India’ Food Security at Stake if Endosulfan Use Is Banned

Once again the issue of imposing a ban on use of Endosulfan has cropped up, thanks to state elections in Kerala. Thus, from an industry or scientific issue it is gaining more ground as a political issue, where facts or fundamentals have no considerations. But what is certain is that if the Government bans the use of Endosulfan in the country under political pressure, , its impact on India’s food security will be unprecedented.

With increasing population, it is becoming essential for India to keep improving the country’s agricultural production and more importantly, to protect our crops. This is the only way to feed the country of over a billion people without being totally dependant on imports. One way to achieve this is integrated crop management.

Routine crop care is an integral part of this management system.It

includes pest management through plant-protection products which are imperative for maintaining the quality of farm produce. Food crops face a threat from around 30,000 species of weeds and 3,000 species of nematodes. Along with them, there is also a danger of 10,000 species of plant-eating insects. Every year, countries lose around 20–40 per cent of potential food production to pests. This indicates that to guarantee an adequate and constant food supply, the reliance on crop-protection products is paramount.

Over the years, it has been accepted that plant protection is vital for developing countries to improve their yield and to maintain food supply to meet ever-increasing demand. Chemical crop protection is a tool to achieve this. But, very few plant protection products actually qualify for integrated crop management. Endosulfan is one such product that is not only effective in controlling pests, but also in improving the productivity of crops without being harsh on the environment.

Currently, the worldwide use of Endosulfan is estimated at around 35 million litres, which makes it one of world’s top five generic agricultural insecticides. For tropical regions like India, Endosulfan acts as a tool for farmers to protect their crops and plantations from pests that are harmful for them. These pests, if uncontrolled may threaten our food supply as well as the financial condition of farmers. They also help improve agricultural productivity. Both activities are essential to meet the ever-growing food demand of India. Endosulfan is one of the most widely used pesticides in India. Indian farmers have been relying on Endosulfan to protect their crops for several years. Thus, prohibiting the use of Endosulfan can impose a serious threat on our food security.  

Replacing Endosulfan with other costly products will make farming expensive. It will negatively impact the production of crops on which Endosulfan is effectively used to control pests, including mango, cashew, cotton, oil seeds such as sunflower and spices . These products are high-priority crops for domestic and export markets.

India has a huge population to feed. Replacing Endosulfan with other patented and costly plant-protection products will increase the cost of pest management for India. Due to this, food prices may swell, causing inflation. The inflation rate in India is already very high. In these times whence the Indian economy is struggling to reduce the inflation rate, any change that can contribute to price rise should be avoided. Thus, it is recommended not to replace Endosulfan with any other product that can threaten India’s food security.

Endosulfan: Victim of public perception

Among the first anti-endosulfan reports was Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) report titled “End of the Road for Endosulfan” – A call for action against a dangerous pesticide, first published in 2002.

Is it a simple coincidence that it was published just a year after the European Multinational manufacturer’s decision to phase out Endosulfan?

Who were the donors for EJF? The report featured the face of an Indian girl child Shruti, a gruesome photograph of a beautiful child with deformed fingers. Soon the internet was flooded with negative reports of Endosulfan.

In 2001 Pesticides Action Network (PAN) donated US$ 3250 to Thanal, a Kerala NGO based out of Kasargod, to educate citizens on the negative effects of persistent organic pollutants on public health, the environment and local communities.

Is it a simple coincidence that this grant was given to Thanal in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

What was the source of funds of PAN? How much of their funding is from European Union? Did Thanal have the approval of regulatory authorities to officially receive funding for such purposes? Was it known to the authorities?

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), an Indian environmental NGO in a report in its magazine Down To Earth issue of February 28, 2001 titled “Children of Endosulfan” reported that “several unusual diseases afflict a Kerala village. Residents blame aerial spraying of the pesticide Endosulfan by the Plantation Corporation of Kerala”. Endosulfan has been aerially sprayed world over without any health effects.

Who would question Sunita Narain the Director of CSE? After all Sunita Narain, has been awarded the Padma Shri in 2005 by the Govt. of India for her commitment to environment protection.

Is it a simple coincidence that the CSE report was published in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Analysis of samples from Padre village from Kasaragod district of Kerala for endosulfan residues (A report by Padma S Vankar et al, for the Pesticide Residue Monitoring Study of the CSE, New Delhi, 2001). This report damned endosulfan for the problems in Kerala and was used by CSE to discredit endosulfan. This report and its conclusions were later found to be fraudulent by a peer review of expert scientists.

Is it a simple coincidence that the report by Dr Padma S Vankar was published in the same year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) a Govt. of India health laboratory published in 2002 a report titled “Report of the investigations of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre Village, of Kasargod district (N. Kerala)”. This report was published soon after a CSE report on Endosulfan.

