A Closer Look at Pesticides Understanding Water Quality Concerns

Understanding Water Quality Concerns: A Closer Look at Pesticides

Defining Pesticides:

The EPA describes a \\\\\\\"pesticide\\\\\\\" as a substance or combination of substances intended for (1) the prevention, elimination, repulsion, or mitigation of any pest, (2) use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant, or (3) use as a nitrogen stabilizer. Although this formal definition is relatively recent, pesticides have been integral to agricultural production worldwide for centuries and have likely played an essential role in managing insects, weeds, and diseases. For example, sulfur\\\\\\\'s use for controlling plant diseases can be traced back 4500 years to its first application in Sumeria. Mercury and arsenic salts were later introduced, and the insecticidal properties of chrysanthemum flower extracts (pyrethrum) were discovered approximately 2000 years ago. Indeed, natural substances have long been employed to help manage pests in agriculture (Reeves et al., 2019).

Contemporary Uses of Pesticides:

Many substances utilized daily are classified as pesticides if marketed for their pest-mitigating abilities. Disinfecting agents serve as a typical example. Products containing bleach and promoted for their capacity to manage pathogens must be registered with the EPA as pesticides. Boric acid, often used as a whitening agent in laundry, is also registered as a pesticide for insect control. Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol), an essential nutrient, is also registered as a pesticide. When ingested in large amounts, vitamin D3 can be lethal to rats and mice, and products containing vitamin D3 designed for this purpose must be registered with the EPA as rodenticides (Reeves et al., 2019).

Exposure Assessment:

Increased pesticide exposure typically falls on the poorest and most vulnerable populations globally. This is also true in the United States, where pesticide exposure strongly correlates with race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. We will focus on general trends in exposure to different subpopulations in the United States and further discuss specific demographic groups that disproportionately bear the societal burdens of pesticide use (Donley et al., 2022).

General Trends:

Researchers from California\\\\\\\'s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified pesticide usage as the most significant pollution burden contributing to racial, ethnic, and income disparities in the state, surpassing various air pollutants and other toxic releases. The findings indicated that most pesticide applications in California occurred within 60% of zip codes, with the highest proportion of people of color. Additional research has revealed that over half of the glyphosate applied in California was utilized in the state\\\\\\\'s eight poorest counties, where 53% of inhabitants identified as Hispanic or Latinx, compared to the statewide average of 38%. In 2019, pesticides of over eight million pounds associated with childhood cancers were employed in 11 Californian counties with a predominantly Latinx population (>50%), equating to 4.2 pounds of these pesticides per individual. Conversely, 770,000 pounds of the same pesticides were applied in 25 Californian counties with the lowest Latinx population (

National patterns also show these differences, with African Americans and Mexican Americans having greater pesticide indicators in their bloodstream or urine compared to non-Hispanic whites not in poverty. Similarly, the largest gap between Caucasian women and women of color in 16 other chemical categories tested was seen in pesticide exposure markers. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducted a study that discovered specific historical pesticide byproducts to be more prevalent in Mexican American and African American women aged 40 and older than whites. Non-Hispanic Black or Mexican American people unevenly felt the financial and health effects linked to organophosphate pesticide exposure compared to non-Hispanic white individuals (Tessum et al., 2021).

To analyze a broader array of pesticides throughout the country, we looked at information gathered by the CDC for the Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. This document includes data on various pesticides and their byproducts, tracked in the blood and urine of a nationally representative U.S. population sample from 1999 to 2016. Among 14 pesticides/byproducts with concentrations high enough to establish a geometric mean for the three demographic subgroups studied (non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic Black, and Mexican American), only 3 (21%) were detected in non-Hispanic whites at levels above the overall population average. In contrast, average urinary and serum concentrations were increased for 8 of 14 (57%) and 10 of 14 (71%) pesticides/byproducts in non-Hispanic Blacks and Mexican Americans, respectively, compared to the national average. For 12 out of 14 pesticides/byproducts evaluated, non-Hispanic Blacks or Mexican Americans displayed higher average concentrations than non-Hispanic whites (Tessum et al., 2021).

