Media/News Archive

Opponents of Pesticide Ban Receive Big Contributions from DowDuPont

Friday, May 24th, 2019
Source: PNASH, Flickr

EPA management first approved the organophosphate insecticide chlorpyrifos for use in conventional agriculture based on data from the pesticide industry declaring its safety. EPA scientists later determined chlorpyrifos is linked to lower IQs and levels of gray matter in children exposed prenatally, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the EPA to ban the toxin. EPA administrators under Trump have appealed the order.

Chlorpyrifos continues to be sprayed widely on conventionally grown produce, including apples, broccoli, oranges, strawberries, corn, and wheat. (Over half of all broccoli and apples in the United States are sprayed with chlorpyrifos.)

As politics around pesticides rage, DowDuPont, the primary chemical manufacturer of chlorpyrifos, has been found to disproportionately contribute to campaigns of lawmakers who have not signed on to a 2019 pesticide ban that would ban chlorpyrifos.

The best way to avoid exposure to this harmful pesticide and many others is to eat an organic diet. Chlorpyrifos is prohibited in organic agriculture.


DowDuPont Giving Generously To Congressional Opponents of Chlorpyrifos Ban
MapLight
by Frank Bass

Lawmakers who are sitting out a fight to ban a controversial pesticide linked to brain damage in children and farmworkers have received about 27 times more campaign cash from its primary manufacturer since 2017 than House members pushing for a prohibition on chlorpyrifos.

Ten of the 107 cosponsors of the Ban Toxic Pesticides Act of 2019 reported receiving $14,000 in campaign contributions since 2017 from the Midland, Mich.-based DowDuPont Inc. Federal Election Commission records show 118 of the 330 congressmen who haven’t sponsored the measure received $379,651 from Dow during the same period. Read Full Article »

Big Win for the Bees!

Tuesday, May 21st, 2019
Source: Bob Peterson, Flickr

Center for Food Safety’s (CFS) recent legal victory has made the United States safer for bees! A federal court found the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) approval of many neonicotinoid pesticides illegal. These pesticides must now be pulled off the market and re-assessed. Neonicotinoids are linked to colony collapse in honey bees, bird population declines, and harm to aquatic life and other essential insect pollinators.

Pesticides, parasites, and climate change are all having a profound effect on pollinators. As pollinator populations decline, many crops that humans utilize for food are endangered.

CFS has also filed a suit against the EPA demanding that seeds coated in neonicotinoid pesticides are regulated as well. Cornucopia will be watching these cases as they unfold.

Home gardeners can protect local pollinators by using organic seed and plant starts whenever possible.


CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY SECURES LEGAL VICTORY FOR BEES!
CFS Blog
by Brenna Norton, Development Manager

CFS scored another huge legal victory! As a result of our lawsuit against EPA, 12 toxic, bee-killing “neonic” pesticides will soon be withdrawn from the market! Read Full Article »

Is Corporate Organic a Problem? It Depends on Who You Ask

Wednesday, May 15th, 2019

As consumer demand for organic food continues to rise, many corporations that previously only marketed conventional food have thrown their hats into the ring. While they claim to be making organic food more widely available, the effects of their vertically integrated supply chains and lobbying efforts to stretch the organic regulations have had catastrophic effects on real organic farmers.

Source: JP Davidson, Flickr

For instance, 80% of the organic eggs now on the market come from factory “organic” henhouses. The birds are offered screened porches in lieu of real outdoor access–relying on the argument that this protects them from disease. In fact, our investigations suggest that hens granted legitimate outdoor access rarely succumb to the kinds of disease that can wreak havoc in giant operations.

While the eggs from these industrial producers are a step above conventional eggs, they cannot match the value of truly organic eggs—to the eater, the hen, the farmers, and the environment.

