EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Naomi Starkman

Naomi Starkman

Posted: May 20, 2010 12:04 PM

Strawberry Showdown: No Methyl Iodide with My Shortcake, Please


Commercially grown strawberries and tomatoes in California could start getting an unhealthy dose of the highly toxic fumigant methyl iodide, a known carcinogen, neurotoxin, and thyroid disruptor. Among scientists' greatest concerns is the pesticide's ability to cause spontaneous abortion late in pregnancy. So you might be surprised to hear that the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) recently issued a proposed decision to approve methyl iodide for use just months after a state-commissioned study warned that any agricultural use "would result in exposures to a large number of the public and thus would have a significant adverse impact on the public health" adding that, "adequate control of human exposure would be difficult, if not impossible." Strawberries are already near the top of the Environmental Working Group's Dirty Dozen (13 pesticides were detected on a single sample) and recently, a high-level Presidential cancer panel recommended reducing chemical exposure by choosing fruits and vegetables grown without pesticides or chemical fertilizers (i.e., organic).

According to Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first registered methyl iodide as a pesticide in 2007, despite a letter of protest [PDF] sent by prominent scientists and Nobel laureates to the agency saying that it's "astonishing" that the EPA is considering "broadcast releases of one of the more toxic chemicals used in manufacturing into the environment." EPA initially limited its approval, registering methyl iodide for just one year. Then, during the final months of the Bush Administration, EPA quietly removed the time limits on its decision, effectively giving its manufacturer, Tokyo-based Arysta LifeScience, the largest privately-held pesticide producer on the planet, a green light for entry into the U.S. market. Two years later, the EPA agreed to reopen its decision on methyl iodide, pending results of a California Scientific Review Committee. The report, referenced above, was published on DPR's Web site in February and shortly thereafter, groups from around the country submitted a petition [PDF] to EPA to reopen their decision.

"We are talking about a pesticide that's been linked to cancer and late-term miscarriages and, because it's a gas, easily drifts from the fields and into nearby communities," said Greg Loarie, an attorney for Earthjustice, which filed the petition. "Families who live and work near California's tomato, strawberry and other fields will be harmed if the state moves forward with this proposal. There are safe alternatives to methyl iodide. There is simply no reason to be subjecting Californians to such serious health risks."

Methyl iodide was developed as an alternative to the fumigant methyl bromide, a chemical which also has serious health implications and serious environmental impacts, and which is being phased out under the Montreal Protocol. According [PDF] to PANNA, methyl iodide is by some measures four times as toxic as methyl bromide. Despite this, the DPR has decided that further restrictions would make the pesticide safe enough for use. These include requiring site-specific licenses, limiting exposure for workers and people living nearby to one-half and one-fifth, respectively, of the EPA's regulatory target levels, increasing buffer zones, and limiting the rate and extent to which the fumigant can be used. "The extra, health-protective use restrictions we are proposing ... are much stricter than those imposed anywhere else in the United States," said DPR director Mary-Ann Warmerdam. Still, the facts remain that methyl iodide is chemically reactive and highly volatile, making its application, even in the best of circumstances, clearly not in the public interest. While the California Strawberry Growers Commission has yet to make its position known on the matter, Salinas Valley conventional strawberry growers apparently welcome the approval--strawberries were a $600 million, 10,449-acre crop there in 2008.

And just in case you thought this might be about whether you can still buy cheap strawberries at Costco, PANNA has put together a superb document, Profiles of Poison [PDF], detailing the personal stories of individuals impacted by pesticides who are saying no to methyl iodide. From the farmworker rushed to the hospital with severe chemical blistering and in need of respiratory support, to the pregnant mother who lost her baby only two days after being exposed to pesticide dew, these are the stories of people who have lived through the pain and trauma of pesticide poisoning and are speaking out to prevent others from suffering the same fate.

The DPR is accepting public comments on its proposal through June 14, so unless you'd like some more toxins with your strawberry smoothie, you might want to urge DPR to immediately withdraw the recommendation to approve its agricultural use. CREDO has a one-step simple petition you can sign to make your opposition heard as well.

Originally posted on CivilEats.com.

 

Follow Naomi Starkman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NaomiStarkman

 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Neutralino
Opposing pseudoscience 24/7
08:14 AM on 05/24/2010
From the comments below, I can tell there is some confusion about the actual dangers of this chemical. Here's the problem:

For years, farmers killed fungus in their fields by injecting methyl chloride gas into the soil early in the season. This chemical kills the fungus on contact, then begins to decompose immediatel­y.

The problem is that this chemical is EXTREMELY toxic for the first few hours. It's really hard to protect farm workers. The nightmare started a few years ago when it became obvious that folks who live next to farms were in danger of getting exposed because of "drift" from the fields.

So methyl chloride was banned. Now pesticide companies want to try methyl iodide, which should be safer because it is a liquid, not a gas that can travel through the air. Obviously, lots of people disagree. That's the dispute.

