NEWS FROM
BRAZIL
supplied by Brazil Justice Net
Number 631, May 26, 2010
Visit our home page at: http://www.braziljusticenet.org
In this week's News from Brazil:
Agriculture Chemicals Create Problems for Public Health and Environment
By Igor Felippe Santos
Brazil
broke a record in its use of herbicides and pesticides last year. More
that one billion liters of chemicals were sprayed on fields, according
to statistics from the National Union of Industrial Agricultural
Products. The country is in first place among countries that use these
chemical products.
With their overuse in Brazilian fields,
chemicals are no longer a concern just for agricultural production, but
have become a public health concern as well. “The negative impacts are
felt by the worker who applies them, by the family who lives on the soy
plantations, and the periphery of the city, as the spraying is very
close to housing. There is an environmental impact too with the
contamination of waters,” said Wanderlei Antonio Pignati, a medical
doctor and professor at the Federal University of Mato Grosso. Pignati
was been researching health and environment, and has been tracing the
impact of these chemical in Mato Grosso. He ceded the following
interview to the MST (Movement of rural workers Without Land).
MST:
In 2009, Brazil used over 1 billion liters of agricultural chemicals.
Why with each harvest does the quantity of sprayed chemicals increase?
Pignati:
The use of agricultural chemicals has doubled in the last ten years.
We have become their greatest user in the world. In Mato Grosso, 105
million liters were used in last year’s harvest, averaging 10 liters
per hectare of soy or corn, and 20 liters per hectare of cotton. There
are various municipalities that use up to 7 million liters in one
harvest. This has a great impact for health and the environment.
Their use has increased because six or seven industries in the world,
including those in Brazil, are dominating the seed industry. These
seeds are chosen because they use pesticides, herbicides and chemical
fertilizers. This increases productivity and profits for
agribusinesses. At the same time, deforestation increases when new
areas are planted, which increase the demand for such products. In
Mato Grosso, last year alone saw an increase from 4 million to 10
million planted hectares. Deforestation is the first step of
agribusiness. The wood industry enters, ranching, agriculture,
transportation and warehouses. Finally, the real agro-industry enters,
with is production of oils, flours, sugar, alcohol, cotton and
biofuels. This is developing a great deal as our dependency on
exportation grows. All of this increases the use of agricultural
chemicals in Brazil.
MST: So the more agribusiness advances, the greater the use of these chemicals?
Pignati:
Yes. The seeds of these industries depend on the chemicals. The
industries do not make seeds that can live without them. They do not
create seeds resistant to diseases without the use of chemicals. They
do not do this because they produce both seeds and chemicals. With
transgenics, the situation is even worse. In the case of soy, the
production is resistant to the herbicide, gliphosate, known as Roundup,
patented by Monsanto. In this case, use of Roundup on soy is two or
three times greater.
MST: But CTNBio [the government’s
biosecurity agency] granted licensing of various varieties of
transgenics with the argument that it would diminish the need of
chemicals…
Pignati: You only have to look at the example of
transgenic soy, which is resistant to not one disease, to see the
lies. We have to unmask it at the national and international level.
Transgenic soy is only resistant to gliphosate. It is the biggest user
of chemicals. They use it before planting, and during the first,
second and third months. It uses three times the amount of herbicide.
Now we have transgenic corn, which is also resistant to gliphosate.
This will only increase the use of chemicals. In general, transgenics
which are resistant to disease and pests are of the minority.
MST: What are the effects of agricultural chemicals on health and the environment?
Pignati:
The negative impacts are felt by the worker who applies them, by the
family who lives on the soy plantations, and the periphery of the city
as the spraying is very close to housing. There is an environmental
impact too with the contamination of waters. There are chemical
residues in drinking wells, in creeks, rivers, rainwater and in the
air. With this, the population ends up absorbing these chemicals.
MST: What are the consequences?
Pignati:
The problems for health are acute and chronic: malformed fetuses,
neoplasty (which causes cancer), endocrine disturbances, neurological
disturbances, and respiratory problems. In lakes and ponds, extinction
begins to happen among various species, like fish, amphibians and
reptiles because of the modification of their environments causes by
the chemicals. And the chemicals are washed away by the rains into
creeks and rivers…
MST: How can you prove these [health problems]?
