This topic isn’t as polarizing as the choice between Clinton vs. Trump but you’ll find plenty of heated discussions between complete strangers if you search the internets. The most vocal commenters generally fall into one of two categories: 1) those who say things like, “Relax, everything can be toxic… so what? Stop with all the scare tactics.” or on the other end of the spectrum, 2) those who say things like, “The government and the chemical companies are all evil, you can’t trust anyone.” That said, let’s talk about pesticides.
Where would you categorize yourself? I find myself somewhere in the middle. Maybe you do too. I buy organic produce for the “dirty dozen” and I use “green” cleaning products in my home. I’d like to think that I take reasonable measures to reduce my exposure to harmful chemicals wherever I can. I suspect this third category of relatively quiet middle-of-the-roaders, of which I have been a longtime member, is perhaps the largest group of people. So if you’re like me and at least curious about how the City of Irvine decided to stop the use of toxic pesticides, read on.
Pediatric Cancer in Irvine
September was Childhood Cancer Awareness month. Laurie Thompson, an Irvine resident and Non Toxic Irvine board member has a six year old daughter who is a cancer survivor. She says her daughter feels embarrassed that she had cancer and she doesn’t want to feel different from other children.
When asked what drove her to push for the ban of toxic pesticides in Irvine, Laurie said, “The effects of childhood cancer are not always visible but they are there. They never go away. It causes me great pain to know that my sweet, spunky, tiny girl feels ashamed of her cancer journey. Cancer has already taken so much from our family and from so many others. I never expected it to cause my daughter embarrassment. The desire to protect my children and all of the children of our community from the effects of toxic pesticides is a major driving factor for me.”
What is a “pesticide” anyway? Some Basic Definitions
Pesticides and Children
Pesticides are products that are designed to kill or harm living organisms, whether they are weeds, insects, rodents or small animals, making them inherently toxic.1)http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/6/e1757
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, “prenatal and early childhood exposure to pesticides is associated with pediatric cancers, decreased cognitive function and behavioral problems.” Due to children’s unique vulnerability to their toxicity, the AAP recommends reducing children’s exposure to pesticides.2)https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Makes-Recommendations-to-Reduce-Children’s-Exposure-to-Pesticides.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token
City Council of Irvine Votes Unanimously to Move to Organic Pesticides at the Urging of Non Toxic Irvine
The Irvine group Non Toxic Irvine (“NTI”) spearheaded a movement to make Irvine as free from toxic pesticides as possible. On February 23rd of this year, NTI, joined by several other Irvine residents and scientific experts, spoke at a City Council meeting to request that the City amend its policy on pesticide use due to health risks associated with exposure to toxic pesticides. The City Council unanimously voted to amend the City’s Integrated Pest Management (“IPM”) policy.
Irvine’s IPM was amended to use pesticides in the following order: 1) organic pesticides, 2) Water Quality Act Allowed Pesticides, and 3) EPA Level III “caution” labeled pesticides only when deemed necessary to protect public health and economic impact by a licensed pest control adviser. Organic pesticides are to be used in all City properties and exposure to any pesticides where children and general public congregate would be limited.3)City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 23, 2016 at 4pm, City Council Chamber, One Civic Center Plaza, Irvine, California 92606.
Although governments can be notorious for stagnation, that was not the case here. Members of NTI say that working with the City has been a very positive experience. “Soon after our online petition launched, we were asked to meet with Mayor Steven Choi and Councilwoman Christina Shea. They agreed to add us to their meeting agenda on February 23.” said Kim Konte another board member of NTI.
Christina Shea was the Council Member who put NTI’s request on the agenda. “Our non toxic pesticide organic program is one of the first to be implemented in the State of California. I am a cancer survivor and I am acutely aware of the damaging effects of toxic chemicals in our lives and the environment.” said Council Member Shea. “Our non toxic organic program will be effective in eradicating weeds and pest infestations within our green belts, parks and open space, but not cause undue harm to our wildlife, family pets and our small and vulnerable children. It was my pleasure to bring forward this proposal with our Non Toxic Irvine parent partners.”
Of course, bringing about major change is rarely easy. When asked if they’ve encountered opposition, Ayn Craciun, a board member of NTI said, “Yes, of course. I like to think it’s mostly inertia—people who are used to doing things the way they’ve always done them and can’t see another way. Some people are afraid organic landscaping will cost more, but when you tell them it will actually cost less in the long run, they are more interested.”
