Pesticide Blog » report

World Malaria Day 2010: pesticides save lives

Gavin — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:13:04 +0000

Everyone has heard of Malaria, a disease that is estimated to claim between one and three million lives every year. Young children account for 90% of the deaths, the majority of victims are in sub-Saharan Africa.

Malaria is caused by a tiny single-celled parasite called Plasmodium which is transmitted to humans through the bites of infected mosquitoes. Malaria is not necessarily deadly in every case of infection, but if not treated the disease can quickly become life threatening. There are a number of Malaria medicines available, although in some parts of the world parasites have developed resistance to them (this has been attributed to misuse of malaria drugs), and for the parts of the world most effected by malaria, drugs for treatment are not readily available, or just too expensive.

Prevention better than cure

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO) one of the main objectives of malaria control is to significantly reduce the rate and number of cases of both parasite infection and clinical malaria. This is achieved by controlling the malaria-bearing mosquito – basically preventing contact between infected mosquitoes and human beings.

The indoor spraying of insecticide is reported by the WHO to be the most effective means of rapidly reducing mosquito density. A practice known as ‘indoor residual spraying’ can protect a living space for three to six months. The WHO claims that the highly controversial DDT offers a longer term solution, offering up to 12 months of protection – although it’s ongoing effectiveness has been called into question.

Another favoured preventative measure is the use of long-lasting insecticidal nets (mosquito nets). Fine-mesh nets treated with insecticide offer personal or group protection and typically remain effective for three – five years.

A closer look at the pesticides

Yes, pesticides – because an insecticide is a type of pesticide. Let’s take a look at those most commonly used in mosquito prevention – permethrin and deltamethrin.

Permethrin is a synthetic chemical and commonly used as both insecticide and insect repellent. It’s effective because it functions as a neurotoxin (it does unpleasant things to insect nerve cells). Permethrin is a favourable deterrent to insects because it is not known to rapidly harm most mammals or birds, and is poorly absorbed by the skin. On the down-side, it is toxic to cats. Permethrin is an effective agent in the battle against malaria, albeit one perhaps better suited to dog-lovers.

Deltamethrin is also a neurotoxin, and while it is used for insecticidal nets, it is also a widely used household insecticide for dealing with pests including bedbugs, cockroaches, ticks and fleas. Deltamethrin of one of the safest groups of pesticides, with mammalian exposure considered to be safe.

Pesticides save lives

Pesticides save lives, something you won’t read every day, but fact non-the-less. The Red Cross reports growing scientific evidence to demonstrate that combining mosquito net distribution with follow-on support and training at household level increases net usage rates and significantly reduces incidence of malaria.

It’s World Malaria Day on the 25th of April, which means I’m a little early with this post (hey, it’s the weekend… I’ve got plans) but in perfect time to share a few links if you feel like learning more about malaria, World Malaria Day, and how you can help efforts to eradicate a disease that takes a life every 30 seconds.

For your consideration

> World Malaria Day 2010 (coordinating body official site) follow @malariaday2010 on twitter

> World Health Organisation (WHO) hub for malaria

> International Medical Corps (NGO) fact sheet on malaria

> Malaria No More (NGO) follow @MalariaNoMore on twitter

> Office of the United Nations (UN) Special Envoy for Malaria follow @Malaria_Envoy on twitter

This list is not exhaustive, so please feel free to drop links and info in the comments section below.

Organic, pesticides, and Integrated Pest Management

Gavin — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 07:09:28 +0000

In ‘Food for Thought: Organic Grub Worth Buying?’ we hear that as US organic sales increase, so do consumer questions about what ‘organic‘ actually means. Answers to this same question in the UK met with surprise early this year, as a report explained that organic does not mean ‘pesticide free’ – perhaps as shocking to some as an earlier report published by the UK Food Standards Agency, claiming that organic food ‘has no health benefits‘ over conventionally grown produce. Essentially this is good news for the consumer – you can receive the same health benefits from conventionally grown (and mostly cheaper) fruits and vegetables.

Organic pesticides

It is true that organic farmers, faced with the loss of their crops, often use ‘conventional’ pesticides, but there are more tools in the organic farmers toolbox, so called ‘organic’ pesticides (sometimes referred to as ‘green’ or ‘ecological’ pesticides). Organic pesticides are claimed to be naturally derived rather than synthetically produced, but this does not tell us anything about their relative safety or impact on the environment. We must also remind ourselves that the most toxic substances known are found in nature: in other words, natural does not always equal safe. Steve Savage, who keeps a blog at eatdrinkbetter.com last week posted ‘The “Pesticide From Hell” (oh, by the the way, its “Organic”)‘, an interesting article on one the oldest and still most used ‘organic’ pesticides – Sulphur (sulfur). Steve points out that sulphur compounds must be used in considerably higher quantities than effective and highly targeted ‘manufactured’ crop protection products; in addition to being one of the most common causes of pesticide user health complaints, there is also an association with bird mortality. Copper sulphate, another commonly use organic pesticide, combines copper and sulphur in a form that is permanently destructive of soil if overused. In terms of the regulation of use of crop protection measures, in the European Union organic pesticides are subject to the same strict regulations as conventional products.

