The ban on Endosulfan is meaningless. There is either very little or no agricultural activity in counties where Endosulfan is banned, or the use of Endosulfan in those countries was negligible. For example, in Europe only 201 tonnes of Endosulfan was used when it was banned.http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-76-06-669/EN/KS-76-06-669-EN.PDF In all other countries where it is banned, the land used for agriculture is very insignificant. In some of the counties like Singapore, there is practically no agricultural activity. In countries like Bahrain, Belize, St. Lucia etc., where Endosulfan is banned, the irrigated land is hardly 30-40 sq. km. In six other countries it is 130-750 sq km. In four countries it is 1k to 9k sq km and in one country it is 16k sq km.
Therefore there was nothing to lose in banning Endosulfan in those countries when the activists published wrongful information on Endosulfan. The authorities did not find it necessary to verify the statements made by activists as it was not going to make any difference in those countries!
US EPA has classified Endosulfan under the class of non-carcinogenic substances i.e., class-E. The activists created stories stating Endosulfan as "cancer causing substance" to draw attention of public.
In fact Endosulfan is very important substance as there are no viable alternatives for many of its uses.
Therefore there was nothing to lose in banning Endosulfan in those countries when the activists published wrongful information on Endosulfan. The authorities did not find it necessary to verify the statements made by activists as it was not going to make any difference in those countries!
US EPA has classified Endosulfan under the class of non-carcinogenic substances i.e., class-E. The activists created stories stating Endosulfan as "cancer causing substance" to draw attention of public.
In fact Endosulfan is very important substance as there are no viable alternatives for many of its uses.
No comments:
Post a Comment