Toxic Free and NC Child have joined with concerned parents and local health advocates to ask major retailers to stop selling canned foods packaged with toxic bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical that has been linked to many health problems for children. Federal and state authorities have declined to move quickly to require safe packaging, so we are calling on Kroger and its subsidiaries—like NC-based Harris Teeter—to eliminate BPA from its canned goods, and replace it with a safe alternative.
BPA is a dangerous synthetic chemical that disrupts the endocrine system and mimics the hormone estrogen. More than 300 animal and human studies have linked BPA exposure to a number of health problems, including breast and prostate cancer, asthma, obesity, behavioral changes and weakening of the immune system, and lowered sperm counts. For children in particular, BPA is associated with low birth weight, altered development of the brain, and attention deficit disorder.
Unfortunately, seeking out products labeled “BPA free” may be another invitation to health concerns. Many retailers and national brands are phasing out BPA, but many are replacing it with harmful substitutes. For example, many cans tested for the Buyer Beware report were lined with a PVC-based polymer. These can linings are made from highly hazardous chemicals including vinyl chloride, a known human carcinogen. Meanwhile, BPS—another common replacement for BPA—can elicit endocrine effects similar to BPA.
Kroger and Harris Teeter should commit to eliminating BPA from food cans sold in their stores and establish clear timelines and benchmarks for a transition to safer alternatives. The retailers should also work with their suppliers to ensure that BPA is not replaced with dangerous chemicals. All chemicals used in can linings should be fully disclosed to ensure consumer safety. Lastly, Kroger, Harris Teeter, and other retailers should adopt a comprehensive chemical policy to safely replace other chemicals of concern in their products and packaging.
There are a few things consumers can do to protect their families until retailers commit to safer product packaging:
Vote with your pocketbook. Only purchase canned food from manufacturers and retailers that exercise complete transparency about what chemicals are used in their canned food packaging.
Avoid canned goods and eat fresh when possible. In general, food that requires less processing and packaging materials will be less-toxic. Think dried beans as opposed to canned. When eating fresh or minimally processed foods isn’t possible, choose frozen food, food stored in glass jars, or food stored in aseptic packaging—i.e. those cartons you find products like milk, soup, and chopped tomatoes in.
Learn more! For more information about can testing results and which stores and food brands are transitioning to safer alternatives, visit www.toxicfoodcans.org.
Tom Vitaglione is Senior Fellow for Health and Safety at NC Child.
Preston Peck is a Policy Advocate at Toxic Free NC
By Elisa Lazzarino, Toxic Free NC Policy Advocacy Intern
The North Carolina General Assembly recently voted to lift a popularly supported and arguably successful ban on e-waste in landfills. The move was harshly criticized by environmentalists in the state, as the landfill ban prevented the hazardous materials contained in electronic devices such as old TVs, cell phones, and computers from lingering in landfills and potentially leaking mercury and other hazardous substances into adjacent properties and groundwater. The ban provided support for a burgeoning e-cycling industry, throughout the state currently worth about $20 billion nationally, with recycling facilities contracting with the state to provide a receptacle for e-waste. Legislators opposed to the ban, however, claimed that the e-cycling program, which was in part funded by fees imposed on electronics manufacturers, burdened these manufacturers who would then pass the cost onto consumers. The state’s Department of Environmental Quality – infamous for its mismanaging of the coal ash crisis of the past few years – released a statement of support for the measure, echoing the legislators’ claims, and alluding to the illegal waste exports that may expose children to toxic chemicals, although they provided no evidence that NC facilities are doing this.
It’s important to acknowledge that e-cycling’s problems, as a relatively new industry, are indeed cause for concern, including instances of fraud involving the illegal shipment of e-waste overseas. But illegal exports aren’t out of states’ control. The US is one of just a handful of developed countries that does not regulate its e-waste exports, and by repealing the landfill ban, North Carolina has arguably taken a step backwards where we could have strengthened our export regulations. The prospect of mercury-laden landfills leaking into wetlands and aquifers, however, is hardly a consolation for the existing regulatory deficit, and legislators’ folksy platitudes tend to obscure the crony capitalism at play. Minus a small number of legislators who opposed the ban, the General Assembly’s conflation of these fraudulent e-cycling businesses with the entire industry is a symptom of the larger trend of deregulation in North Carolina. The repeal of the ban is part of the omnibus regulatory reform bill, Senate Bill 303, which is the legislature’s effort to overhaul regulations across a wide range of public and private sector activities. As with many of the other scrapped regulations, this ban on landfill disposal of e-waste not only mitigated contamination of soil and waterways, but supported a growing industry that encouraged the proper disposal of e-waste through no-cost recycling programs that generated millions of dollars annually and employed hundreds of people.
