Decision to slowly phase out paraquat met with stiff opposition

[webfact]

Decision to slowly phase out paraquat met with stiff opposition

By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM 
THE NATION

 

File photo

 

CONSUMER PROTECTION activists voiced firm objection to Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Grisada Boonrach’s proposal to ban the use of paraquat chemical in three years instead of one year.

 

The Hazardous Substance Committee is scheduled to hold a meeting tomorrow to reconsider the banning of three controversial agricultural chemicals – paraquat, glyphosate, and chlorpyrifos.

 

However, the BioThai Foundation yesterday disclosed the minister’s text message to his ministry’s senior officials, ordering that the ban on paraquat be implemented on a step-by-step basis so farmers have time to seek an alternative weed-controlling option. 

 

His message urged the ministry to start by setting a clear deadline on the ban of paraquat imports and setting up prohibition zones, starting with organic farms and river headwaters in the first year, followed by irrigated farms in the second year before finally banning the use of paraquat nationwide. 

 

Alternatively, he said, farmers and local authorities could set their own plan to phase out the use of paraquat in their province within three years. 

 

However, Grisada’s proposal was met with overwhelming opposition from several environmental and health protection organisations and academics, who urged the Hazardous Substance Committee and the Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry to follow the Public Health Ministry’s and the Ombudsman’s resolution to officially ban the three chemicals this year. 

 

Many netizens also joined forces yesterday by posting comments with the hashtag #SaveThailandBanParaquat in support of banning dangerous herbicides and pesticides.

 

Thailand Pesticide Alert Network coordinator Prokchol Ousap said Grisada’s proposal was unacceptable, as it went directly against the Public Health Ministry, Office of the Ombudsman and the National Human Rights Commission’s decision to not just ban paraquat, but also glyphosate and chlorpyrifos, by the end of 2019.

 

“Even senior officials and experts in the Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry, including Deputy Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Wiwat Salyakamthorn, say we do not have to waste three years just for banning paraquat when we already have the technology to effectively control weeds right now,” Prokchol said. 

 

“Hence, we expect the Hazardous Substances Committee to do the right thing by banning these chemicals, or we will have to upscale our movement against those who are profiting from these chemicals.” 

 

Even though these three chemicals have proven to be extremely toxic, contaminating the environment and the food chain and posing severe threats to people’s health, the herbicides are still widely used in the country, as the Hazardous Substance Committee has not yet decided to ban them. 

 

However, after facing strong pressure from the public, the committee agreed to reconsider its decision tomorrow. 

 

Witoon Lienchamroon, director of BioThai, also warned that if the committee fails to comply with the Ombudsman’s ruling to ban these three chemicals within this year, then the Ombudsman will have to notify the National Anti-Corruption Commission of the panel’s defiance and launch an investigation.

 

Meanwhile, Mana Nimitmongkol, secretary-general of the Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand, has called for the committee to make its meeting transparent and is also urging members who have close ties or interests in farm chemical companies to withdraw from making a decision on the status of the three chemicals. 

 

“If any committee member attending tomorrow’s meeting and participating in the reconsideration of the chemicals ban is later found to have a conflict of interest, they will be sued,” Mana said.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30364015

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2019-02-13

[Samui Bodoh]

"...Even senior officials and experts in the Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry, including Deputy Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Wiwat Salyakamthorn, say we do not have to waste three years just for banning paraquat when we already have the technology to effectively control weeds right now,” Prokchol said..." 

 

I am not a farmer nor do I bring a clear understanding to this issue, but...

 

This seems like it is simply giving money to corporate interests at the expense of Thai people's health.

 

Anyone dispute that? Anyone disagree?

 

First against the wall when the revolution comes (after the lawyers of course)!

 

 

[kannot]

Start hoarding now Paraquat has an indefinite  lifespan

[bluesofa]

26 minutes ago, kannot said:

Start hoarding now Paraquat has an indefinite  lifespan

There seems an irony in Paraquat having a 'lifespan'.

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Even though these three chemicals have proven to be extremely toxic, contaminating the environment and the food chain and posing severe threats to people’s health, the herbicides are still widely used in the country, as the Hazardous Substance Committee has not yet decided to ban them.

if thailand was a single person, then that person could not tie their own shoes' laces; the rest of the world banned this stuff long ago; think there were very good reasons to do so ?

[kannot]

1 hour ago, bluesofa said:

There seems an irony in Paraquat having a 'lifespan'.

depends if  u want to drink it or  not.....maybe an ex  wife?

[kannot]

14 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

if thailand was a single person, then that person could not tie their own shoes' laces; the rest of the world banned this stuff long ago; think there were very good reasons to do so ?

what? people  committing suicide?, theyre  going to do that anyway with or without it.

