This week, through
the web page Forumphyto (see link in the right column of this blog), I got an
article that I found original in its argumentation.
In an opinion
column of the Argentine digital newspaper ON24 of July 1st, Alcira Cavallo, of
CASAFE (Argentine association of technology companies for crop protection),
issued the following note. It seemed very interesting to me, so I decided to
translate it in full.
The
link, in Spanish, is as follows:
It is necessary to replace fear with
knowledge.
The
debate on the benefits of pesticides and their impact on people and the
environment is an outstanding issue.
The questions
about the use of products for crop protection in historically related to
agriculture areas, require to strengthen the relationship between the
productive sector and society.
The
broad debate on the use of pesticides and productive efficiency, quality of
food and its impact on the environment and the population, is one of the
outstanding issues in Argentina.
"The
management of pests and diseases is not a whim, its main grounding is the
guarantee of food quality; the second objective is yield, "says Alicia
Cavallo, from Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences,
National University of Córdoba. And she adds that "one of the most
effective methods is the use of products for crop protection, specific and
properly applied."
However,
she insists that "not use any type of control can lead to total loss of
crop or to quality problems" with serious repercussions for human
consumption. For example, Alicia Cavallo notes that "a fungus as fusarium,
which corn can carry, is itself toxic and carcinogenic."
The environmental impact
For the
specialist, the first synthetic pesticides brought into the country after the
Second World War, and those used in agriculture today are "almost day and
night. In addition, most of those that are used on a massive scale are products
whose toxicological risk is constantly improving".
From her point
of view, the controversy over the use of products for crop protection comes
from "people who are not specialists in this field and build unscientific
theories, often influenced by ideological positions that end demonizing it".
To this, must
be added disbelief of public administrations. "If we do not believe
control agencies, international organizations, the World Health Organization or
the FAO, the situation becomes chaotic because it is no longer recognized any
kind of authority", she explains.
All
this leads to "the belief that everything chemical is toxic and that all
that is natural is healthy. This dichotomy scares people, and it is on these
bases that are created anti-pesticide movements, which is serious », she
says.
In return, she
proposes to convert fear into knowledge. For example, some herbicides that are
applied to the soil may reach the superficial groundwater when applied at very
high doses, as was the case with atrazine in Europe, where the disadvantages
were due to excessive doses applied to unsuitable soils. The products tended to
leach into the soil and to reach groundwater, sometimes very superficial.
"But if it is applied with a proper dose and a proper way, there should be
no inconvenience."
Regarding
responsibilities, Alicia Cavallo emphasizes the need to monitor the
applications of pesticides by professionals. "A pesticide can not be
applied by anyone. For this, there are agronomists who do long studies to take
charge of that. The professionalization of activities related to pesticides is
fundamental, "she insists.
Take charge
In addition,
the absence of a legal framework at the national level led to the disparity of
criteria, disorder and lack of control in many districts. "Here in
Córdoba, there is a law (Nro. 9.164/04) and there are many inspectors in the
field. A prescription is required for agricultural pesticide application, there
are penalties and spraying machines may be confiscated if they do not have
accreditation in good standing and that of their users, "said Alicia
Cavallo . Anyway, "products categories I and II can not be used within 500
meters of urban areas, which is a very important restriction," she
analysis, noting that "there is very little products that can still be
used nearby cities. "
Regarding fear
in the public, Alicia Cavallo believes that "if people were properly
informed about what is going to happen, they would no longer be afraid."
In this sense, she emphasizes that companies should strengthen the relationship
with society, from universities and colleges of agriculture to rural
populations. "If people were well informed, if they properly knew what are
the products for crop protection, they should much better agree with their
use," she said in conclusion.
Author:
Alcira Cavallo – Casafe
Comments
I think it is important to note that atrazine, about
which speaks Alicia Cavallo, is still a widely used herbicide in the world (it
is the second most widely used herbicide in the United States after
glyphosate), but its use is prohibited in the European Community since 2004.
On the other hand, control standards applied in the
province of Córdoba, are very similar to those already applied or being put in
place in the European Union and many other countries worldwide. Awareness by
governments of the risks caused by the misuse of pesticides, led to a gradual
hardening of all standards of use.
Professionalization is already a reality in many
countries.
But what is most lacking, is a realistic and unbiased
communication directed towards the general public, to "replace fear with
knowledge".
We can not allow this communication to be left in the hands of private
organizations, because it is often altered "by ideological positions that
end demonizing it."