While legislators claim they have the interests of consumers in mind, it’s essential that we look critically at who benefits most from this measure. Manufacturers, now unburdened by e-cycling fees, are now saving approximately $1 million, which is a paltry amount relative to the annual profits of most major electronics manufacturers. Still, it’s highly unlikely that they will now pass these savings onto consumers, while under the ban, consumers and the government had a small but arguably effective means to keep the environmental and public health abuses of the electronics industry in check, and a path toward stronger environmental protections. Legislators’ myopic claims of regulatory burden miss several important factors that contribute to the environmental and public health risks inherent to consumer electronics. Deregulation of the electronics industry effectively absolves manufacturers – many of whom have been shown to engage in human rights abuses through the overseas manufacturing process as well as pollution – of their responsibility to the environment and to public health. Statements from elected officials about the greater benefits of lifting the ban are a representation of the triangulation and co-opting of legitimate concerns of the poor and working classes that has become commonplace in North Carolina. This kind of rhetoric from our legislators is a sign of a disturbing species of pro-corporate conservatism that masquerades as ‘traditional values’ conservatism. It’s time for North Carolinians to wake up from the neoconservative fantasy that polarizes our communities, hamstrings small businesses, and destroys our natural resources – and demand accountability from our elected representatives.
Board members present:Dr. Colleen Hudak-Wise, Dr. Ricky Langley (Chair), Dr. Thomas Scarborough (Vice-Chair), Shawn Harding, Don Rodgers, Dr. W. Benson Kirkman
The July 12, 2016 meeting of the North Carolina Pesticide Board began with a reading of the Mandatory Ethics Inquiry, which asks Board members to recuse themselves from actions in the event of a conflict of interest. None of the Board members recused themselves. Several presentations followed the reading of this inquiry, beginning with Brian Pointer of the Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Resources, who spoke about the DWR’s Random Ambient Monitoring System, which monitors waterways for pesticides and other contaminants such as metals, coliform bacteria, cyanide, sulfides, and PCBs. In this presentation, Pointer provided an overview of the methods used in RAMS, as well as the limitations of this system. Of particular note is the fact that while RAMS does test for pesticides on a bi-monthly basis, it does not test for neonicotinoids. Pointer noted that the DWR does not have the funding capacity to conduct neonic testing of its samples.
Following Pointer’s presentation, Toxic Free NC intern Elisa Lazzarino presented on the methodological problems with both RAMS with respect to neonicotinoid contamination in aquatic invertebrate habitats – including those of endangered species – and the Bee-Informed Partnership Survey as a measure of pollinator decline and its causes. Ms. Lazzarino’s presentation also drew the Board’s attention to the widespread problem of consumer misuse of these highly toxic substances. Ms. Lazzarino remarked on the recently passed Maryland Pollinator Protection Act, which reclassified neonics as restricted use pesticides (RUPs) for professional use only, and pressed the Board to adopt a similar policy, through their authority under the NC Pesticide Law of 1971. After this presentation, Toxic Free NC Policy Advocate, Preston Peck, addressed the Board and noted their inaction after three previous presentations on these issues, and urged them to consider the growing body of evidence that strongly connects neonics to both pollinator decline and adverse health in aquatic invertebrates, particularly in view of the enormous economic value of North Carolina’s blue crab industry. Following these comments, the Board unanimously agreed to organize a task force of scientists to investigate the harms of neonics. The Board will accept nominations, and will then vote to approve these nominations.