Toxicity[edit]

Pure paraquat, when ingested, is highly toxic to mammals, including humans, potentially leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although there are no specific antidotes, fuller's earth or activated charcoal is an effective treatment if taken in time. There have been some successful cases of using cyclophosphamide to treat paraquat poisoning.^[26] Oxygen should not be administered unless SpO₂ levels are below 92%, as high concentrations of oxygen intensify the toxic effects.^[27][28]Death may occur up to 30 days after ingestion. Diluted paraquat used for spraying is less toxic; thus, the greatest risk of accidental poisoning is during mixing and loading paraquat for use.^[8]

In acute toxicity studies using laboratory animals, paraquat has been shown to be highly toxic by the inhalation route and has been placed in Toxicity Category I (the highest of four levels) for acute inhalation effects. However, the EPA has determined that particles used in agricultural practices (400–800 μm) are well beyond the respirable range and therefore inhalation toxicity is not a toxicological endpoint of concern. Paraquat is toxic (Category II) by the oral route and moderately toxic (Category III) by the dermal route. Paraquat will cause moderate to severe eye irritation and minimal dermal irritation, and has been placed in Toxicity Categories II and IV (slightly toxic) respectively for these effects.^[29]

The alveolar epithelial cells of the lung selectively concentrates paraquat.^[30] Even a single swig, immediately spat out, can cause death from fibrous tissue developing in the lungs, leading to asphyxiation.^[31]

One of the characters in the infamous British public information film Apaches (1977) dies hours after accidentally swallowing a small amount; the paraquat in the film is contained in a receptacle similar to a whisky bottle.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, ingesting paraquat causes symptoms such as liver, lung, heart, and kidney failure within several days to several weeks that can lead to death up to 30 days after ingestion. Those who suffer large exposures are unlikely to survive. Chronic exposure can lead to lung damage, kidney failure, heart failure, and oesophageal strictures.^[32] Accidental deaths and suicides from paraquat ingestion are relatively common. For example, there are more than 5,000 deaths in China from paraquat poisoning every year.^[33] Long-term exposures to paraquat would most likely cause lung and eye damage, but reproductive/fertility damage was not found by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their review.

[bluesofa]

7 minutes ago, kannot said:

1 hour ago, bluesofa said:

There seems an irony in Paraquat having a 'lifespan'.

depends if  u want to drink it or  not.....maybe an ex  wife?

Yeah, who would end up with an ex-life.

[kannot]

1 minute ago, bluesofa said:

Yeah, who would end up with an ex-life.

Fortunately Im still on the Mk1 model

[LazySlipper]

Bad things in Good things out.

 

Reverse psychology...

[fruitman]

1 hour ago, YetAnother said:

if thailand was a single person, then that person could not tie their own shoes' laces; the rest of the world banned this stuff long ago; think there were very good reasons to do so ?

That's why they walk on slippers.

[klauskunkel]

somebody took an envelope

and now has to give it back

but he already spent the money...

[robblok]

2 hours ago, kannot said:

what? people  committing suicide?, theyre  going to do that anyway with or without it.

Toxicity[edit]

Pure paraquat, when ingested, is highly toxic to mammals, including humans, potentially leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although there are no specific antidotes, fuller's earth or activated charcoal is an effective treatment if taken in time. There have been some successful cases of using cyclophosphamide to treat paraquat poisoning.^[26] Oxygen should not be administered unless SpO₂ levels are below 92%, as high concentrations of oxygen intensify the toxic effects.^[27][28]Death may occur up to 30 days after ingestion. Diluted paraquat used for spraying is less toxic; thus, the greatest risk of accidental poisoning is during mixing and loading paraquat for use.^[8]

In acute toxicity studies using laboratory animals, paraquat has been shown to be highly toxic by the inhalation route and has been placed in Toxicity Category I (the highest of four levels) for acute inhalation effects. However, the EPA has determined that particles used in agricultural practices (400–800 μm) are well beyond the respirable range and therefore inhalation toxicity is not a toxicological endpoint of concern. Paraquat is toxic (Category II) by the oral route and moderately toxic (Category III) by the dermal route. Paraquat will cause moderate to severe eye irritation and minimal dermal irritation, and has been placed in Toxicity Categories II and IV (slightly toxic) respectively for these effects.^[29]

The alveolar epithelial cells of the lung selectively concentrates paraquat.^[30] Even a single swig, immediately spat out, can cause death from fibrous tissue developing in the lungs, leading to asphyxiation.^[31]

