The Problem with Pesticides: 4 good reasons to avoid pesticide use

The Problem with Pesticides: 4 good reasons to avoid pesticide use

Being exposed to potentially harmful chemicals when we don’t need to be is a hazard to our health and the environment. But when it comes to pests, do we have a choice? Would authorities really allow products to be sold if they were as harmful as some people think? These are the types of questions we hear from time to time…

There are many chemicals on the market used in urban pest control and their potential for toxicity varies from low to those that could be carcinogenic, endocrine disrupting, have potential for reproductive & developmental toxicity and/or impact the nervous system depending on the action of the pesticide and the level of exposure. Obviously some pesticides are more toxic than others, which is why vigilance about use, and understanding the toxicity issues helps with independent decision making when it comes to pest management.

Here are 4 reasons to avoid pesticide use in your home:

1. Research shows that even low levels of exposure to the group of pesticides called organophosphates can cause lasting damage to neurological and cognitive functioning¹
2. Children are at a higher risk of a range of developmental issues and childhood cancers when exposed to pesticides.
3. Chemical safety testing is conducted on individual ingredients rather than the mixture of chemicals we are exposed to.
4. Long term impacts of pesticides are often not evident until decades after they have been approved for the market.

Let’s take a look these statements in more detail:

1. Research shows that even low levels of exposure to organophosphates can cause lasting damage to neurological and cognitive functioning1

Organophosphates (OP), derived from World War II nerve gas agents, are now one of the most widely used insecticides in the world.  These chemicals are marketed in many forms. The OP known as chlorpirifos is approved for use in urban pest control as a termiticide, and is sometimes used in broad spectrum applications for ants, cockroaches and spiders. Chlorpirifos was in the news recently when the US EPA made its controversial decision not to ban the chemical contrary to recommendations from its staff. This is one of the chemicals to keep an eye out for when checking the MSDS (Material safety data sheet) that your pest control company can show you upon request (if it’s listed, ask for a safer alternative).

In 2012, researchers at the University College London found that long-term low level exposure to organophosphate pesticides cause lasting damage to neurological and cognitive functions. The study correlated 2 decades of research covering 1600 participants and noted: “The majority of well-designed studies found a significant association between low-level exposure to [organophosphates] and impaired neurobehavioral function which is consistent, small to moderate in magnitude and concerned primarily with cognitive functions such as psychomotor speed, executive function, visuospatial ability, working and visual memory.”

It is important consumers know whether a chemical is an organophosphate so that if you are presented with a residual spray treatment as the only option, you can ask the right questions and seek viable safer alternatives.  We would highly recommend you ask for a safer alternative, especially if you have children, or immunocompromised people living, learning, working or playing in the building.

 

2. Children are at a higher risk of a range of developmental issues and childhood cancers when exposed to pesticides

There is no clearer message about the effects of pesticides on children than in this letter from The American Academy of Paediatrics to the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, in response to the the EPA’s recent decision not to go ahead with the banning of chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate manufactured by Dow.

“Children are not small adults – they have key neurological, physical, developmental, and behavioural differences from adults that make them uniquely vulnerable to chemical exposures. By size and weight, children drink more, breathe more, and have more skin surface area to body weight relative to adults, making their bodies more sensitive to pesticides and other chemicals. Their brains and nervous systems are still making connections and maturing, processes that are particularly sensitive to interference by pesticides. Children come into contact with pesticides daily through air, food, dust, and soil, and on surfaces through home and public lawn or garden application, household insecticide use, application to pests, and agricultural product residues.

Epidemiologic studies associate pesticide exposure with adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, congenital abnormalities, pediatric cancers, neurobehavioral and cognitive deficits, and asthma. The evidence is especially strong linking certain pesticide exposure with pediatric cancers and permanent neurological damage. Some birth cohort studies of American children have found associations between pesticide exposure and neurobehavioral and cognitive defects like lower IQs, autism, and attention deficit disorders.”  

Unfortunately, there are no similar statements from paediatricians or medical associations in Australia. The OP, chlorpirifos was reviewed by the APVMA and approved with no changes to usage restrictions ⁴. In Australia it can be used inside the home for crack and crevice treatments, termite treatments for barriers and spot treatments and in schools and parks where children could be exposed ⁴ .

