Articles

Children are suffering and dying from diseases that emerging scientific research has linked to chemical exposures, findings that require urgent revamping of laws around the world, according to a new paper published on Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).

Authored by more than 20 leading public health researchers, including one from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and another from the United Nations, the paper lays out “a large body of evidence” linking multiple childhood diseases to synthetic chemicals and recommends a series of aggressive actions to try to better protect children.

The paper is a “call to arms” to forge an “actual commitment to the health of our children”, said Linda Birnbaum, a former director of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and a co-author of the paper.

People diagnosed with infertility and certain cancers may have to blame the very air they breathe, according to a new report that adds to evidence that tiny plastic particles in air pollution and other environmental sources could be causing these and other diseases and illnesses.

Researchers at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) said they reviewed approximately 3,000 studies in determining that exposure to microplastics – plastic particles smaller than 5 millimeters – may be causing a host of health problems in people, including colon cancer; chronic pulmonary inflammation, which can increase the risk of lung cancer; and infertility issues in both men and women.

The paper was published Wednesday in the Environmental Science & Technology journal.

“We urge regulatory agencies and policy leaders to consider the growing evidence of health harms from microplastics, including colon and lung cancer,” study lead author Nicholas Chartres said in a statement. Chartres, formerly with the UCSF Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, is now with the University of Sydney.  

The study expands on a 2023 collaboration between the research team and other experts aimed at informing state lawmakers. 

Microplastics are increasingly drawing concerns from public and environmental health scientists as evidence builds showing they’ve become essentially ubiquitous, found in air, water, food, and within human tissues. One recent study that has not been peer reviewed found particularly concerning accumulation of microplastics in brain samples.

Iowa regulators are failing to properly penalize Iowa factory farms for illegally contaminating state waterways with animal waste, according to an analysis released Monday by a public health advocacy group.

Between 2013 and 2023, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) recorded 179 incidents in which livestock operators discharged manure in violation of the law, fouling creeks and rivers and killing off more than one million fish, according to Food & Water Watch, which based its report on a review of state discharge enforcement reports. The quantities of discharges ranged up to 1 million gallons, the group said.

The findings show a “state in crisis,” according to the group, which said its analysis found “no area of the state is safe from manure discharging into waterways.”

The group noted the violators have paid less than $750,000 in penalties for the illegal actions, despite the fact that such spills can carry harmful contaminants known to cause birth defects, cancers and other health problems in people.

 “While factory farms spur on Iowa’s worsening water pollution crisis, the state is letting corporate giants get off with barely a slap on the wrist,” Food & Water Watch organizer Michaelyn Mankel said in a statement.

The Iowa DNR did not respond to a request for comment.

Exposure to a widely used weed killing chemical could be having “persistent, damaging effects” on brain health, according to a new study.

The study, published Wednesday in the Journal of Neuroinflammation, found that laboratory mice exposed to glyphosate herbicide developed significant brain inflammation, a condition associated with neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s. The researchers, many who are associated with a neurodegenerative disease research center at Arizona State University (ASU), said the symptoms continued even long after exposure ended.

“This work is yet another step forward in understanding the impact of this widely used herbicide on the brain,” lead ASU researcher Ramon Velazquez said. “But more research is needed to determine the impact that glyphosate has on the brain since most Americans are exposed to this herbicide on a daily basis.” Velazquez noted that the work is particularly important given the increasing incidence of cognitive decline in the aging population, particularly in rural communities where glyphosate is used in farming. 

Glyphosate is the most commonly used herbicide globally – made popular by Monsanto Co as the active ingredient in its Roundup brand, among others. It has been used so extensively by farmers, homeowners and industrial and municipal users for so long that it is considered ubiquitous – found in food, water and in human urine samples. A 2022 report by a unit of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said more than 80% of urine samples drawn from children and adults in a US health study contained glyphosate.

Several authors of the new paper were also part of a team that published a prior, related study that examined the impact of glyphosate when it infiltrates the brain.  

In the new study, the dosing of the mice ran for 13 weeks, followed by a six-month recovery period. The research used both normal mice and transgenic mice that had been genetically altered to carry genes that cause them to develop Alzheimer’s symptoms.

Even a low dose, close to the limit used to set acceptable doses for humans, had harmful effects on the mice, the researchers determined.

The long and winding regulatory road for a pesticide known to be harmful to developing babies took another turn on Monday as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it was planning to only partially ban the insecticide chlorpyrifos in farming.

Under pressure from powerful agricultural industry interests and ordered by a federal court to consider the factors raised by the farming groups in a legal petition, the EPA said it would continue to allow chlorpyrifos to be used by farmers growing 11 crops, including apples, asparagus, citrus, peaches, strawberries, wheat, soybeans and others, despite evidence that the pesticide is associated with “neurodevelopmental effects” that can impair the normal development of children. Other uses in farming would be banned, the agency said.

