Friday, March 13, 2009

Review urges reducing pesticide exposure..And More

March 13, 2009

The Ottawa Citizen

Review urges reducing pesticide exposure

Re: PhDs, clean out your desks, March 7.

Ontario College of Family Physicians' pesticide literature review,
that was mentioned in this column, is a landmark document on the human
health effects of pesticide exposure.

It represents the scientific views of an expert team of medical
doctors working under the auspices of an organization representing
9,000 family physicians.

The review found very troubling associations between pesticide
exposure and an increased risk of cancer, neurological illness, and
reproductive problems. Based on its scientific findings, it concluded
that Ontarians should "avoid exposure to all pesticides whenever and
wherever possible."

To ensure that their work met the most stringent demands of scientific
scholarship, the review's authors submitted their research to the
prestigious journal Canadian Family Physician.

After a thorough peer-review process -- in which third-party medical
authorities examined the authors' findings -- the research was
accepted for publication in the Canadian Family Physician's October
2007 issue.

We urge all citizens to read this publication for themselves. If they
do, we believe they will share the scientists' recommendation that
"exposure to all pesticides be reduced."

Those supporting continued use of non-essential pesticides tend to be
connected with the pesticide industry itself. Those urging a phase-out
of cosmetic pesticides include Ontario's doctors and nurses and the
Canadian Cancer Society. Readers must decide for themselves whom they
trust to protect their health.

Gideon Forman, Toronto

Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/Review+urges+reducing+pesticide+exposure/1383842/story.html

===========================

March 13, 2009

The Fredericton Daily Gleaner

Data on rats is not a comprehensive scientific review

Re: Letter published March 2 called

Try an honest exploration of facts

A retired intelligence analyst, I am currently honorary Canadian
observer on the Pesticide Working Group based in Washington, D.C.

The word activist applies to pesticide promoters like letter writer
Lorne Hepworth. He is mistaken that pesticides in Canada undergo a
comprehensive scientific review.

Health Canada's toxicologists merely examine rat data provided by the
industry. There is only one epidemiologist on staff and no mechanism
to search for and review epidemiological (human) studies.

No bibliographies of independent data are compiled. If a single report
examined does not overturn the previous decision by Health Canada's
Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), it is put in a "disregard"
file.

Yet information on human neurotoxicity, vital developmental toxicity,
endocrine (hormone) disruption and dioxin contamination is routinely
withheld by the industry from the PMRA, with the potential to inflict
serious health harm also on future generations.

The untested "inert" portion of, for example, 2,4-D, may constitute as
much as 99 per cent of the ready-to-use herbicide and is known to be
toxic, as is also 2,4-dichlorophenol, 2,4-D's first breakdown product
often applied in untested combinations with herbicides mecoprop and
dicamba.

There is no attempt to determine the cumulative effect of such
combinations, whereas herbicides are known to interact and reinforce
each other.

Canada's municipal pesticide bans are unlikely to impact agriculture.

Bear in mind that there is a difference in the absorption of pesticide
residues in food and exposure to lawn chemicals.

In the first case, the residues go directly to the liver, which is the
cleansing organ, and in the second case they may be inhaled, thus
going directly to the brain.

K. Jean Cottam, PhD

Nepean, Ont.

http://dailygleaner.canadaeast.com/opinion/article/601705

===========================

Mar 13, 2009

Dundas Star News

Report finds pesticide enforcement failures Rules are clear says
CropLife representative
By Craig Campbell, News Staff

The vice-president of a pesticide manufacturers’ trade association
doesn’t understand why some companies did not comply with mandatory
incident reporting regulations for the July 2007 Biedermann Packaging
fire in Dundas.

Just last week, after stories in the Dundas Star News and an
environmental petition by Environment Hamilton, a registrant of
pesticide products containing diazinon, malathion and zineb reported
the fire to the Pest Management Regulatory Agency – more than a year
and half after the regulation required it.