Overlooked

The fact that organic farming often makes use of pesticides (of the organic and conventional varieties) is largely overlooked or poorly communicated – reinforcing misconceptions about crop production and crop protection. Recent media coverage of organic agriculture does suggest that the public is beginning to question their understanding of the term ‘organic’. The current economic crisis will have no doubt contributed; with less disposable income it is perhaps no surprise that consumers pass on some of the more expensive items on their shopping list. Rightly or wrongly, organic is often considered something of a ‘niche market’ – with products being more expensive than their conventionally grown alternatives they are unlikely to feature in a ‘recession diet‘.

Unsustainable

The reality of agriculture is that pests must be managed to avoid devastating loss to crops, something independent of the ideology of farmer or consumer. Whilst some loss is indeed expected, without crop protection measures a loss of over 40% yield is possible – this is unsustainable.

An ecological way

Integrated pest management (IPM) is a good practice approach to crop protection. IPM is an integrated strategy for crop management, designed to solve ecological problems when applied in agriculture. Performed in three main stages: prevention, observation, and intervention IPM combines pesticide use with biological and sophisticated management techniques to manage pest populations in an ecological way. IPM can be used by both conventional and organic agriculture.

In the video below, Professor Sir Gordon Conway of the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, explains Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and how it helps farmers. He goes on to tell us how pesticides can be used in conjunction with natural enemy controls, such as parasites and other predators, to help protect farmers’ crops from losses.

Thank you 700 times, and pesticide Tweets…

Gavin — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:46:57 +0000

If you didn’t know it already, we use Twitter, and we now have more than 700 followers – for this we would like to say a big thank you to all.

If you don’t use Twitter, you might not be aware of how useful it can be as a resource for information and good ideas. Here’s a collection of pesticide information from tweets from us, and tweets we’ve re-tweeted from the past few days. Enjoy!

—

Via @cropprotection

News of the EU’s ‘REAL Fake’ competition to raise awareness of the dangers and problems associated with counterfeit and fake products – recognised as a great opportunity for EU agricultural schools to explore counterfeit pesticide issues.

France 24: viewpoints on pesticides and related topics

Phil — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:49:05 +0000

The international news channel France 24 recently features two insightful debates in its program ‘Face-off’.

The first one, entitled ‘Organic Food: not so wholesome?’, picks up on an ongoing furore around the now famous Food Standards Agency (FSA) report on organic (see our last two posts). The debate includes some interesting comments by Olivier Andrault from the Consumer Association UFC-Que Choisir and Diego Garcia from L’Agence Bio.

The second debate - ‘Toxic algae: the new silent killer?’ – features a conversation with Antoine Foucher, Campaign Director at Greenpeace International, and Jean-Charles Bocquet, General Manager at the French Crop Protection Association, on toxic algae and beach pollution.

Highly recommended!

Follow the debate on the FSA organic report

Phil — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:45:52 +0000

The debate around organic has boiled up over the week after the release of the FSA’s study (see our last post below.) Here are some articles published this week on the topic. Do feel free to comment or recommend other news and articles.

Press

Argument is about capitalism, not food (The Guardian)
It’s wrong to believe that nature is always best (The Guardian)
Organic food debate boils over (The Independent)
BBC snubs organic food as it teaches us how to eat well (The Daily Express)
Les défenseurs du bio rapellent son role écologique (Le Monde)
Misleading claims on the credentials of food marketed as organic (The Daily Telegraph)
Organics sector hits back in nutrition row (Freshinfo)
Organic food contains toxic natural pesticides (The Times)

Blogs

UK FSA’s organic study confusing and inconclusive? (The Green Room blog)
Slate: Organic vs. Conventional? Too Complex… (Organic Nation)
Organic food has no health or nutrition benefits, FSA study finds (VitalRead)
Study Finds Organic Foods Not More Nutritous (Pays to Live Green)
Nature’s Path CEO Responds to Organic Food Study Results (DailyBlender)
Is There a Change Afoot in How Organics Are Marketed? (GreenBiz)

UK Food Standards Agency: organic not healthier. Reactions from the press and blogosphere.

Phil — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:43:45 +0000

An independent review published by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) concludes that there are no differences in nutrition content or other health benefits between food produced using organic methods and that grown using scientific agriculture (read the FSA’s new release here). It will come as no surprise to anyone that the report has sparked a heated debate in the press and the blogosphere! Please find below a small selection of press articles and blog posts from across the divide discussing the report. Do feel free to comment or to recommend further articles by clicking on the tab above.