Although the report was published in 2002, it was only in 2010 through the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) that raw data obtained from NIOH through intervention of the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) provided conclusive evidence that the data and analysis of the report and its results were based on false readings.

Is it a simple coincidence that the NIOH report was published one year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Environmental Health Perspectives in a report in December 2003 under the section Children’s Health published a report titled “Effect of Endosulfan on Male Reproductive Development” generated by Dr Habibullah Saiyed of National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) and his team of scientists. Dr Sayed was then the Director of NIOH and the report was published early in 2003.

Is it a simple coincidence that the NIOH report of Dr Saiyed was published one year that the European Multinational manufacturer of Endosulfan decided to phase out Endosulfan?

Dr Habibullah Saiyed is now Regional Advisor Occupational Environmental and Health Sustainable Development and Healthy Environments WHO regional office.

The current Director of NIOH is Dr Nag. He has had to appear before the Central Information Commissioner who hauled the NIOH Director for refusing to provide raw data on the endosulfan study under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).

Endosulfan is Safe!

Since Endosulfan is a contact insecticide as opposed to a systemic one, it is not absorbed into crops or the food chain. It cannot bio-accumulate in the human body as it is continually degraded by metabolism to a lesser state of hazard.

• The Endosulfan evaluations conducted in 1998 by World Health Organisation (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues have recorded that no genotoxic activity was observed in an adequate battery of tests for mutagenecity and clastogenecity. This study categorically mentioned that no evidence was found to prove estrogenic activity involving Endosulfan.
• Endosulfan has been certified by WHO and FAO to not cause cancer, birth defects or any hormonal imbalance on contact.
• It is the opinion of the UN Environment Programme, International Labour Organisation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, the US Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) and California Department of Pesticide Registration, that Endosulfan has no carcinogenic potential.
• In 2007, US-EPA established that Endosulfan is not an anti-androgen, i.e. it does not affect sperm production, sperm count, motility, and the like.
• A peer review by Silva and Gammon (2009) declared that Endosulfan is not a developmental or reproductive toxicant or an endocrine disruptor.
• The WHO has classified Endosulfan as a Class II–moderately hazardous insecticide.

European Union Exploits Stockholm Convention

Driven by trade interest, EU is pushing Endosulfan for POP listing

Elimination of Endosulfan is expected to severely impact pollination and India’s farming

India is today the second largest producer of horticulture crops (fruits at vegetables) and annually produces over 215 million mt (2008-09 figures source Ministry of Agriculture). This is almost as much as India’s total food grain production of 235 million mt (2008-09 figures source Ministry. of Agriculture). India’s export of fresh fruits and vegetables was Rs 3659 crores during 2008-09 (source APEDA). India ranks fifth in the world in cropped area under cultivation and production of potatoes. India produces 40% of world’s mangoes, 26 %bananas, 18 % cashew nuts, 28 % green peas and 12% onion.

Endosulfan is a plant protection chemical used by farmers for more than 55 years to control pests during the early phase of cultivation and particularly during pollination. It is widely used by farmers in India as a broad spectrum insecticide soft on pollinators and beneficial insects. Besides cross pollinating our food crops, Honey bees are vital links that forge the bio diversity of the environment. Endosulfan is used extensively in cultivation of fruits and vegetables. Today India is the largest producer of Endosulfan and accounts for over 70% of the global trade of this product.

The European Union is pushing the Stockholm Convention to bring about a global ban on Endosulfan by spearheading a campaign to list Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant. All decisions taken against Endosulfan at the Stockholm Convention have been without consensus and in spite of lack of full scientific certainty and significant data gaps.

While considering the EU proposal to list Endosulfan there were serious procedural lapses:

• The text of the convention, their articles and rules were not followed
• The process was not transparent
• There was conflict of interest as European Union the notifying party for Endosulfan also prepared the risk profile
• The proposals to recommend Endosulfan lacked scientific merit and decisions were taken despite significant data gaps.
• India’s protest and dissent notes were ignored and all the decisions relating to Endosulfan were taken by voting in spite of serious objections from India, China, Argentina and other countries.

The European Union (EU) is pushing India and the global community to stop use of Endosulfan as it has proposed listing of Endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant, in spite of lacking full scientific certainty. If Endosulfan is banned farmers will need to find replacements and will be forced to use expensive patented and proprietary molecules produced by European multinationals. Farmers in India will be forced to use alternatives like neonicotinoids in spite of it being banned in parts of Europe.