Also presenting at the meeting were researchers from Preventing Agricultural Chemical Exposure (PACE) at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, who spoke about the neurological effects on farmworkers exposed to pesticides. Dr. Thomas Arcury spoke about the subclinical symptoms (i.e. not manifested physically) of pesticide exposure, and Dr. Sara Quandt spoke more directly to olfactory impairment in farmworkers exposed to pesticides as a likely marker of neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s. Dr. Paul Laurienti, also of Wake Forest University School of Medicine, spoke briefly about the strong correlation in pesticide-exposed farmworkers between exposure, balance, and brain anatomy. While Dr. Laurienti’s findings are not conclusive as a sign of ill-health in pesticide-exposed farmworkers, he stressed to the Board that the findings warrant further research.
Settlement Agreements for Violations of Pesticide Law
N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Structural Pest Control and Pesticide Division v.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Local contact: Preston Peck, 919-833-1123 (O); 256-483-9503 (C), preston@toxicfreenc.org National contact: Tiffany Finck-Haynes, (202) 222-0715, tfinckhaynes@foe.org Communications contact: Kate Colwell, (202) 222-0744, kcolwell@foe.org
Dozens of people and 2.5M dead bees gather at Bayer Crop Science to call on corporate responsibility for global pollinator decline
Research Triangle Park, NC – Dozens of people from across North Carolina and the nation gathered at Bayer Crop Science North American Headquarters in Research Triangle Park on Monday to bring awareness to global pollinator decline. The group gathered around 2.5M dead bees that were trucked across the nation to represent the kills that many beekeepers face due to pesticides every year.
The rally and press conference was part of the national Keep the Hives Alive Tour that stopped in cities in California, South Dakota, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina during National Pollinator Week, June 13-23. Later this week, beekeepers, farmers, farmworkers, scientists and advocates will bring the truck load dead bees to Washington, D.C. to urge the EPA, the USDA and Congress to take action on toxic pesticides and support sustainable agriculture.
“Personally, I think pesticide loads are something that need to be looked at a lot more. That’s one thing that the (chemical) industry…it’s like a red herring or a giant elephant in the room for them,” said James Cook, a Minnesota-based commercial beekeeper, who drove the dead bees to North Carolina. “They don’t really want to talk about and look at what is actually going on with the relationship between pollinators and pesticides because I think they know what they would find. It would show a lot of issues going on there.”
Raleigh based non-profit, Toxic Free North Carolina, hosted the rally and press conference in front of Bayer Crop Science North American Headquarters in Research Triangle Park. This beekeeper, farmer, and activist led action called on major pesticide-producing companies, such as Bayer Crop Science, to take on more corporate responsibility by phasing out bee-killing pesticides that researchers are finding in our soil, water, and disrupting various ecosystems. Speakers included beekeepers, activists, and farmers like Charles McNair, founder of Freedom Farm in Goldsboro that promotes youth empowerment though agriculture.
“We don’t just grow food, we grow soil.” said McNair. “Everything we need to protect food cultivation can be found in nature.”
Other speakers included, Representative John Ager from Buncombe County, Liz Lindsey, NC Master Beekeeper, Tony Kleese, farmer and owner of Earthwise Organics, and Nick Wood, State Organizer with Appalachian Voices.
Bayer representatives were on site, but declined to come to the event to listen to the stories presented by the speakers despite numerous invitations.
The truck transporting the bees is now on the way to Washington D.C. for a similar event outside of the EPA where farmers, beekeepers, and other supporters will meet with agency officials and have a Congressional Briefing on Thursday.
####
Toxic Free NC’s mission is to engage North Carolinians in the transition to a toxic free society through initiatives that promote human and environmental health.
Keep the Hives Alive is supported through Pollinator Stewardship Council, Friends of the Earth, Center for Food Safety, Minnesota-California Honey Company, and Organic Consumers Association
The following is an article written by Toxic Free NC policy intern, Elisa Lazzarino:
Published in The Technician on June 11, 2016.
Elisa Lazzarino, Guest Columnist
Bayer is a chemical giant with a more than century of history, and is responsible for the production of some of the most ubiquitous products in homes worldwide. Known for developing aspirin, this multinational corporation expanded to produce agricultural chemicals in 1924 and launched the subsidiary Bayer Crop Science in 2002. Now, it is one of the top six pesticide-producing companies in the world with annual profits of over $10 billion.
