Alors que la 14e Semaine pour les alternatives aux pesticides se clôture, nous voulions prendre le temps de faire le bilan. L’occasion de se replonger, avec vous, dans les moments les plus marquants de l’histoire de Générations Futures depuis sa création et de partager ensemble ses avancées et ses tournants.
Rappelez-vous : chaque action, chaque victoire, nous la devons à votre générosité et à votre soutien. Du fond du cœur, merci. Rien n’aurait été et ne sera possible sans vous. Pour nous aider à œuvrer pour un avenir sans pesticides de synthèse, rejoignez-nous, parlez de l’association autour de vous, faites un don. Chaque action compte ! Référence.
Exposure to chlorpyrifos is linked to ADHD and autism. It should not be allowed on the European market
Today, the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) together with Générations Futures, Pesticide Action Network Europe and Pesticide Action Network Germany released a factsheet on the health effects of chlorpyrifos.
Chlorpyrifos is one of the most widely used pesticides in Europe and its residues are also commonly found in our food. The current authorisation for chlorpyrifos on the European market will expire on 31 January 2019. We are very concerned about the possibility of an extended authorisation due to its health harming properties. Chlorpyrifos is linked to the disruption of the hormonal system and effects on the developing human brain. Children exposed to chlorpyrifos in the womb or in early life can suffer neurodevelopmental effects later in life, like attention deficit disorders (ADHD) and autism.
This factsheet sets out the case and evidence against the use of chlorpyrifos and explains the health impacts which justify its ban.
ALTERNATIVES EN AGRICULTURE, AU JARDIN, POUR LES COLLECTIVITÉS, À LA MAISON
Pour vous donner des clefs et informations sur les alternatives existantes à l’utilisation des pesticides, l’association Générations Futures à réalisé une brochure dédiée que vous pouvez télécharger ici.
19 fruits et 33 légumes qui ont pu être étudiés sur la base des données fournies par la direction générale de la répression des fraudes ( DGCCRF).
Générations futures a rendu public un rapport 2017 inédit sur la présence des résidus de pesticides mesurés dans des fruits et légumes non bio consommés en France.
Ce rapport a été élaboré sur la base de données officielles produites par la direction générale de la répression des fraudes ( DGCCRF). Ces analyses officielles ont permis à Générations Futures de réaliser
un classement des fruits et des légumes en fonction de la fréquence de la présence de résidus de pesticides mesurés
et un classement des fruits et légumes en fonction de la fréquence des dépassements des limites maximales en résidus (LMR), sur une période allant de 2012 à 2016.
À l’heure où la controverse sur le glyphosate soulève débats et questions de santé de publique, en Europe, et que les témoignages de victimes s’accumulent, que nous réservent encore les Monsanto Papers ?
Paris/Brussels, 6 April 2017 – Thirty human “guinea-pigs” entrusted samples of their urine to Générations Futures for testing for traces of the famous glyphosate, one of the active molecules in the herbicide, RoundUp®.
The results? All 100% of the samples contain residues of this herbicide, which is a “probable carcinogen” according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
Context
Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used active ingredient in herbicides. In March 2015, a few months before the European authorisation of glyphosate was due to expire, experts at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen”. EU regulations prohibit the use of pesticides that are classified as carcinogens or probable carcinogens. However, EU regulations refer to EU classification for carcinogenicity not to that of IARC.
Originally, when the authorisation of glyphosate expired, the European Commission proposed allowing its sale for a further 14 years. But this proposition, which was widely criticised by NGOs and civil society, did not receive the support of the Member States. In the end, the Commission was obliged to extend the approval for only 18 months and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) was asked to publish an opinion on the safety of glyphosate the spring of this year. On 15 March 2017, a summary of this opinion was published clearing glyphosate of any carcinogenic risk for humans! The ball is now in the European Commission’s court as it will soon make a new proposal to the Member States.
The survey
It is against this backdrop that Générations Futures wanted to learn more about the extent to which the French are exposed to this widely used herbicide. We chose to carry out a urine analysis of 30 people, including men and women between the ages of eight and 60 years old, living in the city and in the countryside and with a varied diet, organic and non-organic, vegetarian and non-vegetarian. A certain number of well-known people agreed to participate. Analysis was carried out with help of an ELISA test.
Results?
Our investigation demonstrates the omnipresence of this dangerous molecule in our bodies.
100% of the samples analysed contained glyphosate at a concentration above the lowest limit of quantification (LoQ = 0.075ng/ml).
The average concentration of glyphosate found in the samples was 1.25 ng/ml urine.