One of the characters in the infamous British public information film Apaches (1977) dies hours after accidentally swallowing a small amount; the paraquat in the film is contained in a receptacle similar to a whisky bottle.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, ingesting paraquat causes symptoms such as liver, lung, heart, and kidney failure within several days to several weeks that can lead to death up to 30 days after ingestion. Those who suffer large exposures are unlikely to survive. Chronic exposure can lead to lung damage, kidney failure, heart failure, and oesophageal strictures.^[32] Accidental deaths and suicides from paraquat ingestion are relatively common. For example, there are more than 5,000 deaths in China from paraquat poisoning every year.^[33] Long-term exposures to paraquat would most likely cause lung and eye damage, but reproductive/fertility damage was not found by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their review.

Right the rest of the civilized world banned it for no reason and you know better ????

[kannot]

21 minutes ago, robblok said:

Right the rest of the civilized world banned it for no reason and you know better ????

No its  not that dangerous, if wer'e  gonna  ban everything with common sense start lets start with motor vehicles........... especially in Thailand, lets  face it using the correct masks and  protection its no problem... when given to idiots who dont mix  it correctly, spray it correctly at the right time wearing correct protection then yes theyre  gonna  die.

Like most things it gets restricted due to morons who abuse the correct system,same same Visas.

I use it about once a month to spot treat weeds, of course if the Thai werent lazy and at 400 baht a day offered they could  pull them out by hand...........but it aint happening anymore, but then living in the city you wouldnt know about the staff shortage.

Had a  woman turn up here once to spray some weeds, came in flip flops, with the young kids  following her round walking thru the wet( paraquat) sprayed  grass..............theres  the problem

[Kasset Tak]

First, there are big farming companies (CP is one example...) who want to keep these chemicals just so they can maximize their profits!
Secondly, the big agrochemical industry in UK (where many of these chemicals are banned for use... but not production) and US have companies like Bayer (owner of Mosanto and other brands...) and others plowing millions of $ (not Baht) into lobby organizations all over the world to sell their products and say how safe they are. There are lots of research made saying how safe glyphosate (roundup) is for the users... it's all paid for by Mosanto/Bayer who even payed Neil deGrasse Tyson to make/narrate a documentary on how safe glyphosate is... just as the cases of cancers related to glyphosate started to make their ways through the US courts!!!

[robblok]

Just now, kannot said:

No its  not that dangerous, if wer'e  gonna  ban everything with common sense start lets start with motor vehicles........... especially in Thailand, lets  face it using the correct masks and  protection its no problem... when given to idiots who dont mix  it correctly, spray it correctly at the right time wearing correct protection then yes theyre  gonna  die.

Like most things it gets restricted due to morons who abuse the correct system,same same Visas.

Sometimes you have to conform to reality in Thailand only bans work other things just won't be enforced. The people just can't use it will not take any care and with all the corruption nothing but a full ban would suffice. Motor vehicles are hard to replace there are alternatives for paraquat maybe a bit more work or more expensive but they are there. Given the huge pesticide problem Thailand has this is a good thing. Remember where you live.

[kannot]

17 minutes ago, robblok said:

Sometimes you have to conform to reality in Thailand only bans work other things just won't be enforced. The people just can't use it will not take any care and with all the corruption nothing but a full ban would suffice. Motor vehicles are hard to replace there are alternatives for paraquat maybe a bit more work or more expensive but they are there. Given the huge pesticide problem Thailand has this is a good thing. Remember where you live.

Pls  name your alternatives aside manual  pulling which I did for about 5  years until staff could  no  longer be found.

Paraquat  is  fast acting and rain proof  in 10  minutes..............now as for civilized countries banning it remember where they were, surely cant be for the same reason? 

I see a lot of reference to suicide but thats just nuts they can as  easily  jump off a  building or step into a Thai car ( same thing)

Flame  gun and use  gas is about all I can see, I dont use  a lot and spot  treat I dont spray vast swathes of crops with it.

 have already spread 6  inch deep gravel over a lot of my land which helps with them getting started and  makes them easier to  pull out.

[robblok]

8 minutes ago, kannot said:

Pls  name your alternatives aside manual  pulling which I did for about 5  years until staff could  no  longer be found.

Paraquat  is  fast acting and rain proof  in 10  minutes..............now as for civilized countries banning it remember where they were, surely cant be for the same reason? 

I see a lot of reference to suicide but thats just nuts they can as  easily  jump off a  building or step into a Thai car ( same thing)

Studies have shown its not as innocent as you believe otherwise they would not have banned it. Its not a suicide thing. Anyway normally I would agree with you about banning and responsible use. However in this country banning is often the only thing that works. Normally I am all for personal responsibility. But given the scale of the pesticide problem in Thailand. Just look at what comes up when they test vegetables in markets and supermarkets, the health of the nation supersedes the need of the farmers to save money.

