Health effects

Health effects

The Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations has concluded that long-term intake of residues of endosulfan from uses that have been considered by the JMPR is unlikely to present a public health concern. Endosulfan is one of the most toxic pesticides on the market today, responsible for many fatal pesticide poisoning incidents around the world.^[34] Endosulfan is not a xenoestrogen—a synthetic substance that imitates or enhances the effect of estrogens—and there is no evidence that it can act as an endocrine disruptor, causing reproductive and developmental damage in both animals and humans, although this has been claimed. Whether endosulfan can cause cancer is debated but experimental tests showed it was not (see POPRC, UNEP).

Endosulfan Kasaragod Kerala

History of the tragedy


Various reports and other features reveals that there has been an Endosulfan tragedy in Kasaragod.

Endosulfan, a highly toxic organochlorine pesticide was sprayed in the cashew plantations in Kasaragod District sine 1976, till 2001 regularly three times every year. The aerial spraying of Endosulfan was allegedly undertaken to contain the menace of the tea mosquito bug. The intensive use of Endosulfan results in a chemical disaster (similar to the case of Bhopal gas leak disaster – http://www.bhopal.net,http://www.bhopal.org)

Just after three years, the ill effects of Endosulfan spraying came to notice. As early as 1979, stunted growth and deformed limbs were noticed among new born calves. By 1990s health disorders of very serious nature among the human population came to the lime light. Children were found to be the worst affected with congenital anomalies, mental retardation, physical deformities, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, hydrocephalus etc. Men and women were also affected with various chronic ailments, many irreversible and difficult to treat. There is a high incidence of disorders of the central nerves system, Cancer and reproductive disorders. The National Institute Occupational Health (Indian Council of Medical Research) says that after studying various aetiological factors responsible for health problem was aerial spraying of Endosulfan

Kerala seems to be at the epicentre of the world’s Endosulfan debate. The largest manufacturer and exporter of the pesticide—India—is also its second largest user. Where else could a competitor find a more fitting place to drop the Kasargod stink-bomb? Today parallels have been continually drawn between Kasargod and Bhopal. However, there is a fundamental difference between the two situations. In the case of the alleged Endosulfan incident, it must be remembered that India is a massive user and there has been wide use of Endosulfan here for 30 years, and in Europe for over 55 years. So there is enough experience that the user farmers can count on. There has been not one case of mal-effects arising from Endosulfan use.

Kerala C M aganist endosulfan

Environmental NGOs like Thanal and Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) have all produced reports linking Endosulfan to adverse human health problems including cancer, infertility, birth defects and neurotic disorder. However, not only are these scientifically flawed, but also deliberate. A $3,250 donation was made to Thanal in 2001 by EU-funded Pesticides Action Network (PAN). A similar contribution was made by the EU to Sunita Narain-led CSE to implement a project on ‘Pollution Research and Awareness Creation in the Field of Environmental Health Interface and Development of an Alternative Pollution Monitoring System’ from 2000 to 2006. One of the objectives of this programme was to ‘catalyse the formation of pressure groups.’ The intent of these pressure groups is quite obvious. (Copies of these documents are with the author.)

Supported internationally by PAN, EJF (Environment Justice Foundation) and I-PEN (International POP’s Elimination Network), these NGOs have exploited media by creating rogue activism to generate a negative public perception of Endosulfan. Every scientific study constituted to causal effect has been refuted by the NGOs. For instance, the study by Kerala Agricultural University study pointing out insignificant residues of Endosulfan in samples in February 2001.

The case of Endosulfan is a stark reality of how wars are waged against generic pesticides by patent holders. EU controls 75 per cent of the world’s crop protection trade. EU doles out 85 per cent funding that flows to the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP). The UNEP as a beneficiary works effectively to support the donor’s interests. Naturally, the two forums under the UNEP — Stockholm Convention and Rotterdam Convention are majorly influenced by EU. Europe dominates and pulls strings at these global chemical conventions. Its subtle and not so subtle manoeuvres have led these forums to increasingly deliver non-tariff barriers favouring elimination/restriction of the use/production of generic chemicals manufactured/used in developing countries. By subtle means, the EU has propped a funded campaign inside Kerala with a hope to successfully enlist Endosulfan as a POP at the Stockholm Convention and eliminate its use such that its new patented formulas gain market. By not so subtle means, the EU has thwarted the articles that guide its own proceedings while considering Endosulfan; leading to the brink of its elimination with pressure for a ban, even thought there is severe lack of scientific certainty and major data gaps.