Your Daily Poison - Pesticide Action Network UK

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 Executive summary This new report, the second in the series 1 , examines in detail government information accessible to the public about exposures to pesticides we all have, on a daily basis, in our food, water, and the environment. The previous report covered 2003 figures, and this report covers exposures in 2004 from published sources. We highlight the paucity of accessible information available, not just to the public, but to decision-makers at a local level: local authorities, water companies and health professionals, who are responsible for protecting public health. The implications of an important new report by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) ‘Crop spraying and the health of residents and bystanders’ 2 , for all forms of pesticide exposure, are assessed. Our main findings: ◆ An analysis of results from UK regulators and the latest European Commission data indicates that levels of pesticide residues in food are increasing in the UK and are significant across Europe, with consequent health risks ◆ Survey results in this report confirm the widespread presence of pesticides as lowlevel contaminants in drinking water. Because of advances in technology, it has become evident that the legal limit for pesticides in treated water needs revision ◆ Pesticides which have been contaminating drinking water ever since they were approved: atrazine, isoproturon, mecoprop and simazine, are still widespread in drinking water ◆ The post-approvals monitoring for pesticides in food and water is inadequate, because insufficient numbers of pesticides are tested for, even though there is evidence of their use ◆ Because the government has not set standards and protocols for the selection of specific pesticides to be tested for in food and water, and the analysis of results, existing strategies are inconsistent. See our recommendations on page 17. Introduction This report of pesticide exposures in 2004 follows up evidence of exposures in 2003, published as the report People’s Pesticide Exposures – poisons we are exposed to every day without knowing it. The public has the right to know the extent to which we are all exposed to pesticides in our food, water and the environment. Information in this report is sourced from government monitoring data, and set out in an accessible form alongside more detailed data we collect from the authorities by questionnaire survey, and our own results. The intention is to fill in some of the gaps in government-disclosed data, and identify areas in which information is not available either because it is not collected or because it is kept secret. Trends are also described where possible. Since the last report, the government has published its National Strategy for the Sustainable Use of Plant Protection Products. The strategy does not encompass a plan for overall reduction of pesticide use, and it does not yet include a section on protecting human health from the effects of pesticides. The government supports an industry-controlled programme, the Voluntary Initiative, to attempt the reduction of harmful effects of pesticides on the environment, the success of which is limited 3 . Overall pesticide use remains high: over 31,000 tonnes of active ingredient are applied to UK farmland per year (Appendix 1). The government asked the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) to carry out an independent investigation into the health impacts of pesticides, and its report, published in September 2005, made important recommendations to protect human health from pesticide exposure. Sources of published government information include the Health & Safety Executive, the Pesticides Safety Directorate (Defra) the Advisory Committee on Pesticides, the National Poisons Information Service, the Pesticide Residues Committee; and the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Additional information is provided by PAN UK’s own surveys. There are summaries of the organisations involved in the regulation of pesticides and pesticide laws, and the regulatory testing and assessment of pesticides at Appendices 2 and 3. Your daily poison
1 Pesticide exposure in the environment People’s experience of pesticide exposure There are a number of monitoring schemes for the collection of pesticide exposures and poisonings: the government’s Health & Safety Executive’s (HSE) Pesticide Incidents Appraisal Panel (PIAP) scheme, the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD) annual survey of cases reported by companies (the ‘human health incidents survey’), and pesticide poisoning enquiries reported by the National Health Service National Poisons Information Service. People also report poisoning incidents to their local authority. There is no aggregation of all schemes to produce an annual total of exposures reported to government. The PEX- Action on Pesticide Exposure database is run by PAN UK, and other non-governmental Table 1. Pesticide Incidents Appraisal Panel data for 2004/05 5 PIAP Total Employees/self- Members of classification employed public/others