Sir,

Pesticide Spray practices

With reference to the letter by Malcolm Gordon, published in the Paarl Post on 14 January 2010.

Perhaps it would have been appropriate if Mr Gordon had included his title of Regional Manager for Product Development – Bayer when signing his letter. That way, readers would be able to understand his letter in the context of representing one of the larger pesticide manufacturers. A simple Google search will show the volume of pesticide related court cases his company is facing.

I make no claims of being a chemist, but surely once the chemicals are released into the atmosphere those chemicals will react to whatever is in the atmosphere?

The toxicology impact of the chemicals used in our area will no doubt be highlighted in the research project currently being conducted by Professor London of UCT.

Let’s look at a couple of simple points of law.
Irrespective of what chemicals are being used:
When spraying in the vicinity of a residential area, written notices need to be distributed to all residents within a 5km radius no less than 72 hours prior to spraying. These notices are to include a list of the chemical agents being used together with copies of their warning labels as well as information regarding action in the case of accidental exposure.
Precautions must be taken to ensure that there is no spray drift into the residential area. If wind conditions are such that spray drift (into a residential area) may occur, then spraying is prohibited.

For example, most of the vineyards in our village get sprayed using a centrifugal crop spraying trailer pumping out 8000 litres of pesticide at a nozzle speed of 600 km/h. Quite simply, this method of application ensures that spray drift into the surrounding residential properties will occur – and is therefore breaking the law.

Concerned resident 

Anonomous Complaints Forum

Following a meeting held today, at The Sustainability Institute in Stellenbosch, at which members of Tatib, concerned residents, Stellenbosch Municipality, Cape Winelands District Municipality & "The Green Scorpions" were present, a request was made that complainants ( ie those residents who have been exposed to spray drift) be given a way to complain, without their names being given.

In this regard you can either do so by emailing Tatib  : info@tatib.co.za

or post your comments in here - ie comment on this particular  topic of conversation.    All complaints will be treated confidentially and your names will NOT be disclosed to the Municipality.

THE GREEN TIMES

Links to most of the documents discussed in our blog (Whats your poison, amendements to Act 36 of 1947, representations regarding Chlorpyrifos, list of pesticides sprayed on the average vineyard in the Western Cape) can be found in the latest article on Tatib, in The Green Times .   Please go and take a look

www.thegreentimes.co.za

WHAT'S YOUR POISON

Please go and take a look at this excellent report prepared by The Environmental Justice Foundation

www.ejfoundation.org/page97.html

Also download  "END OF THE ROAD FOR ENDOSULFAN

The Green Times

The Green Times

Please go and take a look at the article that has appeared in the latest Green Times, an environmentaly conscious newspaper.

www.thegreentimes.co.za

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ACT 36 OF 1947

Following a workshop, on pesticide spray drift, held in Johannesburg on 7/8/9 December 2009 (due to the publicity generated by the Riebeek-Kasteel, Groblersdal & Stellenbosch Tatib issues), sections of Act 36 of 1947 have been amended so as to tighten up the law, giving greater protection to farm workers & adjacent residents, from spray drift and exposure to pesticides. 

The amendments, in brief, are as follows: 


1.  The pest control operator needs to be registered and have certain qualifications and has to keep strict records (for a specific period of time) of what has been sprayed and has also to spray making sure that spraying takes place according to the various stipulations as per Act 36 of 1947. 


2.  The pest control operator must issue a "treatment notice" at least 72 hours prior to application of any agricultural remedy (pesticide/fungicide/herbicide etc), and that the treatment notice needs to be given to all occupants adjacent to and within a 5 KM radius of the area to be treated. 


3.  The pest control operator is made responsible for ensuring that anyone who could be exposed to spray drift is to be notified before spraying takes place and that the Product Label is followed at all times (i.e. no spray drift into residential areas is to be allowed).


 4.   The pest control operator now has to be physically present to supervise the application of the agricultural remedies by unregistered pest control operator (s) i.e. the farm worker(s) doing the actual spraying, and that way made responsible for ensuring that spray drift out of the area being treated does not occur. 

The proposed final draft is just that (a proposal ) , and we are hoping that the Registrar  (National Department of Agriculture)  will, with further consultation, have the draft promulgated.

Cape Times 26 Nov 2009

Speech by Dr Johan Minnaar 24 November 2009

Dangers of pesticides and the effect  they have on human health

First of all I want to thank Jurgen Schirmacher,  and everyone involved for the invitation to this meeting here today. I know Jurgen since October 2006. We met after I read a newspaper report in the Sunday Times dated October 2006 with regard to pesticide poisoning in Riebeek Kasteel. We shared the same problems and the same interest, namely “pesticides”, two provinces far apart. Jurgen, South West in Riebeek Kasteel, Western Cape and myself, North East in Groblersdal, Limpopo.

Yes, 2 provinces apart not knowing each other but fighting the same problem, pesticide poisoning. To attend  this meeting here today in Stellenbosch is a big honour to both of us.

I want to introduce myself by giving you some background.

I am a medical practitioner in Groblersdal, Limpopo for the past 12 years. I saw serious illnesses like miscarriages, partial facial paralysis, cancers, ear malfunctions as well as milder poisoning symptoms, such as asthma, sinusitis, headaches, dizziness, blurred vision and depression among many of my patients. Commercial farmers are spraying large amounts of pesticides on crops in Groblersdal. Groblersdal is surrounded by farms and throughout the year there is constant crop spraying with pesticides containing organophosphate’s and carbamates.  No one has ever informed the community what pesticides are being used, even though the law states people must be notified before spraying.

I started investigating after I realized that the symptoms I had experienced over six years followed a pattern.  I experienced chronic fatigue, nausea, muscle aches and pains, skin rashes and arthritis, particularly from August till November.