 

Below an alternative to paraquat tested in Malaysia (that has banned paraquat and has similar climate to Thailand. This is just for one thing I am sure others can be found)

 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1445-6664.2007.00263.x

 

Normally id be firmly on your side but enforcement of partial bans just does not work here. The lazy corrupt police makes sure of that. 

[thequietman]

4 hours ago, YetAnother said:

if thailand was a single person, then that person could not tie their own shoes' laces; the rest of the world banned this stuff long ago; think there were very good reasons to do so ?

Thailand is also one of the largest importers of asbestos. They say it doesn't hold any danger either.

[canopy]

Kannot I am surprised you are still in denial. The farms in Thailand and all around you are operating just fine yet there you are blaming your labor shortcomings on a non-existent labor shortage / no one doing manual labor nonsense. Look around and fix your problem. And another thing. You know full well that in Thailand no one follows the directions and how bad that is so calling these things safe when used properly is ridiculous. It's about as safe as giving them all a red button to set off a nuke in your front yard because they are all such thoughtful and responsible people and would never press the button. And as already pointed out, I want to point out a second time especially for you that banning this is different than banning vehicles. There are easy alternatives to poisoning, vehicles not so much.

 

Having to pull the weeds would be the best thing ever, though that's not where we will get to with this ban. A plate of rice would cost 1 more baht. And it would mean infinitely more jobs in the poor areas instead of this money going in the pockets of the big chemical companies. And the food would be healthy. And the environment clean. The eagles would not prey on sick animals and die off. And the farmers would not suffer. The price of goods simply follows the increases in production price.

 

Just think about it the other way around. If someone told you they could make your plate of rice 1 baht cheaper, BUT it would be laced with dangerous chemicals, pollute the environment, and kill jobs in the countryside to enrich the big chemical companies would you want that? Of course not. We need to recognize the madness of these chemicals and get rid of them now. The big chemical companies seem desperate to buy time and find ways to unravel this common sense future. 3 years gives them a lot of time to infiltrate and buy people off. Glad to hear there are a few people that want to press them on this. Don't be fooled by the monopolies. There are no uncharted waters ahead and no need to wait which is proven by the fact all the other countries have made this ban successfully long ago.

 

[Guest Jerry787]

H.E The Minister and H.E. the Prime Minister shall ban paraquat asap, its a heavy pollutant, killing people from the field to consumers, indeed shall sue the producer of paraquat for all the damage done to the Kingdom of Thailand Population !

 

[unamazedloso]

im a farmer. i dont use the stuff. All my neighbours do but dont worry all the feilds are on fire so the country can breath in a little taste of paraquat!

Its all about money and laziness. My neighbours are frightened to light there sugarcane on fire but instead of plowing the leftover plant material back in to the dirt which is a GOOD thing to do they are waiting for a time to light it so they dont get in trouble. Same thing woth weeds. Just plow it. A little by hand if needed but with sugar cane if they leave the stuff they usually burn right on top which they can do for 3years in a row before a replant it limits the amount of weeds that can grow. On out farm we cover the ground in cut grass and bamboo leaves, banana leaves and weeds. Reduces the need for wate rand over time makes the soil good again.

[jak2002003]

58 minutes ago, unamazedloso said:

im a farmer. i dont use the stuff. All my neighbours do but dont worry all the feilds are on fire so the country can breath in a little taste of paraquat!

Its all about money and laziness. My neighbours are frightened to light there sugarcane on fire but instead of plowing the leftover plant material back in to the dirt which is a GOOD thing to do they are waiting for a time to light it so they dont get in trouble. Same thing woth weeds. Just plow it. A little by hand if needed but with sugar cane if they leave the stuff they usually burn right on top which they can do for 3years in a row before a replant it limits the amount of weeds that can grow. On out farm we cover the ground in cut grass and bamboo leaves, banana leaves and weeds. Reduces the need for wate rand over time makes the soil good again.

Then you are a good farmer who is using good farming practices..  There are a few good Thai farmers near me who have great farms and use good farming methods, such as ploughing in the stubble, creating water reserves, rotating crops, etc.  I can tell they have a passion for their job, and are using their brains as to how to get the best yields and good quality crops.  

 

But the bad ones far outweigh the good.  I have seen farmers loose entire crops because they did not make provisions for adequate water, seen the same mistakes being made time and time again each year, and so much wastage.  