To create a climate for ban on Endosulfan in India, the EU funded lobby of environmental NGO’s has generated various studies and surveys to link Endosulfan to incidences of  human health effects and have stigmatized Endosulfan by unleashing a false propaganda against Endosulfan in the  media.

World Health Organisation (WHO) and Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have all classified that Endosulfan does not cause cancer, is not genotoxic or mutagenic.

  

Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) held a Press Conference in an effort to support India’s position on Endosulfan at The Stockholm Convention and invited Mr R Hariharan, Chairman International Stewardship Centre (ISC), an observer at The Stockholm Convention and Mr Anil Kakkar, Director Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI) to share their experiences.

Shri Pradip Dave, President of Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI), expresses fear that “India’s Food Security would be at stake if the use of Endosulfan is banned.” An industry issue, it is gaining more ground as a political issue, where facts or fundamentals have no considerations. Under any circumstances, if the Government bans the use of Endosulfan in the country, the farming community and the country’s food security will be adversely affected, he added.

With the growing population of India and to meet the basic needs of the masses, it is becoming essentially vital and important that agricultural production keep pace with the increase in population. This is the only way to feed more than billions people without being dependent on imports.

A very few plant protection products actually qualify for Integrated Crop Management system,  Endosulfan is one such product which is not only effective in controlling pests but also helps in improving the productivity of crops/plants without being harsh on the environment.

Shri Hariharan, Chairman of International Stewardship Centre (ISC) said that “Currently, the worldwide usage of Endosulfan is estimated at 40 million litres, which makes it one of world’s top five generic agricultural insecticides. The trade in Endosulfan today is in excess of US$ 300 million (Rs 1350 crores) and its replacement value is estimated to be in excess of US$ 1000 million (Rs 4500 crores). Endosulfan’s popularity as a broad spectrum generic insecticide soft on pollinators and beneficial insects has resulted in its safe use for over 55 years. Today India is the largest producer of Endosulfan and accounts for over 70% of the global trade in Endosulfan. As a result it’s caught in a cross fire in a battle between “generic” insecticides produced by Indian companies vs. “patented” insecticides produced by European multinationals”.

Shri Anil Kakkar, Director of Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI), further added that “Endosulfan is one of the most widely used pesticides in India. Indian farmers have been relying on Endosulfan to protect their crops since several years. The climatic conditions and the pest complex in India are very different that Europe and the use of products like Endosulfan are well suited for tropical countries like India. Banning the use of Endosulfan can impose serious threat to pollination and on its resultant effect on our food security. Replacing Endosulfan with other patented costly plant protection products will increase the cost of pest management for Indian farming community, which may increase food prices and aggravate inflationary pressure”.

About Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI):

It came into existence in the year 1967 as Pesticides Formulators of India with a view to provide a platform for small scale Pesticides Formulators. It was subsequently changed in 1997 as Pesticides Manufactures & Formulators Association of India. The members of PMFAI include multinationals, large-medium and small scale basic manufacturers & manufacturers of intermediates required for Pesticides. PMFAI also organises various training programmes and seminars for the Indian Pesticide Industry and also circulate to members the recent developments as regards to regulatory affairs which are time to time changed by State and Central Governments.

International Stewardship Centre, Inc.:

 The International Stewardship Centre (ISC) is a non-profit corporation, with roots in the early 1990s it was created for the purpose of educating, promoting and encouraging safety in the manufacture, transport, distribution, storage, use and disposal of chemical substances. ISC works through its member companies with both end users and governments in sharing product stewardship information. Its membership consists of manufacturers of industrial chemicals and insecticides. By the nature of its charter, member companies of ISC are committed to the safe use of chemicals. ISC supports the stated principles of the Stockholm Convention in which it has been granted observer status and has followed closely the deliberations and developments at its various meetings. 

Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI):

 It is one of the oldest and foremost associations. CCFI is a non-profit, non-commercial organization, endeavoring to build a responsible image for the agrochemical industry Most of the leading pesticides manufacturers and formulators are its members. As a committed and progressive body representing the Indian agrochemical industry, CCFI has pursued its focal goal of advancing the cause of Indian farmers through better crop-protection.


Source: http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/european-union-exploits-stockholm-convention/422653/

Endosulfan is safe to bees and beneficial for insects

Endosulfan exhibits low toxicity to bees and beneficial insects http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp41-c4.pdf ). 
Endosulfan has relatively low toxicity to many species of beneficial insects, mites and spiders. These insects are beneficial in the sense that they prey upon pests which damage crops. Hence it is important that the insecticide used to kill pests is not unsafe to these beneficial insects. Other chemicals, necessarily substituted for endosulfan, would kill beneficial insects leading to population explosions of damaging pests which in turn would require more frequent sprays of harsher chemicals than if endosulfan had been used in the first place.