Unknown facts about Endosulfan

For people who feel NIOH study is the final report on Endosulfan

In response to claims connecting Endosulfan with human disorders in Kerala and Dakshina Kannada, six committees and expert groups including representatives from health, environment and agriculture departments were set up by the Govt of Kerala, Govt of India and the Govt of Karnataka to investigate into the reported linkage of Endosulfan with the various incidences of adverse health effects. Each committee has concluded that none of the alleged victims were proven to be affected by Endosulfan. The findings of these committees have been methodically dismissed and barely presented in the media. 

Many NGOs have produced reports linking Endosulfan to adverse health problems including cancer, infertility, birth defects and neurotic disorder. These reports were based on the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) report which is proved to have been flawed. Despite this, international conventions and regulatory authorities worldwide have referenced this report while reviewing Endosulfan in both, the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. Recently, the National Human Rights Commission has also demanded a nationwide ban on Endosulfan based on this faulty report. Media, polity and other vested interests are also pressuring the government into discontinuing the studies on Endosulfan as they are already aware of what the results would be.

NIOH Errors: The NIOH report of 2002 titled ‘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 β 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. 

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.

Source: http://whybanendosulfan.org/facts-vs-myths.htm

Endosulfan is Safe!

Since Endosulfan is a contact insecticide as opposed to a systemic one, it is not absorbed into crops or the food chain. It cannot bio-accumulate in the human body as it is continually degraded by metabolism to a lesser state of hazard.

• The Endosulfan evaluations conducted in 1998 by World Health Organisation (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues have recorded that no genotoxic activity was observed in an adequate battery of tests for mutagenecity and clastogenecity. This study categorically mentioned that no evidence was found to prove estrogenic activity involving Endosulfan.
• Endosulfan has been certified by WHO and FAO to not cause cancer, birth defects or any hormonal imbalance on contact.
• It is the opinion of the UN Environment Programme, International Labour Organisation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, the US Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) and California Department of Pesticide Registration, that Endosulfan has no carcinogenic potential.
• In 2007, US-EPA established that Endosulfan is not an anti-androgen, i.e. it does not affect sperm production, sperm count, motility, and the like.
• A peer review by Silva and Gammon (2009) declared that Endosulfan is not a developmental or reproductive toxicant or an endocrine disruptor.
• The WHO has classified Endosulfan as a Class II–moderately hazardous insecticide.

http://www.whybanendosulfan.org/what-is-endosulfan.htm

Withdraw erroneous report on endosulfan, Centre urged

The Pesticides Manufacturers and Formulators' Association of India (PMFAI), on the radar of some environmentalists and business lobbies, on Friday demanded the Central government to withdraw the “erroneous” report of the Ahmedabad-based National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) declaring endosulfan as a health hazard.

Describing the opponents of the insecticide as the agents of some European chemical manufacturers, the PMFAI claimed that imported substitutes to endosulfan would cost the Indian farmers dearly.

Pointing out at a media conference that the NIOH report had become an alibi for some non-governmental organisations working for an environmental cause and business lobbies to raise the anti-endosulfan propaganda, the PMFAI claimed that there was nothing to suggest that endosulfan was harmful to human health in any way.

‘Genetic disorder'

The six committees set up by the Centre earlier had also concluded that endosulfan was not the reason for the alleged ill-health of the people at Padre village in Kasaragod district of Kerala, where the farmers had been using the insecticide for many years.

The diseases were found to be caused by some inherited genetic disorders that obtained even before endosulfan came to be used, PMFAI president Pradip Dave said. He alleged that the basic issue involved was “to protect the business interests of European chemicals manufacturers at the cost of the Indian farmers under the garb of environmental and health issues for which the NIOH report has come in handy.”

S. Ganesan, Chairman, International Treaties Experts' Committee, said that these European chemical giants had decided to phase out endosulfan in 2001 as it was no longer profitable to them. Chemicals including pesticides and insecticides were the second largest traded commodity in the world, after fuel, in which the manufacturers of the European Union countries enjoyed a 60 per cent share in 2009. A ban on endosulfan to be substituted by other imported pesticides would immensely benefit these manufacturers, he alleged.

‘Largest manufacturer'

According to R. Hariharan, a representative of the International Stewardship Centre, India is the world's largest manufacturer of endosulfan and has a 70 per cent market share of endosulfan business globally with exports worth Rs.180 crore annually. Gujarat alone produced about 55 per cent of the world's requirements - of 40 million litres worth Rs.1,350 crore, while its imported substitute would cost the Indian farmers over Rs.4,500 crores, he claimed.

A farmer from Amreli district in Gujarat, Nayan Visavalya, claimed that he had been using endosulfan for many years and it had not caused health problem to his family or anyone in the village.

Source: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1447725.ece

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/

‘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.

