2015 Conference of the Parties in Geneva failed to place some highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) under its global watch

By Chela Vázquez

At 3:45 am Saturday, 16 May 2015 the Conference Of the Parties (COPs) to the Basel (COP 12), Rotterdam (COP 7) and Stockholm (COP 7) Conventions officially closed in Geneva, Switzerland following two weeks of intense negotiations and several hours after the Triple COPs, as they are known, were scheduled to end on Friday.
 
I among almost 1,200 participants, composed of government delegates and observers from 171 countries, followed the negotiations on regulations of hazardous chemicals and waste. Many of us were hopeful that more hazardous chemicals would be placed under the global watch of the conventions, particularly the Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions that regulate the toxic chemicals listed in their Annexes, bearing in mind that the primary objective of the conventions is to protect human health and the environment.
 
However, the conventions operate largely by consensus among the parties, and just one party can prevent the listing of additional substances to the conventions. As it turned out, some countries opposing new listings of toxic substances did not offer a justification in accordance with the objectives of the conventions.

 
COP 7 Stockholm Convention resorted to majority vote to list pentachlorophenol, an HHP used for wood preservation
 
At COP 7 of the Stockholm Convention, which targets persistent organic pollutants (POPs) for global elimination, India opposed the addition of the pesticide pentachlorophenol (PCP) to the convention’ list and questioned the recommendation for listing made by the POPs Review Committee (POPRC), the scientific body of the convention. By the end of the second week after talks had been exhausted, COP 7 resorted to a vote, the first time in the convention’s history, and decided to list PCP and its salts and esters to Annex A of the convention with a time-limited exemption for utility poles and crossarms.
 
PCP is a ubiquitous global contaminant that has been found in breast milk, blood, amniotic fluid, and other human tissues throughout the world, including Indigenous peoples of the Arctic. It is associated with increased risk of certain cancers such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
 
COP 7 of the Stockholm Convention also agreed to list the industrial chemicals hexachlorobutadiene (HCBD) to Annex A without exemptions, and polychlorinated naphtalenes (PCNs) to Annex A with a time-limited exemption for use as intermediates in the production of polyfluorinated naphtalenes, including octafluoronaphtalene.

COP 7 of the Rotterdam Convention failed to reach an agreement to apply international trade regulations to dangerous pesticides
 
Of the pesticides proposed for listing at COP 7 only methamidophos was added in Annex III to the Rotterdam Convention, which regulates trade of hazardous chemicals on the principle of Prior Informed Consent
 
In addition, parties deliberated on the listing of the formulation fenthion ultra-low volume (ULV) at or above 640 g active ingredient/L as a Severely Hazardous Pesticide Formulation (SHPF), the herbicide paraquat dichloride 276 g/L as SHPF, and the active ingredient trichlorfon.
 
Sudan opposed the listing of fenthion
 
Sudan’s government representative said that adding fenthion to the Rotterdam Convention could decrease production of the chemical and increase market prices. Fenthion is used in Sudan to kill migratory birds that eat crops, such as millet and sorghum.
 
Other Sahel countries in the region having the same problem are opting for gentler solutions. Mr. Moussa Abderaman Abdoulaye, Chad’s delegate to the Rotterdam Convention said: “Fenthion was used in Chad until 2011 to combat birds that eat cereals from farms. However, the human health and environmental costs were enormous. Chad banned it, began raising awareness on the toxicity of fenthion and promoting the use of nets to trap birds that are also edible. The use of the nets do not threaten the bird population, it provides food to rural communities, and a source of protein and income.”
 
The proposal to add fenthion in Annex III to the Rotterdam Convention was initially proposed by the Republic of Chad and later reviewed and recommended for listing by the Chemical Review Committee (CRC) of the Convention.
 
India, Guatemala, Indonesia, and Paraguay opposed the listing of paraquat dichloride
 
For the second time, paraquat dichloride 276 g/L was blocked from being listed as a SHPF to the Rotterdam Convention. The countries opposing the listing were India, Guatemala, Indonesia and Paraguay.
 
Baskut Tuncak, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and hazardous substances said “it is legally and morally unjustifiable for countries to continue to obstruct the listing of asbestos and paraquat under the Rotterdam Convention.”
 
Two years earlier, at COP 6 in 2013 India and Guatemala, both manufacturers of paraquat formulations, blocked this substance from being added to the convention. Guatemala expressed at COP 6 that listing paraquat would affect its exports in the region because countries could take action and stop imports of this toxic chemical.
 
