Showing posts with label Stockholm convention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stockholm convention. Show all posts

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Endosulfan - A Victim of Dirty Politics

Politicians are back in action, thanks to the forthcoming Assembly elections in Kerala and this time the agenda for Kerala State Assembly election is, ‘Ban Endosulfan’. But as always, ‘All talk no work’ is the strategy to execute this political agenda as well. Every political party has suddenly become concerned about the ill-effects of Endosulfan on human health and joined the race to show the people of Kasargod District their invaluable support. A scientific subject has now transformed into a political issue. Politicians of the state are leaving no stone unturned to encash this opportunity.

Please note that Endosulfan is being used across the globe for more than 50 years and before the Kasargod conundrum came into light, there has been no talk of health hazards due to this pesticide in India or anywhere else. It is interesting to note how the debate on Endosulfan has intensified in the last few months. For the first time, something other than the Plachimada issue has caught the fancy of politicians in Kerala. Obviously, politicians have a stand on issues that are hot-favourites among the media and create public frenzy. And all they have to do to achieve their objectives is to build on the havoc created by the NGOs in Kerala over the past few years. The fascinating thing here is while the scientific community is ridiculing the studies published by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), these politician and NGOs are using the same as tools to persuade people to support a nationwide ban on Endosulfan.

Some of them went ahead and compared the Kasargod situation to the Bhopal Gas Tragedy. What they did not consider is that if Kasargod was an ‘industrial disaster’ like Bhopal, then workers in Endosulfan manufacturing facilities would have reported health problems. On the contrary, these workers are condemning politicians and NGOs for exploiting the Kasargod situation for their vested interests and demanding an end to anti-Endosulfan campaigns immediately. They are also demanding a withdrawal of the misleading NIOH studies on Endosulfan.

On the other hand, politicians and NGOs are completely ignoring experts’ opinions regarding the fraudulent NIOH studies. They are deliberately ignoring facts that point towards serious scientific flaws in these studies. They have even criticised the Minister of Agriculture, Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Shri Sharad Pawar for setting up a panel to study the Endosulfan issue. Insensitive towards farmer’s needs and its various socio-economic repercussions, these politicians and activists are blindly struggling for a total ban of Endosulfan in the country.

So far, politicians have declared relief packages, but made negligible efforts to find the actual cause of these health problems to keep a check on it or try to eradicate it. It is apparent from the poor conditions of these victims that only a portion of these relief packages have actually been handed to them. The state government is now demanding that the Central government provide a Rs 100-crore rehabilitation package to the alleged Endosulfan victims of Kasargod district. An approval to this effect will only give room to more publicity for these politicians. Vote bank politics in Kerala never had it so good.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Reviewing the Alternatives of Endosulfan

Since EU lost its share of the Endosulfan pie when it went generic decades ago, their recent promotion of patented pesticides is only part of its attempt to re-enter global pesticide trade. Since their attempts to compete with Indian Endosulfan producers and regain their lost markets did not meet with success, some of them are understood to have resorted to unfair trade practices. By churning out unfavourable stories surrounding Endosulfan through patronage to certain NGOs, the EU appears to be out to recapture their markets by any means possible. Now, in order to counter the affordability, utility and beneficial softness of Endosulfan, EU is engaging in illegal attempts to introduce Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant in the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. They hope that a total ban will initiate a shift in global pesticide demand patterns.

Endosulfan is a broad-spectrum pesticide active ingredient that is sprayed on a range of 29 crops to protect them from about 60 types of pests. The most prominent benefit of Endosulfan over other pesticides, including those touted as its replacements, is that it is safe for beneficials and pollinators, such as honeybees. Endosulfan is the last pesticide in use that is recommended as a first-spray during pollination by agriculture scientists and entomologists worldwide. The replacement of Endosulfan would not only result in incalculable and irreplaceable harm to biodiversity and the agriculture ecosystem, but also present an additional cost of pollination to farmers. Since India became a prominent Endosulfan producer, India’s farmers have trusted its use in a variety of crops, especially coffee, tea and cotton. The states of Maharashtra, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are the top consumers of Endosulfan in India. More than 12 million litres of Endosulfan is used here per annum. In order to be popularly accepted, any substitute for Endosulfan will have to possess similar attributes.