United Agri Products of Dorchester, Ont., sent a report to the PMRA on
March 2, 2009. The mandatory report states the company became aware of
the Biedermann fire on July 26, 2007, over 18 months ago. The incident
reporting regulation required the report to be filed within 15 days of
the company being notified of the incident.

“The rules are very clear,” said Peter MacLeod of CropLife Canada.
“There should be compliance. It’s not like people didn’t know about
that fire.”

Mr. MacLeod said members of CropLife are well aware of the
requirements and he feels the system has been working since introduced
in the fall of 2006.

Officials of the Health Canada agency told the Dundas Star News they
have only “been in contact” with pesticide registrants whose products
were in Biedermann Packaging during the 2007 fire.

Concerns about PMRA enforcement are not new. There has been no further
review of the agency since a 2003 audit found the federal department
was failing to enforce its pesticide regulations.

Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
expected PMRA’s effort to ensure compliance would get even more
difficult in the future.

“The agency does not have reliable or timely information on the
effectiveness of its compliance programs,” the report stated.
“Therefore, it is difficult for the agency to determine what resources
are needed and to help target its limited inspection and enforcement
activities systematically or on the basis of risk. Nor can it
demonstrate that it is meeting its commitment to ensure compliance
with the Pest Control Products Act.”

Three years later the agency brought in new mandatory reporting
regulations for pesticide registrants whose products were involved in
major incidents, like the Biedermann Packaging fire in July 2007.

There has not been any update on enforcement of the regulation by the
PMRA. There is apparently no way to know how many significant
pesticide incidents impacting human or environmental health have not
been reported to the PMRA, despite legislation requiring it.

Environment Hamilton filed an environmental petition last month with
the commissioner’s office, asking for some accountability and an
explanation from the PMRA about its lack of enforcement in the Dundas
case, as well as reviews of the products apparently involved in the
death of millions of fish and aquatic organisms in Spencer Creek and
Cootes Paradise. The organization has several months to respond.

Two companies reported their products were in the Biedermann building
at the time of the fire within a month of the incident, but there’s no
evidence those products had any impact. Both companies reported the
incident as major. Several environmental organizations, including the
Canadian Environmental Law Association, and Ecojustice had no details
about the mandatory reporting regulation or its enforcement.

That was no surprise to Stephen Hazell, executive director of the
Sierra Club of Canada. He said the national environmental organization
has done little work in the area of pesticides and other toxins
because there’s little funding available for such projects.

“It’s very, very small the amount of work the non-governmental
organizations are doing,” he said.

http://www.dundasstarnews.com/news/article/166618

============================

March 13, 2009

Durham Region.com

Cosmetic pesticide ban offers green choice for our lawns

A new tough provincial ban on cosmetic pesticides will be enacted by
the Province, appropriately enough on Earth Day, April 22. And it
couldn't come at a better time.

A mountain of evidence has piled up over the years which has linked
the use of pesticides, especially children's exposure to them, to
increased risk of cancer and other illnesses.

That proof and the work of committees and groups who have studied the
issue was enough to convince the Province to ban 250 products for
sale. Some 80 pesticide ingredients will be banned for cosmetic use.

Now that the Province has decided what is fit for use on our lawns,
it's important to know exactly what you'll able to do this spring and
summer when you go out to your lawn and garden.

Pesticides cannot be used for cosmetic purposes on your lawn, your
vegetables or ornamental gardens, your patios, driveways or on any
part of your property.

There will strict rules for sale and if you use anything that has been
banned you will face a fine that will be phased in. You should note
that the banned pesticides are found in the products that kill slugs,
grubs, caterpillars, earwigs, clover, dandelions and other weeds.

There will be exemptions which include the following: golf courses,
farms, sports fields and trees.

It's very important to note that farms are included in the exemptions
because farmers have expressed grave concerns that the ban on cosmetic
pesticides will have a major effect on them.

While urban sprawl has meant suburbia and farmland have come closer
together than ever and the needs of agriculture and playground often
come into conflict, there should be compromise when it comes to the
use of pesticides.

