Pesticide’s Victims Will Finally Come Before Court
Pesticide’s Victims Will Finally Come Before a US Court
Banned Products Return Home
after Being Sprayed on U.S.-bound Crops
For the period of
May, 2007, the USDA reported the total value of monthly
agricultural imports to the U.S. amounted to $6.1 billion.
Of that total value, 15 percent arrived here from Mexico, 15
percent from Canada, three percent from Chile and three
percent from Brazil (USDA April 2007). Latin American
produce historically has found a warm welcome in the U.S.;
however, these products often carry on them dangerous
pesticide residues. Most recently, on July 18, President
Bush set an urgent timetable of 60 days for the newly formed
Cabinet-level committee to announce safety limits on
produce, especially on food products being imported into the
U.S.
According to a Trade and Environment Database (TED) case study regarding pesticide use in Mexico, which is published online by American University, “Toxicity threatens U.S. consumers in the ‘circle of poison’ effect in which unregistered or banned pesticides are exported to Mexico and sprayed on crops whose produce is then exported back to the U.S.” More specifically, dibromochloropropane (DBCP) was banned in the U.S. in 1979, yet it continues to be used on crops in developing hemispheric countries such as Nicaragua and Costa Rica, years after its cut-off date. Since then, there have been numerous reports of the chemical’s baleful effects. But in the months to come, tropical plantation workers will finally have their day in a U.S. court, as they try to seek compensation for the residual harm arising out of pesticide use which, for many of them, has ruined their lives. The trial began on July 19 in a Los Angeles courtroom and is expected to last two to three months.
Not Acknowledged to
be Dangerous Until Symptoms Are Exhibited
The Pesticide
Action Network of North America describes DBCP as a
carcinogen, a ground water contaminant, a developmental or
reproductive toxin and a suspected endocrine disruptor. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found that DBCP
can potentially cause kidney and liver damage as well as
cancer, especially if one is exposed to levels greater than
the maximum contaminant level of .0002 mg/L for an extended
period of time. The pesticide in question was manufactured
by chemical companies like Dow Chemical and Shell Oil to be
used as a fumigant for nematode worms in the U.S. until it
was pulled off the shelves in 1979. It had been used as a
spray on agricultural produce such as cucumbers, grapes,
tomatoes, squash, carrots, okra, camellia and roses. The EPA
(2006) established that by 1974, farmers in the U.S. were
treating crops with 9.8 million pounds of DBCP, and by 1977,
831,000 pounds of it were in use in California alone. There
is a considerable likelihood that DBCP often seeped into the
groundwater supply during this period.
Banana Plantations
are a Dangerous Place
According to a press statement by
the Dole Fresh Fruit Company on November 10, 2002, there
were nine DBCP cases pending in the U.S. against the fruit
company, in which plantation workers have alleged injury to
them due to DBCP exposure. The latest set of lawsuits, filed
in 2004 against Dole Fresh Fruit Company and Standard Fruit
Company, have recently reached the point where the first
case is about to be heard by a U.S. court. All told, five
lawsuits involving at least 5,000 agricultural workers from
Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama are
waiting to be heard. Dole has been aware of the extent of
the Nicaraguan injury claims for some time. In a 2002 press
release, the company acknowledged that they “are aware of
295 DBCP lawsuits now pending against U.S. DBCP
manufacturers, Dole and other banana growers, in which a
total of 6,544 plaintiffs are now seeking (a total of)
approximately $9.6 million in purported damages.” Although
a Dole press release on April 2, 2007 stated that the
company was one of the first fresh produce companies in the
1970s to create programs to decrease pesticide use, DBCP
was, in fact, used throughout the decade. The lawsuit
accuses Dole and Standard Fruit Companies of negligence and
concealment during the time the pesticide was in use. Duane
Miller, the lawyer representing around 50 Nicaraguan
plantation workers, informed a hearing on July 19 that the
workers “weren’t told until the ‘90s — and they
weren’t told by Dow or Dole.”
Fighting Back
Duane
Miller claims that the inherent toxicity of DBCP was
recognized as early as the 1950s when scientists working for
Dow Chemical observed the deleterious effect on the testes
of laboratory animals exposed to the chemical. Examinations
indicated a noxious condition in the reproductive organs. A
study (Potashnik, 1979) released by the EPA, which was based
on the examinations of 23 workers at a DBCP production
plant, found that 18 out of the 23 men had azoospermia (no
sperm was present in the semen) or oligospermia (a low sperm
count). The severity of their condition was directly
proportional to the time that they spent working in the
plant that was producing the DBCP. For example, a group of
12 men with azoospermia logged in between 100 and 6,726
hours while a group of 6 men with oligospermia had exposure
rates of 34-95 hours. Rabbits and other laboratory animals
have been used to further prove the destructive
manifestations of DBCP on reproductive and adrenal
functions. One group of rabbits was subjected to 10 parts
per million (ppm) of DBCP for 14 weeks which were compared
against a control group of rabbits. Those injected with 10
ppm showed a significant decrease in the amount of sperm
present compared to the control group.