The BBC program, The Food Chain, takes a look at the corporatization of “organic” from the perspective of experts in India, the Netherlands, and the U.S. The Real Organic Project’s Dave Chapman was interviewed for this episode and observes: “It’s not a given in my mind that big is bad, it’s just that when big is bad, it’s very bad.”


Organic Inc
BBC, The Food Chain

At heart, the organic movement is driven by ethics, not market-forces. It started out as a reaction to large-scale industrial agriculture, with an anti-establishment vibe which abhorred mass produced, processed food. But, as demand for organic products has grown, big business has moved in, and now accounts for an increasing amount of the market.

Big Food has money and clout. It can support farmers to transition to organic, and throw its weight behind marketing the virtues of organic methods and food. But whilst its products might be organic on paper, has it truly embraced the spirit of the movement, and does that matter? Read Full Article »

Monsanto/Bayer Loses for the Third Time

Tuesday, May 14th, 2019

Thousands of lawsuits against Monsanto are pending in state and federal courts alleging the company failed to warn consumers that glyphosate causes cancer. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, the most widely used herbicide in the world.

Source: Corey Templeton, Flickr

Monsanto continues to cite statements from the EPA that glyphosate poses “no risk to public health,” a position that contradicts a 2015 report from the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, which found glyphosate was probably carcinogenic to humans. Documents released in legal proceedings have raised questions regarding the legitimacy of the EPA’s review of glyphosate and whether Monsanto had ghostwritten research involving the chemical.

The article below chronicles the pending litigation against Monsanto, including the most recent verdict against the company in a case brought by a couple who contracted non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The California jury handed the company its third major loss, ordering Monsanto to pay the couple more than $2 billion.

Glyphosate is not allowed in organic production.


California jury hits Bayer with $2 billion award in Roundup cancer trial
Reuters
by Tina Bellon

A California jury on Monday awarded more than $2 billion to a couple who claimed Bayer AG’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused their cancer, in the largest U.S. jury verdict to date against the company in litigation over the chemical. Read Full Article »

The Power of the Pesticide Industry

Thursday, May 9th, 2019

The article from the Washington Post, below, highlights how much sway the pesticide industry has in the U.S. government, regardless of the administration in power. Not only do chemical companies hold lobbying power, they also have had a role in drafting the laws that are supposed to regulate their actions and protect consumers. This is a dangerous conflict of interest that has proved, time and again, to lead to public safety concerns. For example, glyphosate (which is one of the most widely used pesticides) was deemed safe by regulatory agencies but has been linked to cancer in ongoing lawsuits against its manufacturer.

Source: CGP Grey, Flickr

The USDA is in charge of pesticide oversight in the agricultural sector. As in other areas, the USDA tends to be lax in its analysis of all relevant data. Often chemical manufacturers produce their own safety data and studies, which are then taken as fact by regulators. Other federal agencies including the Public Health Service and Food and Drug Administration have taken different approaches to evaluating “poisons” for public use. Some only consider negative effects if they are immediate. The health and environmental effects of long-term exposure are rarely studied.

Whenever pesticides or other chemicals are being introduced to the changing market, regulators should use the precautionary principle: accepting new products or processes whose ultimate effects are disputed or unknown should be resisted. As the Washington Post article elucidates, the fact that policymakers and regulators do not take a hard line toward pesticides is not a Republican or Democrat problem. It is everyone’s problem—although some individuals are put at higher risk than others.

In better news, some states are taking action against specific pesticides. Vermont is banning consumer use of neonicotinoid pesticides by July 2019, and California is in the process of banning chlorpyrifos.

Organic food is produced without these pesticides. Cornucopia and its allies will continue to work to keep it that way, using precautionary principles that take into account all science—not just those studies funded by chemical companies.


Why both major political parties have failed to curb dangerous pesticides
The Washington Post
by Elena Conis

The news that David Bernhardt, President Trump’s Interior Secretary nominee, blocked a federal report on the risks certain pesticides pose to hundreds of endangered species has enraged scientists and environmental groups. Read Full Article »