Bayer Crop Science, whose North American headquarters is in Research Triangle Park, is vying for more of the pesticides market by merging with another multinational agrochemical corporation, Monsanto. If the two merge, the resulting conglomerate would control a staggering 29 percent of the global seed market and 24 percent of the pesticides market, leaving a corporate empire in control of the future of our food systems.
The potential merger of Bayer and Monsanto is troublesome for a multitude of reasons. This merger would limit farmers’ choice in both conventional and organic agriculture, and researchers worry about the long-term impact of such an entity on our ecosystems due to the persistence of pesticides already produced by these companies. While Monsanto has been the target of mass protests in Europe, Bayer’s production of pesticides known as neonicotinoids (“neonics”) are strongly linked to the large-scale deaths and disruption of honeybees and other pollinators in North America and Europe.
Beekeepers in the U.S. have reported unusually high losses of their hives, with recent losses above 40 percent, costing more than $2 billion annually to our agricultural system. Bee deaths on such a large scale carry grave implications, as honeybees pollinate approximately one-third of the food crops in our diet. Without pollinators, we face the threat of huge spikes in food prices and a sharp decrease in the diversity of our diets.
Rather than take action to rectify the damage, Bayer has doubled down on their rejection of scientific findings, insisting that the blame for bee deaths rests not on the neonics they sell, but rather on external factors such as parasitic mites and incorrect pesticide application by their consumers. Bayer’s resistance disregards data from the EPA and a growing network of scientists, beekeepers and farmers that link neonics to bee deaths, while regulators who work closely with the industry have obfuscated the reality of this crisis.
In 2015, USDA researcher Jonathan Lundgren became the target of what he alleges is a campaign to suppress scientific evidence of the dangers of neonics. Lundgren was fired after speaking to the media about the role of neonics in the mortality of critical pollinators, and alleges that his superiors at the USDA attempted to silence him to protect the interests of agrochemical producers. This crackdown on science exposes the influence of industry over regulators, but Lundgren’s case is more troubling because it suggests a precarious future for the global food system.
While Bayer’s resistance is not unexpected, the potential impacts of Bayer’s products on the entire global food system have prompted farmers, beekeepers and other pollinator advocates to press Bayer into meaningful action for the public good. Bayer’s current inaction and denial of their culpability in a coming global food crisis is why masses of beekeepers, farmers and communities from around the nation and North Carolina will convene at 11:00 a.m. on June 20 at Bayer’s RTP headquarters as part of the Keep the Hive Alive Tour to demand that Bayer take action to address the concerns of the community. In order to save our food system, we must change it to one that puts pollinators and people over profits.
Elisa Lazzarino is a senior studying political science with a concentration in public policy.
Board members present: Dr. Colleen Hudak-Wise, Dr. Ricky Langley (Chair), Dr. Thomas Scarborough (Vice-Chair), Shawn Harding, Don Rodgers, Dr. W. Benson Kirkman
The NC Pesticide Board met on May 10th, 2016 with an extremely full agenda of settlement agreements. The Board’s new legal counsel, Christopher McLennan, has made it a priority to catch up on settlement agreements, as there was a backup due to paralegal troubles within the Department of Agriculture. There were 23 settlement agreements for a total of $33,800 in penalties that were up for approval from the Board, with all of them being approved unanimously. Please see link below for description of violation, violator, and settlement amount.
Before the Board moved into the settlement agreements, Toxic Free NC’s Policy Advocate, Preston Peck, had an opportunity to give a presentation to the Board entitled, “The state of the science of neonicotinoid insecticides and effects on aquatic invertebrates.” This presentation gave a review of “Neonicotinoid contamination of global surface waters and associated risk to aquatic invertebrates: A review” by Morrissey et. al. and related it back to water contamination issues in North Carolina. The Board was quite receptive to this presentation and voted unanimously to inquire into NC Department of Environmental Quality’s Random Ambient Monitoring System (RAMS) about if they are monitoring for neonicotinoid insecticides and, if so, what levels they are finding. If the RAMS program is not monitoring for neonicotinoids, then the Board admitted that testing should be conducted through a commissioned study. The results of the inquiry are to be reported back at the next Board meeting. Please see full speech below.
