In 2002, the US Environmental Protection Agency completed its assessment of the risks of endosulfan. About 1.4 million pounds of this chemical are used in the United States each year on a wide variety of crops, where it runs off agricultural fields, contaminates rain, fog, surface water, ground water, and soil, and bio-accumulates in the food chain. According to data from the US Food and Drug Administration, residues of endosulfan are detected on a very wide array of food products, including apples, tomatoes, cucumbers, pickles, zucchini, green peppers, olives, raisins, cantaloupe, prunes, squash, potatoes, french fries, canned pears, spinach, green beans, and butter.

Because endosulfan and its major break-down products are persistent and toxic they can remain as hazardous waste in the environment for years or even decades after the pesticide is used. In fact, residues of endosulfan have been detected in multiple human tissues including blood, breast milk, and breast fat.

In laboratory studies, the toxic effects of endosulfan are most pronounced in immature animals whose reproductive systems and brains are still developing. In immature (three-week-old) rats, endosulfan causes significant dose-related decreases in sperm counts, and sperm deformities at low exposure levels. The doses that cause these serious testicular adverse effects in immature animals are lower than doses causing effects in older (three-month-old) rats.<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--> A National Cancer Institute study also showed testicular atrophy in lab rats exposed to endosulfan.

For these reasons, NRDC had petitioned back in 2002 to have it banned.

More recently, EPA reviewed new data suggesting that parent endosulfan and its sulfate degradate were even more dangerous than previously thought! EPA found that, “while the parent may readily undergo degradation under some environmental conditions, the sulfate degradate is persistent and represents a source for endosulfan to enter aquatic and terrestrial food chains. While endosulfan is not expected to biomagnify appreciably in aquatic food webs, the compound does bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms to a significant extent. Also, there is direct evidence (measured residues) that endosulfan bioaccumulates in terrestrial systems and indirect evidence (modeling) that endosulfan has a significant potential to biomagnify in certain terrestrial food webs. In addition, EPA continues to be concerned about endosulfan’s volatility and its ability to migrate to sites distant from use areas, such as the Arctic, through various environmental media (air, water, and sediment)” And, that’s what the EPA scientists are saying...but, management isn't listening.

Endosulfan shares a similar hazard profile with its chemical cousins, the cyclodiene-like pesticides. These chemicals have been either cancelled (toxaphene, mirex, kepone, dieldrin, aldrin, chlordane) or severely restricted (heptachlor) due to their hazardous nature. 

But, when EPA revised its assessment in 2006, they didn’t ban it. Nope. Instead, EPA actually increased allowable contamination levels on food! In fact, EPA is increasing the legal levels on foods that have been demonstrated to be contaminated, so that the contamination that used to exceed ‘safe’ levels is now considered ‘safe’. For example, because detected residues are as high as 0.38 parts per million (ppm) on grains, EPA is increasing the legal limits on grain from 0.1 to 0.3 ppm. Ditto for blueberries. Since broccoli has contamination levels as high as 2.41 ppm, EPA raised the legal ‘safe’ level from 2 to 3 ppm. Celery had endosulfan contamination up to 7 ppm, so EPA raised the legal limit from 2 to 8 ppm, so ‘illegal’ just became ‘safe’. Ditto for lettuce, oat grain, beef, milk, squashes, tomatoes, and other common foods. Legal levels in cattle fat went from 0.2 to a whopping 13 ppm, to make contamination levels seem ‘safe’!

So, this week NRDC had to petition for a ban on endosulfan…again. Behave, EPA, because people are watching!

<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->