Burkina Faso initially proposed that paraquat dichloride as SHPF be added to the Rotterdam Convention because of the harm to human health and the environment reported in the country. The CRC reviewed the proposal and recommended it for listing to the COP.  
 
The active ingredient Trichlorfon was not added to the Rotterdam Convention

The listing of the pesticide trichorfon to the Rotterdam Convention was blocked by India.

 
Also, the industrial chemical chrysotile asbestos, used to make rooftops in many developing countries, for the 5^th time was blocked from being listed to the Rotterdam Convention. Belarus, Cuba, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Russia, and Zimbabwe opposed the listing.  
 
The effectiveness of the Rotterdam Convention is at stake
 
Parties and observers attending the COPs questioned the effectiveness of the Rotterdam Convention, whose mission has been undermined by seemingly commercial interests.
 
Malaysia’s Ms. Fatimah Md. Anwar from the Pesticides Control Division of the Dept. of Agriculture said “We question the effectiveness of the convention if considerations of trade, availability of pesticides and market pricing supersedes the importance of information sharing.”
 
Also, the undue pressure from the industry was reported by Ecuador who asked that the meeting report reflect its declaration that it has been approached by private sector representatives seeking to persuade countries to oppose listing (re paraquat dichloride), which was “unacceptable.”
 
Hopes for listing additional hazardous chemicals
 
On the promising side, COP 7 of the Rotterdam Convention decided to establish an inter-sessional working group to review the cases where consensus on the listing of chemicals was not achieved and to come up with a proposal to improve the effectiveness of the convention. COP 8 in 2017 will decide on the options developed by the inter-sessional working group.
 
Parties requested technical assistance and support to identify alternatives to HHPs. Dr. Meriel Watts from Pesticide Action Network said “This offers an opportunity for countries to implement agroecological approaches and promote sustainable agriculture and rural development.”
 
Overall the 2015 Triple COPs adopted over 50 decisions and agreed to convene the next round of chemicals and waste COPs, with a high level segment, in 2017.

********

International measures to control Paraquat, once again derailed

By Chela Vázquez

The enforcement of an international mechanism for Prior Informed Consent when trading with a dangerous herbicide, paraquat dichloride, was blocked by India, Guatemala, and Indonesia at the 7^th Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention. 

 

 “People in Africa have felt the impact of paraquat dichloride and have paid dearly with their health and lives. This acutely toxic chemical impairs people for life. Listing paraquat dichloride 20% and above in the Rotterdam Convention would empower governments in the exercise of their duty to protect human health and the environment” said Dr. Paul Windinpsidi Savadogo, Director General of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development of Burkina Faso. He added “This is a missed opportunity and it is regrettable that a few countries prevented the majority from being able to take measures to protect human health, particularly of farmers and agricultural workers, who are the most exposed with this chemical.”

In 2010 Burkina Faso proposed adding the herbicide paraquat dichloride 20% to the Rotterdam Convention in order to have information about potential imports of this herbicide and take pertinent measures, which could include placing restrictions or banning. Burkina Faso reported serious health impacts linked to this chemical among farmers. The scientific body of the Rotterdam Convention reviewed Burkina Faso’s proposal and recommended the inclusion of paraquat dichloride to the convention.

Paraquat dichloride, an acutely toxic chemical

Omara Amuko, based in Uganda, from the International Union of Food and Allied Workers Africa said  “Paraquat dichloride has caused serious harm to farmers and agricultural workers in Africa. This chemicals needs to be under the scrutiny of governments, already CILSS countries have prohibited the use of paraquat in the region.”  The Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS for its acronym in French) banned paraquat in 2011.

 “Paraquat dichloride is an acutely toxic chemical that is used under high risk conditions in developing countries. In India for instance, its use poses great health risks to farmers and workers” said C. Jayakumar from PAN India.

Jayakumar was referring to a new report from India by PAN India and other groups that documented paraquat dichloride being sold in plastic carrying bags, mixed with other ingredients such as shampoo, and applied with leaking knapsack sprayers on crops where its use has not been approved.

“The use of paraquat is not allowed in Switzerland, the European Union and many other countries” said Francois Meienberg from the Berne Declaration. He added “Syngenta, the creator and main seller of paraquat, currently makes profits from its sales to developing countries, knowing that farmers and workers have no possibility to protect themselves adequately which leads to high risk conditions of use and uncounted poisoning cases.”  

