Villagers
dig graves to bury the school children who died after consuming
contaminated meals given to them at a school on Tuesday at Chapra
district, in the Bihar on July 17, 2013. The Indian government announced
on Thursday it would set up an inquiry into the quality of food given
to school pupils in a nationwide free meal scheme after at least 23
children died in one of the deadliest outbreaks of mass poisoning in
years. REUTERS
Nearly a decade ago, the Indian
government ruled out a ban on the production and use of monocrotophos,
the highly toxic pesticide that killed 23 children this month in a
village school providing free lunches under a government-sponsored
programme.
Despite being labelled highly hazardous by the World
Health Organisation (WHO), a panel of government experts was persuaded
by manufacturers that monocrotophos was cheaper than alternatives and
more effective in controlling pests that decimate crop output.
India,
which has more hungry mouths to feed than any other country in the
world, continues to use monocrotophos and other highly toxic pesticides
that rich and poor nations alike, including China, are banning on health
grounds.
Although the government argues the benefits of strong
pesticides outweigh the hazards if properly managed, the school food
poisoning tragedy underlined criticism such controls are virtually
ignored on the ground.
According to the minutes, the 2004 meeting
conducted by the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee,
the Indian government body that regulates pesticide use, concluded
that: "The data submitted by the industry satisfies the concerns
raised...Therefore, there is no need to recommend the ban of this
product."
The minutes of the meeting can be read here: http://cibrc.nic.in/248rc.doc
Government scientists continue to defend the pesticide, and insist the decision to not ban it remains good.
Just
weeks before the school tragedy in Bihar state, the Indian government
advised farmers via text message to use monocrotophos to kill borer
pests in mandarin fruits and rice, records on the agricultural
meteorology division's web site show.
"It is cost effective and
it is known for its efficacy ... some even call it a benevolent
pesticide," said T. P. Rajendran, assistant director general for plant
protection at the Indian Council of Agricultural Research.
"I can
say that pesticides currently permitted in the country are safe
provided they are used as per specifications and guidelines. We have
exhaustive and detailed guidelines. They need to be followed."
A
senior official directly involved in the decision-making on pesticide
use said: "You have got to understand that all pesticides are toxic but
they are essential for maintaining or increasing agricultural
production.
"Can we afford to lose 15-25 percent of output? One
cannot afford to lose such a large percentage of agricultural produce.
The answer lies in judicious use."
The official declined to be identified.
The
WHO has cited a 2007 study that about 76,000 people die each year in
India from pesticide poisoning. Many of the deaths are suicides made
easy by the wide availability of toxic pesticides.
15 PAGES OF REGULATIONS
In
the school tragedy, police suspect the children's lunch was cooked in
oil that was stored in a used container of monocrotophos.
The
Indian government has issued 15 pages of regulations that need to be
followed when handling pesticides - including wearing protective
clothing and using a respirator when spraying. Pesticide containers
should be broken when empty and not left outside in order to prevent
them being re-used.
But in a nation where a quarter of the 1.2
billion population is illiterate and vast numbers live in far-flung
rural districts, implementation is almost impossible. For instance,
monocrotophos is banned for use on vegetable crops, but there is no way
to ensure the rule is followed.
According to the WHO, swallowing
1,200 milligrams - less than a teaspoon - of monocrotophos can be fatal
to humans. In 2009, it called for India to ban the product because of
its extreme toxicity.
"It is imperative to consider banning the
use of monocrotophos," it said in a 60-page report. "The perception that
monocrotophos is cheap and necessary, have prevented the product from
being taken off the market" in India.
WHO officials say the school tragedy reinforces the dangers of the pesticide.
"We
would advocate that countries restrict, ban, or phase out...those
chemicals for which they can't ensure that all aspects of use are safe,"
said Lesley Onyon, WHO's South-East Asia regional adviser for chemical
safety. "If they can't ensure safety, it's our policy to say that these
chemical or pesticides shouldn't be used."
Indian government officials refuse to address the WHO's findings directly.
"We
have to take decisions depending on our need, our priorities, and our
requirements. No one knows these things better than us," said the
government source.
NATIONAL PRIORITY
For
India, providing more food to its people is a national priority.
According to the World Bank, nearly 400 million people in the country
live on less than $1.25 per day.
Nearly half its children under five are malnourished.
The
Bihar school where the children died was participating in the
government's midday meal programme, aimed at giving 120 million school
pupils a free lunch - both providing nutrition and encouraging
education. India is also close to implementing an ambitious plan to
provide cheap food to 800 million people.