The sample with the lowest value was at 0.09 ng/ml and the highest value was 2.89 ng/ml, which is 32.11 times higher than the lowest value.
Twenty-nine of the 30 samples (96.66%) contained concentrations that were above the maximum allowable pesticide concentration in water (0.1 ng/ml).
“Unfortunately, these tests confirmed what we feared having consulted surveys undertaken elsewhere in Europe and around the world: we are all contaminated with glyphosate. It is indeed time for the European authorities to become aware of the urgency to act, and to finally forbid this molecule considered likely to be carcinogenic to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer!”
“Not all the cards are played yet. We can still stop the authorisation of this substance. We therefore invite citizens to take action and join the 500,000 Europeans who have already signed the European Citizens’ Initiative calling for the banning of this dangerous molecule,”
“This study shows that all those tested in France have been exposed to glyphosate. This means that, in all likelihood, all Europeans are contaminated – potentially elevating everyone’s risk of cancer. “The evidence against glyphosate is piling up all the time. National governments face the decision at the end of this year whether to continue allowing glyphosate in Europe. We urge everyone to tell their governments to put preventing cancers first.”
100% of the personalities have traces of Bisphenols, PCBs, pesticides and phthalates
Générations Futures EXPPERT survey number 9 provides the results of tests for the presence of suspected or known endocrine disruptors in hair samples of some leading environmentalists in France. The worrying and conclusive results are the basis for a further call to the European Commission to improve its proposal on criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals ahead of a possible vote by EU Member States on 28 February 2017.
Paris, Brussels, 24 February 2017 – Seven environmentalists in France have their hair analysed for traces of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Generations Futures, with the support of HEAL and other members of the EDC-Free Europe coalition, published a new report yesterday, the 9th survey of the EXPPERT series on population exposure to chemicals that are suspected or known to disrupt the endocrine system. The results are unchallengeable!
Who? In this new survey, Générations Futures asked personalities from the environmental movement to entrust to us a lock of their hair, which we had analysed by a competent laboratory. The participants were Yann Arthus-Bertrand, Isabelle Autissier, Delphine Batho, José Bové, Nicolas Hulot, Yannick Jadot and Marie-Monique Robin.
What? Approximately 200 pesticides (products used in agriculture and in the home to get rid of “harmful” or “undesirable” flora and fauna) and pesticide metabolites (resulting from metabolism), three bisphenols (plasticiser used in the composition of the polycarbonate – hard plastic), 13 phthalates and metabolites of phthalates (plasticisers used to soften plastics) and 32 PCB congeners (PCBs have been banned since 1987 but were used massively in electric transformers and as heat transfer fluid.).
Results? 100% of the personalities has traces of each of the families of compounds analysed in their bodies!
– We discover between 36 (D. Batho) and 68 (I. Autissier) endocrine disrupters per personality. The quantities varied from 9 031 μg/mg of endocrine disrupting chemical (D. Batho) to 158 643 μg/mg (I. Autism) – a discrepancy factor of 17.5 times between the least contaminated person (D. Batho) and the most contaminated person (I. Autissier). This clearly shows that individual’s exposure is not uniform but rather varies considerably according to the environment in which they circulate and/or in which they have developed and lived.
Bisphenols: All the personalities tested had at least one of the three bisphenols in their hair. Three out of the seven people tested had the renowned Bisphenol A in their hair: M-M. Robin, Y. Arthus-Bertrand and I. Autissier. All 7 had Bisphenol S but none had signs of Bisphenol F.
Phthalates: 11 of the 13 phthalates or metabolites of phthalates tested for were found at least in one person. Neither MMP or DPP were found in any sample. The number of phthalates and metabolites of phthalates found ranged from eight to 11 depending on the individual. Between six and 10 of these molecules could be quantified in each person.
PCBs: All samples that could be analysed contained PCBs: between 14 and 30 PCBs were found in participants’ samples.
Pesticides: 32 molecules suspected of being endocrine disruptors or endocrine disrupting metabolites were found in at least one person. Between nine and 25 of these pesticides were found in each hair sample tested.
“The hair of the personalities tested all contain an important cocktail of many endocrine disruptors (between 36 and 68 per person) although tests were only carried out on four families of chemicals. And these cocktails pose a problem – what is the health impact of this mixture?”
“This report points out more than ever the need to remove endocrine disrupting substances from our environment. Only a truly protective definition within the European framework will ensure that endocrine disruptors are excluded from the market and protect populations from these hazardous compounds. That is why the vote on the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (SCOPAFF) on 28 February is so important! We urge all national governments to reject the European Commission’s proposal on the criteria for endocrine disrupting chemicals in its current form and insist on major changes to ensure that proven, probable or suspected endocrine disruptors to which we are exposed are identified as such. Only in this way will these chemicals be prohibited from use as required in the European legislation voted in 2009, to protect our health.”
