NOTE: A new book chapter (abstract and concluding section reproduced below) by Prof Andres Carrasco and colleagues reviews the scientific literature on the health effects of the pesticides used in large amounts on GM soy and other GM crops.
It draws damning conclusions about the unsustainable nature and harmful effects of GM/pesticide-based agriculture and calls for the adoption of policies that prioritise environmental safety and and food security over the interests of private agrochemical industries and markets.
The chapter forms part of a new book, Advances in Molecular Toxicology, Vol. 6, published by Elsevier:
http://www.amazon.com/Advances-Molecular-Toxicology-Volume-6/dp/0444593896
More about Prof Carrasco's previous research, which found that Roundup and glyphosate cause birth defects in animal embryos:
http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12482
---
---
Pesticides Used in South American GMO-Based Agriculture: A Review of Their Effects on Humans and Animal Models
Silvia L. Lopez, Delia Aiassa, Stella Benitez-Leite, Rafael Lajmanovich, Fernando Manas, Gisela Poletta, Norma Sanchez, Maria Fernanda Simoniello, and Andres E. Carrasco
Advances in Molecular Toxicology, Volume 6
Elsevier B.V. 2012
ISSN 1872-0854
Abstract
In South America, the incorporation of genetically modified organisms (GMO) engineered to be resistant to pesticides changed the agricultural model into one dependent on the massive use of agrochemicals. Different pesticides are used in response to the demands of the global consuming market to control weeds, herbivorous arthropods, and crop diseases. Here, we review their effects on humans and animal models, in terms of genotoxicity, teratogenicity, and cell damage. We also stress the importance of biomarkers for medical surveillance of populations at risk and propose the use of biosensors as sensitive resources to detect undesirable effects of new molecules and environmental pollutants. The compatibility of glyphosate, the most intensively used herbicide associated to GMO crops, with an integrated pest management for soybean crops, is also discussed.
1. Introduction
The horticultural productivity in the subtropical regions of the world is severely limited by the pests and diseases affecting crops, and therefore, the quality of the products, which has become a priority worldwide in response to the demands of the consuming market. The use of agrochemicals is the most common strategy for fertilizing soils, control weeds, herbivorous arthropods, and crop diseases, but it also constitutes a major factor affecting natural resources as well as the health of the rural workers and potential consumers.
In South America, different agrochemicals are massively used, with a preponderance of the broad-spectrum glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs), which utterly depend on genetically modified organisms (GMO) engineered to be glyphosate-resistant, such as soy crops.
In Argentina, the extension of soil devoted to transgenic soy reached 20 millions of hectares. 200 millions of liters of GBH are used for a production of 50 millions tons of soy beans per year [1,2]. Paraguay currently presents a great soybean culture expansion, with GMO seeds introduced illegally in the country and the infrastructure mounted and controlled by big corporations [3 5]. In the 2006/2007 harvest, the acreage reached 2,426,000 ha, almost 400,000ha more than the preceding harvest (2005/2006). Of the herbicides imported in 2002, 75% was destined to soybean culture; of the imported pesticides, 68% was used in the same area; and of the fungicides, 65% had a similar destination [6].
The extensive agricultural model based in the GMO technological package is currently applied in South America (mainly in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) without critical evaluation, rigorous regulations and adequate information about the impact of sublethal doses on human health and environment, leading to a conflictive situation. Studies of the possible impacts are absolutely necessary, since there is a paucity of data regarding chronic exposure to agrochemicals.
...
A need for critical and independent science
Multinational corporations handle virtually most of the seed and chemical products market in the world. It cannot be inferred that research performed or supported by such companies is completely objective. Dismissal of research from independent groups harkens back to the ongoing debate about bisphenol A, where no single industry funded study has ever found adverse consequences linked with bisphenol A exposure, whereas 90% (n>100) of non-industry funded studies show significant adverse consequences of bisphenol A exposure [177,178].
Several malformations were found in rabbits and rats according to the industry’s own teratogenicity studies submitted for the 2002 EU approval of the active ingredient glyphosate. The original industry studies are claimed to be commercially confidential. However, the said industry data were compiled from the 1998 draft assessment report (DAR) by the German government, since Germany has been the rapporteur member state for glyphosate and will remain in this role for the next review of glyphosate in 2015. Malformations include extra ribs, distortions affecting thoracic ribs, heart malformations, kidney agenesia, unossified sternebrae, reduced ossification of cranial centers and sacrocaudal vertebral arches, and also skeletal variations and major visceral malformations, which were unspecified in the DAR [179].
It is indispensable to change the direction of scientific research, leaving behind the reductionism and pragmatism that dominated agriculture in the past decades. It will not be possible to devise a sustainable agriculture that satisfies social needs if man does not begin to prioritize policies that enhance environmental and food security over the interests of private agrochemical industries and markets. The authors of this chapter appeal to the scientific community to be aware of the hazards involved on a local and a global scale, anticipating the problems before they surprise us.