Those who choose to live near farmland do so with the knowledge they
risk exposure to pesticides farmers need to use on their crops. And
farmers can be assured that the ban involves only cosmetic pesticides
and does not extend to them.

Homeowners will be able to use a range of products that are ban-free
that meet the standards set by the Province. While lawns might not be
as pristine as they have been in the past, concerns about the health
of our children should be relieved as time goes on.
-- Metroland Durham Region Media Group

http://newsdurhamregion.com/articlePrint/121674

===========================

March 1 2, 2009

Peace Arch News
Pesticide rules bug city

White Rock council is planning to launch an education program to
support an impending ban on cosmetic pesticides in the city, a move
backed by members of the Surrey White Rock Pesticide-free Coalition,
which includes parents Brenda Kent and Eryn Weidner.
File photo

By Alex Browne - Peace Arch News

Politicians are finding out the hard way it’s easier to educate about
pesticides than ban them.

While White Rock council has approved a $10,000 educational program to
go along with its draft bylaw banning the use of cosmetic pesticides
within the city, the bylaw itself is proving harder to manage.

Councillors were told this week that many products and uses are
excepted from the bylaw. This is a result of provincial regulations
which take precedence over city decisions, explained city operations
manager David Pollock.

For instance, council doesn’t have jurisdiction to make rules for non-
resident private property owners.

Also, the use of cosmetic pesticides on ‘hard landscaping’ involving
asphalt, including driveways, comes under provincial purview.

But Coun. Helen Fathers, who proposed the bylaw, said there may be
differences for the city depending on whether a bylaw cites provisions
of the Natural Environment Act or the Public Health Act.

City staff will investigate further.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/surrey_area/peacearchnews/news/41173789.html

===========================

March 13, 2009

Ottawa Citizen

Popular kid's bath products contain toxic chemicals: Study

By Sarah Schmidt, Canwest News Service

The best-known brands of children's bath products available in North
America were found to contain ingredients with a high-risk of
contamination. The results, released Thursday, show that 17 of 28 — or
61 per cent — contained both toxins, including some products pitched
to parents as gentle and natural.

The best-known brands of children's bath products available in North
America were found to contain ingredients with a high-risk of
contamination. The results, released Thursday, show that 17 of 28 — or
61 per cent — contained both toxins, including some products pitched
to parents as gentle and natural.
Photograph by: Alexis Doyle, Canwest News Service

Many popular children's bath products on the market contain the cancer-
causing chemicals formaldehyde or 1,4-dioxane, a study has found.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, based in Washington, D.C., tested the
best-known brands available in North America containing ingredients
with a high-risk of contamination. The results, released Thursday,
show that 17 of 28 — or 61 per cent — contained both toxins, including
some products pitched to parents as gentle and natural.

They include Johnson's Baby Shampoo, L'Oreal Kids Extra Gentle 2-in-1
Fast Dry Shampoo, Huggies Naturally Refreshing Cucumber & Green Tea
Baby Wash, Gerber's Grins & Giggles Milk & Honey Baby Wash. Bubble
bath products branded with popular children's characters also tested
positive for both chemicals, including Barbie, Dora the Explorer,
Sesame Street, Hot Wheels and Tinker Bell.

"Companies are doing an excellent job of marketing products to kids
and making products attractive to kids, but they're not necessarily
looking at how to make products as safe as they possibly can for
kids," co-author Stacy Malkan said in an interview.

Twenty-three of 28 products (82 per cent) contained formaldehyde at
levels ranging from 54 to 610 parts per million.

The levels of dioxane, found in 32 out of 48 products (67 per cent),
ranged from 0.27 to 33 ppm.

"I think these companies can absolutely do better and they need to do
better," said Malkan.

Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., shot back Thursday, saying
the trace levels of certain compounds found "can result from processes
that make our products gentle for babies and safe from bacteria
growth. The (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) and other government
agencies around the world consider these trace levels safe, and all
our products meet or exceed the regulatory requirements in every
country where they are sold."

