Fungiciden

Carlos Jusino grew up a typical kid in Harlem, rollerblading near the Hudson River, eating at the McDonald's on 145th Street and Broadway, hanging out with friends in his building. Also typical was the fact that many of Jusino's neighbors and family members, including his mother, had asthma. "When I was growing up, she went to the hospital about once a month for asthma," he says. Although he didn't know it at the time, more than 30 percent of the kids in Harlem have asthma, one of the highest rates in the country. Jusino's family was worried about the air quality around Harlem, but most of its attention was directed to a sewage treatment facility built in 1985 along the West Side Highway next to the Hudson, where a foul-smelling settling tank lay exposed. The plant galvanized the community, including a group of environmental justice activists known as the Sewage Seven. They sued the city and won a settlement in 1994 that helped establish air-monitoring stations around the plant.

A growing number of well-designed epidemiological and molecular studies provide substantial evidence that the pesticides used in agricultural, commercial, and home and garden applications are associated with excess cancer risk. This risk is associated both with those applying the pesticide and, under some conditions, those who are simply bystanders to the application. In this article, the epidemiological, molecular biology, and toxicological evidence emerging from recent literature assessing the link between specific pesticides and several cancers including prostate cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, leukemia, multiple myeloma, and breast cancer are integrated. Although the review is not exhaustive in its scope or depth, the literature does strongly suggest that the public health problem is real. If we are to avoid the introduction of harmful chemicals into the environment in the future, the integrated efforts of molecular biology, pesticide toxicology, and epidemiology are needed to help identify the human carcinogens and thereby improve our understanding of human carcinogenicity and reduce cancer risk.

De Europese Unie is op 1 december 2013 moedig begonnen met een verbod van twee jaar op bepaalde toepassingen van drie neonicotinoide pesticiden die schadelijk voor honingbijen en andere bestuivers zijn. Het Europese verbod gaat over neuroactieve insecticiden die in hun werking vergelijkbaar zijn met nicotine. De bekende gevolgen voor bijen variëren van negatieve beinvloeding van foerageergedrag en navigatie (die hun vermogen om gewassen te bestuiven vermindert) tot de dood. Bestuivers zijn essentieel voor onze voedselvoorziening en landbouweconomie. Ze zorgen voor meer dan een derde van het voedsel dat we eten, verbeteren de productie van 75 procent van alle soorten gewassen, en zijn essentieel voor talrijke gewassen, zoals amandelen, avocado's, appels en kersen. Maar we moeten veel meer doen, en uitgroeien tot een wereldleider in duurzame alternatieven voor schadelijke pesticiden.

Like the European Union – which today (Dec. 1) boldly begins a two-year ban on selected pesticides thought to be harmful to honeybees and other pollinators – the United States should help protect pollinators by banning these pesticides. But the United States should do far more, and become a world leader in championing sustainable alternatives to harmful pesticides.

Once it became clear to citrus growers that the British hate to peel anything and can’t face pips in any number, efforts were concentrated on producing easy-to-eat fruit for a nation that must be strong-armed into eating its five a day. The fresh fruit eventually arrived in wooden trays, precious little gifts individually wrapped in tissue paper. They were expensive – there were no bogof deals then. But the mandarins, tangerines and satsumas in today’s fruit section of Tesco, Sainsbury, Morrisons and Asda are on permanent special offer. The most irritating thing about the convenience fruit mountains, however, is not only the manipulation of the skin, but the use of pesticides. When the government-backed Pesticides Residue Committee (PRC) last tested soft citrus in 2008, 24 out of 24 samples were found to contain residues of agricultural chemicals. Nineteen of the samples were from outside the EU, five from the EU and 10 out of the total 24 contained residues of three separate chemicals.