Enquête de santé, Allo Docteurs France 5, 01/02/2017.
Un documentaire / débat diffusé le 31 janvier 2017 sur France 5.
Documentaire
Débat
Les perturbateurs endocriniens, substances chimiques, sont présentes dans de nombreux objets de consommation courante : plastiques, résidus de pesticides sur les fruits et légumes, OGM, cosmétiques, lunettes, semelles de chaussures… Ils interagissent avec le système hormonal et seraient responsables de l’augmentation de certains cancers, selon des associations impliquées dans les problèmes de santé liés à l’environnement.
EXPPERT Survey 8 – Exposure to endocrine-disrupting pesticides in water
Générations Futures EXPPERT survey 8 uses government reports on water quality in France as the basis for an analysis of the extent to which endocrine-disrupting pesticides and their byproducts can be found in French tap water. A European law banning endocrine disrupting pesticides came into effect years ago but has not been implemented because the European Commission has delayed proposing the needed scientific criteria to identify endocrine disruptors. Now, EU Member Countries are expected to take a final decision on a European Commission proposal this spring.
Paris, Brussels, 13 January 2017 – The report published today on endocrine disrupting chemicals in water in France is the eighth part of the EXPPERT survey. EXPPERT stands for Exposure to endocrine-disrupting pesticides.
Context
In July 2016, the French Ministry of Social Affairs and Health published its report, “Bilan de la qualité de l’eau au robinet du consommateur vis-à-vis des pesticides en 2014” (Assessment of the quality of tap water with regard to pesticides in 2014). In 2014, The Ministry of Ecology published its survey, “Pesticides les plus quantifiés dans les cours d’eau et dans les eaux souterraines en 2013” (The most frequently quantified pesticides in surface water and groundwater in 2013).
While these reports inform us about the presence of pesticides in water, they do not actually provide the toxicological properties of the molecules identified, and notably for those pollutants that could be endocrine disrupting chemicals.
Générations Futures’ work
Générations Futures carried out an analysis, which had never previously been conducted. The aim was to know whether any of the pesticide residues, or the byproducts from the degradation of these pesticides, covered in the investigations cited above, were potential endocrine disrupting molecules.
Our analysis identified molecules that are potentially disruptive to the endocrine system.
The following results, which are detailed in the EXPPERT 8 report, were obtained. They unfortunately show that:
73.3% – that is, 11 out of the 15 most frequently quantified pesticides (or their degradation byproducts) in surface water in metropolitan France in 2013 are suspected of being endocrine disruptors.
53.3% – that is eight out of the 15 molecules classified as the most frequently quantified pesticides (or their degradation byproducts) in groundwater in metropolitan France in 2013 are suspected of being endocrine disruptors.
Tap water: 50% – that is, 18 out of 36 pesticides (or their degradation byproducts), which were the reason that the water was classified as not conforming to standards in 2014 (either as NC1 – without restriction or NC2 – with restriction) for more than one unit of distribution of drinking water (UDI), are suspected of being endocrine disruptors.
Why this report?
As a reminder, on Wednesday 21 December 2016 (following a delay of three years), the European Commission attempted to have its new proposals on the criteria for endocrine disrupters voted. This would provide the basis for endocrine disruptors to be excluded from the market under the pesticides and biocides legislation. In November, Générations Futures had condemned the Commission’s proposals as unacceptable because they required a level of proof that was almost impossible to attain. The proposal also provided for a derogation in the event of “negligible risk” to humans. The Commission even added a new gift to industry in its proposal of 21 December by introducing – at the last moment and for the first time – the scandalous possibility of a derogation from the ban on endocrine disruptors. But events did not take place exactly as the Commission would have wished. Many Member States (including France and Sweden) opposed the proposal. The Commission found that it could not even hope for 40% support. The vote was therefore postponed until the spring.
“By bringing out one report after another, our association continues to sound the alert about the exposure of populations, especially the most vulnerable, to endocrine disruptors. This new report demonstrates again the urgency for action and the need to remove endocrine disrupting pesticides from the market,”
“The EU has a unique opportunity to show that it truly cares about the health of its fellow citizens by proposing genuinely protective criteria for defining endocrine disrupting chemicals. That is not the nature of its current proposal. We urge all national governments to demand from the European Commission a serious proposal with a reasonable level of proof and without derogations to exclude suspected endocrine-disrupting pesticides,”