Imidachloprid (Rs 2,000/litre), Thiamethoxam (Rs 3,200/litre) and Coregen (Rs 700/litre) are the pesticides promoted as replacements for Endosulfan. Presently, the Indian farmer spends Rs 250/litre for Endosulfan. Therefore, the obvious repercussion of a shift from using Endosulfan is the manifold increase in the cost of pest-protection. The next cost to emerge with the replacement of Endosulfan is that of the potential purchase of bee boxes. Bee boxes cost as much as Rs 90,000 for pollinating a 1-hectare field of crops in the absence of honeybees. Wherever Endosulfan has been substituted by more expensive alternatives like Neonicotinoids, it has resulted in the elimination of pollinators. Imidachloprid, the most popular Neonicotinoid is blamed for killing bees and is banned in France, Germany and Slovenia, among other European nations.

Affordability as a factor will be an impossible offering for patented pesticides from the EU. If the European agenda to free up a brand new market by banning Endosulfan meets success, farmers in developing nations and India in particular, will be left in financial ruin. If they consider options touted by local governments, they will have to rely on methods like organic farming. This means risking their produce for a method that if successful, may not possess the effectiveness for a required scale. News reports suggest that the present situation has now compelled farmers in Kerala, where Endosulfan is banned, to resort to smuggling the pesticide into the state in cans and bottles. The clash of ‘patented versus generics’ threatens to leave many such innocents in a lurch.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Endosulfan cannot be blamed for diseases in Kerala: Dr. S. K. Handa


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 which has been under scanner for the last one year. The flaws have been exposed through the RTI and the masked raw data has evoked public outrage when ten thousand people drew a rally in Gujarat to seek withdrawal of the flawed report. Similar agitation was led by thousand workers in Kochi to demand justice for the unfairly stigmatized workers at the government run HIL plant.
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 his report.” said Dr S K Handa, Fellow of National Academy of Agricultural Sciences. 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) does not possess properties to cause cancer or diseases as reported in Kasargod, Kerala.
Source: http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/endosulfan-cannot-be-blamed-for-diseases-in-kerala-dr-s-k-handa/424070/

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

‘Move to ban Endosulfan will hit Indian farmers’


The Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) expressed concern over European Union’s proposal to categorize Endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant (POP).
According to PMFAI, EU’s proposed move to launch new, patented, expensive products in the Indian market will be against the interests of the farming community.
Currently, farmers use generic pesticides which are available at affordable prices. Interestingly, Anil Kakkar, director, Crop Care Federation of India, said in countries such as India where small acre farming and sustainable farming was widely prevalent, a ban on Endosulfan would deprive the Indian farmer access to an affordable and effective crop protection solution and alternatives are likely to be harmful to the farm ecosystem and destroy pollinators and beneficials.
“The European Union’s proposal to list Endosulfan as POP is against the interests of Indian farmers as they will be forced to buy patented pesticides at high prices,” said R Hariharan, chairman, International Stewardship Centre Inc (ISC). For instance, Imidachloride, a product touted as a replacement to Endosulfan costs `2,000 per litre, while other alternative pesticides such as Thiamethoxam costs `3,200 per litre and Coregen `700 a litre while Endosulfan is only `200 per litre.
According to estimates, the global crop protection industry is worth $40 billion and the top three companies alone account for over 50 per cent. “There is a strong motivation for the European multinationals to replace widely used, generic and low-priced pesticides with their high-priced patented alternatives,” said Pradip Dave, president, PMFAI.
Endosulfan is the third largest selling generic insecticide worldwide with global market in excess of 40 million liters valued at over $300 million with replacement cost of alternative estimated to be in excess of $1 billion. India’s share in global Endosulfan market is over 70 percent. Similarly, exports of Endosulfan from India are valued at $40 million.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Proxy battle over endosulfan