 

Some are just lazy, some don't care or like their work, and others are just selfish.

 

Poor education and ignorance is a big factor to the problem I think.  I have seem many times farmers spraying their crops with dangerous chemicals for hours at a time, not even wearing a face mask.  I have seen farmers leave their cows to nearly starve to death as they cant be bothered to move them to new grazing further down the street! 

 

I was upset one year when the farmer next door miscalculated the concentration of pesticide to spray on his rice fields... the water from the fields flowing into a large community lake (owned by the temple).  This caused thousands of fish, lots of turtles, frogs and wild ducks to get poisoned.. all floating on top of the water stinking the place out.  Did he face any consequences.... of course not.  Years on the lake is now a barren muddy expanse of water.  Even all the water lilies, reeds and other vegetation have died (I suspect form his weed killers).  

 

 

[seajae]

I vary between paraquat and glyphosate so weeds do not become used to either, I only spray around trees(for 6" out) where the brush cutter cant go and do so wearing boots and a mask, weeds cannot be controlled  as I cannot dig around the trees or I will destroy roots, pulling them is beyond a joke as getting any workers apart from the brush cutter has proven to be impossible. I offer more than double the daily wage for a few hours work and none want to do it, seems manual labour is too much for most of them and when I have had a few come along they simply stop working if I leave or dont show up again even though I am there working with them and I am disabled, laziness appears to be rife. I would love an alternative but they are going to ban both paraquat and glyphosate which was what they started using instead of glyphosate in Malaysia, my trees (over 500)are a hobby for me, it gives me something to do with my time and they are not a financial proposition for me, by all means, all those saying these sprays  are not needed come in and come up with another method that is proven, when done as I do it is controlled, no over spray and not near any food sources, admittedly the farmers using it are idiots the way they spray it but when done correctly it can be controlled, I would have no problems if they left glyphosate on the market but that is going as well

[PETERTHEEATER]

Decision to slowly phase out paraquat met with stiff opposition

 

Then ban Viagra too!

[JimmyJ]

8 hours ago, kannot said:

No its  not that dangerous, if wer'e  gonna  ban everything with common sense start lets start with motor vehicles........... especially in Thailand, lets  face it using the correct masks and  protection its no problem... when given to idiots who dont mix  it correctly, spray it correctly at the right time wearing correct protection then yes theyre  gonna  die.

Like most things it gets restricted due to morons who abuse the correct system,same same Visas.

I use it about once a month to spot treat weeds, of course if the Thai werent lazy and at 400 baht a day offered they could  pull them out by hand...........but it aint happening anymore, but then living in the city you wouldnt know about the staff shortage.

Had a  woman turn up here once to spray some weeds, came in flip flops, with the young kids  following her round walking thru the wet( paraquat) sprayed  grass..............theres  the problem

"No its  not that dangerous..."

 

You are the problem. You and farmers like you, too lazy/ignorant/uncaring/selfish to do the right thing.

 

It may not be too dangerous for you if you are wearing full protective gear.

People ingesting the poisonous food you produce are the ones who will suffer.

 

""No its  not that dangerous...".

It's great that anonymous internet poster kannot knows better than the scientists who can produce empirical evidence of its dangers.

[kannot]

9 hours ago, robblok said:

Studies have shown its not as innocent as you believe otherwise they would not have banned it. Its not a suicide thing. Anyway normally I would agree with you about banning and responsible use. However in this country banning is often the only thing that works. Normally I am all for personal responsibility. But given the scale of the pesticide problem in Thailand. Just look at what comes up when they test vegetables in markets and supermarkets, the health of the nation supersedes the need of the farmers to save money.

 

Below an alternative to paraquat tested in Malaysia (that has banned paraquat and has similar climate to Thailand. This is just for one thing I am sure others can be found)

 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1445-6664.2007.00263.x

 

Normally id be firmly on your side but enforcement of partial bans just does not work here. The lazy corrupt police makes sure of that. 

glyphosate is not  good  either

https://www.care2.com/greenliving/new-study-shows-epa-safe-levels-of-glyphosate-not-safe-at-all.html

[kannot]

2 hours ago, JimmyJ said:

People ingesting the poisonous food you produce are the ones who will suffer.

youre nuts  pal, what food am I producing smarty pants?? let me help you with the answer NONE.

[Samuel Smith]

4 minutes ago, kannot said:

youre nuts  pal, what food am I producing smarty pants?? let me help you with the answer NONE.

You might not be, but many farmers are.  Should be banned.

[Bluespunk]

14 hours ago, kannot said:

Start hoarding now Paraquat has an indefinite  lifespan

Unlike that of those using it.