India and Guatemala again blocked the inclusion of paraquat dichloride to the Rotterdam Convention

The Conference of the Parties (COPs) to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions met in in Geneva on May 4-15, 2015 and deliberated on the listing of new hazardous chemicals to the conventions.  Paraquat dichloride 20% and above was on the Rotterdam COP 7 agenda two years after COP 6 in 2013 failed to reach an agreement on its inclusion to the convention.  Similar to COP 6, at COP 7, India and Guatemala obstructed the inclusion of paraquat dichloride to the convention. This time, Indonesia also joined them.

Most governments at COP 7 of the Rotterdam Convention were in favor of adding this highly hazardous pesticide to the Convention. The Prior Informed Consent procedure of the Convention would allow governments to exchange information and more effectively control the use of this chemical in order to protect the health of their most vulnerable citizens.

Many government delegates attending the meeting in Geneva took the floor to express concern that a handful of governments using the consensus procedure under the convention prevented other countries from their right to having information on trade of hazardous chemicals. They called for urgent review of the rules of the Rotterdam Convention.

Monsanto’s popular herbicide, glyphosate, linked to cancer and antibiotic resistance

By Chela Vázquez

 The world is scrutinizing Monsanto’s popular weed killer, glyphosate, classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the cancer arm branch of the World Health Organization (WHO).

On March 20, 2015 seventeen global health experts met at WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to discuss years of data linking glyphosate and cancer in experimental animals, and concluded that it probably causes cancer in humans as well. Four other organophosphate insecticides also were evaluated.

IARC’s decision on glyphosate came on the heels of a study released by scientists from New Zealand that linked the herbicides glyphosate, 2,4-D, and dicamba to antibiotic resistance in disease-causing bacteria, such as E. coli and Salmonella.

Widespread use of glyphosate in Asia and around the world

Glyphosate, also known as Roundup for its tradename with Monsanto, is the most common and heavily used herbicide worldwide.

In Asia glyphosate is used in rubber, oil palm, sugar cane, tea, and hybrid corn plantations. It is also used on soybeans, cotton, rice, and wheat among other crops.

Monsanto created and marketed glyphosate as Roundup. After Monsanto’s patent on glyphosate expired in 2000, many agrochemical companies manufacture it under different commercial names. Over 700 glyphosate formulations are used globally.

China has become the largest glyphosate supplier in the world, with production over half a million tons, mostly for export.

Implications to human health

“Glyphosate is widely used in Asia, often with minimal protection. The people mostly impacted are farmers, agricultural workers, women and children” said Sarojeni Rengam from PAN Asia Pacific. “Therefore, the health implications of carcinogenicity and antibiotic resistance linked to glyphosate are enormous”. 

 In addition to exposure during pesticide spraying, pesticide storage creates health hazards. For instance, a 2011 field appraisal on the use of pesticides in Lao PDR, PAN Asia Pacific found glyphosate originating from China, in 15 and 30 liter plastic tanks, stored at home in close proximity to cooking and sleeping facilities. Pesticide shops also sold glyphosate and other pesticides close to food items.

Governments should take measures to remove this highly hazardous pesticide from the farming communities.

 Increased use of glyphosate with genetically engineered crops

Monsanto also genetically engineered (GE) soybeans, corn, and cotton resistant to glyphosate, and multiplied its revenues by selling both GE seed and glyphosate. Monsanto’s US$15.9 billion annual sales are closely tied to glyphosate.

Because weeds developed resistance to glyphosate, increasing amounts of the herbicide are applied in combination with old and dangerous herbicides, such as 2,4-D, which was used as an ingredient of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War.

Strong global response is needed

The IARC’s labeling of glyphosate as a probable carcinogen to humans has sent ripple waves around the world. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), which registers and regulates pesticides for use in agriculture, has announced that it will require a weed resistance management plan for glyphosate from Monsanto, which includes monitoring for weed resistance.

PAN Asia Pacific and PAN International have called on governments to exercise their political will to protect people and the environment, and have demanded a plan in the next 60 days to address the use of highly hazardous pesticides and a way to move forward towards sustainable, healthy methods of agricultural production.