“The state of the science of neonicotinoid insecticides and effects on aquatic invertebrates.” Preston Peck, Policy Advocate, Toxic Free NC
Thank you for the opportunity to bring these important issues concerning pesticide contamination to the Board’s attention. What you have in front of you is a comprehensive review by Morrissey et al. of 29 published studies from nine countries on the acute and chronic toxicity to 49 species of aquatic insects and crustaceans spanning 12 invertebrate orders. These studies are from the academic sector, industry sector, and various government regulatory entities. The findings in the study are consistent with what I have brought forward to the Board previously, in that, the thresholds set for water contamination of neonicotinoids by regulatory agencies a vastly under representative of the levels that can lead to both short and long-term impacts on aquatic invertebrate species. Furthermore, consistent with Center for Food Safety’s report, Water Hazard, the majority of studies reviewed used Daphnia magna as their test species for neonicotinoids. This information could contribute to the regulatory agencies setting the threshold extremely high for neonicotinoid exposure as D. magna seems to be the industry’s preferred test species but also has an extremely high tolerance for neonicotinoid exposure at a half maximal effective concentration (EC50) range of 4100 to 1,000,000 mg/L, with a geometric mean of 43,927 mg/L. By contrast, the mayfly, caddisfly, and midge are about 100,000 times more sensitive to neonicotinoids, have acute toxicity levels that average below EPA standardized thresholds for neonicotinoids, and are critical to supporting aquatic and terrestrial food webs. The overreliance on D. magna, that has an extremely high tolerance for these chemicals, can, and potentially has, lead to an inadequate determination of levels that impact aquatic invertebrates by both state and federal regulatory agencies.
Furthermore, in light of the Board’s previous comments concerning water sampling in North Carolina and that the levels found of specifically, imidacloprid, were well below the thresholds set forth by the EPA, I reached out to the NC Division of Water Resources to ask about sampling methodology. After speaking with Brian Pointer, Ambient Monitoring System Coordinator within the Division, I found out several things about the sampling methodology that concerned me that the true exposure rates are not being adequately represented. In his words, “RAMS are sampled monthly (not based on weather/streamflow – again, the random nature of the sampling), but pesticides are sampled every other month in addition to SVOCs and a couple of other parameters. RAMS are sampled on a two year cycle, are always freshwater stream sites, and the sites are chosen at random from a grid that is provided us by EPA. They are occasionally near urban and agricultural activities, but they are not purposely targeted at those locations due to the random nature of site selection. Generally, these sites are very small streams, but we do have a couple of large rivers occasionally (e.g., NE Cape Fear in this current cycle).”
This was concerning for a variety of reasons in relation to pesticide water contamination. First, it is troubling to know that pesticide contamination sampling occurs only six times a year by the Division, and not necessarily in areas that have heavy agricultural production. While, I understand the benefits and scientific significance of randomized sampling, there could be effort to strategically obtain random samples for a general region, so that we can obtain data that accurately reflects pesticide contamination for both high and low agricultural production areas. Also, it was troubling to hear that samples are not taken at peak flows following rain, and other events that would more adequately reflect the real toxicity thresholds that these species face. Given this information of sampling methodology, there seems to be a gap in knowledge of perceived pesticide contamination levels and realistic contamination levels.
Under the Pesticide Law of 1971, section 143-437, part 2, the Board has the duty “to carry out a planning, environmental and biological monitoring, and investigation into long-rage needs and problems concerning pesticides.” That being said, the evidence of water contamination by neonicotinoid insecticides is well documented at levels that, at the very least, are disruptive to aquatic ecosystems and the Board should therefore commission a study to investigate the level of contamination around North Carolina at peak flow times in areas where there is heavy neonicotinoid use as to accurately estimate maximum threshold exposure levels for both aquatic invertebrate species and other species that might consume contaminated water. It is also within the purview of the Board, under section 143-440, Part (a) that the Board “may designate any pesticide or device as a ‘restricted use pesticide’ upon the grounds that, in the judgment of the Board (either because of its persistence, its toxicity, or otherwise) it is so hazardous or injurious to persons, pollinating insects, animals, crops, wildlife, or the environment, other than the pests it is intended to prevent, destroy, control, or mitigate that additional restriction on its sale, purpose, use or possession are required.”