The statement expressed "disappointment" that the Campaign for Safe
Cosmetics "has inaccurately characterized the safety of our products,
misrepresented the overwhelming consensus of scientists and government
agencies that review the safety of ingredients, and unnecessarily
alarmed parents. We want to reassure parents that Johnson's Baby
Shampoo and all our baby and kids products are safe, gentle and mild
products that they can trust and use with confidence."

Mike Patton, spokesman for the Canadian Cosmetic, Toiletry and
Fragrance Association, echoed the sentiment, saying the report is
"irresponsible."

In Canada, both chemicals are on Health Canada's cosmetics hotlist,
which means they cannot be used as ingredients in makeup or personal-
care products, but are allowed in trace amounts in levels higher than
detected in the study. There are a few exceptions for formaldehyde,
which is permitted as in ingredient at low concentrations to provide
antimicrobial preservation.

Internationally, the World Health Organization's International Agency
for Research on Cancer in 2004 classified formaldehyde as a
carcinogenic to humans in 2004 after 26 scientists from 10 countries
evaluated the available evidence.

The U.S. Department of Human Health and Services says dioxane is
"reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen" based on evidence of
carcinogenicity in experimental animals. The U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, highlighting that consumers can be exposed to the
chemical in detergents, shampoos and surfactants, says "the presence
of 1,4-dioxane, even as a trace contaminant, is cause for concern."

The source of dioxane contamination is a chemical conversion process
used to soften the chemicals that make products bubbly. For example,
sodium lauryl sulphate, which makes bubbles, is converted to sodium
laureth sulphate, which makes the product milder on the skin but the
conversion also creates dioxane.

In the case of formaldehyde, the toxin likely is released from
ingredients that act as preservatives, namely Quaternium-15, DMDM,
hydantoin or Diazolidinyl urea, according to the report.

Polyethylene glycol (PEG), a family of synthetic chemicals widely used
by cosmetic manufacturers, is also used for this purpose, according to
the report, which recommends parents read all cosmetic labels and
avoid baby bath products that contain these chemicals.

Some companies, including Peter Rabbit Organics, Nature's Baby and
Weleda, have moved away from these ingredients to make sure their
products aren't contaminated with the toxins. Whole Foods, which has
six stores in Canada, has introduced a premium body care seal as an
incentive for companies to reformulate.

"Companies are already making products that are perfectly sudsy and
well-preserved without any of these chemicals that are at high-risk
for contamination," said Malkan.

Michelle Kertesz of Richmond, B.C., finds the survey results
disquieting, but hardly surprising.

The mother of two young girls, ages 2 1/2 and seven months, has long
avoided products with the ingredient Quaternium-15 as a result of a
her training in the health-care field. "We used that for
disinfectants. They'd make sure we didn't touch it with our bare hands
and here we're putting in our shampoos."

But since the birth of her first child a few years, she's taken it
upon herself to read up on dozens of other chemicals from as many
sources as she can to determine if she wanted her child exposed to
them.

"There are 40 different ingredients (listed) and 30 I couldn't
pronounce and I don't know what they are," said Kertesz, who has found
a line of organic products for her little girls that isn't
contaminated with any carcinogen or another toxins.

"If we can't have faith in companies selling products to our babies,
who do you have faith in?," she asked.
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

============================
Warning Industry Propaganda Below
============================

Friday, March 13, 2009

Windsor Star

Lawn-care legislation won't help job market

The future looks very lean for the job market in Ontario and across
Canada with thousands of job losses in the past year and many
companies having closed. With Stelco closing operations just ask one
of the 1,200 or so that got the pink slip last week.

Chrysler just cut 1,200 jobs as well and we have to ask who is next?
Well, the next will be the large number of jobs that are certain to
disappear with the Ontario government's cosmetic ban on pesticides and
the potential of other provinces doing the same.