Ayn became interested in working on this issue after experiencing a series of unexplained miscarriages. She began looking for answers and found numerous studies linking pesticide exposure to fetal death. “I want my kids to know that when something is wrong, you do your best to fix it. I want them to remember that I tried to do that.” said Ayn.
What began as isolated efforts by individuals in Irvine within their own communities or schools, became NTI in early 2015 when they banded together to successfully lobby the Irvine Unified School District to stop using Roundup, a commonly used pesticide, at schools. Soon after, NTI turned its focus to the City of Irvine. Thanks to NTI’s efforts, IUSD has adopted fully organic landscaping methods.
Private Properties within Irvine
Legally, the City’s decision only covers properties managed by the City and cannot extend to private properties such as property managed by home owners associations.
The following is a current list of approved chemicals for a community here in Irvine.
“Irvine has 230+ HOAs, and all but maybe 8 are still using a conventional pesticide regimen. We are trying to help people who reach out to us make changes in their communities by providing a toolkit – template letter, meeting comments, factsheet, and other support. It is a lot of work, but it’s very rewarding when we hear that a community is making a change in the right direction.” says Ayn.
Evaluating the Risk of Pesticide Exposure
Perhaps one major reason NTI has had success is because they do not use alarmist fearmongerer tactics. Instead, the group relies on data and science to spread awareness. One of their scientific advisers is Dr. Bruce Blumberg, a Professor of Developmental and Cell Biology and Professor of Pharmaceutical Sciences at UC Irvine.
Last year, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (“IARC”) an arm of the World Health Organization (“WHO”) classified the chemical glyphosate, as a probable carcinogen in humans. Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the United States.4)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate The chemical has already been proven to cause cancer in animals.5)http://fortune.com/2015/04/15/roundup-monsanto-cancer-link-hard-to-prove/ “The major challenge with showing that a chemical causes cancer in humans [as opposed to animals] is that the cancer typically develops many years after exposure.” said Dr. Blumberg.
One of the most commonly used brand of herbicides that uses glyphosate as its active ingredient is Roundup, a product of the multinational agrochemical company, Monsanto.6)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Current_products Roundup is an approved chemical in the list above.
“Timing [can make] effects permanent. That’s why it’s so important we protect children, women who are pregnant or may become pregnant.” Dr. Bruce Blumberg
Should the Public Wait for the Final Word on Glyphosate from Federal and State Agencies?
The US Environmental Protection Agency’s stance on glyphosate has been unclear at best. In 1985, the EPA classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans.7)https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0ahUKEwiupqrHwOjPAhUGPiYKHQ1LCmYQFggyMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.epa.gov%2Fsites%2Fproduction%2Ffiles%2F2016-09%2Fdocuments%2Fglyphosate_issue_paper_evaluation_of_carcincogenic_potential.pdf&usg=AFQjCNEIz48cO2sYFNdEyc_Vr0gnjxF9jA&sig2=us9Uv7Cbdzx49zE6NF3ZOA&cad=rja Then in October of last year, the EPA published a report stating it was not a carcinogen.8)https://morningconsult.com/alert/epa-paper-glyphosate-not-likely-carcinogenic/ This month, to evaluate whether glyphosate is carcinogenic or not, the EPA was slated to hold public meetings with expert panelists. Just four days before the meetings were to take place on October 18th, the EPA announced that it would postpone the meeting following lobbying efforts by the agrichemical industry to cancel the meeting all together or at a minimum, to remove panelists who has ever spoken publicly on whether glyphosate is a carcinogen. No date has been set to reschedule the meeting.9)http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carey-gillam/epa-bows-to-chemical-indu_b_12563438.html
At our state level, the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued a statement one year ago of its intent to list glyphosate as a chemical known to cause cancer under Proposition 65.10)http://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/crnr/notice-intent-list-tetrachlorvinphos-parathion-malathion-glyphosate In response, Monsanto (the manufacturer of Roundup) filed a lawsuit in Fresno this year, (Monsanto Company v. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, et al, case number 16-CECG-00183) asking for the court to stop the OEHHA from listing glyphosate as a carcinogen and to declare the proposed listing of glyphosate as a carcinogen as unconstitutional. Numerous parties have joined the case and the next motion on calendar set for early December is a motion to dismiss filed by the OEHHA.