In the most recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pesticide residue monitoring report, chlorpyrifos was the 11th most frequently found pesticide in human food samples out of 209 different pesticides detected by FDA testing.   

“EPA continues to prioritize the health of children,” Michal Freedhoff, assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, said in a statement. “This proposed rule is a critical step forward as we work to reduce chlorpyrifos in or on food and to better protect people, including infants and children, from exposure to chemicals that are harmful to human health.”

New types of Roundup weed killing products marketed to US consumers contain chemicals that pose greater health risks to people than prior formulations suspected of causing cancer, according to an analysis by an environmental health advocacy group.

Friends of the Earth (FOE) reported Tuesday it found four chemicals have recently been added to Roundup products that have been scientifically shown to cause a variety of health problems, including reproductive defects, kidney and liver damage, cancer, and neurotoxicity.

The analysis comes after the agrochemical company Bayer pledged that it would remove glyphosate from its popular Roundup herbicide products sold for residential lawn and garden use starting in 2023.

Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, made the change to try to curtail the filing of future litigation as it battles thousands of lawsuits filed against Monsanto by cancer patients who claim they developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma from using Monsanto’s Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides.

Citing a need to protect the unborn babies of pregnant women, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday banned a pesticide used to kill weeds on farms, golf courses and athletic fields.

The action comes after years of mounting scientific evidence of the dangers posed by exposure to the chemical dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate, also known as DCPA or Dacthal.

“With the final cancellation of DCPA, we’re taking a definitive step to protect pregnant women and their unborn babies,” Michal Freedhoff, assistant administrator for the EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, said in a press release. “The science showing the potential for irreversible harm to unborn babies’ developing brains, in addition to other lifelong consequences from exposure, demands decisive action to remove this dangerous chemical from the marketplace.”

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.” 

More than 50 US lawmakers are calling on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to join dozens of other countries in banning a widely used weedkiller linked to Parkinson’s disease and other health dangers.

In a 31 October letter to the agency, seven US senators said that paraquat, a weedkiller commonly applied on US farms, was a “highly toxic pesticide whose continued use cannot be justified given its harms to farmworkers and rural communities”. The call for a ban from the senators came after 47 members of the US House of Representatives sent a similar letter to the EPA calling for a ban earlier in October.

The lawmakers cite scientific links between paraquat use and development of Parkinson’s and other “life threatening diseases” as well as “grave impacts on the environment”. “Health risks include a higher risk of Parkinson’s disease, with some studies finding a 64% increase in the likelihood of developing Parkinson’s, non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, thyroid cancer, and other thyroid issues,” they wrote.

In 2017, two United Nations experts called for a treaty to strictly regulate dangerous pesticides, which they said were a “global human rights concern”, citing scientific research showing pesticides can cause cancers, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s, and other health problems.  

Publicly, the industry’s lead trade association dubbed the recommendations “unfounded and sensational assertions”.  In private, industry advocates have gone further.

Derogatory profiles of the two UN experts, Hilal Elver and Baskut Tuncak, are hosted on an online private “social network” portal for pesticide company employees and a range of influential allies.

Members of the network can access a wide range of personal information about hundreds of individuals from around the world deemed a threat to industry interests, including US food writers Michael Pollan and Mark Bittman, the Indian environmentalist Vandana Shiva and the Nigerian activist Nnimmo Bassey. Many profiles include personal details such as the names of family members, phone numbers, home addresses and even house values.

The profiling is part of a broad campaign – that was financed partly with US taxpayers dollars – to downplay pesticide dangers, discredit opponents, and undermine international policymaking harmful to the pesticide industry, according to court records, emails and other documents obtained by the non-profit newsroom Lighthouse Reports in an investigative reporting collaboration with The New Lede, the Guardian, and other international media partners. 

The efforts were spearheaded by a “reputation management” firm in Missouri called v-Fluence.  The company, founded by former Monsanto executive Jay Byrne, provides self-described services that include “intelligence gathering”, “proprietary data mining” and “risk communications”.

The revelations demonstrate how industry advocates established a “private social network” to counter resistance to pesticides and genetically modified (GM) crops  in Africa, Europe and other parts of the world, while also denigrating organic and other alternative farming methods. More than 30 current government officials are on the membership list of the private network, most of whom are from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Elver, who is now a university research professor and a member of a United Nations food security committee, said public money would have been better spent on scientific research into the health impacts of pesticides than on profiling people such as herself.

“Instead of understanding the scientific reality, they try and shoot the messenger. It is really hard to believe,” she said.

Author Michael Pollan’s profile portrays him as an “ardent opponent” of industrial agriculture and (GM) crops and a proponent of organic farming. His profile includes a long list of criticisms and details such as the names of his siblings, parents, son and brother-in-law. 

“It’s one thing to have an industry come after you after publishing a critical article. This happens all the time in journalism,” Pollan said. “But to have your own government pay for it is outrageous. These are my tax dollars at work.”