Central to these efforts will be higher crop yields and managing costs.
According
to government officials and manufacturers, monocrotophos is cheap and
is also a broad spectrum pesticide that can only be replaced by four or
five crop- or pest-specific pesticides. Even similar pesticides are much
more expensive.
A 500 ml monocrotophos bottle sold by Godrej
Agrovet, a subsidiary of Godrej Industries, is priced at 225 rupees
($3.75), while an alternative, Imidacloprid, in a bottle of 500 ml
produced by Bayer, costs 1,271 rupees.
Monocrotophos is banned by
many countries, including the United States, the European Union
nations, China, and, among India's neighbours, Pakistan. Sri Lanka only
allows monocrotophos use for coconut cultivation.
One of the two
companies that argued against the ban on monocrotophos in 2004 halted
production five years later under pressure from the public in its home
country, Denmark.
Cheminova, a unit of Auriga Industries, said it
stopped producing monocrotophos in India in 2009 and converted its
plant to produce a low-toxic fungicide.
"We decided to phase out
monocrotophos because with many alternative products, we could not see
any reason to have such a toxic product in a country like India,"
Lars-Erik Pedersen, vice-president of Auriga Industries, told Reuters in
Copenhagen.
"It was a big decision because it is one of the best-selling products in India," he added.
The
other manufacturer that made a presentation at the 2004 meeting was
United Phosphorus, currently the biggest producer of the pesticide in
the country.
Managing Director Rajju D. Shroff told Reuters that
monocrotophos was "very harmless," and hinted calls for a ban were aimed
at helping multinationals sell more costly alternatives.
"Companies
want to sell new pesticides. If they have monocrotophos, farmers will
not change to new, expensive ones," said Shroff, who attended the
meeting as the head of the Crop Care Federation of India, a position he
still holds.
NOT MOST TOXIC
Historically, India appears
reluctant to ban pesticides. Monocrotophos isn't the most toxic
pesticide used in the country, according to the WHO's classifications.
Phorate, methyl parathion, bromadiolone and phosphamidon, all classified
as extremely hazardous, are likewise registered for use.
And
endosulfan - a substance so nasty the United Nations wants it eliminated
worldwide - was banned only by a Supreme Court order in 2011. The
decision came a few months after the chief minister of the southern
state of Kerala, the top elected official, went on a day-long hunger
fast to demand the ban.
According to media reports, over 1,000
people were killed and hundreds born deformed because of indiscriminate
aerial spraying of endosulfan in Kasargod, a Kerala district.
Both
production of monocrotophos and demand in India was higher in 2009/10
than in 2005/06, according to latest available government data. It
accounted for about 4 percent of total pesticide use in 2009/10 and 7
percent of production.
Its share in total sales is about 2-3
percent now, according to the Pesticides Manufacturers & Formulators
Association, which says it represents the industry on a national basis
with over 250 members.
The Centre for Science and Environment, a
leading environmental NGO in India, says the state of pesticide control
in the country is deplorable and companies have great influence.
"The
story on the ground is abysmal, it's very disappointing," said Amit
Khurana, programme manager in the CSE's food safety and toxins unit.
"People
still do not know how much of pesticide is to be used, which pesticide
is to be used for which crop. The biggest influence for a farmer is the
sales representative of the company ... so there's this sense of gross
mismanagement at that level."
The government has tried to
introduce legislation for "more effective regulation of import,
manufacture, export, sale, transport, distribution and use of
pesticides" but the bill has languished in parliament since 2008.
India
is no stranger to the dangers of pesticides. Besides the thousands
killed each year, the country suffered the world's worst industrial
disaster when lethal methyl isocyanate gas leaked from a pesticide plant
in the city of Bhopal in 1984, killing nearly 4,500 people.
But in the fields of rural India, pesticides like monocrotophos continue to be widely used.
"I
have been using it for the last 10 years, I have a very good
experience," said Gaiyabhu Patil, a 56-year-old farmer who has just
finished spraying monocrotophos on his 15-acre cotton crop in the
western state of Maharashtra. "It is cheap and effective."
Anil
Dhole, a pesticide vendor in Koregaon, a district town southeast of
Mumbai at the centre of a sugarcane and cotton growing region, said few
of his customers took health warnings seriously.
"Many farmers
don't take the necessary precautions while applying the pesticide. We do
inform them about its toxic nature, but they take it casually," he said
"Farmers don't even bother to cover their noses."