HOME • WHAT'S NEW • GETTING STARTED • ADVOCACY • RESOURCES • CREEK • STOP THE DUMP EXPANSION
|
|
Canadian Cancer Society Position
Statement
on Ornamental Use of Pesticides
Position
The Canadian Cancer Society is very concerned about the use of potentially
carcinogenic (cancer causing) substances for the purpose of enhancing
the appearance of, for example, gardens, lawns, parks, recreational facilities
and golf courses (ornamental use). We base this concern on the conclusions
of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that state that
some substances used in pesticides are classified as known, probable or
possible carcinogens.
Since ornamental use of pesticides
has no countervailing health benefit, we call for a ban on the use of
any pesticide for ornamental purposes that has not been scientifically
demonstrated to be non-carcinogenic.
Canadian Cancer Society
Action
The Canadian Cancer Society has posted this position statement and background
material on its website to contribute to the public’s education about
the ornamental use of pesticides. We will also take advantage of opportunities
to influence decision makers to support a ban on the use of pesticides
for ornamental uses.
For more information
For more information about the ornamental use of pesticides contact the
Canadian Cancer Society’s Cancer Information Service toll-free at
1-888-939-3333 or refer to the following publications and websites:
-
Health Canada – Information about Lawn Maintenance
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/pmra-arla/english/pdf/pnotes/lawn_maintenance-e.pdf
-
Environment Canada –
a. Pesticides and the Environment in the Atlantic Region.
http://www.atl.ec.gc.ca/epb/fiddle/herbicid.html
b. Lawn Herbicides
http://www.atl.ec.gc.ca/epb/factsheets/pesticides/lawn.html
c. Alternatives to Pesticides
http://www.atl.ec.gc.ca/epb/factsheets/pesticides/altern.html
-
Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment – Pesticides
http://www.cape.ca/toxics/pesticides.html
-
International Agency for Research on Cancer: www.iarc.fr
Frequently Asked Questions
about Ornamental Use of Pesticides
What does “ornamental
use of pesticides” refer to?
Pesticides are chemicals designed to kill or control pests, mainly weeds,
insects and fungi. There are three principal pesticide uses:
-
To prevent blemishes and other imperfections that have no connection with health or taste. This practice is also referred to as the “ornamental” use of pesticides. This paper deals only with the application of pesticides for outdoor spaces including lawns, parks and golf courses;
-
To prevent insects, fungi and pests from destroying our food supply;
- In some specific cases, to prevent disease. DDT, for example, is an effective prophylactic treatment for malaria
Of the three principal pesticide
uses, the Canadian Cancer Society opposes only the first.
What are the types of exposure?
Toxic substances are absorbed into the body through three routes: swallowing,
inhaling (breathing into the lungs) and through the skin. Because skin
contact leads to the highest exposure, children sitting or playing on
a lawn after spraying will experience a higher exposure level than they
would by any other route. Children are also prone to swallow contaminants
because of their high frequency of hand-to mouth activities.
Is there a link between
pesticides used for ornamental purposes and cancer?
Studies in peer-reviewed journals indicate that there is a link between
exposure to some components of pesticides and an increased risk of cancer.
The level of risk is related to the type of exposure; it is highest amongst
those who work with these chemicals, including farmers and lawn pesticide
applicators. Some studies have found that in this population, the risks
of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, leukemia and multiple myeloma
are significantly higher than the average population. Studies have also
linked occupational exposure to certain pesticides with ovarian cancer,
lung cancer and non-melanoma skin cancer.
Research also indicates that
people who are exposed to pesticides commonly used to improve the appearance
of lawns and outdoor settings have a higher risk of developing leukemia,
brain tumors, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, Hodgkin’s lymphoma and
soft tissue sarcomas. The potential for these chemicals to contaminate
local watersheds and properties adjacent to those that have been treated
with pesticides is a concern because exposure is neither expected nor
is it voluntary.
Several credible organizations
have published comments about the toxicity of pesticides. The International
Agency for Research on Cancer has classified at least 10 pesticides as
known, probable or possible carcinogens. Health Canada, Environment Canada,
the United States National Cancer Institute and others have publicly recommended
limiting exposure until further evidence is available to clarify the risk
associated with exposure to these substances. The House of Commons Standing
Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development’s report, Pesticides,
Making the right choice for the protection of human health and the environment,
supports this concern. The report states that “there is mounting
scientific evidence of the adverse effects of certain pesticides”
and it urges the federal Government to take appropriate action to limit
these effects even if the cause-and-effect relationship between pesticides
and human healthare not fully established scientifically.
The safety precautions for
using pesticides suggest, amongst other things, that people stay away
from areas that have been exposed to pesticides for a minimum of 24 hours.
