Center for Food Safety

November 22, 2024

Friend or foe? Environmental advocates eye Kennedy nomination warily

By Shannon Kelleher

In the wake of last week’s announcement that President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), some leading environmental and public health advocates say they’ve found themselves in a “difficult” position.

On the one hand, Kennedy is a lifelong environmental advocate himself and is pushing a platform called “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA), which sets an agenda strikingly similar to those of many groups on the political left – “prioritizing regenerative agriculture, preserving natural habitats, and eliminating toxins from our food, water and air.”

But on the other, Kennedy’s alignment with Trump – who touts his intention to roll back regulations and undo many hard-fought consumer protections – and Kennedy’s controversial views on certain health-related issues, have left leading environmental health groups unclear on whether he should be seen as friend or foe.

Kennedy has argued for tighter US pesticide regulations and has spoken out against glyphosate, the main ingredient in the popular weedkiller Roundup that has been classified as a probable carcinogen by a major international cancer research group. He has also been sharply critical of regulators for failing to protect kids from harmful additives in food.

He rails against cozy connections between big business and the regulatory agencies that are supposed to oversee them, and vows to work to eliminate conflicts of interest in the agencies he would oversee, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH) and others.

“I can get the corruption out of the agencies,” said Kennedy in a recent interview. “It’s what I’ve been doing for 40 years. Once [the regulatory agencies] are not corrupt, once Americans are getting good science and are allowed to make their own choices, they’re going to get a lot healthier.”

Kennedy has a background as an environmental lawyer with a decades-long track record of fighting for green issues – he was once named one of Time magazine’s “Heroes for the Planet” for his work restoring the Hudson River, he founded the clean water advocacy group Waterkeeper Alliance, and he previously served as senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

But critics point out that Kennedy has no medical training and has been accused of peddling baseless conspiracy theories and making claims not supported by science.

winifred-helton-harmon-4GIF-BcmZlM-unsplash

November 22, 2024

Court deals setback to efforts to regulate pesticide-coated seeds

By Carey Gillam

A federal court this week dealt a blow to calls for new regulations on pesticide-coated seeds used in farming, ruling that US regulators were not acting improperly in exempting the seeds from registration review.

The US District Court for the Northern District of California on Wednesday granted a summary judgment in favor of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and agrochemical industry lobbyist CropLife America, turning back arguments by the Center for Food Safety and other environmental advocates who have spent years warning of a range of “devastating effects” they say result from widespread use of the specialty seeds.

The concerns addressed in the case focus on seeds that are coated in insecticides before they are planted. Three specific types of insecticides that are part of a class of chemicals known as neonicotinoids present particular threats to beneficial birds and insects such as butterflies, and can contaminate the air, soil and water with toxins, according to critics.

The court case ruled on this week focused on three types of neonics – imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, and clothianidin.

“Neonicotinoid treated seeds are used on at least half of all croplands in the US but pose an extreme danger to birds, bees, and other pollinators,” the Center for Food Safety said in a statement issued Thursday following the ruling. “With the future of agriculture and entire food webs on the line, it is irresponsible and unlawful that these pesticides will continue to be exempted from registration.”

The European Union has banned the outdoor use of certain types of neonicotinoids, also called neonics, and the United Nations has said neonics are so hazardous that they should be “severely” restricted. But in the US, neonics remain widely used, typically as coatings on corn, cotton and soybean seeds, planted by farmers to protect crops from insects and disease.

Scientific research has shown they are contributing to a decline in important pollinators such as honeybees. Environmental advocates say numerous studies show neonics are not necessary.

April 24, 2024

US health advocacy groups support Mexico in GMO trade dispute

By Johnathan Hettinger

More than a dozen North American organizations have weighed in to support Mexico in its trade dispute with the United States over Mexico’s ban of genetically modified (GM) corn, agreeing that the nation has the right to protect human health from food ingredients it considers hazardous.

“The burden of proof, so far generated for Mexico, [should] be reversed. It should be the United States that proves that there is no long-term risk to human health from the direct consumption of [genetically modified corn], in the particular case of the Mexican consumption pattern,” Mexico-based El Poder del Consumidor, a consumer rights association, wrote in comments filed earlier this month.

In the series of recent filings submitted to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement secretariat, only one group, the US-based Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) defended the United States’ position that Mexico is violating trade agreements by banning the corn for foods for human consumption. Bayer AG, which bought GMO crop developer Monsanto in 2018, is a BIO member as are other companies that make and sell GMO seeds and agrochemicals.

The Canadian government also defended the US position. Both Canada and the US accuse Mexico of failing to base its decision on GMO corn on valid scientific research. The governments say science shows GMO corn is not a threat to human health. Mexico disagrees, and says that solid research does show risks to humans from foods made with genetically altered corn. Mexico also objects to GMO corn for environmental and cultural reasons.

