The Fraud NIOH report

In 2002, National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad published a study titled, “Report of the investigations of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre Village of Kasargode district (N. Kerala)”. It was followed by another study made by the NIOH titled, “Effect of Endosulfan on Male Reproductive Development.” Both of these studies have become available on internet for public access. During thorough readings of these reports, scientists and experts have noted that the studies have several serious scientific errors relating to the residue analysis of Endosulfan.

Analytical Errors in the NIOH report

The NIOH report named ‘Report of the investigations of unusual illnesses allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre village, of Kasargode district (N. Kerala),’ had fundamental inconsistencies as was observed by scientists and experts.

Chemical residue analyses are performed on a sophisticated analytical instrument known as Gas Chromatography (GC) fitted with an Electron Capture Detector (ECD). Each GC-ECD has a lower limit for the minimum amount of a chemical that it can detect. This is expressed as Instrument Detection Limit (IDL). For the study under question, the NIOH had used GC-ECD (HP Model 6890) with the minimum IDL of 1 part per billion (1 ppb) for Endosulfan. In other words, the instrument used by the NIOH could not detect Endosulfan residues lower than 1 ppb. Yet, the NIOH report carries residue findings as low as 0.4 ppb and 0.5 ppb. Simply put, the residue levels reported by the NIOH fall below the minimum detection limit of the instrument used. These findings are scientifically indemonstrable, and are false and incorrect claims.

Since, the raw data recorded by the NIOH for generating Endosulfan residue data in water, soil and blood samples were fundamentally flawed, its subsequent analysis is even more peculiar. For instance, the table no. 4 in the report shows the total Endosulfan (ppb) in six samples as 0.030 ± 0.18. Annexure -8 shows ß Endosulfan residues as 0.0005± 0.001. It may be observed here is that the standard deviation goes beyond the mean (average) by up to 500 per cent.

The Most Clinching Evidence: Modern GC-ECDs are fitted with computers that process the data gathered from the detectors into chromatograms and finally produce an easy-to-view report. Normal practices of a residue-testing laboratory require that copies of chromatograms of analysed samples are retained and stored in the laboratory/computer for future reference in case of any dispute. Therefore, letters were sent to NIOH under Right to Information Act (RTI Act) seeking copies of chromatograms relevant to this study. NIOH did not respond to requests for parting with raw data until the intervention of the Chief Information Commissioner. The case was heard at the Information Commission and it took three hearings and two orders by the Chief Information Commissioner for NIOH’s appellate authority to finally handover the 1,700 pages of raw data. The varying and inconsistent excuses given by the NIOH while refusing required information under the RTI Act were revealing signs of a cover-up. On examining the data, experts learned that the analysis conducted by NIOH had sure laboratory failings. The conclusions drawn did not corroborate with the raw data and the complete analysis is now being believed to be forged.

Many erroneous reports emerged after the NIOH study that was proved to be fundamentally flawed. Among these was another noted NIOH report, ‘Effect of Endosulfan on Male Reproductive Development.’ Kasargod-based NGO Thanal, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) and National Institute of Occupational Health, Ahmadabad (NIOH) have all produced reports linking Endosulfan to adverse health problems including cancer, infertility, birth defects and neurotic disorder. There were numerous scientific flaws in these reports too. For instance, CSE found Endosulfan residues of 9.91 ppm (parts per million) in filtered water samples taken from Padre village. The dissolved chemical concentration in water cannot exceed the solubility of the chemical. Endosulfan’s water solubility is 0.32 ppm. The analytical methodology used by CSE for estimation of Endosulfan residue was scientifically incorrect and inconsistent. CSE’s claim of 9.19 ppm is scientifically implausible. It violates the basic laws of chemistry.

Supported internationally by PAN, EJF (Environment Justice Foundation) and I-PEN (International POP’s Elimination Network) NGOs with vested interests have effectively used media to generate a negative public perception of Endosulfan. Despite the inconsistencies, international conventions and regulatory authorities worldwide have referenced the NIOH report while reviewing Endosulfan, including the Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. Recently, the National Human Rights Commission has pressed the Central Government for a nation-wide ban on Endosulfan based on the same report.

Source: http://whybanendosulfan.org/endosulfan-in-india.htm#niohreport

Trade body opposes ban on Endosulfan

The killer pesticide Endosulfan is in news again. With `1,300-crore market in the country, Endosulfan has been facing the wrath of environmentalists and NGOs who are demanding a ban on the pesticide. But a trade body representing pesticide manufacturers has opposed the ban, saying the chemical was not responsible for the deaths it is accused of.

The Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) on Friday said Endosulfan was not responsible for the deaths and sufferings of people in Kerala’s Kasaragod. Talking to the media here, president of PMFAI Pradeep Dave alleged the environmental groups campaigning against Endosulfan were funded by the multinationals in Europe who wanted to ensure a ban on the affordable and generic pesticide to push their patented and expensive alternatives.

However, he said several expert committees were set up by the Union Government and all of them concluded that there was ‘no link established’ between Endosulfan and the alleged reports of health problems in Kasargod. Dave blamed the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) study, which was the root cause of demand for ban on Endosulfan, but it contained “unscientific and implausible” aspects.