If you live near one of these farms, I think you should be seriously concerned. But there is no reason at all to worry about eating contaminat­ed strawberri­es. There are lots of farm chemicals that can contaminat­e food, but this isn't one of them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LastAngryWoman
between hope and fear
06:27 AM on 05/22/2010
Words like 'shocked' have little meaning anymore.

I don't know how to express my rage.

Let me at least say this...the rare times I have given in and purchased one of those containers of plastic/pe­sticide strawberri­es are completely over.

I get the impression California has a mental health issue. It is a state that prides itself on leading the no smoking thing...ye­t they poison themselves and the rest of the continent with their toxic fruity chemicals. Hahhaha. What a joke. What a complete absurdity life has become.
10:19 PM on 05/21/2010
My interest in organic food started seriously a dozen years ago because of a close friend. She helped me find sources and her commitment inspired me. But the most compelling case for going organic came from her friend, a farmer, who had switched to organic crop and meat production because of his own experience with cancers...­particular forms of liver cancer that occurred in local farmers at an astonishin­g level. His perspectiv­e - a lifelong farmer, vietnam vet, inheritor of his father's farm, not a yuppie or hippie in any way shape or form - was so compelling­. He began by trying to save his own life and farm by finding healthier practices, but it grew way beyond that and I'm grateful that he helped me to start down a path that continues to grow, expand, extend today.
09:37 PM on 05/21/2010
Methyl iodide is made by Arysta LifeScienc­es, the tenth largest chemical company in the world, based in Tokyo. They named Methyl iodide Midas, like the Greek God. When I commented that King Midas killed everything he touched including his daughter, the company took the name Midas off it's web site (as of last Tuesday). How telling, the name Midas. The salesman for Arysta LifeScienc­es, Bill Lewis, told the Labor and Employment committee (see video:YouT­ube IfilmORG) that the UC Regents are the patent owners of methyl iodide and will be paid a per pound profit for it's use after registrati­on. The UC Regents, in my experience pressure Professors into saying what is in their best interests. I am an alumni of the UC system and I take this personally­. Methyl Iodide was formulated at UC Riverside - lab techs had serious health complicati­ons while working with MEI. I also found this article from the Annals www.annals­.org/conte­nt/82/4/53­4.abstract (Methyl Iodide Intoxicati­on: A Case Report) and "A comparativ­e investigat­ion of the metabolism of methyl bromide". The reason I am being so vocal is because I am an American who is very concerned about our children's health and safety.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
john649
10:06 PM on 05/21/2010
thanks for the info......­....I agree with you. Americans are being given fantasy stories about all the chemicals and pesticide 'safe' levels in our foods because half the ppl in charge in the govt. come from corporate chemical/p­esticide companies like Monsanto..­.......
10:51 PM on 05/21/2010
I have been edited... but Google "Mergers & Acquisitio­ns" and the name of the company is a good place to start if you want to look for the "ppl in charge" as you say.
07:10 PM on 05/21/2010
I have edited a CA assembly hearing so you can see and hear the scientists testimony first hand. "Methyl Iodide kills or mutates every cell it touches, on contact." Says Kathleen Collins PhD. UC Berkeley. Dr Neil Schore UC Davis, says that because methyl iodide is 5 times heavier than oxygen it seeks to meet the groundwate­r, when is does it changes into methyl alcohol, and the saying is 2 tsp. and your blind and a half cup and your dead. Because, most of CA residents have groundwate­r as their main source of water supply it would mean that our water would become toxic/pois­on in as little as 4 - 6 months. Two children have died in Utah from exposure and 50 thousand Lbs. have been spilled in SC. (Source: scorecard.­org) You can find the videos on YouTube, at profile name: IfilmORG . I want to urge everyone to make public comments on the California Department of Pesticide Regulation web site at: cdpr.ca.go­v The public comment time ends soon so don't delay.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amber15
12:19 PM on 05/21/2010
I am so outraged and tired of these pesticide corporatio­ns spreading their products from coast to coast. But the bigger question is why don't more ppl wake up and demand it to stop????
I'm wondering if poverty consciousn­ess is making ppl think they cannot afford to eat pesticide free food.
08:29 PM on 05/21/2010
I think they really think eating healthy is too expensive. They have an opinion with no life experience­; they believe the media. That is sick. TV was created simply to sell products, the entertainm­ent was to keep them watching between the ads. It is a marketing and propaganda tool. Read Edward Bernays book, "Propagand­a" it is very small yet very eye opening...
12:07 PM on 05/21/2010
Whatevah,
Methyl Iodide is such a reliable carcinogen it is used in labratorie­s on rats for cancer studies. Strawberri­es can absorb chemicals making it impossible to wash off. Fumigating with this chemical requires the person spraying to wear a hazmat suit. Is this really a chemical you want to feed your children? The informatio­n on MI is all over the internet and easy to find. Ms. Starkman includes a lot of reliable sources that shouldn't be taken lightly.

There are a lot of ways to grow strawberri­es and other produce in a less toxic way that aren't as labor intensive. Choose organic strawberri­es, or don't eat them at all if you can't afford organic.
01:53 PM on 05/21/2010
Thanks Rachel,

You sound like someone who is somewhat believable­. Most of the strawberri­es I eat come from my own garden, and I haven't found the need to use any chemicals at all. So far.

Be aware of the fact that my concern deals with the RANGE of problems. I still don't know how to assess this concern against the bazillion other sources of chemical contaminat­ion that afflict modern Americans. The question is this: How much of a threat is posed by Big Strawberry­?

It's not an easy question to answer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amber15
02:45 PM on 05/21/2010
yes, but there's only one way the pesticide co.s make any money from you is from buying this lethal stuff. Can you make the connection from posted propaganda to corporate profits??
this blog is filled with them......­.
08:50 AM on 05/21/2010
I wish it was possible to believe the informatio­n in essays like this. I care a great deal about the explosion of chemical exposure in our everyday lives. I take great care to make sure that the food and water my family consumes is as clean as possible; my organic garden is a labor of love.

Unfortunat­ely, this field is plagued by a huge group of ignorant folks who take the position that all chemicals are always bad and none should be used ever. The fact is that some chemicals are worse than others, and it isn't practical to try to supply grocery stores with the kind of labor-inte­nsive food I grow myself.

In the real world, the best tactic to take now is to strive to reduce or eliminate the worst chemicals out there, and sometimes that means substituti­ng safer chemicals. Alas, this kind of nuance is not possible for most of the commentato­rs who participat­e in this discussion­.

Is Ms. Starkman a reliable source of informatio­n on this topic? Is methyl iodide as hazardous as she suggests? Even though I am unusually well informed on the topic of food safety, I just don't know enough specifics to judge exactly how concerned we should be.

It is extremely frustratin­g that so much of what is written on these topics is motivated by ideology instead of science.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amber15
12:24 PM on 05/21/2010
I thought I'd find you here......­..more corporate shill.

For anyone who thinks this person cares about your health just go to this website and realize who's out there trying to hoodwink you into buying pesticides­.........

www.berman­exposed.or­g or http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/R­ichard_Ber­man
or look up David Martosko, the CCF who all get paid millions to post propaganda so big corporatio­ns don't lose money when the truth comes out.

Even Richard Berman's own son refuses to have anything to do with these lobbyists.­...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
01:16 PM on 05/21/2010
Your positions confuse me. First you say you care a great deal about the chemicals in foods but then you fail to research anything associated with chemicals in foods and admit to your lack of knowledge and suspect the author.
Suggestion­: Do the research! Googe a bit. Then come back and comment.
01:45 PM on 05/21/2010
I realize that you think your comments make sense. I wish it did.

I sincerely doubt that there is anyone on HuffPo who has done more research into this topic than me. My extensive efforts have revealed that it is impossible to take anything written on this topic at face value.

With all due respect, I take a backseat to nobody on the subject of research. The reality is that very few HuffPo readers take nearly as much care as me to investigat­e this topic.

And that is the point! If you take the time to read the comments that are posted after these essays, it is abundantly clear that almost no one makes ANY effort to check the reliabilit­y of these posts.

The thing that I want other readers of HuffPo to know is that they can't trust anything they read on the topic. This is a very important truth which needs to be shared.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SusanElizabeth1949
My micro-bio may be empty but my head isn't.
10:56 AM on 05/23/2010
What bothered me was the citing, in the article of unnamed Nobel Laureates and Scientists­. Without a name how can one be sure they are commenting in their field of expertize. Remember Linus Pauling?
05:17 AM on 05/21/2010
Thank you for your excellent article. Here we go again. Would'nt you think we'd be working on trying to improve the safety of the food we eat by developing methods that don't involve insidious chemicals by now? Having recently viewed the "Dirty Dozen" I will be voicing my objection to this new and dangerous chemical. Replacing methyl bromide with something even more hazardous does not make sense to the consumer but for agricultur­al profit it speaks volumes. Buy organic and support a resposible local farm instead.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
john649
08:19 PM on 05/21/2010
AMEN! I agree with you - I ONLY buy organic and ONLY local
12:56 PM on 05/20/2010
Naomi, great article as usual. Clearly the California Governor needs to help move this state in the right direction and challenge big chemical companies just like he's challengin­g big Texas oil companies and move us towards safe farming and safe strawberri­es.

For folks who want to stay engaged on this issue regularly, please visit the "No to Methyl Iodide" group on Facebook.

- Paul, Pesticide Watch
10:20 PM on 05/21/2010
Here is Paul S. Towers. http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=PfoyYDRK5­L4 speaking at the committee hearing. Anyone who wishes to re-post any of the videos of the hearing be my guest they are public property. Your government $$ at work so to speak.