It is the recommendation of Toxic Free NC that the Board commission a study to specifically examine neonicotinoids pervasiveness in North Carolina’s soil and water, then, contingent upon the findings and public input, restrict the application and sale of neonicotinoids as the Board sees appropriate. I hope that the Board strongly considers these recommendations and takes the pervasiveness of these chemicals seriously as more articles come out everyday demonstrating how pervasive these chemicals continue to be in our environment.
Preston H. Peck, Policy Advocate
Toxic Free NC
Settlement Agreements for Violations of Pesticide Law
N.C. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Structural Pest Control and Pesticide Division v.
We are excited to announce that Program Manager, Dylan Williams, will be taking over as Executive Director on June 1st of this year! Stay tuned for an open letter from him in the coming weeks, but for now here’s a quick word from him on the transition and future of Toxic Free NC:
“First of all I want to thank Harry Payne for taking on the directorship over the past year. I am grateful for his leadership and guidance during his tenure and especially now as I move toward this new role. I am honored and humbled by this opportunity and look forward to supporting the work of this incredible team, ensuring continued protection of the health of North Carolinians and our environment. Toxics in our daily lives are more pervasive than ever. As industry finds new ways to prescribe need for chemicals in the home, in the field, or on our bodies, we have to remain vigilant and advocate for sound science and protective legislation. I look forward to working with you, for you, and continuing the 30 year legacy of Toxic Free NC. Please feel free to call, write, or stop by our office, as this work can only move forward if we work together!”
Toxic flame retardants policy
Toxic Free NC at the subcommittee table making sure that legislators know that we want toxic chemicals out of our children’s bedding products!
April has been busy leading up to the General Assembly going back into session for the 2016 short session this Monday. Toxic Free NC was in subcommittee meetings this month with other members of the NC Coalition for Environmental Health as we worked with legislators, firefighters, mothers, doctors, and others to get toxic flame retardants out of bedding products. Unfortunately, we faced some extreme opposition from the American Chemistry Council and other industry representatives and the Environmental Review Committee in the General Assembly decided not to pursue a ban on these flame retardants this session. However, the Committee did propose that the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Department of Environmental Quality work together to develop a toxics action plan for future consideration to ban these chemicals from bedding and other products.
Our Forest Aren’t Fuel Rally
Toxic Free NC speaks with Charlotte residents about the effects of pesticides in our food system, school, and child care facilities and what we can do to stop it!
Toxic Free NC was in Charlotte this month with many other organizations to support the Our Forests Aren’t Fuel Campaign. This campaign asks the biofuel industry to stop cutting the Southeast’s forests down for biofuel that they claim in carbon neutral. The state of the science says this is not so and industry science does not factor in other inputs such as pesticides when growing these trees for “green energy”. It was great to reconnect with old allies in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg area, get some great tours of amazing work being done in the area, and solidify new relationships. We will be back in Charlotte tabling this Sunday, May 1st for a Community Garden Dedication at Shalom Park from 10AM to 12:30PM. Come out and see us!
NC Farmworker Institute
Toxic Free NC and the NC Department of Agriculture teaming up for a informative workshop on the revised WPS (bottom L and R); researchers from Wake Forest University sharing chemical exposure results for farmowrkers (upper R); and advocates address poultry worker concerns (upper L).
Toxic Free NC had the great opportunity to participate in the 2016 NC Farmworkers Institute as a workshop presenter on the revised Worker Protection Standards (WPS). This event brought together farmworkers, advocates, and researchers from around the state to share current issues facing farmworkers, and strategies for increased enforcement tactics. It was great to team up with the NC Department of Agriculture for this workshop so that they could hear from the community various strategies that will lead towards a meaningful implementation of the revised rules for protecting farmworkers from pesticides. Many of the strategies include how to use social media to stay in touch with farmworkers after the grow season, strengthening the relationship between NC Department of Agriculture inspectors and farmworkers, and strategic partnerships between health and faith non-profits and the NC Department of Agriculture.
IPM Trainings in the Southeast!
Toxic Free NC traveled to Bladen, Brunswick, Columbus, New Hanover, and Pender counties to deliver our IPM: Plan and Policy training. Over 150 child care providers attended the trainings and were provided with information and tools to ensure the safest pest management at their child care facility. Many have begun the certification process, we’d like to highlight The Puddle Jumpers, Pat’s Toyland Preschool, and Rhonda’s Precious Gems, for completing the certification this month and encourage parents and providers to move their center to join the movement!