He said, “Endosulfan was cheap at `250 a litre compared to the cost of patented alternatives that ranged from `2,000 to `8,000 a litre.”

However, India produces over 80 per cent of global production and uses 12 million litre of this pesticide. It also exported 18 million litres of this pesticide last year.

In a related development, MP and environmentalist Maneka Gandhi has urged all the State Governments to ban the pesticide. She said recently at Hubli that the use of Endosulfan has proved fatal in many cases. “It is causing huge damage to soil fertility and crops, besides severely affecting the health of people who consume crops sprayed with endosulfan,” she remarked.

SK Handa, fellow of National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, said as per international norms prescribed by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), it was mandatory for residues to be reported as identified only after performing ‘confirmatory test of each sample’.

“Endosulfan cannot be blamed for diseases in Kerala. It is due to other reasons. Genetic variations in certain groups of people in Kerala could be responsible for these diseases. There are such health problems reported in other parts of Kerala where Endosulfan is not used,'” he claimed.

However, R Hariharan, chairman of Washington-based International Stewardship Centre, said the proposed listing of Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP) was to serve European trade interest. “If generics are banned through regulatory mechanisms it becomes easier for patented molecules to expand their market share. These contentions are being exploited by the vested interest,” he alleged. 

NIOH failed to verify the final analysis of Endosulfan residues

PMFAI defends Indian government’s position on Endosulfan

At a media briefing held by the PMFAI, speakers questioned the flawed study conducted and published by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad. The study titled “The Final Report of the investigation of unusual illness allegedly produced by Endosulfan exposure in Padre Village of Kasargod district (N. Kerala)”, has been the root cause for the demand for a ban on the pesticide Endosulfan.  An expert panel examined the unscientific and implausible aspects of the NIOH’s study. The flaws have been exposed through the RTI query and the masked raw data evoked public outrage when ten thousand people drew a rally in Gujarat seeking withdrawal of the flawed report. Over thousand workers in Kochi held a rally recently to seek justice for the unfairly stigmatized staff at the government run HIL plant in Kerala.

As per the international norms prescribed by the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), it is mandatory for residues to be reported as identified only after performing “confirmatory test” of each sample. “Different chemicals may appear in the same peak due to similar retention time leading to wrong reporting. However, in the NIOH study in Padre Village in Kerala no confirmatory data was generated, thus NIOH report on Endosulfan is incorrect and misleading. No decisions can be taken based on this report.” said Dr S K Handa. He further added “since there was no confirmation referring to presence of Endosulfan in the report made by scientists at NIOH, Endosulfan cannot be blamed for diseases in Kerala.”    Dr. S K Handa pointed out that Endosulfan is a safe molecule and as per World Health Organisation (WHO) and does not possess properties to cause cancer or diseases as reported in Kasargod, Kerala. Dr Handa is a Fellow of National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, has over 35 years of research experience in pesticide residues and was former WHO consultant, Ministry of Health, Government of India. He was All India Coordinator for pesticide residues, has authored several books on pesticide residue analysis and has published 120 research papers.

Mr. Pradip Dave, President, Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) indicated that several expert committees were set up by the Government of India and all of them concluded that there is no link established between Endosulfan and the alleged reports of health problems in Kasargod, Kerala. He added, “Even Government of Karnataka constituted an expert committee of very senior scientists. A detailed report was submitted in October 2004 stating that the use of Endosulfan was not responsible for the reported health problems. The report was table in the Karnataka Assembly on April 14, 2005 and accepted.”

Based on a proposal by the European Union, Endosulfan is being considered at the Stockholm Convention, to be listed as a Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP). India has rejected listing of Endosulfan as a POP due to lapse in proceedings, gaps in scientific data and lack of transparency which have been observed, reported and protested by India and other member countries. Endosulfan was invented in Europe and was manufactured and used across the entire region for over 55 years.

Clarifying the status of Endosulfan in USA, Mr. Charles Hanson – Executive Director, International Stewardship Centre clarified that “Endosulfan is not banned in the USA. It was a voluntary withdrawal by the manufacturer and sole registrants and a fall out of a congressional mandate to conduct cost prohibitive product testing for over 64 chemicals, one of which is Endosulfan. Citing small user market in USA, huge investment in research, mounting pressure and uncertainty at the international conventions, the manufacturer chose to avoid any further studies and opted for a voluntary withdrawal of Endosulfan.” There is concern amongst the farmers as USA has not found alternatives for all uses of Endosulfan. While various alternatives have been suggested as a possible replacement, many of these are known carcinogens, toxic to pollinators such as honey bees and are banned in countries like Germany and France.

European Union's strategy in banning Endosulfan

European Union had produced and used Endsoulfan for 55 years until they discontinued it due to low profitability. In order to replace the undisputed demand in the global endosulfan markets with their patented products, they played up a strategy which even went to the extent of creating fradulent scientific studies to funding NGO's to create noise against endosulfan.
It's high time we raise our voice against the super powers and prove the power of truth!
http://www.whybanendosulfan.org/