“There is a basis in the Mexican legal framework that makes it necessary for the Mexican government to transition away from GM corn to protect its people,” Javier Zuñiga, an attorney with Mexico-based El Poder del Consumidor, said in a webinar held on Tuesday. “It guarantees the right to live in a healthy way.”

Mexico is also working to ban glyphosate, the active ingredient in Bayer’s Roundup weedkiller and other herbicides. Glyphosate is commonly used on genetically modified crops, including corn. The ban on glyphosate in Mexico was set to go into effect April 1, but was delayed indefinitely last month.

sippakorn-yamkasikorn-6v9w4ZR2TJE-unsplash

February 14, 2024

Pesticide-treated seeds harm earthworms, study finds

By Shannon Kelleher

Commonly used pesticides pose a toxic threat to earthworms, creatures considered crucial for the health of soil used to grow crops, according to a new study published Wednesday.

The study builds on evidence that a class of insecticides called neonicotinoids, or neonics, are harming a range of species important for planetary health. Neonics have been banned in many countries but are popular with farmers in the United States.

The authors of the new study said they found that when earthworms were exposed to four different types of neonics, as well as the fungicide difenoconazole, they suffered damage to their mitochondrial DNA and gained significantly less weight than earthworms not exposed to the chemicals. The pesticides were especially damaging when the worms were exposed to a neonic plus the fungicide in combination.

The findings were published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology Letters.

“We need to re-evaluate the toxicity of neonics and the synergistic effects of neonics and systemic pesticides in those non-target organisms when they are applied to soil simultaneously,” said Chensheng (Alex) Lu, a professor at Southwest University in Chongqing, China and an author of the study.

“The contribution of earthworms to crop yields is as essential as pollination done by honey bees,” he added. “A healthy soil is simply not possible without the presence of earthworms.”

shad-arefin-sanchoy-AbIiPjvu5z0-unsplash

December 19, 2023

New EPA plan for hormone-harming pesticides sparks hope, but also skepticism

By Johnathan Hettinger

A new US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plan aimed at protecting the public from exposure to pesticides that harm reproductive health is sparking hope for advocates who have called for action for more than two decades, but skepticism remains high.

The EPA is accepting public comments on the plan, which could impact regulation of several widely used pesticides, until December 26. But key players in the agrochemical industry – as well as some environmental advocates – are asking the EPA to extend the deadline, citing the complexity and magnitude of the EPA’s proposal.

The long overdue strategy comes after litigation and multiple Inspector General probes exposed decades of EPA inaction to deal with evidence that many widely used pesticides are disrupting human hormones in ways that interfere with healthy pregnancies and cause an array of other harms.

“Generally, we’re very happy EPA is finally taking some action on this program,” said Jenny Loda, a staff attorney at the Center for Food Safety (CFS). Last year, CFS sued the EPA on behalf of farmworkers for failing to abide by the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) implemented by Congress as part of the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996.

Loda said that they will continue with their litigation, which has the potential to set court-ordered timelines on the EPA’s progress with the program.

December 13, 2023

Citing new science, groups petition EPA to suspend glyphosate weed killer

By Carey Gillam

Citing new scientific research, a coalition of farmworker, public health and environmental advocates on Wednesday filed a legal petition with US regulators demanding they immediately suspend authorization for the controversial weed killing chemical called glyphosate.

The petition, filed with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), alleges that the chemical does not meet the required safety standard set by federal law and the EPA has “no valid assessment demonstrating otherwise.”

If the EPA fails to address the petition, the groups said they will take the agency back to court, where the groups last year successfully garnered a judicial finding that the EPA’s most recent assessment of glyphosate was deeply flawed.

The legal petition comes less than 10 days after the publication of a new scientific study that lends fuel to critics who say glyphosate herbicide products can cause cancer.

In a paper published Dec. 6, National Institutes of Health cancer scientists said they found markers of genotoxicity in male farmers with high uses of glyphosate. The authors said their work suggested glyphosate ‘could confer genotoxic” effects, and amount to “novel evidence regarding the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate.” The study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The journal also published an accompanying opinion article from environmental and occupational health researchers who called the new study “important new evidence” that should be considered in evaluating glyphosate safety. The study was the largest of its kind and provides “mechanistic support for genotoxicity of glyphosate,” the researchers wrote.

“There is really compelling new science out there,” said Bill Freese, science director with the Center for Food Safety, the group leading the legal petition. “It’s becoming increasingly untenable for the agency to deny the cancer hazard.”

In addition to multiple studies cited as evidence of a cancer connection, “numerous studies” show glyphosate has harmful impacts on the liver, kidney and reproductive system, according to the petition.

October 14, 2023

EPA fast-tracking of gene-altering pesticide sparks concerns

By Shannon Kelleher

US regulators are fast-tracking a novel, gene-altering insecticide in an unusual move that would greenlight the product for three years of commercial use before a standard testing period is completed.

