Wed 29 Jun 2005
A
parting shot at cosmetic pesticides
by Dr. Robert Cushman
No one can discount the contributions pesticides have
made in the modern age, such as reliable crop
production and malaria control. But there is a time
and place for everything. How did chemicals
appropriate for agricultural or industrial use
suddenly become de rigueur on residential lawns where
children play?
Environmental health is still a young science, and
answers to complex questions are often elusive.
However, scores of studies on pesticides -- taken
together -- paint a disturbing picture, particularly
of childhood cancers, prostate cancer, Parkinson's
disease and fetal death. New, better-designed
research finds that pesticides can cause DNA damage
and that people with certain genetic make-ups are
more susceptible to the hazards of pesticides.
Pesticides seep into our soil, drift into our air,
and migrate to our bodies. They're found in a baby's
first bowel movement, in mother's milk, in body fat.
The Centers for Disease Control in the U.S. concluded
that the average person has 13 pesticides in his or
her body. Children are at greater risk due to their
small size and large body surface area, fast
metabolism, and because they crawl and put things in
their mouths.
What we need is better regulation. Canada's Pest
Management Regulatory Agency has failed us. A 2003
auditor general's report found gross inadequacies on
the part of the federal pesticide agency. And the
revised Pest Control Products Act, which was passed
in 2002 and would modernize the regulation process,
still isn't inforce. The result of under-regulation
is widespread cosmetic use, because people assume
these products are safe.
This isn't only a health issue, it's also one of good
neighbourliness. I know of a number of people with
extreme sensitivities who politely asked their
neighbours to refrain from spraying, only to be
ignored. Condominium boards have cavalierly dismissed
anti-pesticide petitions from concerned residents. In
another case, children attending a birthday party on
a windy day were sprayed with pesticide during an
application from the property next door.
Some 70 Canadian jurisdictions already have
pesticide-free bylaws in place, including Halifax,
Toronto and Montreal. Ottawa lags behind.
Our citizens deserve the same health protection as
the rest of the country. Ottawa's pesticide-reduction
education campaign has made little impact; research
has shown education alone isn't enough to reduce
usage. The public understands this. A recent survey
found 71 per cent of Ottawa residents would support a
pesticide bylaw plus an education strategy, as
opposed to 27 per cent who would support education
alone. Our municipal politicians need to catch up
with the public. The time has come to do the right
thing. Most of those opposed will see the merit over
time. In the interim we must do our best to convince
them that a few dandelions are insignificant compared
to safeguarding our health and that of future
generations.
Often when a protective law is proposed, the
inevitable cries of "nanny state'' are heard.
But those who fear government over-regulation haven't
been paying attention lately to the news.
Drug companies are pulling drugs off the market
because they're killing people. When it comes to
human safety, the regulatory framework should be
rigorous, not lax. It's time to start questioning
corporate influence on our poorly resourced
regulatory processes.
Potential hazards need to be examined before a
product has gone to market, not following an
unforeseen tragedy.
Some environmental problems require complicated
solutions. Not so with pesticides. There are
alternatives. Pull dandelions, spread clover. Hire a
lawn-care company that uses organic solutions. Yes,
gardening without pesticides is more
labour-intensive. All the more reason we should
support it. It means more physical activity, more
local outfits doing lawn care, more pride in the
results. Even with rising public demand for the
organic alternative, a number of pesticide companies
are still fighting to preserve the right to shower
chemicals on our communities. This is shortsighted.
Not unlike the fast-food industry, these companies
have cornered the market.
Basically, we want their services; so let them
provide us with a product we both know is healthy.
I urge city council to pass a cosmetic pesticide
bylaw to be implemented in the spring of 2006. The
phase-out would include residential and
non-residential lawns and gardens. For something as
inconsequential as a lawn, we shouldn't jeopardize
people's health.
The lawn-care industry, pushing the fabricated notion
of a "perfect'' lawn, will only change when it
is required to do so.
What do we prefer -- obnoxious dandelions, or noxious
chemical substances? The decision, to be debated this
fall in Ottawa, will have an impact on the health of
our children and our grandchildren.
Dr. Robert Cushman is Ottawa's medical officer of
health. On Aug. 22, he will become the head of the
Champlain Local Health Integration Network.
Community Web.