Press
Organic food is not healthier, says FSA (The Guardian)
Don’t write off organic food (The Daily Telegraph)
Organic food ‘no healthier than conventional’ (The Independent)
Organic has no health benefits (BBC)
Les bénéfices du «bio» en question (Le Figaro)
Il biologico? Fa bene solo a chi lo produce (La Stampa)

Blogs
Organic Versus Conventional Food: UK Report Flawed (Huffington Post)
News Report: Organic food no healthier, but is that all that matters… (Daily Cup of Yoga)
Organic Isn’t Healthier, But People Will Keep Buying (Humblement)
Organic Food Trash? Or Just Trashing Organic Food? (Unbossed)
Organic Versus Conventional Food: UK Report Flawed (Civil Eats)
Will you still shop organic after the publication of the FSA findings? (Ooffoo)
Joanna Blythman: Please Read the Data Appendices About Organic Food Before Conjuring ‘Cancerous Conspiracies’: Part 1 (Holford Watch)
Organic no better says FSA (Grow organic food)

Recent articles on pesticides and related topics

Phil — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:40:53 +0000

Please find below some recent articles on pesticides and related topics. Do feel free to recommend more articles by selecting “Recommend a page or site” above or access a more comprehensive list of articles by using the Delicious cloud in the right-hand colmumn.

The Three A’s of Food Security (Sciencebase blog)
Differing patterns in food price falls (BBC)
French village goes organic one day a week (3News)
EU survey reveals poor state of biodiversity (Euractiv)
EU farm subsidies ‘inconsistent’ with global food security (Euractiv)
Sweden introduces climate labelling for food (Euractiv)
World food prices: Whatever happened to the food crisis? (The Economist)
Agriculture Demand Outpacing Honeybee Increase, Researchers Say (Bloomberg)
EFSA publishes report on pesticide residues in food (Food Production Daily)
Forum on the Future of Agriculture goes on the road… (Blogactiv)

Latest study concludes that food prices will increase with revision of pesticides legislation

Helen Dunnett — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:59:33 +0000

Last week we attended a press briefing in Brussels for the launch of a new impact study that looks at the possible price increases on agricultural markets in Europe if current revisions of the regulation governing pesticides (Directive 91/414) are approved. The study was produced by EuroCARE BONN, the European Centre for Agricultural, Regional and Environmental Policy Research, and was commissioned by ECPA (disclaimer: sponsor of Pesticide Information). At the event, I had an opportunity to speak to two of the panelists:

Séan Rickard, Senior Lecturer in Business Economics from the Cranfield University School of Management, who wrote What price protection? An Economic Assessment of the Impact of Proposed Restrictions. He gave me his views on the derogation which gives a 5-year exemption on irreplaceable crop protection products and on food availability more broadly.
Dr. Marcel Adenauer from EuroCARE Bonn and the University of Bonn, who headed the panel. Marcel talked about the possible effects on the price of fruit (the EuroCare report focuses on wheat and potatoes), the effects of price increases on the European economy as a whole, and the prospect of Europe giving up its primacy in food production.

For background information on this legislation visit EurActiv.

Fruit and vegetable sector criticize European Commission for failing to look at the wider impact of the pesticide proposals

Helen Dunnett — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:52:03 +0000

Representatives from Europe’s fresh and processed fruit and vegetable sector voiced their concern last week about the ongoing revisions to the pesticide legislation.

They argue that if the pesticide legislation goes through based on the European Parliament’s amendments adopted during first reading of this Directive last year, it will remove many plant protection solutions (fungicides, herbicides, insecticides) currently available to protect European fruit and vegetable crops. They highlight carrots, onions, broccoli and cauliflower being potentially the hardest hit, going on to add that they believe it is likely that farmers will decide not to grow certain crops in future due to the lack of any effective plant production products to protect their crops from disease and attack which ensure a reasonable crop at harvest.

The sector can also foresee an increase in the cost of fruit and vegetables which they believe will “have a knock-on effect on fruit and vegetable consumption” at a time when the Commission itself has set nutrition and obesity as one of the key priorities in the EU public health policy as seen in their White Paper A Strategy for Europe on Nutrition, Overweight and Obesity related health issues.

Read the full statement.

Pesticide cutbacks could hit food prices

Wyn Grant — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 08:20:15 +0000

Substantial increases in household food prices could result if the European Parliament succeeds in pushing through its version of proposals to cut the availability of pesticides for use in agriculture. This is the key finding of a new report on the impact of the EU’s proposed pesticides legislation carried out by economist Sean Rickard of the Cranfield School of Management.

Under the European Parliament’s most restrictive scenario, which would remove 85 per cent of current pestcides from the market, EU cereals output could drop by about 100m tonnes, leading to an effective doubling in grain prices. A £100/t increase in wheat prices, according to Mr Rickard’s calculations, would translate into an extra 9p on a loaf of bread, 3p on a litre of milk and a 40p increase in the price of pork. Potato prices would also double. Mr Rickard suggested that it could easily put another 10 per cent on the rate of food inflation.

The report notes that for arable farmers these price rises would not be enough to make good the drop in yields. For livestock farmers, the rise in feed prices would cut incomes, forcing many out of business. The UK would also face a deterioration in the food trade deficit of £14bn, as more imports are drawn in and self suffiency falls.

In many instances the proposals would force farmers to replace crop protection products with increased cultivations. The farming industry would become more dependent on fuel and, with it, ots carbon footprint.