Calantha, a product of the company GreenLight Biosciences, contains the active ingredient ledprona, which uses a mechanism called RNA interference (RNAi) to kill the Colorado potato beetle, a notorious pest, by turning off genes it needs to survive. Calantha would be the first pesticide spray using RNAi, though the technology has been genetically engineered into some corn plants to protect them from the corn rootworms, and RNAi has a history of use in medical therapeutics and vaccines.

The EPA just granted GreenLight Biosciences an Experimental Use Permit (EUP) in May, giving the company two years to gather and assess data from use of the new product in limited test plots. But now the new pesticide could be widely sprayed on potato crops around the country as early as this spring.

Critics fear that the new pesticide is being fast-tracked without sufficient data to demonstrate that it is safe for human health and the environment, and that it will even be effective.

“It’s a huge precedent-setter,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist at Consumer Reports. “This is a new form of pesticide which has never been on the market before. When this is a new class [of pesticide], you shouldn’t be cutting corners.”

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said Friday that it is extending the public comment period for ledprona following a request from the environmental group Friends of the Earth. The deadline for the comment period, which was scheduled to end October 13, has been moved to October 30.

May 8, 2023

EPA move to allow new pesticide use on food crops worries health advocates

Federal regulators are poised to allow US farmers to start applying a pesticide currently restricted to non-food uses on fields producing an array of food crops in a move that scientists and advocates say could threaten human and ecological health.

Last week, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposed decision to allow the first-ever uses of chlormequat chloride on wheat, barley, oats and a hybrid of rye and wheat known as triticale. The agency said the move is aimed at helping farmers limit the bending and breaking of small grains, a condition called lodging, which can impair harvesting and reduce yields. The pesticide acts as a plant growth regulator, controlling plant size by blocking hormones that stimulate growth prior to bloom.

Chlormequat is not currently approved for use on food or animal feed in the United States, though it has been allowed for use on ornamental crops grown in nurseries and greenhouses since 1962.

Farm groups welcomed the EPA action; the pesticide is already used by farmers in other countries on small grain products that are imported to the US. But critics say laboratory research has linked the chemical to problems with reproduction and development, and the EPA should not be putting people and animals at greater risk of exposure.

The crops included in the proposed decision can make up a significant portion of a child’s diet, a fact that makes the EPA’s proposal potentially dangerous for children, according to Phil Landrigan, a professor of public health and epidemiologist at Boston College.

February 22, 2023

Citing birds and bees, groups petition EPA to close pesticide loophole

By Carey Gillam

The US should overhaul regulation of a class of insecticides tied to excessive honeybee and bird deaths, according to a citizen petition filed Wednesday with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by a coalition of more than 60 nonprofit groups.

Specifically, the groups are demanding the EPA revoke a nearly 40-year-old waiver that allows pesticide companies to bring their products to market without first providing data that proves the product benefits. The groups say the waiver dates back to a 1984 EPA declaration that stated: “rather than require efficacy data the Agency presumes that benefits exceed risks”.

The petition, which was submitted by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the American Bird Conservancy, is aimed at turning back the use of insecticides known as neonicotinoids, or neonics, which many studies have shown to be exceptionally harmful to hundreds of species.

Environmental advocates say numerous studies show neonics are not necessary and are so detrimental to the environment that they should be banned.

“This stuff is causing all sorts of environmental problems and the environmental tragedy is multiplied because in many cases these insecticides provide farmers no benefit but at the same time they’re doing all this damage,” said Peter Jenkins, a lawyer with PEER.

The European Union has banned the outdoor use of certain types of neonics, and the United Nations has said neonics are so hazardous that they should be “severely” restricted. But in the US, the pesticides remain widely used, typically as coatings on corn and soybean seeds planted by farmers to protect crops from insects and disease. Neonicotinoids are used across on an estimated 150m acres of US farmland annually.

When used as seed coatings, neonics are absorbed through the roots of plants as they grow. Residues of the chemicals can persist for years in the environment and are blamed, along with other pesticides, for a so-called “insect apocalypse.”

September 14, 2022

Court smacks USDA for lack of transparency in GMO labeling

By Carey Gillam

Years of legislative and court battles over the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) food took another turn this week when a federal court determined on Tuesday that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) erred in allowing food companies to label GE products simply with digital codes that consumers have to scan, without any accompanying disclosure options.

Under USDA rules that took full effect earlier this year, food made with genetically modified crops can be labeled simply as “bioengineered” (BE), or come with a QR code guiding consumers to more information online, among other options.

But the court said those rules did not comply with the law, and found that the USDA knew that allowing “standalone electronic disclosure” would not provide consumers “sufficient access” to disclosures about bioengineering involved in creating certain products.