[NYTr] Banned Pesticides Come Home on US-Bound Crops (and into Court)

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

Council on Hemispheric Affairs - Aug 13, 2007
http://www.coha.org/2007/08/13/pesticide%e2%80%99s-victims-will-finally-come-before-a-us-court/


Pesticide’s Victims Will Finally Come Before a U.S. Court

Banned Products Return Home after Being Sprayed on U.S.-bound Crops

by Research Associate Jacquelyn Godin 

For the period of May, 2007, the USDA reported the total value of
monthly agricultural imports to the U.S. amounted to $6.1 billion. Of
that total value, 15 percent arrived here from Mexico, 15 percent from
Canada, three percent from Chile and three percent from Brazil (USDA
April 2007). Latin American produce historically has found a warm
welcome in the U.S.; however, these products often carry on them
dangerous pesticide residues. Most recently, on July 18, President Bush
set an urgent timetable of 60 days for the newly formed Cabinet-level
committee to announce safety limits on produce, especially on food
products being imported into the U.S.

According to a Trade and Environment Database (TED) case study regarding pesticide use in Mexico, which is published online by American University, “Toxicity threatens U.S. consumers in the ‘circle of poison’ effect in which unregistered or banned pesticides are exported to Mexico and sprayed on crops whose produce is then exported back to the U.S.” More specifically, dibromochloropropane (DBCP) was banned in the U.S. in 1979, yet it continues to be used on crops in developing hemispheric countries such as Nicaragua and Costa Rica, years after its cut-off date. Since then, there have been numerous reports of the chemical’s baleful effects. But in the months to come, tropical plantation workers will finally have their day in a U.S. court, as they try to seek compensation for the residual harm arising out of pesticide use which, for many of them, has ruined their lives. The trial began on July 19 in a Los Angeles courtroom and is expected to last two to three months.

Not Acknowledged to be Dangerous Until Symptoms Are Exhibited

The Pesticide Action Network of North America describes DBCP as a
carcinogen, a ground water contaminant, a developmental or reproductive
toxin and a suspected endocrine disruptor. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has found that DBCP can potentially cause kidney and liver
damage as well as cancer, especially if one is exposed to levels
greater than the maximum contaminant level of .0002 mg/L for an
extended period of time. The pesticide in question was manufactured by
chemical companies like Dow Chemical and Shell Oil to be used as a
fumigant for nematode worms in the U.S. until it was pulled off the
shelves in 1979. It had been used as a spray on agricultural produce
such as cucumbers, grapes, tomatoes, squash, carrots, okra, camellia
and roses. The EPA (2006) established that by 1974, farmers in the U.S.
were treating crops with 9.8 million pounds of DBCP, and by 1977,
831,000 pounds of it were in use in California alone. There is a
considerable likelihood that DBCP often seeped into the groundwater
supply during this period.

Banana Plantations are a Dangerous Place

According to a press statement by the Dole Fresh Fruit Company on
November 10, 2002, there were nine DBCP cases pending in the U.S.
against the fruit company, in which plantation workers have alleged
injury to them due to DBCP exposure. The latest set of lawsuits, filed
in 2004 against Dole Fresh Fruit Company and Standard Fruit Company,
have recently reached the point where the first case is about to be
heard by a U.S. court. All told, five lawsuits involving at least 5,000
agricultural workers from Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua
and Panama are waiting to be heard. Dole has been aware of the extent
of the Nicaraguan injury claims for some time. In a 2002 press release,
the company acknowledged that they “are aware of 295 DBCP lawsuits now
pending against U.S. DBCP manufacturers, Dole and other banana growers,
in which a total of 6,544 plaintiffs are now seeking (a total of)
approximately $9.6 million in purported damages.” Although a Dole press
release on April 2, 2007 stated that the company was one of the first
fresh produce companies in the 1970s to create programs to decrease
pesticide use, DBCP was, in fact, used throughout the decade. The
lawsuit accuses Dole and Standard Fruit Companies of negligence and
concealment during the time the pesticide was in use. Duane Miller, the
lawyer representing around 50 Nicaraguan plantation workers, informed a
hearing on July 19 that the workers “weren’t told until the ‘90s — and
they weren’t told by Dow or Dole.”

Fighting Back

Duane Miller claims that the inherent toxicity of DBCP was recognized
as early as the 1950s when scientists working for Dow Chemical observed
the deleterious effect on the testes of laboratory animals exposed to
the chemical. Examinations indicated a noxious condition in the
reproductive organs. A study (Potashnik, 1979) released by the EPA,
which was based on the examinations of 23 workers at a DBCP production
plant, found that 18 out of the 23 men had azoospermia (no sperm was
present in the semen) or oligospermia (a low sperm count). The severity
of their condition was directly proportional to the time that they
spent working in the plant that was producing the DBCP. For example, a
group of 12 men with azoospermia logged in between 100 and 6,726 hours
while a group of 6 men with oligospermia had exposure rates of 34-95
hours. Rabbits and other laboratory animals have been used to further
prove the destructive manifestations of DBCP on reproductive and
adrenal functions. One group of rabbits was subjected to 10 parts per
million (ppm) of DBCP for 14 weeks which were compared against a
control group of rabbits. Those injected with 10 ppm showed a
significant decrease in the amount of sperm present compared to the
control group.