But the potential harm to humans is not limited to cancer. In 1991, a group of scientists at the Wingspread Conference concluded that compounds introduced into the environment by human activity are capable of disrupting the endocrine system of animals … and humans.11)https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?dirEntryId=187223
Today, these chemical compounds are known as endocrine disruptor chemicals (“EDCs”) and they include chemicals such as bisphenol-A (“BPA”) and polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”). EDCs can commonly be found in things we encounter every day including food, cosmetics, food containers and pesticides.12)https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/
“These EDCs are chemicals with similar chemical properties to natural hormones, allowing them to interfere with the normal function of the endocrine system.” said Dr. Blumberg. Also significant is the timing of one’s exposure to EDCs. “Timing [can make] effects permanent. That’s why it’s so important we protect children, women who are pregnant or may become pregnant.” added Dr. Blumberg.
But back to those who might say “everything can kill us, so what?” Well, it’s partially true; we encounter things that are harmful to us on a daily basis. Some carcinogens, we may accept as having more benefits than risks and voluntarily expose ourselves to, such as alcohol or the sun’s UV rays.13)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_cancer Other chemicals, if enough people speak out, may be banned. One such example is the history of bisphenol-A (“BPA”), an estrogen mimicking chemical that has been used in plastics since the 1960s. Although the Food and Drug Administration declared BPA as safe in 2008, after repeated reports of negative health effects, they instituted a ban of BPA in 2012.14)http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/science/fda-bans-bpa-from-baby-bottles-and-sippy-cups.html?_r=0
As of today, there remains disagreement and much controversy on the issue of whether glyphosate is harmful to humans. Today, we know there is sufficient evidence that it causes cancer in animals.15)http://fortune.com/2015/04/15/roundup-monsanto-cancer-link-hard-to-prove/ Is it a stretch that what can cause cancer in animals could also cause cancer in humans? No, says Dr. Blumberg. “It is true that there are some instances where a chemical will have one effect in humans and another effect in animals but those are the exceptions, not the rule.” says Dr. Blumberg.
The question we should ask ourselves is should we wait for the final word that glyphosate or other pesticides are a carcinogen or EDC? Or should we err on the side of caution and take action now?
“Why risk exposing young people to a chemical that is a probable human carcinogen? There is a benefit and a risk with any decision you make in life. You have to accept that you might make the wrong decision. Which way do you want to be wrong?” asked Dr. Blumberg “With respect to EDCs and carcinogens, it is obviously prudent to reduce exposure to suspect chemicals. This is what we call a ‘no brainer’ unless you are the person who stands to benefit from the sales or use of the chemical in question.”
- Reduce exposure to a chemical “probably” carcinogenic to humans
- Reduce exposure to EDCs
- Long term likely benefit of improved health, lower incidence of disease and lower health care expenditures
- Cost savings with increased soil health, reduced water use and reduced cost of chemicals
- Possible decrease in aesthetics
- Manufacturer of chemicals/pesticides may suffer lower sales or may need to offer an alternative formulation
- Landscaping companies may need to adopt new practices
What’s Next for the Non Toxic Irvine Movement
Even though they’ve already brought about significant change in Irvine, NTI says they have only just begun their work.
NTI is still working with the Irvine Unified School District on their Pesticide Management Policy and four of NTI’s board members serve on IUSD’s Pest Management Task Force. They have also met with The Irvine Company and are hopeful that they too will follow the City of Irvine’s lead. Most recently, the large community of Woodbridge, home to some 30,000 residents confirmed that they are working with the City to develop a pest management plan that is consistent with the City’s. NTI’s efforts are being recognized at the national level and like minded people in other cities are starting their own non toxic movements.
Of her efforts to make Irvine non toxic, Kim Konte’s 11 year old son said, “Mom, I had no idea such a small group of people could make such a big change.” “To know that we could have fewer families go through what Laurie and her family has makes every second, every meeting, every moment working on Non Toxic worth it.” said Kim.
If you’re interested in finding out what chemicals are being used in your neighborhood, contact your HOA and ask them to provide a list like the one above. For more information on how to work with your homeowner’s association (or cities outside of Irvine) to stop the use of toxic pesticides please contact NTI.
Want to send Non Toxic Irvine your thanks or have a question for them?
References [ + ]