Promoting paraquat

Re: “Pork protectionism”, (PostBag, April 25).

We should be grateful that the Thai government has had the sense to ban American pork because of concerns that it contains ractopamine.

Farmers in the US have for years been dosing animals intended for human consumption with a cocktail of antibiotics, growth enhancers, etc. with profit being a key factor. The net results speak for themselves. They’re having to contend with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, requiring higher and higher dose rates. Additionally, it’s difficult to believe there is no link between what is fed into the meat and the humans who eat it, when North America has one of the highest obesity rates in the Western world.

Comparing the danger of ractopaminefed animals with a herbicide such as paraquat is rather akin to comparing apples with coal. One is designed to be eaten by humans, the other is not. For sure, both paraquat/ diquat are potentially poisonous to humans. So is petrol or common household bleach, if you drink them, which is the most likely risk. To minimise this risk, paraquat is formulated with a powerful blue dye and a strong emetic, making it visually obvious and distastefully unpalatable.

When it is used, paraquat is applied in a highly diluted form and is inactivated immediately on contact with most soil. It has proven to be one of the most effective long-term methods of weed control in farming, and is used throughout the developed world for this purpose, with no evidence of resistance such as has been observed with another herbicide, glyphosate.

In response to the April 23 editorial, “A swinish proposal”, Mr Corrigan states that paraquat is banned in most countries. It most certainly is not, having been approved for use in Australia, the US and the EU. This most certainly would not be the case were the risks as bad as he claims.

Conversely, it is American imports of ractopamine-fed animals that are banned from import into the EU, Russia, China and over 160 other countries.

The Thai government is to be applauded for its decision not to expose the public to meat produced using chemicals with known risks to children and those with cardiovascular disease. MR JOHN