Nicaraguans Protest against Approaching Lawsuit

Monetary compensation for damages incurred seems to have taken
precedence over social awareness for Nicaraguan workers. A court case
would likely gain international attention and would inspire strong
human rights and environmental legislation likely to positively affect
all agricultural workers associated with the manufacture of the lethal
chemicals. Many Nicaraguan banana workers signed a petition circulated
on July 11 to fire their legal team in the upcoming lawsuit. There have
been accusations, mainly by the union leader Victorino Espinales, that
the lawyers have deceptively changed medical reports to make their
future case more formidable; therefore, giving up any prospect that the
case for the workers could be won. Since past lawsuits against
companies like Dole and Dow have been settled out of court for monetary
compensation ranging from $20 million in 1992 to $41.5 million in 1997,
it would be safe to say that some Nicaraguan workers would rather
directly negotiate with the drug companies for monetary amounts than
establish important legal precedents. This seems to represent a sharp
shift in feelings for the thousands of banana workers, including
Espinales, who in the recent months had petitioned the Nicaraguan
Congress for governmental relief from their plight. The orientation of
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega also has come under close scrutiny
during this investigation into the use of poisonous pesticides, having
reportedly met multiple times with top Dole officials. An offer of more
jobs to the country was presented, but only if Nicaragua altered their
legal system to make it more difficult to sue the giant drug
corporations.

With or without Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans are Victims

Although Dole claims to have halted any use of DBCP on its plantations
in Latin America after 1979, the pesticide’s continual usage in the
region seemed to defy the U.S.’s ban: “In July 1991, 186 banana workers
alleged that they were exposed to DBCP from the early 1960’s to 1984,
causing them serious and permanent sterilization.” (American
University, 1995). One TED case study was conducted in 1995 and
investigated the sterilization of 1,500 plantation workers due to
exposure to DBCP’s harmful effects from its usage on Costa Rican banana
crops. It is estimated that around 2,000 men were sterilized due to
their exposure to DBCP throughout the 1970s. Workers were not even able
to sue Dow Chemical and Shell Oil until March 1990 when the Texas
Supreme Court narrowly voted in favor of the Costa Ricans’ right to do
so. Other grievances have been settled outside of court in order to
salvage the good name of the corporations. The 1995 case study states
that in 1992, a suit by Costa Rican plantation workers was settled out
of court for a sum of $20 million.

Guatemalan Pesticide Use and its Eventual Arrival in the U.S.

The same issue was addressed in a 1997 TED case study on Guatemalan
snow peas, one of the country’s main agricultural exports to the U.S.
The case study referenced an investigation conducted in 1995, in which
it was estimated that Latin American campesinos were 13 times more
likely than U.S. farmers to suffer from pesticide poisoning (Tansey, et
al., Eradicating the Pesticide Problem in Latin America). Furthermore,
the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit organization,
stated that the greatest number of Guatemalan pesticide violations came
about as a result of U.S. imports of Guatemalan snow peas. The EWG
concluded that 41 percent of the tested snow pea shipments exported to
the U.S. from Guatemala during 1992-1993 were found to contain illegal
pesticide residues (American University, 1997).

Pesticides Used Today Hardly Represent an Improvement

As recently as December 2006, banned residential chemicals, endosulfan
and diazonin, were found during air monitoring near an elementary
school in Hastings, Florida. According to the Pesticide Action Network
North America (PANNA, 2007), endosulfan is used in the U.S. as an
insecticide mainly on cotton, potatoes and apples. Residential use of
endosulfan was banned in 2000 after findings concluded that it is a
neurotoxin with poisoning symptoms including tremors, convulsions,
vomiting and hyperactivity. Diazonin is also a neurotoxin, but is still
used as an insecticide on nuts, vegetables and fruits. The EPA banned
its residential use in 2004. If repeatedly exposed to diazonin, asthma,
cancer and gestational diabetes are some of the possible noxious
outcomes. Endosulfan was used to combat insects on coffee plantations
in Colombia. According to PANNA, more than 100 poisonings and three
deaths were reported in 1994. A study by the German Federal
Environmental Agency (February 2007) reported, “Excessive and improper
application and handling of endosulfan have been linked to congenital
physical disorders, mental retardations and deaths in farm workers and
villagers in developing countries in Africa, southern Asian and Latin
America.”

What a U.S. Trial Could Do

In light of the ongoing trial, U.S. investigations will hopefully
direct their attention to the human rights abuses and manifestation of
negligence committed by large fruit and chemical companies as well as
demand stringent analysis of the methods and pesticides, like
endosulfan, used in agricultural production. This could result in many
U.S. citizens to question every organization, from Dole Fresh Fruit
Company, Shell Oil and Dow Chemical to the EPA, USDA and FDA,
associated with the drug. Critics insist that pesticide use
domestically as well as throughout Latin American has not always
ceased, but instead, very likely has been masked or transformed,
without benefit of reconsideration.