Cameron Highlands Waters Tainted with Pesticides

By Chela Vázquez

Once again Cameron Highlands in Malaysia takes the stage for the dubious honor of being a highly polluted place. Here, vegetables are grown for export and for internal consumption across the country and overseas markets, raising concerns about the safety of the food produced and consumed in Malaysia.

Researchers from University Kebangsaan Malaysia over a 5-month study, August-December 2014, in Cameron Highlands of the surface waters of two rivers, Bertam and Terla, and tap water in the town of Brinchang, have found residues of highly toxic organochlorine pesticides (OCs). These results were presented at a seminar with government officials and the general public in Cameron Highlands on March 6, 2015. A local organization, REACH, and Pesticide Action Network Asia Pacific co-hosted the event.

 Potential Health Impacts

“The people of Cameron Highlands have the right to know about poisons present in the water they drink. Furthermore, consumers in Malaysia must know about pesticide residues found in their food” said Sarojeni Rengam from PAN Asia Pacific.

The highly toxic pesticide residues found on surface water and in the drinking water of pipes, sends alarming signals about the long-term human health impact in Brinchang and other towns which depend on the same sources for drinking water.

OCs have affinity for fat tissue and are found in most living organisms. Their ability to adhere to soil particles and affinity to fat tissue facilitate their long-range transport across the globe. They are infamous for their presence in places where they have never been produced nor used. In pristine environments like the Arctic, even the polar bears have OCs in their bodies, and breastmilk of indigenous women in Alaska contain OC concentrations that are among the highest in the world.

OC chemicals are known for their adverse health impact at low dose of exposure over log periods of time because they bioaccumulate inside living organisms. They are known endocrine disruptors, capable of mimicking hormones such as estrogen. In lab animals and wildlife exposed to OC chemicals, birth defects, behavioral abnormalities, impaired fertility have been observed in the offspring of parents exposed to these chemicals, indicating hormonal disruption during prenatal development.

Illegal Pesticides

Most of the pesticide residues were breakdown products belonging to the insecticides endosulfan, aldrin, methoxychlor, eldrin, lindane, DDT, and heptachlor oxide, which have been banned in Malaysia years ago. OC chemicals are persistent and adhere to soil particles, therefore their presence in water might originate from their leaching out of the soil. However, the presence of undegraded endosulfan II in water, suggests application of this insecticide on agricultural fields around a year ago.

At the meeting in Cameron Highlands, Mr. Rama from REACH, presented to the press several illegal pesticides, that ranged from labels in foreign language, repackaged pesticides sold in bags with poor labeling, and methomyl, an insecticide classified by the World Health Organization as class 1 because of its high toxicity. Methomyl has never been registered in Malaysia.

This study only measured OC pesticides in water. It did not test for the presence of organophophorus compounds, carbamates, pyrethroids, fungicides, and toxic herbicides, which are also known to be in high use in Cameron Highlands.

Further Research and Action are needed

The OC findings in Cameron Highlands’ waters point to the need to obtain more information on the presence of pesticide residues in water and also on food. This would be an exercise on the public Right to Know on matters that affect their health and particularly the development of young children.

Regarding the presence of illegal toxic pesticides, it calls for urgent action to prevent further poisoning the environment and endangering human health. Additionally, monitoring of human health, particularly of agricultural workers and farmers is needed. Finally, implementing policies to assist farmers to move towards safer ecological methods in agriculture, free of toxic chemicals, would be crucial to protect human health and the environment.

The Future of Poisoned Children (Poem)

By: Romeo F. Quijano, M.D.

Look into the future my friend and see the mass of poisoned children

Born into the muck of apathy they seem to wander aimlessly

Brains impaired and bodies made frail insidiously by toxic mists

Deprived of vision deprived of hope,  no path to tread nowhere to go.

Look into the food they eat and see the dreg it had become

Examine the water they drink, not even fit for pets you own

Pesticides in their springs, wells and rivers, lakes and seas

Poisons bathing all their farms, rice, vegetables and even sweets.

Wasn't there a global summit as early as 1990,

For a better future of progeny, political action it has to be?

But where is that promise to create a world fit for children,

Where is that global pledge to protect the rights of every child?

Are there not many institutions, UN bodies, various governments

Enacting laws and regulations to protect health and environment?

Are there not scientists who know toxic chemicals and the risks?

Aren't there any publication telling the true information?

All swept away by the avalanche of capitalist greed!