Equipment manufactures, lawn-care providers as well as the many
students work in this $2-billion service industry to help put them
through school after the summer's done. With 33,000 people working in
the industry between lawn care and golf courses/parks, with half of
these working on the lawn care side, we can expect to see 12,000 jobs
lost in Ontario alone.

Can Ontario afford for that to happen? Far better than the total ban
that has been imposed would be enabling those knowledgeable
professionals, trained in proper usage, to continue practising their
trade rather than acting as though all misused pesticides. Aside from
direct loss of jobs and its mushroom effect into an already ailing
economy not occurring, the esthetics of public and private lawns free
from the weeds -- rather than streets filled with dandelions and
thistles, which will soon be the standard in Ontario -- could have
been avoided.

We do not need legislation that increases reduction in the workforce.

Paul Pisani

York-Simcoe
© The Windsor Star 2009

http://www2.canada.com/windsorstar/news/letters/story.html?id=ad40396c-a66c-48e8-a4fd-5f7e360f2d9c

===================

Pisani is a founding member of the East Gwillimbury Chamber of
Commerce and sits on the board of directors of ADAPT (Association for
Differently Abled People Together of Ontario).

Owner of a landscaping company, Pisani was president of the
Professional Lawn Care Association of Ontario from 1995 to 2000.
Previously, he was employed by an International Harvester, and then a
John Deere dealer servicing clients in the Holland Marsh area.

Pisani and his wife, Janice, have two children and live in East
Gwillimbury.

END – “Politics can be done differently,” Pisani says. “Help us prove
it.”

For more detailed information on Pisani and the Progressive Canadian
Party platform and policies, visit www.paulpisani.com

http://www.georginaadvocate.com/News/Regional%20News/article/82475
Paul Pisani

Party: Progressive Canadian Party

Profession: Entrepreneur

Marital Status: Married

Name of Spouse: Janice

Children: Two

Career Background: Owns a landscaping company. Former president of the
Professional Lawn Care Association of Ontario.

Community Activities: Founding member of the East Gwillimbury Chamber
of Commerce and is a board member of the Association for Differently
Abled People Together of Ontario.

Mailing address:

19 Sand Road

P.O. Box 1673

Holland Landing, ON

Contact information:

Phone: 905-836-6221

paul@paulpisani.com

paulpisani.com


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/riding/211/candidate.html

============================

March 13, 2009

Kitcheher Waterloo Record

Pesticide ban unfair

Re: Provincewide Pesticide Ban Takes Effect April 22 -- Mar. 5

The new regulations governing the use of pesticides in Ontario are
neither logical nor fair.

The provincial government does not test pesticides; that is a federal
responsibility. Why has the province ignored the results of rigorous
testing by the federal government?

The list of pesticides which are now banned was only released last
week, yet retailers and companies which provide lawn care services
must immediately cease selling or using the banned products. Why was
no advance notice given?

The new regulations allow golf courses to use pesticides which cannot
be used by home owners. This is completely illogical. If a pesticide
is not safe to use on a lawn, why is it safe to use on a golf course?

Diane Girard

Kitchener


ttp://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/502566
© Copyright 2007 Metroland Media Group Ltd. All rights reserved.

============================

Canadian Superintendents Face New Pesticide Use & Reporting
Requirements

American golf course superintendents are watching with interest the
impact of new pesticide use requirements confronting their Canadian
counterparts in the province of Ontario.

In the latest chapter of a long-running saga, the provincial
government in Ontario fulfilled the promise of its Cosmetic Pesticides
Ban Act last month by announcing a sweeping ban of 85 cosmetic-use
chemicals - a total of 250 individual products - that included the
herbicide 2,4-D. The bans are expected to become effective on April
22, Earth Day, and are a finalization of the original act, which was
passed by the provincial government last June.
Golf courses in Ontario, along with agriculture, forestry and public-
health and safety uses, are conditionally exempt from the ban, but
they must adhere to a set of extensive conditions in order to continue
using pesticides in the future. Golf courses must be accredited for
integrated pest management by an approved accreditation body - the
province's Ministry of the Environment is in the process of posting a
list of such "approved accreditation bodies" on its website, and
prepare an annual report on how they minimize pesticide use, make that
report accessible to the public and hold a public meeting in which
they must present that report.