There is no requirement for homeowners to post signs indicating the date
of pesticide application, or even that they have been used. This type
of situation makes avoidance difficult, if not impossible.
How are pesticides used
in agriculture?
Using pesticides to protect our food from bacteria, fungi and other organisms
has improved crop yields and has increased the quantity of fresh fruits
and vegetables available to the public, thereby contributing to a significant
reduction in the risk of developing heart disease, cancer, diabetes and
a host of other chronic debilitating diseases. The U.S. National Research
Council noted that there was no evidence that pesticide residues or natural
toxins in food contribute significantly to cancer risk in the
U.S. Other views have suggested
that residues on fruit and vegetables may be high enough to cause cancer,
but it is generally agreed that careful washing prior to consumption will
eliminate the associated risk.
An ad hoc panel convened in
1997 by our research partner, the National Cancer Institute of Canada,
concluded that it was not aware of definitive scientific evidence to suggest
that synthetic pesticides contribute significantly to overall cancer mortality.
But this must be interpreted in a specific context. This expert scientific
group examined the possible contribution of pesticide exposure to the
overall development of cancer in the general population. It also reviewed
some potential benefits of pesticide use, including the availability of
abundant and low-cost fresh fruit and vegetables as an important\ strategy
in the overall reduction of cancer risk.
It must be stressed that the
number one conclusion of the panel was cautionary. Our understanding of
potentially complex exposures and biologic mechanisms is incomplete. Further
research and continuous reassessment were called for. In fact, we have
struck a working group to examine the overall issue of environmental contaminants
this year.
What is the precautionary
principle and how does it apply to the ornamental use of
pesticides?
An estimated 134,100 new cases of cancer were diagnosed in 2001 and more
than 65,000 Canadians died from the disease. Even if ornamental exposure
to pesticides causes less than one percent of cancer deaths, approximately
135 Canadians will develop cancer and 65 will die as a result of this
exposure. These numbers represent a small yet significant concern, particularly
when one considers the broader global impact.
Most of our information on
environmental health risk is based on epidemiological investigations of
exposed populations. Epidemiological studies have the advantage of providing
information directly about humans but they are subject to certain significant
limitations It is becoming increasingly clear that quantifying human exposures
to environmental agents is very complex matter. For example:
-
Epidemiological studies are possible only after human exposure has occurred, and after the health effect under review has had sufficient time to develop (Krewski et al., 1990) With chronic diseases such as cancer, this time period may span decades, during which multiple exposures to both the agent of interest and to many others are simultaneously occurring. Thus, with such studies there is great difficulty in concluding that a causal relationship exists.
-
There is a possibility that the relationship discovered could also be due to other concurrent exposures or to additional confounding factors which are almost impossible to control for;
-
Estimating and measuring exposure levels, especially long-term, low-level exposures to multiple agents poses serious technical problems; Individual exposures in the community are often significantly different than measurements obtained at central monitoring sites (Sexton, 1991).
The precautionary principle
states “when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or
to the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some
cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically”.
The evidence linking pesticides and cancer is suggestive and the amount
and quality of the research is growing. In light of this, application
of the precautionary principle would suggest that appropriate action be
taken to limit the risk to human health. Several communities in Canada
have already banned the ornamental use of pesticides. These actions are
consistent with the recommendations of several environmental advocacy
organizations, including the Canadian Association of Physicians for the
Environment.
Health Canada’s lawn care
site states that the best way to maintain a healthy, green lawn is through
proper mowing, watering fertilizing, aerating, raking and top dressing.
Pesticides should be used only after physical controls, such as raking
and aerating, have been tried.
What are alternatives to
the ornamental use of pesticides?
A healthy lawn is the best deterrent against weeds. The following actions
will improve the health
of your lawn:
-
Pick or dig out weeds at their root.
-
Keep lawns adequately watered. 2 cm of water should be enough to water your lawn, so put a container on your grass when you water to help you measure.
-
Never cut more than 1/3 of the height off your grass. Cut your grass shorter in the spring and then raise the blade on your lawnmower as the summer progresses, allowing your lawn to develop strong roots.
-
Aerate your lawn to allow moisture and nutrients to reach the roots of the grass.
-
Dethatch your lawn if necessary.
For more information
contact: Dr. Barb Whylie, Director, Cancer Control Policy, Canadian
Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada; 416-934-5637, bwhylie@cancer.ca
Our position statements are developed based on the best available information
and science. We are continually reviewing new information and our positions
will evolve over time. When developing our positions we balance the precautionary
principle with scientific evidence. The precautionary principle states:
When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment,
precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships
are not fully established scientifically.
Last Updated: April 5, 2002
RELATED:
