Panels to meet over ongoing agrochemicals problems

By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM 
THE NATION

 

File photo

 

Healthcare reform committee agrees to back banning of three harmful farm chemicals

 

THREE NATIONAL reform committees – public health, social, and natural resources and environment – met yesterday in an attempt to settle a protracted problem of hazardous agrochemicals and ensure that consumers are properly protected from food safety problems.

 

Dr Seree Tuchinda, the head of the national Healthcare Reform Committee, said his committee had agreed to fully support the prohibition of three harmful farm chemicals – paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos – in the Kingdom.

 

The ban is needed to ensure successful implementation of the national food safety policy and to enhance protection for consumers, Seree said.

 

Academics and public health experts had provided scientific evidence to conclude these farm chemicals have serious impacts on health, he said. 

 

However, the national Hazardous Substance Committee had extended the use of the two toxic herbicides and a pesticide in a recent move that drew heavy criticism.

 

The national Healthcare Reform Committee will work with the national social, and natural resources and environment reform committees to solve the problem, he said, and ensure that people are protected from chemical contamination in the environment and their food.

 

The Healthcare Reform Committee will also work with Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives to shift the nation’s agriculture toward organic farming and push food safety policies, he added.

 

Meanwhile, Dr Thiravat Hemachudha, a medical professor at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Medicine, said the three-committee effort is the most plausible path to finding a solution for this issue. 

 

 

Thiravat, who is a member of the Health Reform Committee, said anybody exposed to toxic agrochemicals could learn from a recent California court case in which a man successfully won compensation from Monsanto after a weedkiller it manufactures caused him cancer. 

 

“Many more people in Thailand have been affected by these hazardous chemicals, ranging from gangrene, slow child development, cancer and brain diseases. [They] could also sue the chemical companies, but the major problems are most of these victims do not know that they have this right or they cannot access financial and legal support for the lawsuit,” he said.

 

Thiravat predicted that the result of the meeting would not differ much from the outcome of the previous Hazardous Substance Committee. 

 

It will amount to just another time-consuming tactic by corrupt officials to further prolong the problem and allow agrochemical companies to continue making profit, he said.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30352152

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-08-15

9 minutes ago, webfact said:

The national Healthcare Reform Committee will work with the national social, and natural resources and environment reform committees to solve the problem, he said, and ensure that people are protected from chemical contamination in the environment and their food.

Phew!

 

Now that there are several committees working on the issue, I feel safer.

 

Thank you committees!

 

 

31 minutes ago, webfact said:

It will amount to just another time-consuming tactic by corrupt officials to further prolong the problem and allow agrochemical companies to continue making profit, he said.

BOOM!

Edited August 14, 20188 yr by Bluespunk

1 hour ago, webfact said:

[They] could also sue the chemical companies,

When it's a farang company, they are more than happy to sue. If it were a Thai-Chinese or Thai company, nobody would dare speak of legal action. Cowards

46 minutes ago, Fex Bluse said:

When it's a farang company, they are more than happy to sue. If it were a Thai-Chinese or Thai company, nobody would dare speak of legal action. Cowards

I had the feeling paraquat or maybe some of the others were now being produced in China (under licence?), although they originated in the US from Monsanto?

I'm willing to be corrected on that though.

 

I read an article the other day where it stated that glyphosate was not carcinogenic when contaminated food was ingested, no mention of exposure to the chemical through skin contact or inhalation.

 

Another article stated that UK farmers routinely sprayed their wheat crops just before harvest to kill the crop and enhance drying techniques.

 

Who the hell allowed them to start this practice?

 

Do the Thais do this to rice crops?

17 minutes ago, grollies said:

I read an article the other day where it stated that glyphosate was not carcinogenic when contaminated food was ingested, no mention of exposure to the chemical through skin contact or inhalation.

 

Another article stated that UK farmers routinely sprayed their wheat crops just before harvest to kill the crop and enhance drying techniques.

 

Who the hell allowed them to start this practice?

 

Do the Thais do this to rice crops?

Monsanto just lost a massive law suit related to the dangers of thess chemicals 

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5b6e14f1e4b0bdd062095477

Search Google for "Monsanto Dwayne Johnson" for a 289 Million USD law suit Monsanto just lost. 

The Doctors who claimed these chemicals were harmless are quiet.

 

11 minutes ago, Oziex1 said:

The Doctors who claimed these chemicals were harmless are quiet.

 

Probably because they've been drinking the paraquat, to test their claim.

 

Why not have all organic food in Thailand, with controlled organic farming, and markets all over. The prices of these veggies and fruits are probably higher, but I believe it is worth the effort. When I read in the BKK Post, that 64% of all veggies sold in Thailand are contaminated to an extent, that one should avoid those, I am convinced that is the solution.

Monsanto seems to be no more",Bayer announced its intent to discontinue the Monsanto name, with the combined company operating solely under the Bayer brand."

Seems Monsanto had such a bad name that Bayer decided to change the name.

Regards Worgeordie

let me get this straight, they have had meetings to decide that more meetings need to be held to determine the danger to the public , when the results of those meetings are known, then more meetings will be held to ascertain how to deal with the problem. Further meetings will be held to ensure how to ban them if that is the case ( at the moment it is LEGAL to harm humans with these chemicals here ion THAILAND ).

Then a period of consultation will beheld with interested parties to determine if any the reaction to the ban by the agricultural community . Then possibly in 3-5 years a Ban may come into effect. 

During thast time the Health ministry to identify which people are suffering from these chemicals being used, so that the THAI GOVERMENT can be sued for harming the population. 

OR !!

 

The NCPO just plain BANS them until these chemical companies prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are in fact SAFE...INTERNATIONALLY .

 

Failure to act is in itself a Criminal offence under Thai law to harm another person !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Section 44 could be used to immediately ban use, sale or purchase of these chemicals, with the Government footing the bill oF supplies brought or ordered. Far cheaper than dealing with the possible thousands of people suffering from its use. 

 

BUT THAT IS LOGICAL, POSSIBLY A STEP TO FAR FOR THE THAI GOVERNMENT !!

 

Edited August 15, 20188 yr by Khun Paul

1 hour ago, Fex Bluse said:

Monsanto just lost a massive law suit related to the dangers of thess chemicals 

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5b6e14f1e4b0bdd062095477

Thanks, I did read that. I am trying to go organic with my fruit trees, hence my interest in the subject.

1 hour ago, fxe1200 said:

Why not have all organic food in Thailand, with controlled organic farming, and markets all over. The prices of these veggies and fruits are probably higher, but I believe it is worth the effort. When I read in the BKK Post, that 64% of all veggies sold in Thailand are contaminated to an extent, that one should avoid those, I am convinced that is the solution.

Difficult (but not impossible) with all the bugs, fungi and canker around. I feel I'm fighting a loosing battle sometimes.

'three-committee effort is the most plausible path to finding a solution for this issue.'  Oh no it isn't !  A simple decree from he-who-must-be-obeyed is the most plausible.

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

Monsanto seems to be no more",Bayer announced its intent to discontinue the Monsanto name, with the combined company operating solely under the Bayer brand."

Seems Monsanto had such a bad name that Bayer decided to change the name.

Regards Worgeordie

Bayer has a fascinating and disturbing history. As well as purchasing Monsanto, purveyors of Agent Orange along with Dow Chemicals, Bayer were indirectly responsible for production of Zyklon B,  a derivative of Zyklon A, a pesticide.

 

Briefly, Bayer formed in 1863.In 1880 the company renamed Farbenfabriken Bayern & Co. The Bayer logo appeared in 1904. The trademarks and rights were appropriated by the US after WW1 and recovered by Bayer in 1994.

 

In 1925 Bayer became part of IG Farben, a company who set up factories next to Auschwitz and used prisoners for experimentation.

 

IG Farben held a 42.5% stake in Degesch, the company that manufactured Zyklon B for the Nazis. It was so profitable they made more in dividends from Degesch during WW2 than from their own company profits.

 

Post WW2 IG Farben was broken up and Bayer reappeared with most of IG Farbens assets.

 

In 1956 one of IG Farbens directors, imprisoned by the allies for 7 years after WW2 for directing operations at Auschwitz, became head of the Bayer board.

 

From there on the company grew to what it is today.

 

PS, Degesch is still in business today as Detia-Degesch GmbH.

 

You say Monsanto has a bad name? Go figure.

Edited August 15, 20188 yr by grollies

1 hour ago, grollies said:

Bayer has a fascinating and disturbing history. As well as purchasing Monsanto, purveyors of Agent Orange along with Dow Chemicals, Bayer were indirectly responsible for production of Zyklon B,  a derivative of Zyklon A, a pesticide.

 

Briefly, Bayer formed in 1863.In 1880 the company renamed Farbenfabriken Bayern & Co. The Bayer logo appeared in 1904. The trademarks and rights were appropriated by the US after WW1 and recovered by Bayer in 1994.

 

In 1925 Bayer became part of IG Farben, a company who set up factories next to Auschwitz and used prisoners for experimentation.

 

IG Farben held a 42.5% stake in Degesch, the company that manufactured Zyklon B for the Nazis. It was so profitable they made more in dividends from Degesch during WW2 than from their own company profits.

 

Post WW2 IG Farben was broken up and Bayer reappeared with most of IG Farbens assets.

 

In 1956 one of IG Farbens directors, imprisoned by the allies for 7 years after WW2 for directing operations at Auschwitz, became head of the Bayer board.

 

From there on the company grew to what it is today.

 

PS, Degesch is still in business today as Detia-Degesch GmbH.

 

You say Monsanto has a bad name? Go figure.

Sounds a perfect match Monsanto and Bayer

regards Worgeordie

4 hours ago, bluesofa said:

Probably because they've been drinking the paraquat, to test their claim.

 

No probably just retired and living a good life after being paid handsomely by the manufacturers for what they said!!

 

Go agro chemical manufacturers keep poisoning and killing for profits..never mind the suffering...

just go to the temple & give merit once a month to feel ok with yourselves !!