Unleashed  by the brute force of a superpower gone crazy

Pushed by the ruthless might of agrochemical TNCs,

Vile bureaucrats complicit, children's welfare trumped by profits!

Book into the future, my friend, and join the mass of people rising

Gather a crowd of enlightened gentry and be a revolutionary!

No more brains impaired no more bodies made frail by toxic mists

Vision restored and hope revived, our path is clear, children set free!

                                      ---000---

Promoting ecological agriculture

Promoting ecological agriculture

With CPAM creating strong awareness among farming communities, many of them not only pledged to reduce pesticide use, but also wanted to move towards farming without chemicals – that is, towards organic or ecologi-cal agriculture. After the CPAM process, PAN AP’s partner Vikalpani, the Sri Lankan Women’s Federation, was motivated to work with PAN AP to organize a series of training workshops on organic farming for its members, many of whom are now practising organic agriculture in their home gardens and in their rice fields.

PAN AP has been a strong advocate for small-farm BEA as a sustainable alternative to the toxic model of modern agriculture. BEA is also a fundamental component of food sovereignty. It provides sustainable livelihoods for small farming communities and strengthens community resilience in coping with climate change. It is one of the Five Pillars of Rice Wisdom that form the foundation of PAN AP’s Save Our Rice campaign, launched in 2003. With the global food, financial and climate crises which emerged in 2008, the importance of BEA in sustaining the food security and food sover-eignty of small, vulnerable rice communities all over Asia took on greater urgency. Thus, capacity-building has featured largely in our activities in recent years as a focus area that contributed significantly towards community resilience and sustainable development.

We identified the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) as an impor-tant BEA technology for sustainable livelihoods. This was because SRI had proven to reduce production costs while increasing yields and net incomes significantly in several Asian countries over the past three decades. Two regional workshops for network partners and farmers from eight Asian countries were organized in Cambodia and India, with partner organizations Centre d’Etude et de Développement Agricole Cambodgien (CEDAC) and Kudumbam respectively acting as trainers due to their expertise in SRI. Another regional training programme on farmer empowerment, seed breeding and climate change adaptation using diversified integrated farming systems was organized for partners and farmers from 11 countries to meet the need for rice communities to learn to organize themselves, save seeds and adapt to climate change. This training was conducted by MASIPAG, a farmer-scientist partnership for development in the Philippines, due to its expertise in the areas of focus. These were fundamental areas for the sustainable development of poor rural communities.

Indigenous women preparing a nursery bed as part of the BEA training in Sarawak.

Having close network partners with BEA expertise has been very significant and a major strength for our network. With these partners, we have managed more effectively to meet the needs of our other network partners and the sectors both we and they serve. Other than training, such partners have also helped us to develop important factsheets on BEA and farmer empowerment, which have been translated by network partners into local languages to strengthen their BEA sustainability initiatives.

We also responded to local needs for capacity-build-ing in BEA where local communities were found to be struggling with low yields and incomes. Local indigenous communities in East Malaysia and small rice farmers in Andhra Pradesh and Uttarakhand, India, received special hands-on training in BEA and SRI skills.

All the BEA projects were very much appreciated by the participants, who said they had gained a lot from the training and who continue to practise and benefit from their new skills. Trainees have reported gains such as minimizing pest attacks by using organic pesticides they have learned to make. They have also achieved improved yields, better incomes and a more diversified diet (for example from kitchen gardens), and have even increased their adaptive capacity to climate change. Seed breeding techniques learned from MASIPAG have been upscaled at the local level in several countries, including Indonesia, Nepal, Cambodia and India.

PAN AP works with marginalized groups to ensure food security and a healthy environment farmer said of the MASIPAG training: “It widened my vision and knowledge in terms of the role of local rice seeds for farmers.” Meanwhile, network partners have shared how these initiatives have helped them build capacity to upscale BEA initiatives at the local level and empowered local communities to do better.

The capacity-building activities have facilitated the upscaling of BEA practices; built BEA skills among farmers, non-governmental organi-zation (NGO) staff, agricultural extension workers and others; and supported local action and network building. Collectively, the activities have significantly contributed to the sustainable human development of small rice farming communities in various countries in Asia.

