Click on these links to download this fact-sheet, formatted for colour printing:
page 1 [104 Kb]    page 2 [85 kb]     (Adobe Acrobat Reader required)

Pesticides and Poisoning

Global Poisonings

It is estimated that there are 25 million cases of pesticide poisoning each year 1.  And while most pesticides are applied in developed countries, 80% of all poisonings occur in developing countries where regulatory, health, and education systems are weakest.

Tragically, a large percentage of these poisonings are completely avoidable and unnecessary from a farming point view. In fact, 25 years of research on tropical rice by national research groups and international agencies such as IRRI and FAO has proven that pesticides are often the cause of pest problems, not the solution. The pesticides most dangerous to human health are often the very chemicals that have been banned in many countries due to pest resistance and resurgence caused by their use. 

In Europe and North America, citizens are worried about minute exposures and the long term effects of residues. While this health threat deals with microscopic levels, poor farmers in Asia are literally bathing in potent cocktails of old and dangerous chemicals that are near impossible to use safely under real field conditions; while immediately suffering the signs and symptoms of poisoning. 

The most popular pesticides in Cambodian fields include Methyl-parathion, Monocrotophos, and Mevinphos: all categorized as Category Ia 'Extremely Toxic' by the WHO. Even in other countries of S.E. Asia such as Indonesia, these chemicals have been banned or severely restricted. The pesticide that Cambodian farmers and sellers deemed most popular was Methyl-parathion. In Thailand this off-patent chemical is formulated, packaged, and sold under more than 200 local brand names. Methyl-parathion is an organo-phosphate responsible for acute poisoning with direct effects upon the nervous system.

One can only surmise the long-term effects of these extremely hazardous chemicals on the health status of rural families and communities. However, the signs and symptoms of acute poisoning with organophosphates are readily apparent. A recent village level health survey of Cambodian farmers found as many as 88% reporting indications of 'mild' poisoning pesticide use 2. Signs and symptoms directly observed or reported by respondents included dizziness, headaches, shortness of breath, dry throat, red eyes, and runny nose. More disturbingly, some 35% reported episodes of vomiting, an indication of what is in occupational health terms 'moderate' acute poisoning. 'Severe' poisoning is defined as loss of consciousness, coma, or death.

A more rigorous study in Indonesia of lowland vegetable-rice farmers found that over 20 % of all spray operations resulted in pesticide poisoning as indicated by the presence of 3 or more neuro-behavioral, respiratory, and intestinal signs and symptoms associated with pesticide poisoning3. This figure denotes a major health threat and suffering on a grand scale in poor rural communities. And this despite the fact that unlike in Cambodia, very few WHO category Ia and Ib pesticides are used by Indonesian farmers due to bans and regulations.

Unsafe Handling, Storage and Disposal of Pesticide

A visit to the field in Cambodia, Indonesia, Vietnam, or other poorer countries will quickly confirm that farmers are not handling, storing, or disposing of pesticides within even minimal international standards. The application of extremely hazardous chemicals such as Methyl parathion would require face shield, respirator, full-body non-permeable cover, rubber gloves, and boots. Besides being prohibitively expensive ( a farmers' yearly income) for poor farmers, such protective gear is rarely available in rural markets. Even if available and used, such gear would be difficult to use in 30-40 degree Celsius tropical heat. Research in Indonesia also found that nearly half of all spray equipment (tanks, valves, lances) leaked: onto hands, and down necks and backs. Concentrated chemicals are most often mixed into toxic 'cocktails' with bare hands. 

The majority of pesticide users store their pesticides near cooking and living areas and often in the reach of children. 

In Cambodia only a very few of the chemicals sold have labels written in Khmer. Nearly all were labeled in Thai or Vietnamese; a clear indication of the origin of the commercial pressure.

Children and the Community

While the direct, acute, and avoidable poisoning of rural farmers is the most obvious and shocking problem caused by pesticides, the more general and long term effects upon children and the general community although less obvious, cannot be ignored. Some chemicals threaten mothers and their unborn children because of teratogenic or embryotoxic effects. Children are particularly vulnerable to pesticide exposures because of their distinctive diet and play activities. In communities where toxic chemicals are kept throughout the household and released indiscriminately into the ground, air and water, children are at serious risk. Besides field run-off into water sources, in some places toxic pesticides are even used to 'harvest' fish, further increasing the overall pesticide 'load' on the environment and increasing the risk of health problems for the community.. 

Safe Use or Hazard Reduction? 

Perhaps ironically, the same chemical industry that for decades has allowed toxic chemicals to be sold as obat ('medicine' in Indonesian) is now promoting a 'safe use' campaign. While newer and less hazardous chemicals are being developed and marketed by the industry, the extremely toxic formulations remain popular, profitable, and highly hazardous under normal conditions of use in poor rural farm communities.

The Global Crop Protection Federation launched the Global Safe Use Campaign in 1991. Training includes protective clothing, 'safe' ways to dispose of bottles, prevention and treatment of poisoning. Serious questions have been raised above the need for the campaign, its efficacy and the motivation of the industry which has sponsored it 4. The campaign starts with the assumption that pesticides are needed and that if used properly, they can be safe. This approach fails to recognise some important features of agricultural reality. First, structural constraints (e.g. poverty, education) prevent poor rural communities from having access to the equipment and information necessary for 'safe use'. At present, nearly everywhere pesticides are used, they pose a risk to human health and the environment. Secondly, pesticides, besides being extremely hazardous, are NOT agronomically or economically justifiable under many prevalent conditions in tropical agriculture. In many cases in rice, pesticides, not pests, cause the problems due to resistance and resurgence. A study by the International Rice Research Institute shows that the net economic benefit of pesticides in tropical rice is negative 5. And while the lowest risk position in tropical rice production is to use no pesticides, it has also been proven that pesticide use can be reduced by over 80% from current practice in vegetables without loss in yields. 

The rational approach would call for immediate hazard reduction through greatly decreased use of all pesticides to a much lower and more agronomically sound level. Subsequently consumers, governments, farmers, and supporting institutions and if possible industry can work to also remove the older, most toxic chemicals which put both crops and people at risk.

Farmers and IPM proponents cannot do this work alone. The unacceptable levels of risk to crops, to the environment, to consumers, and to rural communities must be recognised by broader society, hence allowing a concerted program of regulatory enforcement, consumer pressure, public awareness, and training programs in ecologically sound agriculture for farmers to be pursued. 

"It is not my contention that chemicals never be used. I do contend that we have put poisonous and biologically potent chemicals in the hands of persons largely or wholly ignorant of their potential harm" (Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, 1964)

Further Information

Web Sites

Pesticide Action Network, Asia & Pacific: www.panap.net/index.cfm 

International Chemical Safety Cards, such as the card for Methyl-Parathion which is quoted above, have been prepared as a joint project of 3 UN agencies (WHO, ILO and UNEP).  The cards can be seen at this address: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ipcs

See the Toxic Trail resources page for more websites which have useful information about pesticides and health. 

Sample Documents

Click the titles to download these documents.   

Contacts

Helen Murphy, Community Health Consultant: hmurf@attglobal.net

Pesticide Action Network, Asia & Pacific: panap@panap.po.my