Nicaraguans Protest
against Approaching Lawsuit
Monetary compensation for
damages incurred seems to have taken precedence over social
awareness for Nicaraguan workers. A court case would likely
gain international attention and would inspire strong human
rights and environmental legislation likely to positively
affect all agricultural workers associated with the
manufacture of the lethal chemicals. Many Nicaraguan banana
workers signed a petition circulated on July 11 to fire
their legal team in the upcoming lawsuit. There have been
accusations, mainly by the union leader Victorino Espinales,
that the lawyers have deceptively changed medical reports to
make their future case more formidable; therefore, giving up
any prospect that the case for the workers could be won.
Since past lawsuits against companies like Dole and Dow have
been settled out of court for monetary compensation ranging
from $20 million in 1992 to $41.5 million in 1997, it would
be safe to say that some Nicaraguan workers would rather
directly negotiate with the drug companies for monetary
amounts than establish important legal precedents. This
seems to represent a sharp shift in feelings for the
thousands of banana workers, including Espinales, who in the
recent months had petitioned the Nicaraguan Congress for
governmental relief from their plight. The orientation of
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega also has come under close
scrutiny during this investigation into the use of poisonous
pesticides, having reportedly met multiple times with top
Dole officials. An offer of more jobs to the country was
presented, but only if Nicaragua altered their legal system
to make it more difficult to sue the giant drug
corporations.
With or without Nicaraguans, Costa Ricans
are Victims
Although Dole claims to have halted any use
of DBCP on its plantations in Latin America after 1979, the
pesticide’s continual usage in the region seemed to defy
the U.S.’s ban: “In July 1991, 186 banana workers
alleged that they were exposed to DBCP from the early
1960’s to 1984, causing them serious and permanent
sterilization.” (American University, 1995). One TED case
study was conducted in 1995 and investigated the
sterilization of 1,500 plantation workers due to exposure to
DBCP’s harmful effects from its usage on Costa Rican
banana crops. It is estimated that around 2,000 men were
sterilized due to their exposure to DBCP throughout the
1970s. Workers were not even able to sue Dow Chemical and
Shell Oil until March 1990 when the Texas Supreme Court
narrowly voted in favor of the Costa Ricans’ right to do
so. Other grievances have been settled outside of court in
order to salvage the good name of the corporations. The 1995
case study states that in 1992, a suit by Costa Rican
plantation workers was settled out of court for a sum of $20
million.
Guatemalan Pesticide Use and its Eventual Arrival
in the U.S.
The same issue was addressed in a 1997 TED
case study on Guatemalan snow peas, one of the country’s
main agricultural exports to the U.S. The case study
referenced an investigation conducted in 1995, in which it
was estimated that Latin American campesinos were 13 times
more likely than U.S. farmers to suffer from pesticide
poisoning (Tansey, et al., Eradicating the Pesticide Problem
in Latin America). Furthermore, the Environmental Working
Group (EWG), a non-profit organization, stated that the
greatest number of Guatemalan pesticide violations came
about as a result of U.S. imports of Guatemalan snow peas.
The EWG concluded that 41 percent of the tested snow pea
shipments exported to the U.S. from Guatemala during
1992-1993 were found to contain illegal pesticide residues
(American University, 1997).
Pesticides Used Today Hardly
Represent an Improvement
As recently as December 2006,
banned residential chemicals, endosulfan and diazonin, were
found during air monitoring near an elementary school in
Hastings, Florida. According to the Pesticide Action Network
North America (PANNA, 2007), endosulfan is used in the U.S.
as an insecticide mainly on cotton, potatoes and apples.
Residential use of endosulfan was banned in 2000 after
findings concluded that it is a neurotoxin with poisoning
symptoms including tremors, convulsions, vomiting and
hyperactivity. Diazonin is also a neurotoxin, but is still
used as an insecticide on nuts, vegetables and fruits. The
EPA banned its residential use in 2004. If repeatedly
exposed to diazonin, asthma, cancer and gestational diabetes
are some of the possible noxious outcomes. Endosulfan was
used to combat insects on coffee plantations in Colombia.
According to PANNA, more than 100 poisonings and three
deaths were reported in 1994. A study by the German Federal
Environmental Agency (February 2007) reported, “Excessive
and improper application and handling of endosulfan have
been linked to congenital physical disorders, mental
retardations and deaths in farm workers and villagers in
developing countries in Africa, southern Asian and Latin
America.”
What a U.S. Trial Could Do
In light of the
ongoing trial, U.S. investigations will hopefully direct
their attention to the human rights abuses and manifestation
of negligence committed by large fruit and chemical
companies as well as demand stringent analysis of the
methods and pesticides, like endosulfan, used in
agricultural production. This could result in many U.S.
citizens to question every organization, from Dole Fresh
Fruit Company, Shell Oil and Dow Chemical to the EPA, USDA
and FDA, associated with the drug. Critics insist that
pesticide use domestically as well as throughout Latin
American has not always ceased, but instead, very likely has
been masked or transformed, without benefit of
reconsideration.
This analysis was prepared by Research
Associate Jacquelyn Godin
August 13th, 2007
ends