Strange is the interplay of money power, business interests and NGO politics. In most cases, farmers turn out to be victims. A recent notification of the Kerala government is a good instance. The State Government recently issued guidelines which render sale of pesticides illegal , unless supported by a prescription from an appropriate agricultural officer.
Behind this apparently innocuous notification lies a complex interplay of various interests. The ostensible object of the notification is to ensure a proactive remedy against health hazards caused by certain pesticides. The real purpose is to effectively proscribe a particular pesticide, viz. endosulfan blamed for certain incidents of congenital abnormalities, cancer and other diseases.
DEBATE OVER ENDOSULFAN
Endosulfan has been the subject of intense debate and controversy. Sixty nations have banned it — 27 belong to the European Union; the 21 African countries that have banned it have substantial trade with Europe known for its reservations against GM foods and pesticides in agricultural produce.
India accounts for about 70 per cent of the world production of this pesticide — about 12 million litres annually, valued at Rs 4,500 crore. The controversy is very similar to that concerning GM foods. European Union countries do not favour GM food items as they harm European pesticide interests. They also oppose pesticides that have ceased to interest them.
On the other hand, endosulfan is used on a very large scale by Indian farmers, particularly in horticulture and pulses. It is considered to be soft on pollinators such as honeybees and other beneficial insects such as ladybird beetles, though effective as a pest killer, acting through the digestive system. It is used for aerial sprays in the cashew plantations in Kasargode district of Kerala.
In the incidents reported from certain villages in Kasargode district , no conclusive evidence has been produced to show that the diseases were linked causally to endosulfan and nothing else. An independent study demonstrates that the symptoms in reported cases correspond to those of handi godu, attributed to chronic inbreeding in the region. Kasargode district represents a peculiar topography that is not ideal for aerial sprays. Endosulfan by itself applied locally might have produced no adverse effects of the alleged type.
The timing of the Kerala notification is ominous. A group of 172 nations is scheduled to meet in April 2011, under the auspices of the Stockholm Convention, to take a final decision on declaring endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant (POP). India is opposed to such listing…http://bit.ly/proxybattle

Sunday, February 6, 2011

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.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

EU’s move to ban Endosulfan to benefit European Crop Protection Industry


The Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) held a press conference today and invited speakers who pointed to European Union’s (EU) role in steering proceedings at international chemical conventions. The Stockholm Convention has been exploited by European Commission to further its trade interests as world market leader in crop protection chemicals. A push for elimination of the generic pesticide Endosulfan will directly promote the use of patented alternatives and benefit European multinationals.
The meeting was addressed by senior members from the International Stewardship Centre Inc. (ISC) – a non-profit organization registered in Washington D.C. that holds an observer status at these conventions. Along with ISC there was participation from Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI) which is focused on advancing the cause of Indian farmers through better crop protection. The speakers shared their experiences and highlighted the current status of Endosulfan and the proceedings that are likely to impact India and its agriculture in the months ahead.
Speaking to the press, Mr. Pradip Dave, President – Pesticide Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) gave an overview of the international chemical trade. “Europe is a leader in the international chemicals trade which includes crop protection chemicals. The global crop protection market is valued at over US$ 40 billion. The top three companies which dominate this business are all European and account for over 50% of the global market. This market share has been built with a strong focus on patented and proprietary crop protection chemicals supported by strong regulations, driven by the European standards.” “This has been the motivation for European multinationals to replace “low priced generics” with their “expensive patented alternatives”, added Mr. Dave.
The European Union (EU) has been pushing for a global ban on Endosulfan by proposing its inclusion in the Stockholm Convention as a Persistent Organic Pollutant. As an observer at the Stockholm Convention, Mr. Charles Hanson - Executive Director of International Stewardship Centre Inc. shared that, “Aggressive campaigning by the EU and environmental NGO’s supported and funded by the EU, has resulted in a number of countries announcing a ban on Endosulfan.” Echoing the EU call, the Chemical Review Committee of the Stockholm Convention recommended the listing of Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant despite significant data gaps and without a clear consensus on the decision.
Endosulfan is the third largest selling insecticide worldwide. Invented in Germany over 55 years ago, today it accounts for a global market in excess of 40 million liters valued at over US$ 300 million. Mr. R. Hariharan – Chairman, International Stewardship Centre Inc. (ISC) shared, “Indian companies account for over 70% of this market which has come at the cost of the European manufacturers. The replacement value of Endosulfan by patented alternative is estimated to be in excess of US$ 1 billion. As a result, Endosulfan is today in the eye of the storm in the battle of “patented” versus “generic” pesticides.”
 Source: Business Standard http://bit.ly/endosulfantruth