Incidents People Incidents People Incidents People Confirmed 0 0 0 0 0 0 Likely 5 8 0 0 5 8 Open 0 0 0 0 0 0 assessment (i) Open 3 3 0 0 3 3 assessment (ii) Unrelated 5 5 0 0 5 5 Insufficient 25 32 1 1 24 31 information Pending 15 17 1 1 14 16 Not an incident 2 5 1 1 1 4 TOTAL 55 70 3 3 52 67 Pesticide Incidents Report, HSE Field Operations Directorate Investigations, 1 April 2004 – 31 March 2005. Definitions Confirmed There are clinical symptoms and signs typical of exposure to the cited pesticide formulation combined with either: corroborating medical and (where appropriate) biochemical evidence; or evidence of overexposure. Likely The balance of evidence based on reported exposure circumstances, clinical symptoms and signs or biochemical evidence (where appropriate) is consistent with ill health due to exposure to the cited pesticide formulation. Open assessment (i) The reported ill health is not consistent with the known potential ill-health effects of the cited pesticide formulation given the reported exposure circumstances but the implied association cannot be entirely discounted in the light of current knowledge; or (ii) the evidence is consistent with pesticide exposure being the cause of the reported ill health but alternative explanations, eg pre-existing disease are also present. Unrelated There is strong evidence, eg evidence about exposure or from medical reports, that the reported ill health is not pesticide-related. Insufficient information The available data is insufficient, incomplete or conflicting and the panel is unable to classify a case for one or more of these reasons. organisations, such as the Organophosphate Information Network and the UK Pesticides Campaign, also maintain records of exposure cases. a. THE HEALTH AND SAFETY EXECUTIVE’S PESTICIDE INCIDENTS APPRAISAL PANEL (PIAP) The HSE is the government agency which has the main responsibility for the investigation of complaints alleging that pesticide exposure has caused ill-health. The HSE PIAP is comprised of a panel of government toxicologists and medical experts, and considers all incidents reported to the HSE’s Field Operations Directorate where there is any allegation that the use of a pesticide has caused harm or ill health. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP), in its report ‘Crop spraying and the health of residents and bystanders’, confirmed PAN UK’s concerns about PIAP, the main government post-approvals surveillance scheme for pesticide-related ill-health, and concluded that it is so inadequate that the HSE should relinquish this function 4 . In its evidence to the RCEP, PAN UK identified the following flaws: ◆ PIAP does not initiate clinical examination itself: the assessment largely relies on medical information from the complainant’s general practitioner (GP). But if the patient does not know which chemicals he or she has been exposed to it is impossible for the GP to investigate properly; ◆ GPs have very little training in toxicology, and the specialist resource available to them, the National Poisons Information Service, is for acute poisonings only; ◆ PIAP is designed to deal with ‘incidents’ only, and does not take account of disease which could be linked to chronic exposures; ◆ Only after the HSE inspector has concluded his or her investigation of a pesticide complaint, and taken official actions such as issuing a notice to the farmer, does he or she send details of the alleged ill-health incident to PIAP. This incurs a delay of, on average, six months. This means that it is very unlikely that evidence, in terms of pesticides in the environment, or in biological media, is still present. Around one per cent of cases the second UK pesticide exposure report 3
Page 1 and 2: YOUR DAILY POISON: THE SECOND UK PE
Page 3: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . .
Page 7 and 8: ◆ A baby girl of 9 months was fou
Page 9 and 10: Exposure to spray-drift, pesticide
Page 11 and 12: 2 Food residues PAN UK has conducte
Page 13 and 14: David Mason, ‘official laboratori
Page 15 and 16: environment in the cycle of precipi
Page 17 and 18: conference that a Europe-wide biomo
Page 19 and 20: 5 Conclusions and Recommendations T
Page 21 and 22: APPENDIX 1 Pesticide usage trends i
Page 23 and 24: APPENDIX 3 The regulatory testing a
Page 25 and 26: APPENDIX 4a ‘The human health inc
Page 27 and 28: APPENDIX 4c PAN UK survey: pesticid
Page 29 and 30: Local authority Number and nature o
Page 31 and 32: APPENDIX 5b Food residues (UK testi
Page 33 and 34: Food Pesticide WHO hazard OP WHO Cl
Page 41 and 42: APPENDIX 6a Pesticides in the publi
Page 43 and 44: APPENDIX 6b PAN UK survey: pesticid
Page 45 and 46: APPENDIX 7 Members of the All Party
Page 47 and 48: development in the womb. As a resul
Page 49 and 50: pollution stems from steroid hormon
Page 51 and 52: APPENDIX 10 Copies of PAN UK questi
Page 53 and 54: the second UK pesticide exposure re
Page 55 and 56:
the second UK pesticide exposure re
Page 57 and 58:
References 1. Craig A, People’s P
Page 59 and 60:
57 Your daily poison:
show all

Your Daily Poison - Pesticide Action Network UK

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?