In 2009, the rice fields of Yunnan, China, were destroyed by the rice plant hopper and we collaborated with our network partner in Yunnan, the Pesticide Eco-Alternatives Center (PEAC), to address the situation. A short study was carried out, followed by a cross-country workshop on the results, involving NGOs, academics, scientists and policymakers from China, Vietnam, Laos and Burma. In addition, we produced factsheets on the rice plant hopper and Integrated Pest Management. All these efforts were timely responses by PAN AP and PEAC to the crisis, to convince agriculturalists and policymakers that the use of pesticides actually exacerbates rice plant hopper attacks and is unsustainable, whereas BEA methods are effective and sustainable in dealing with pests.

The Future of Poisoned Children

By Romeo F. Quijano, M.D.

My grandson, David, stays in our house 2-3 times a week while his parents are at work. It is my wife who usually does the babysitting but I often have the chance to do the babysitting myself whenever I am at home. Despite my many travels abroad and to Mindanao, I get to spend quite a lot of time with David, enjoying every moment of it - playing, showing him some simple tricks, singing songs, listening to music on line and dancing (he's such a good dancer!), playing my mandolin to him, feeding him, assisting him in the toilet, putting him to sleep, etc, etc. I began to teach him about healthy diet, organic fruits and vegetables, and the dangers that pesticides bring to children's health when he was about 3 years old. I even taught him the scientific names of fruits and vegetables he ate and some medicinal plants. He is such a fast learner that now his knowledge of science is far advanced of his age (he is now 5 yrs old) and he now knows the scientific names of at least 20 fruits and vegetables. Whenever I am not home, he always asked my wife where I was and whenever I come home he hugs me, tells me he missed me and then shows me his drawings and scribbles about me when I was away, all showing pure love and affection. He is such a lovable and intelligent kid who would undoubtedly be a valuable contributor to the society of the near future to which he belongs and which would be beyond my time.

When I think about David's future, and the future of all children, I feel sad and angry but at the same time, deeply motivated and hopeful.  I feel sad because I know that despite my best efforts to protect David from toxic chemicals, he is still exposed to a variety of pesticides and other toxics and all I could do is try to reduce that exposure.  There is hardly any person or any place on earth that is left uncontaminated and not poisoned to some degree. Children are the hardest hit. The health of children worldwide is worsening. The incidence rates of developmental abnormalities, asthma, diabetes, certain cancers and other diseases in children have increased. This has serious implications for the future wellbeing, not only of the children, but of the future society as a whole. Pesticides and other toxic contaminants in air, water, and food have emerged as important causal factors. I have personally studied and observed this unfortunate situation in my 38 years of work in the academe and in various communities in many countries as a medical professional. In banana plantation communities in Mindanao, in palm oil plantations in Malaysia, in a cashew plantation in India, in garbage dump communities in Manila and Cebu, and in many other areas, I have examined children harmed by pesticides and other toxic chemicals. In addition, having participated in many international meetings and negotiations pertaining to toxic chemicals and related issues at various international fora, my personal experiences were affirmed by information exchanges and discussions with numerous experts in toxic chemicals from various governments, international agencies, research and academic institutions, public interest groups and even from the chemical industry.

I feel angry because big business continue the irresponsible manufacture and use of highly hazardous pesticides and other toxics with the complicity of governments, international agencies, corrupt bureaucrats and prostituted scientists that promote or allow profiteering from toxic chemicals at the expense of health and environment, putting our children's future in serious jeopardy. Corporate interests and political expediency are the dominant considerations influencing regulatory decisions pertaining to pesticides and other toxic chemicals especially in Third World countries where socio-political circumstances are conducive for powerful corporations to exert influence and manipulate public policy.

These mixed feelings of sadness and anger, however, keeps me deeply motivated to continue fighting to eliminate or at least restrict, as many as possible, highly hazardous pesticides and other toxics and to continue supporting community struggles against corporate aggression in various forms.  People's resistance against corporate imposed unsustainable and toxic agriculture is increasing and offers hope and optimism. Biodiversity-based ecological agriculture and non-pesticide approaches are being practiced more widely by tens of thousands of farmers across Asia and other parts of the world. These farmers and their children not only lead healthier lives but have improved livelihoods. Landless peasants, consumers and other sectors are organizing themselves and coming together in broader coalitions to assert food sovereignty and to resist agrochemical TNCs. Indeed, the growing people's movement against imperialist imposition and for social liberation is a reason to be optimistic and to be hopeful that the future of poisoned children may not be so bleak after all.