Program Manager, Dylan Williams (bottom right) and attendees in Whiteville go over the importance of protecting children and staff at child care centers from the exposure to pesticides. (Photo Credit: Wallyce Todd)
A huge thank you to everyone who was able to attend a training despite the busy life of child care and early childhood development. We look forward to helping your center be among the safest and healthiest in the state!
We’d also like to thank the Smart Starts of Bladen, Brunswick, Columbus, New Hanover and Pender counties for their active participation and support of this important work. Their resources and connections in the community are the reason we were able to turn out as many folks as we did for this first round of trainings. Thank you!
Toxic Free NC in the news…
Toxic Free NC was recently featured on WECT in Wilmington while conducting IPM trainings in multiple counties in the Southeast.Check out Toxic Free NC’s Program Manager, Dylan Williams, discussing the benefits of IPM in child care facilities and what we can do to get pesticides out of the places where children live, learn, and play.
Chemical Companies Consolidate
Earlier this month, Chinese, state-run chemical company ChemChina agreed to buy Swiss pesticide and seed giant, Syngenta, for $43 million making it China’s largest outbound acquisition ever. Given the size of the merger and the other recent consolidations within the agricultural industry, there are some serious questions that must be addressed in regards to how this will affect the global food supply trade. Click here to read Toxic Free NC’s analysis of how this merger will affect North Carolina’s grower, farmworkers, and consumers.
Meeting with Senator Burr to get labeling on toxic products
(L to R: Beth Messersmith (MomsRising); Mateland Mayes (owner, My Sisters’ Natural); Gath Regan (Deputy Director of Economic Development with Senator Burr’s office; Preston Peck (Toxic Free NC)
Toxic Free NC’s Policy Advocate, Preston Peck, NC MomsRising’s Beth Messersmith, and Mateland Mayes, owner of My Sisters’ Natural, met with Garth Regan from Senator’s Richard Burr’s office to discuss the Senator’s leadership on the Personal Care Products Safety Act (S.1014). This act would require that personal care products be labeled with their ingredients and regulated through the Food and Drug Administration. It has been over 75 years since there was any legislation passed regarding ingredients in personal care products, and since then, many of the products have been found to contain toxic ingredients such as lead in lipstick. We look forward to continuing to work with Senator Burr’s office as he provides leadership in the U.S. Senate to move this issue forward.
Thanks for your feedback on our website!
We received some extremely helpful responses about how we can effectively use our website to get information out about reducing toxics in North Carolina. Thank you to all of those that chose to fill out our survey and congratulations to Mario Sugus who was randomly selected from the respondents to receive some Toxic Free NC swag and Burt’s Bees bath products!
Last week it was announced that Chinese state-run company, ChemChina, would buy Swiss agrochemical company, Syngenta, for $43 billion making it China’s largest outbound acquisition ever. This will also be the world’s largest chemical sector buyout in history and the fourth largest full cash acquisition on record. What does this mean for North Carolina?
In two words, food security. Or in this case, a lack-there-of.
This merger was not unique, in that, the past six months were marked by some historic mergers for the agricultural sector including, the Smithfield-Shanghui pork industry merger, chemical giants Dow Chemical and DuPont announcing they will merge, and now another buyout of epic proportion. This could mean farmers in North Carolina are getting the short end of the stick from the agro-chemical industry and will be forced further into a sector that is dominated by vertical integration.
This consolidation is another example of how chemical companies have slowly overtaken the agricultural industry over the past century and forced growers into a pesticide treadmill of creating a chemical “solution” for a pest only to have that pest adapt, become resistant to the chemical, or open the door for insects the eradicated pest formally preyed upon. Make no mistake, these companies’ missions are not to “feed a growing world”, but rather to make a profit on selling their product while ensuring the financial longevity of their company.
As agriculture is North Carolina’s top industry at $78 billion, growers and consumers alike should be wary of these mergers as they could have implications to limiting options for growers when it comes to the chemicals they use to treat pest and more organic based alternatives for those that do not wish to participate in “conventional agriculture.” This is yet another encroachment on farmers’ right to choose what they grow and how they grow it, be it without or without chemical pest management practices.