Golf industry alliances in Ontario have been working closely with the
government for some time on this issue to develop golf-specific
requirements. They have worked with the government to demonstrate that
golf course superintendents and the golf industry are responsible in
developing measures to properly manage the use of chemicals.

Despite those conditions, environmental groups in Canada continue to
push for golf to be removed from the exempt category.

Meanwhile, the GCSAA will monitor the situation in Ontario and assess
possible ramifications for U.S. golf courses and superintendents.

The above report was originally published in GCM News Weekly. For more
information, visit www.gcsaa.org.

http://www.cybergolf.com/golf_news/canadian_superintendents_face_new_pesticide_use_reporting_requirements

============================ Best Blogger Tips
  • Stumble This Post
  • Save Tis Post To Delicious
  • Share On Reddit
  • Fave On Technorati
  • Buzz This Post
  • Tweet This Post
  • Digg This Post
  • Share On Facebook
Blog Gadgets

St. John's Daily Spray Advisory

My Past Articles

More enforcement needed for pesticide spray regulations
The Western Star (Corner Brook) - Final - 10-01-2002 - 413 words
Karen Griffin - Judie Squires says someone needs to patrol the companies that spray residential areas for pesticides because she's observed nine violations of the Environmental Protection Act in her Paradise neighborhood alone


Spray woes: Province falling down on monitoring pesticides
The Telegram (St. John's) - Final - 10-01-2002 - 253 words
Judie Squires - environment to become poisoned? A temporary ban on all residential pesticides has to be put into place, to protect us, our wildlife and our environment as a whole. Judie Squires Paradise


Government lax on cosmetic pesticide regulation: advocate
The Telegram (St. John's) - 08-28-2004 - 613 words
Stokes Sullivan, Deana - Despite increased awareness about adverse health effects from pesticides, Judie Squires, a member of the Pesticide Working Group of Newfoundland and Labrador, isn't optimistic the province will ban cosmetic use


Woman doesn't expect cosmetic pesticide ban any time soon
The Western Star (Corner Brook) - 08-30-2004 - 712 words
Stokes Sullivan, Deana - Despite increased awareness about adverse health effects from pesticides, Judie Squires, a member of the Pesticide Working Group of Newfoundland and Labrador, isn't optimistic that the province will ban the


Province lagging behind in pesticide control
The Telegram (St. John's) - 09-04-2005 - 496 words
Squires, Judie - it to do is to prohibit the cosmetic use of synthetic pesticides altogether in order to protect our citizens and the environment. Judie Squires writes from Portugal Cove-St. Philip's


The two sides to pesticide use
The Telegram (St. John's) - 07-16-2006 - 781 words
Judie Squires - health of your families. When Canada's most respected health authorities tell us pesticides threaten our health, we should all be listening. Judie Squires writes from Portugal Cove-St. Philip's


Inquiry implicates BTk
The Telegram (St. John's) - 06-24-2006 - 353 words
DEANA STOKES SULLIVAN - of trees. The live spores can be inhaled by humans and animals exposed to BT. Judie Squires, secretary of the Northeast Avalon Group of the Sierra Club, says despite claims that


Delayed pesticide laws 'disappointing'
The Telegram (St. John's) - 06-24-2006 - 833 words
DEANA STOKES SULLIVAN - at the end of this year. These products will only be sold to certified dealers. Judie Squires, secretary of the newly formed Northeast Avalon Group of the Sierra Club, isn't


Above Articles available through Trancontinental Newsnet

Time for provincial lawn pesticide regulation
The Telegram (St. John's) - 03-14-2009 - 419 words
pesticides. Please join me in lobbying our province for a pesticide ban Judie Squires Portugal Cove...

Online Marketing - OnToplist.com