3. Chemical safety testing is conducted on individual active ingredients rather than the mixture of chemicals we are exposed to.

Pesticides are used as mixtures called formulations. They contain adjuvants, which are often kept confidential and are called inerts by the manufacturing companies, plus a declared active principle, which is usually tested alone. A 2013 study in France3 tested the toxicity of 9 pesticide formulations, comparing active principles and their formulations, on three human cell lines. The study tested the cells at dilutions lower than those recommended by manufacturers and found that 8 out of 9 were up to one thousand times more toxic than their active principles. The study results challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake for pesticides because this norm is calculated from the toxicity of the active principle alone, concluding that current tests on pesticides may not reflect relevant environmental exposures if only one ingredient of these mixtures is tested alone.

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) is responsible for approving pesticides for use in Australia (the US equivalent is the EPA), and test active ingredients in isolation. Our authorities also do not yet have a way to test “chemical synergism” of pesticides used in combination, or the interactions between pesticide and pharmaceuticals. It is therefore often unknown what level of exposure is safe for an individual, or the level of sensitivity a person will have to a pesticide. Alfredo A Sudan, a professor of neurology and ophthalmology at the University of Southern California was quoted estimating that taking a medication like the ulcer drug Tagamet “can make a person 100 to 1,000 times more sensitive to organophosphate poisoning.” ³

When it comes to determining toxicity, we currently rely on a system that sets safe limits of exposure based on a neutral baseline. Unless we are a pharmacist or toxicologist, we probably have no way of determining the potential risk of toxicity when exposed to a pesticide while on any given pharmaceuticals, and have no way of measuring the synergistic or accumulated toxicity of exposure.

4. Long term impacts of pesticides are often not evident until decades after they have been approved for the market.

The story of the US reversal of the decision to ban chlypirifos is an example of the powers that can influence safe standards, leading to time lags of decades between when a chemical is showing signs of being unsafe to when it is finally taken off the market.

If we are to learn anything from history it is that being vigilant is an important way to keep authorities regulating to safe standards, and applying the lessons sooner rather than later.

Australia has authorities that approve and set standards on safe use of chemicals. The effectiveness of this system is largely reliant on active scientists and citizens that monitor use and notify authorities when they observe pesticides are not being used appropriately.

Older readers will be familiar with dangerous organochlorides; examples include: heptachlor which was systematically used as for termite protection, and dieldrin which was heavily used in agriculture from the 50’s to the late 80’s.

Thanks to action taken by educated scientists and citizens passionate about protecting the health of people and the environment, organochlorides were given restricted uses in 1986, and finally phased out in 19975, some 50 years after appearing on the market. And even now it is still only suspected that this could be an environmental factor that impacted my father’s health. He was diagnosed with parkinson’s disease 7 years ago. Although the jury is still out on the link between parkinson’s disease (PD) and organochlorides, research has shown that farmers may be at a higher risk of PD6. As a farmer, my father routinely waded through sheep dip and directed overhead crop dusters in the 60’s and 70’s. Although he didn’t experience any side effects at the time, the true consequences of farming practices of his generation may only emerge in the science journals after he has gone.

Educating people on safe pest management is part of my mission so we can create a cleaner safer world for future generations and limit the potential for unnecessary consequences of pesticides that appear safe until proved otherwise. Consumers can make a big difference by maintaining vigilance, asking questions and making wise lifestyle choices and of course choosing pest managers that know their stuff.

References cited:

1. Neurobehavioral problems following low-level exposure to organophosphate pesticides: a systematic and meta-analytic review, by Mackenzie Ross et al. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 2012.
2.  Major Pesticides Are More Toxic to Human Cells Than Their Declared Active Principles (PDF Download Available). Available from:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261521701_Major_Pesticides_Are_More_Toxic_to_Human_Cells_Than_Their_Declared_Active_Principles
3. http://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/infoservices/pesticidesandyou/Winter%2003-04/Synergy.pdf
4. https://ama.com.au/ausmed/parkinson%E2%80%99s-cluster-fund-rural-victoria
5. Immig, J 2010: A list of Australia’s most dangerous pesticides.
6. AVPMA 2017 Organophosphate Report https://archive.apvma.gov.au/publications/reports/docs/organophosphate_report_volume2.pdf