Impact Analysis on Public Health Response (Local and Global):

The Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions are international agreements aimed at banning and limiting the use of pesticides. The Rotterdam Convention fosters joint responsibility and efforts among all participants in the global trade of specific hazardous chemicals. This Convention also encourages information sharing about the properties of dangerous chemicals, supports national decision-making on their import and export, and circulates these decisions. Its primary objective is safeguarding the environment and human health from potentially harmful chemicals. The Convention was enacted on February 24, 2004 (Sapbamrer et al., 2023).

The Convention addresses 52 chemicals (comprising 16 industrial chemicals, 35 pesticides, and 1 in both pesticide and industrial chemical groups) that have been prohibited and severely limited. This Convention aims to safeguard human health and the environment from POPs. It was established on May 17, 2004, and covers 35 POPs divided into three categories: industrial POPs, pesticide POPs, and unintentional production of POPs (Sapbamrer et al., 2023).

Thailand approved the Rotterdam Convention on February 19, 2002, and it was implemented on February 24, 2004. The Stockholm Convention was approved on January 31, 2005, and went into effect on May 1, 2005. Parties to the Conventions enjoy numerous advantages. The Conventions facilitate informed decision-making and raise awareness of severe limitations on hazardous chemicals and national bans among other Parties. They also distribute responsibility among Parties to prevent the export and import of some dangerous chemicals.

Regarding risk management, exporting Parties provide notifications, labels, and safety data sheets to inform importing Parties of the chemicals\\\\\\\' hazards. Additionally, the Conventions manage networks among designated national authorities to share knowledge and experience in implementing the Convention. They also offer technical and economic assistance to transitioning Parties (Sapbamrer et al., 2023).

The Conventions assist Parties in protecting the environment and human health from dangerous chemicals. All chemicals listed in the Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions fall under the 1992 Hazardous Substances Act, B.E.2535. This Act controls hazardous chemicals across all activities, including licensing, registration, and monitoring. However, industrial association non-members cannot access the information. Consequently, there is an urgent need to strengthen law enforcement and increase awareness (Sapbamrer et al., 2023).

Current and Proposed Actions Status:

Health and Environmental Impacts

Pesticides are generally regarded as contributors to global food security. However, debates continue over the importance of this contribution and the balance between potential harm to human health and the environment. Nowadays, there is evidence that some pesticides have long-term severe negative effects on human health and the environment (PDER, 2021).

Furthermore, developing countries have greater health risks associated with pesticide handling and usage. Farmers often lack proper personal protective equipment (PPE) and struggle to read labels that are typically the sole source of safety instructions. In-person training for farmers on these subjects is rarely accessible (PDER, 2021).

Pesticide-related problems can also extend beyond agricultural areas when residential zones are nearby. Pesticides pose a specific threat to children, not only through their use but also through their storage within households. Statistics indicate that many suicides involve pesticides each year (PDER, 2021).

Challenges of Implementing Alternatives

Global concerns about the environment and sustainable food production have emphasized the importance of moving away from complete dependence on chemical pesticides. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the EU promote Integrated Pest Management (IPM), which utilizes natural predators, biopesticides, mixed cropping, and crop rotation when possible. Attempts to substitute pesticide use with alternative methods like IPM have been made in various countries, including Indonesia. However, sustaining government support has been challenging due to farmer resistance and the system\\\\\\\'s complexity (PDER, 2021).

The shift to alternative solutions is further complicated by factors such as climate events, pandemics, and the challenges presented by the alternatives. Moreover, businesses manufacturing harmful pesticides might lack short- to medium-term incentives to change their product lines. Some detrimental products still hold considerable market shares in numerous developing countries (PDER, 2021).

When a product is fully developed and approved, companies have minimal incentive to enhance product safety beyond complying with new regulatory demands. As a result, fostering a transition to alternative methods requires stronger regulation and enforcement in both developed and developing countries and EU leadership on these issues. However, regulators often take years in many developing countries to approve new pesticides, making older (potentially more harmful) products more readily available. These older pesticides, having usually recovered their development expenses, can be sold at lower prices, making them more attractive in low-income countries (PDER, 2021).

Monitoring legal pesticide trade already poses challenges for governments in developing countries. Still, many also face the added burden of counterfeit imports and local traders who illegally mix and market their versions of pesticides, selling them at affordable rates to small-scale farmers (PDER, 2021).