North Carolina’s growers should have options available that allow for them to choose what sort of seed they wish to plant and their own pest management programs. Along those lines, consumers have the right to know what goes into the products they feed their children and have a variety of options based on what they feel best suits their health and financial needs. Fair competition is at the heart of out society, and when the top six companies that already dominate the world’s agro-chemical industry begin to consolidate, then there is little room for a fair choice in products used in agricultural operations.
Russ Vollmer, an organic strawberry farmer from Bunn, who I heard speak in the General Assembly last session said that the single biggest obstacle to running a sustainable, organic strawberry farm was that he did not see the same amount of dollars going into finding him to tools necessary to combat pests. Growers and consumers both must pressure elected officials to invest more research dollars into organic pest management practices and organic agricultural operations, which is currently a fraction of the amount spent on research into genetically modified organisms and “conventional agriculture.” If we want to create options for growers and consumers then we must give the organic industry a fighting chance and step off of the pesticide treadmill.
Happy New Year!
Happy 2016! As we move forward together with our work to transition North Carolina to a toxic free society, we want to take a moment and thank everyone that generously chose to support us with their end-of-year contributions. Together, we raised tens of thousands of dollars to support our work to eliminate pesticides and other toxics from our bodies and our environment. A huge thank you from the Toxic Free NC team! We look forward to working with you towards our shared goal of a toxic-free North Carolina.
Interns Needed!
Are you, or do you know of, an undergrad student that is looking for a PAID Summer internship? Toxic Free NC is working with the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation to provide an 8-week paid summer internship in public policy. Click here to view the details, but hurry as applications are due Tuesday, February 2 by Noon.
We Need Your Input on Our New Website!
Now that our new website has launched, we need input from the community on how we can make it an effective and useful tool. Please take a few minutes to check out our website and fill out this brief survey with your thoughts! Also, feel free to email us you thoughts and suggestions to info@toxicfreenc.org. Participants will be automatically entered to win some Toxic Free NC swag and some Burt’s Bees bath products! Thanks in advance for your input!
Policy Update
The NC Pesticide Board Meeting was earlier this month and you can read Toxic Free NC’s full notes from the meeting on our new website. Some of the main topics covered during the meeting were a request for aerial spray height limitation exemption for a pheromone used to treat the Gypsy Moth; a Worker Protection Standards update from the NC Department of Agriculture; two request for funding from the Pesticide Environmental Trust Fund; and a presentation from Toxic Free NC’s Policy Advocate, Preston Peck, on the effects of neonicotinoids on North Carolina’s Blue Crab. We will maintain a presence at the Board meetings and continue to request to be on the agenda to let the Board know that there are many topics of concern to our supporters and we are there to be the voice of human and environmental health in NC!
IPM in child care, coming soon to the Southeast!
Toxic Free NC will be visiting the Smart Starts of Bladen, Brunswick, Columbus, Pender, and New Hanover counties to train child care centers on pesticide safety and least-toxic Integrated Pest Management practices. The training includes a workshop on how to become IPM certified through Toxic Free NC and ensure common-sense pest management is practiced at your center! Click here for more details!
[ Not in our current target area, but interested in participating? Both Parents/Guardians and Center Directors can contact Dylan Williams: Dylan@toxicfreenc.org for more information ]
Toxic Free NC Turns 30!
Toxic Free NC has fought pesticide pollution since 1986 and this year marks the 30th year that we have stayed true to that fight. We have won several victories along they way including, forcing the NC Pesticide Board to create an interagency task-force to study groundwater contamination by pesticides, increased buffer zones for aerial pesticide spraying, increased protections for farmworkers through the revised Worker Protection Standards, and increase protection for pollinators by pressuring corporations, like Bayer CropScience, to act responsibly. As long as there are pesticides and other toxics in our homes and environments we will continue to watchdog regulatory bodies, advocate for policies that put human and environmental health first, and intentionally work to be a more inclusive and equitable organization that pushes back against environmental injustices. Please stay tuned for more events throughout 2016 as we celebrate the last 30 years while preparing for the next 30 years!