Monday, January 31, 2011

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/

Monday, January 24, 2011

European Union Exploits Stockholm Convention


Driven by trade interest, EU is pushing Endosulfan for POP listing
Elimination of Endosulfan is expected to severely impact pollination and India’s farming

India is today the second largest producer of horticulture crops (fruits at vegetables) and annually produces over 215 million mt (2008-09 figures source Ministry of Agriculture). This is almost as much as India’s total food grain production of 235 million mt (2008-09 figures source Ministry. of Agriculture). India’s export of fresh fruits and vegetables was Rs 3659 crores during 2008-09 (source APEDA). India ranks fifth in the world in cropped area under cultivation and production of potatoes. India produces 40% of world’s mangoes, 26 %bananas, 18 % cashew nuts, 28 % green peas and 12% onion.

Endosulfan is a plant protection chemical used by farmers for more than 55 years to control pests during the early phase of cultivation and particularly during pollination. It is widely used by farmers in India as a broad spectrum insecticide soft on pollinators and beneficial insects. Besides cross pollinating our food crops, Honey bees are vital links that forge the bio diversity of the environment. Endosulfan is used extensively in cultivation of fruits and vegetables. Today India is the largest producer of Endosulfan and accounts for over 70% of the global trade of this product.

The European Union is pushing the Stockholm Convention to bring about a global ban on Endosulfan by spearheading a campaign to list Endosulfan as a Persistent Organic Pollutant. All decisions taken against Endosulfan at the Stockholm Convention have been without consensus and in spite of lack of full scientific certainty and significant data gaps.

While considering the EU proposal to list Endosulfan there were serious procedural lapses:

  • The text of the convention, their articles and rules were not followed
  • The process was not transparent
  • There was conflict of interest as European Union the notifying party for Endosulfan also prepared the risk profile
  • The proposals to recommend Endosulfan lacked scientific merit and decisions were taken despite significant data gaps.

  • India’s protest and dissent notes were ignored and all the decisions relating to Endosulfan were taken by voting in spite of serious objections from India, China, Argentina and other countries.


 

The European Union (EU) is pushing India and the global community to stop use of Endosulfan as it has proposed listing of Endosulfan as a persistent organic pollutant, in spite of lacking full scientific certainty. If Endosulfan is banned farmers will need to find replacements and will be forced to use expensive patented and proprietary molecules produced by European multinationals. Farmers in India will be forced to use alternatives like neonicotinoids in spite of it being banned in parts of Europe.

To create a climate for ban on Endosulfan in India, the EU funded lobby of environmental NGO’s has generated various studies and surveys to link Endosulfan to incidences of  human health effects and have stigmatized Endosulfan by unleashing a false propaganda against Endosulfan in the  media.

World Health Organisation (WHO) and Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have all classified that Endosulfan does not cause cancer, is not genotoxic or mutagenic.
  
Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI) held a Press Conference in an effort to support India’s position on Endosulfan at The Stockholm Convention and invited Mr R Hariharan, Chairman International Stewardship Centre (ISC), an observer at The Stockholm Convention and Mr Anil Kakkar, Director Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI) to share their experiences.

Shri Pradip Dave, President of Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI), expresses fear that India’s Food Security would be at stake if the use of Endosulfan is banned.” An industry issue, it is gaining more ground as a political issue, where facts or fundamentals have no considerations. Under any circumstances, if the Government bans the use of Endosulfan in the country, the farming community and the country’s food security will be adversely affected, he added.

With the growing population of India and to meet the basic needs of the masses, it is becoming essentially vital and important that agricultural production keep pace with the increase in population. This is the only way to feed more than billions people without being dependent on imports.

A very few plant protection products actually qualify for Integrated Crop Management system,  Endosulfan is one such product which is not only effective in controlling pests but also helps in improving the productivity of crops/plants without being harsh on the environment.

Shri Hariharan, Chairman of International Stewardship Centre (ISC) said that “Currently, the worldwide usage of Endosulfan is estimated at 40 million litres, which makes it one of world’s top five generic agricultural insecticides. The trade in Endosulfan today is in excess of US$ 300 million (Rs 1350 crores) and its replacement value is estimated to be in excess of US$ 1000 million (Rs 4500 crores). Endosulfan’s popularity as a broad spectrum generic insecticide soft on pollinators and beneficial insects has resulted in its safe use for over 55 years. Today India is the largest producer of Endosulfan and accounts for over 70% of the global trade in Endosulfan. As a result it’s caught in a cross fire in a battle between “generic” insecticides produced by Indian companies vs. “patented” insecticides produced by European multinationals”.

Shri Anil Kakkar, Director of Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI), further added that Endosulfan is one of the most widely used pesticides in India. Indian farmers have been relying on Endosulfan to protect their crops since several years. The climatic conditions and the pest complex in India are very different that Europe and the use of products like Endosulfan are well suited for tropical countries like India. Banning the use of Endosulfan can impose serious threat to pollination and on its resultant effect on our food security. Replacing Endosulfan with other patented costly plant protection products will increase the cost of pest management for Indian farming community, which may increase food prices and aggravate inflationary pressure”.

About Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators Association of India (PMFAI):
It came into existence in the year 1967 as Pesticides Formulators of India with a view to provide a platform for small scale Pesticides Formulators. It was subsequently changed in 1997 as Pesticides Manufactures & Formulators Association of India. The members of PMFAI include multinationals, large-medium and small scale basic manufacturers & manufacturers of intermediates required for Pesticides. PMFAI also organises various training programmes and seminars for the Indian Pesticide Industry and also circulate to members the recent developments as regards to regulatory affairs which are time to time changed by State and Central Governments.

International Stewardship Centre, Inc.:
 The International Stewardship Centre (ISC) is a non-profit corporation, with roots in the early 1990s it was created for the purpose of educating, promoting and encouraging safety in the manufacture, transport, distribution, storage, use and disposal of chemical substances. ISC works through its member companies with both end users and governments in sharing product stewardship information. Its membership consists of manufacturers of industrial chemicals and insecticides. By the nature of its charter, member companies of ISC are committed to the safe use of chemicals. ISC supports the stated principles of the Stockholm Convention in which it has been granted observer status and has followed closely the deliberations and developments at its various meetings. 

Crop Care Federation of India (CCFI):
 It is one of the oldest and foremost associations. CCFI is a non-profit, non-commercial organization, endeavoring to build a responsible image for the agrochemical industry Most of the leading pesticides manufacturers and formulators are its members. As a committed and progressive body representing the Indian agrochemical industry, CCFI has pursued its focal goal of advancing the cause of Indian farmers through better crop-protection.