Pignati:
To prove these, it is necessary to compare epidemiological data of
diseases from regions which use a great deal of chemicals to others
that use little. For example, in the three regions of Mato Grosso
which produce soy, corn and cotton, the indices of acute intoxication
by chemicals is three times higher than the other 12 regions which
produce less, and use less chemicals. Analyzing by region the system
of notification of acute intoxication by the municipal and state
secretaries and by the Ministry of Health, we see that where there is
greater production, there are more cases of intoxication, like
diarrhea, vomiting, fainting, death, heart and respiratory problems,
besides sub-chronic diseases which appear one or two months after
exposure, neurological and psychiatric problems, like depression.
There are some chemicals which cause visual and auditory
irritations….Besides this, the regions which produce more soy, corn and
cotton present two and three times greater instances of cancer in
children and adults and malformations in newborns when compared to the
other regions which produce less and use less chemicals. This is
because they are using various types of chemicals which are
carcinogenic.
MST: What are the dangers for consumers of these foods?
What initiatives is Anvisa [the government food safety agency] taking?
Pignati:
Anvisa is reviewing 16 chemical products. Fourteen of these products
have been prohibited in the European Union, the United States and
Canada, being recognized as carcinogenic, causing neurological and
endocrinal problems. But these products are sold freely here, even
with the knowledge that there are chronic effects. Anvisa has a
program of analysis of chemical residues on 20 food products that it
has been doing since 2002. In these studies, they have found residues
on foods above the maximum limit permitted. Endosulfan, for example,
is a carcinogenic insecticide that has been prohibited for 20 years in
Europe, the United States and Canada. It is not prohibited in Brazil,
and is often used in soy and corn production. The maximum limit of
residue on food is questionable because sensitivity to the chemical is
highly individualized. For one person, the maximum limit is 10mg per
day before developing a disease; for another, it is only 1mg per day.
This is not counting the contamination already in the water, in the
air, and in the rain, which really we should consider.
MST: How would you evaluate Brazilian law regarding agricultural chemicals and the work of Anvisa?
Pignati:
From the point of view of legislation, Anvisa is doing good work.
However, every day large producers break the law. Not only the
national laws governing chemicals, but also the Forest Code, Norms from
the Work Ministry (which oblige farm owners to properly outfit the
workers), and norms from the Ministry of Agriculture (which impede
spraying less than 250 meters from springs, rivers, creeks, lakes, and
from places where animals and humans reside). In Mato Grosso, planes
spray all kinds of chemicals and do not respect these norms.
MST: The large landowners say they use the chemicals correctly, that there is no danger.
Pignati:
But there are problems. Even if the workers were to dress like an
astronaut, using all the necessary equipment for protection, they may
not harm there own health, but what about the environment? All
chemicals are toxic, from Class 1 to Class 4. And where are the
residues from these chemicals going? The rains come are wash
everything to the rivers, creeks, then it evaporates into the air and
falls with the rain. There is no secure and correct use of chemicals
for the environment. We have to say that the use of chemicals is
intentional. The so-called pests and weeds--I don’t call them that--be
it an insect, and weed or a fungus, grows in the middle of the crops.
Then the farmer intentionally pollutes the environment to destroy
these. There is no way he can specifically take them out, put them in
a jar, and then apply the chemicals. So, he intentionally pollutes the
crops, the environment, the worker and production. Some of these
chemicals remains on the food.
MST: Agribusiness argues that it
is necessary to use large quantities of chemicals because Brazil is a
tropical country, with great climatic diversity. Is that true?
Pignati:
There is no necessity…They have to use chemicals because the seed
depends on them. There are ways to do large scale production without
seed that is dependent on chemicals and artificial fertilizers. There
are various examples of this in the world and in Brazil. More than 99%
of our total agricultural production depends on seeds from industries
which do not choose seeds which can grow without chemicals.
MST: Given this scenario, what can we expect in the future?
The
tendency is to increase the use of chemicals. Thus, more stringent
government policies will need to be in place, as well as pressure from
ecology groups and consumers, who more and more are consuming this
chemicals. It is necessary to combat the agricultural production that
is here now. With transgenic corn, they are going to use more
gliphosate. There is a cycle which will increase the use of chemicals
without end. If you analyze resistance of the weeds/diseases, there
are some already resistant to gliphosate. At first, you have to
increase the dose to kill them. Instead of five liters you use seven.
Then you have to use a stronger chemical; they become resistant to
that, and there is then no end. There are already large areas of weeds
that are resistant in the United States, Argentina, and are now coming
to Brazil in Rio Grande do Sul, Paraná and Mato Grosso. It is an
unsustainable model.
Source: Movimento Sem Terra Website: www.mst.org.br Accessed May 21, 2010
The reproduction of this
material is permitted as long as the source is cited. If you wish to
contact us, send a message to bjn@braziljusticenet.org.
