Toxic love affair with pesticides kills us

Pesticides, touted by some as the saviour of modern agriculture, have become a silent assassin, lurking in our fields, poisoning our food and devastating human lives. Widespread and indiscriminate use of these toxic chemicals birthed a crisis that few are willing to confront. As profits soar for agrochemical giants such as Syngenta and Bayer CropScience, human casualties mount, with farmworkers paying the ultimate price for the world’s food security.

The narrative surrounding pesticides often revolves around their necessity for feeding the world’s growing population. To sustain the demand to feed 9.3-billion people by 2050, researchers believe farmers will need to use even more pesticides.

INFESTATION

However, the stark reality is that while pesticides may boost yields in the short term, the long-term costs to human health and the environment far outweigh any temporary benefits.

Am I saying farmers should just leave their crops to be wiped out by pest infestation? Not at all — there is a place for pesticide use in agriculture (especially the softer options).

The problem with modern agriculture is that pesticide application has become a default setting instead of a careful consideration.

It is well documented that most pesticides (fungicides, herbicides, insecticides and nematicides) applied to crops to control various pests are toxic. The degree of toxicity is indicated by a colour code (red, yellow and green) and other label data such as LD50 (lethal dose). And that’s just looking at the pesticide’s active principles.

The insidious nature of pesticide poisoning extends beyond acute toxicity. Recent research findings shed light on the alarming discrepancy between the toxicity of pesticide formulations and their declared active ingredients.

Pesticide formulations contain active principles and adjuvants, which are often kept confidential and called “inerts” by the manufacturing companies.

A 2014 study found that major pesticides are more toxic to human cells than their declared active principles. The study tested the toxicity of nine pesticides and found that eight formulations out of the nine were up to 1,000 times more toxic than their active principles.

These results challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake for pesticides because this norm is calculated from the toxicity of the active principle alone.

It is not uncommon to have these toxic products applied from the air or to see a crop being sprayed with the wind from behind, creating a cloud of misery for the driver.

In the US, 37%-54% of pesticide-related illnesses among agricultural workers are attributed to spray drifts.

The lucky drivers are in insulated cabins, but these products still have to be mixed into the applicator, where the fumes alone can be unbearable.

A damning report from the Pesticide Atlas unveils the grim reality: pesticides are responsible for more than 11,000 human fatalities and they poison more than 385-million people worldwide a year.

Yet the allure of profit continues to drive the industry forward, with a 96% increase in global consumption of agricultural pesticides between 1990 and 2021.

Consider the case of glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundUp, one of the most widely used pesticides globally. Despite its pervasive presence in agriculture, mounting evidence links glyphosate exposure to a litany of health issues, including cancer and neurological disorders.

GLYPHOSATE

The repercussions are not confined to developing countries; they reverberate across the globe, disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities in developing nations where regulations are lax and corporate accountability is virtually nonexistent.

A quick search for glyphosate will reveal the billions of dollars being claimed due to sickness and directly related deaths. Disturbingly, glyphosate

— an ingredient linked to cancer — has been found in 80% of US urine samples. And this is just one of thousands of pesticides.

The associated claims and court cases are coming from developed countries. One can only imagine what happens in the developing world, where those suffering do not know better and certainly do not have the means to fight a court case. Never mind that when pesticides are banned in developed countries they tend to get dumped in developing countries for a fraction of the price.

In SA more than 3,000 registered pesticides are sprayed across our environment, several of which are banned or severely restricted in Europe due to human and environmental safety risks.

The country has become the largest consumer of pesticides in Africa, accounting for about a third of all farm chemicals used on the continent.

Outdated legislation, such as SA’s archaic 1947 Pesticides Control Act remains in force after 77 years, failing to address the evolving landscape of agricultural practices and the mounting evidence of pesticide harm.

Even as evidence piles up about the serious threat pesticides pose to humanity and the environment, the government has failed to implement a series of reforms recommended by the “new” pesticide management policy published 14 years ago.

Fragmented oversight, conflicts of interest and industry influence perpetuate a culture of impunity, shielding agrochemical giants from accountability while leaving farmers and communities exposed to grave risks.

In the face of mounting evidence and public outcry, governments must act decisively to safeguard human health and environmental integrity. The EU’s progressive stance on pesticide reduction sets a precedent for proactive policymaking, emphasising the imperative of shifting towards sustainable pest management practices.

By prioritising precautionary measures, investing in research on alternative farming methods and empowering independent regulatory bodies, policymakers can chart a path towards a future free from the scourge of pesticide poisoning.

One of the best books I have ever read is Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. First published in 1962, the book is regarded to have launched the environmental movement and the start of regenerative agriculture.

As you regenerate your soil, your need for synthetic chemical inputs will lessen dramatically over time. You’ll no longer pay for chemical inputs or irrigation if you don’t have to, and you won’t have to if your soils and soil biologies are replenished and thriving.

OVERUSE

This is an ideal state, and it does take time. So even if eradicating pesticide use isn’t possible in the short term, the agricultural world needs to become more cognisant of the overuse of harmful chemicals and more intentional about adopting new strategies that go beyond the deadly default.

The time for complacency is over. We stand at a crossroads where the choices we make today will reverberate for generations to come. Will we continue prioritising profit over human life, or will we muster the courage to challenge the status quo and embrace a paradigm shift towards sustainable and regenerative agriculture?

The answer lies not in rhetoric but in action. It is time to confront the harrowing reality of pesticide poisoning and forge a path towards a future where health, justice and sustainability prevail.

THE PROBLEM IS PESTICIDE APPLICATION HAS BECOME A DEFAULT SETTING INSTEAD OF A CAREFUL CONSIDERATION