Source: http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/%E2%80%98move-to-ban-endosulfan-will-hit-indian-farmers%E2%80%99/246486.html

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

Ban on Endosulfan is meaningless

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.

http://www.whybanendosulfan.org

Funds for Anti-Endosulfan Campaign

Thanal Conservation Action And Information Network has received a grant of $5,000/- from Global Green Grants Fund 
( www.greengrants.org.pdf/2001_report.pdf please see page 19 ) to support medical and educational efforts to 'protect' people in kerala from continued exposure to Endosulfan and other pesticides. Under pretense of such "protection", activists are launching anti-ecdosulfan campaigns for misleading innocent people.

Kerala’s pesticide puzzle

Twice every year, between 1981 and 2000, a helicopter would whirr around the hills of the Western Ghats in Kasargod, a district in north Kerala bordering Karnataka, spraying endosulfan over the cashew plantations on the upper reaches. Children would rush out to take a look at the helicopter and the white spray would settle like mist on their heads and on leaves and shimmer in the sunlight. But that’s also when people associated the mist with something deadly—the unusually high number of people with infertility and congenital problems in 11 panchayats in the district.

In 2000, after a sustained anti-endosulfan campaign, the state government banned the pesticide. But the issue stayed alive and images of the ‘pesticide victims’ from Kasargod villages filled the public debate in the state. Recently, Union Minister of State for Agriculture and the Congress’s MP from Kochi, K V Thomas, reignited that debate when he said there was no proof to hold the pesticide guilty for the health hazards in Kasargod. Thomas’s comment came soon after India opposed a global ban on endosulfan at the sixth meeting of the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee to the Stockholm Convention. But the issue is an emotive one in Kerala and Thomas quickly changed his stand to go with the prevailing mood.

Last week, the Indian Council for Medical Research commissioned a study to look into the extent of the damage the aerial spraying of endosulfan over 4,696 hectares of cashew plantation, owned by the state-run Plantation Corporation Kerala Limited, had done to the surrounding villages.

... contd… http://bit.ly/keralatragedy

Fabricated False Evidence against Endosulfan

Activists have created stories and have fabricated false evidence against Endosulfan. Obviously they were funded for carrying out campaigns against Endosulfan. 

Many useful products like Endosulfan have become off-patent today, in due course of time. As anyone can manufacture these products, there is competition in the market. Consequently, these products have become available at an affordable price, and poor consumers are benefited. But some companies launch a campaign against such off-patent products through activists, with a view to prejudice people and impose a ban on such products. The result will be that, the off-patent products will be off-market. On one hand, the consumers will suffer as they will have to pay high price for patented products, and on the other hand, the small industry will also suffer, as the off-patent products which they manufacture will be banned with the help of activists.

Symptoms of iodine deficiency wrongfully linked with Endosulfan

Symptoms of iodine deficiency include thyroid enlargement, goiter, nodules within goiter, and pregnancy related problems such as miscarriages, stillbirth, preterm delivery and congenital abnormalities in babies. Children of mothers with severe iodine deficiency during pregnancy can have mental retardation, problems with growth, hearing and speech, cretinism and low intelligence. 
These effects are NOT caused by Endosulfan, but it is due to iodine deficiency. 

Read more on the website of American Thyroid Association. http://www.thyroid.org/patients/patient_brochures/iodine_deficiency.html#symptoms

Down To Earth [DTE] Publishes Unscientific Articles

Down To Earth publishes unscientific articles on Endosulfan. This magazine has also published in past a lab report on analysis of Endosulfan carried out by Centre For Science and Environment [CSE] lab. In said report, CSE has reported amount of Endosulfan 27 times higher than its scientifically established solubility in filtered water. Study conducted by CSE was funded by European Union. Activists

If such horror story entertains you, there is another one at: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/32919
Another Kasaragod
Author(s): Savvy Soumya Misra
Issue: Jan 31, 2011

The article starts with "Like Kerala’s Kasaragod, neighbouring Dakshina Kannada is bearing the brunt of spraying of endosulfan. While Kasaragod grabbed media spotlight and Kerala banned the pesticide, victims in Karnataka are still struggling for recognition"

The expert committee constituted by Government categorically concluded that there is no link between Endosulfan and alleaged health effects in Kasargod.

Now desparate attempts are made through DTE magazine to deceive public. The article states:

"If one cannot prove endosulfan as a causative factor, one cannot disprove it either."

Media has selectively picked up only such horror sensationalizing stories which are not based on science.

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. 

Source: http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/european-union-exploits-stockholm-convention/422653/

Endosulfan is safe to bees and beneficial for insects

Endosulfan exhibits low toxicity to bees and beneficial insects http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp41-c4.pdf ). 
Endosulfan has relatively low toxicity to many species of beneficial insects, mites and spiders. These insects are beneficial in the sense that they prey upon pests which damage crops. Hence it is important that the insecticide used to kill pests is not unsafe to these beneficial insects. Other chemicals, necessarily substituted for endosulfan, would kill beneficial insects leading to population explosions of damaging pests which in turn would require more frequent sprays of harsher chemicals than if endosulfan had been used in the first place.