I laid complaints with the registrar of the national agriculture department but was unsuccessful to get government and regulatory authorities to intervene at that stage.

The history of pesticides

In recent years, few environmental issues have aroused the concern of the public as much as pesticides, especially in relation to the health of children.

Prior to World War II, the pesticides that we use now did not yet exist. Some pesticides currently in use were in fact developed during the World War II for use in warfare. The organophosphate insecticides were developed as nerve gasses.  The phenoxy herbicides became a component of Agent Orange. After World War II these chemicals began to be used as pesticides in agricultural production.

Rachel Carson’s revolutionary book, Silent Spring, first published in 1962 (ironically enough, the year in which I was born), started the slow process of raising political and public awareness of the hazards posed to wildlife, humans and the ecosystem by the use of pesticides. This process continued with Our Stolen Future, described by then Vice-President Al Gore as the sequel to Silent Spring, which documented the health effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Since then, there have been hundreds of scientific studies done to determine if there is a relationship between pesticide use and human health problems.

Routes of Exposure

There are many sources of exposure to pesticides. The three routes of exposure for pesticides are oral ingestion, dermal absorption and inhalation. Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of pesticides. Children eat and drink more per kilogram of body weight than adults. Their skin is more permeable and their livers do not excrete as efficiently as adults’. Their hand-to-mouth behaviour increases the chance of ingestion and their dermal contact is increased because of a proportionally larger skin surface, and because they play on the ground outdoors and on the floors indoors.

Acute effects of pesticides are well documented in the literature, especially with respect to organophosphate poisoning. However, the chronic effects of pesticide exposure are much more difficult to assess. Hundreds of studies done in the past few decades have attempted to establish whether chronic exposure to pesticides has adverse effects.

Symptoms of Acute Pesticide Poisoning

These are the symptoms you are warned about on the label. Most of these illnesses are the daily flu-like or typical gastro, allergy symptoms for example headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, diarrhea, skin rashes, coughing, runny nose etc.

More severe cases develop muscle weakness, muscle twitches, change in heart rate, bronchospasm, convulsions and coma.

These are the symptoms people don’t really worry about, but what most people don’t know and don’t believe is what a low dose chronic exposure can do to human health and the environment.

Symptoms of chronic low-level exposure

Common pesticides used in homes, lawns and agriculture are now being shown in medical research to cause serious health problems years after exposure.

Even in the absence of acute poisoning, chronic exposure is associated with a broad range of non-specific symptoms, including headache, dizziness, fatigue, weakness, insomnia, confusion, as well learning and behavioral problems.  “Multi-symptom Illness” related to “Gulf War Veterans syndrome”. Memory problems, mood alterations and chronic respiratory problems.

Chronic exposure can cause neurological problems such as ADHD, Parkinson’s and autism.  Some pesticides are endocrine disrupters and some pesticides can damage or weaken the immune system, can cause birth defects and cause many types of cancer.

Piosoned Profits: The toxic assault on our children, written by Philip and Alice Schabecoff says: “Genetics loads the gun, but the environment pulls the trigger”.

Why worry about pesticides and health?

The conclusion is straightforward – exposure of the developing child to even small levels of common everyday chemicals during the critical window period of development can result in many health problems evident throughout life.

Scientific evidence increasingly points to links between the cancer epidemic and exposure to certain chemicals including pesticides.

People are daily exposed at work and at home through pesticide spraying (in agriculture, parks, open spaces, gardens, house plants, via food and in water!)

Children are especially vulnerable and the unborn child can be affected by parental exposure.

Did you know?

Many people believe that we are superior to nature, they truly believe that our health is completely unaffected by what is in the environment – no matter how toxic. This believes needs to  change.

I am standing here today because of my own experience I had due to pesticide poisoning as a result of pesticide drift. I am concerned about the effect it has on human health and the current legislation and regulations on the use of pesticides in South Africa. I would like to see a change in the SA Government’s policies on pesticide uses.

What do we want?

A safer and cleaner environment needs strong laws, especially to protect the most vulnerable groups in society such as pregnant women, children, farm workers as well as farmers.

Taking a precautionary approach, we want to see:

§         A ban on avoidable, cancer causing and neurotoxic pesticides

§         Targets to reduce the use of pesticides and eliminate or minimize exposure

§         Pesticide free areas where children can play and learn without the risk of being exposed to harmful chemicals such as parks, schools and sports grounds

§         Healthcare strategies and national cancer plans that include plans to reduce exposure

Why launch a pesticide campaign now?

New European rules on pesticides have been introduced because of concerns about serious health effects. The SA government is reluctant to act. There is a need in SA to provide information on pesticides and health issues, to give a voice to concerned citizens, cancer sufferers and their families.  There must be support to those who want to rapidly reduce their dependence on pesticides.

GE Crops & Pesticides

http://www.organic-center.org/science.pest.php?action=view&report_id=159

State of Science : Pesticides

"Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years"
November 2009

Author(s): Charles Benbrook, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist
The Organic Center
Genetically-engineered corn, soybeans, and cotton now account for the majority of acres planted to these three crops. A model was developed that utilizes official, U.S. Department of Agriculture pesticide use data to estimate the differences in the average pounds of pesticides applied on GE crop acres, compared to acres planted to conventional, non-GE varieties.


The basic finding is that compared to pesticide use in the absence of GE crops, farmers applied 318 million more pounds of pesticides over the last 13 years as a result of planting GE seeds. This difference represents an average increase of about 0.25 pound for each acre planted to a GE trait.


GE crops are pushing pesticide use upward at a rapidly accelerating pace. In 2008, GE crop acres required over 26% more pounds of pesticides per acre than acres planted to conventional varieties. The report projects that this trend will continue as a result of the rapid spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds.