In an emergency advisory, the United States has called for a halt to all use of a dangerous pesticide called DCPA, dacthal or chlorthal. Meanwhile, Health Canada has taken no action to notify people who may still have stocks of the product on this side of the border or who may have been exposed to its dangers, raising concerns among an environmental group and a scientist. The latest in a series of failures, they say.
This herbicide has been used to control unwanted plants in crops such as broccoli, onions, Brussels sprouts and kale or on sports fields or golf courses, for example. It poses high risks to the developing fetus.
“DCPA is so dangerous that it must be removed from the market immediately,” the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wrote last week.
On this side of the border, Health Canada confirmed in an email to Duty that no use was authorized after December 31, 2023. However, we were unable to find any online mention of this ban. This federal body was also unable to provide any document related to this ban.
“They did it on the sly,” says Laure Mabileau, spokesperson for Vigilance OGM, while a large-scale alert was launched in the United States. “We have to be hypercritical of Health Canada’s position, because it is repeated in several cases,” she emphasizes.
It has been 20 years since the first studies documenting certain risks of chlorthal surfaced, and it has been banned in Europe since 2009, she specifies.
“They can be criticized for not being more proactive in warning users and people potentially affected by a dangerous molecule,” says Maryse Bouchard, a professor at the Institut national de la recherche scientifique. “At the very least” Health Canada should produce a public notice and disseminate this information widely, she adds.
“They silently banned him,” she also notes.
Stocks
Provincial and federal data, however, show that stocks may have been built. In Quebec, chlorthal sales in 2022 (73 kg) far exceeded those in 2021 (8 kg) and 2020 (16 kg), the last years for which wholesale sales data are available. They remained at small volumes, however. Across the country, 10 times more of this molecule was sold in 2021 than in the three previous years.
It is Health Canada’s responsibility to inform users that the product is no longer permitted, says M.me Bouchard: “You can’t expect people to know that.”
“Existing stocks will have to be destroyed,” Health Canada wrote to Dutywithout indicating what measures it can take to achieve this result.
“It’s not written on the bottle that it has become forbidden either, it will be easy to continue,” notes Laure Mabileau, from Vigilance OGM.
Historical
Studies have shown that chlorthal persists at “unsafe levels” for up to 25 days after application, the EPA wrote last week, rather than the 12 hours its manufacturer claims. The risks pose not only to farmworkers during application, even if they wear personal protective equipment, but also to pregnant women who may come into contact with the substance.
Mme Bouchard also notes in passing that this situation demonstrates once again that “our regulatory authorities are very accommodating with companies.” Since 2013 and repeatedly, the EPA has asked the only manufacturer manufacturing this substance to provide studies specific to the risks examined, in particular the risk for thyroid development.
In 10 years, the company has been unable to present sufficient evidence, despite the EPA’s “unprecedented efforts” in requesting the data, the statement said.
Here, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), part of Health Canada, conducted a special review of the product in 2017. “Registered products [au Canada] containing chlorthal-dimethyl do not present any unacceptable risk to human health or the environment under current conditions of use,” it wrote in its decision to continue permitting the pesticide in question.
“False sense of security”
For Laure Mabileau, this is another nail in the coffin of Health Canada’s credibility in the area of pesticides, an authority that “does worse than everyone else in its decisions.”
“You could even say it’s redundant,” she continues, citing the example of chlorpyrifos, a pesticide that is now known to have a negative effect on children’s IQ. It was only in 2022 that the ARLA revoked its approval, while allowing its use until December 2023. The main producer of chlorpyrifos had already announced in 2020 that it was ending its production. “So they made a decision on something that didn’t even exist anymore,” laments Mme Mabileau.
Europe has also just banned the s-metolachlor, particularly because of its contamination of drinking water sources. “Here, we’re just going to change the labels,” she denounces. This is a pesticide that is at the top of the list in Quebec for the risks posed to human health and the environment, and this has been the case in all pesticide sales reports since 2006.
Without being too harsh, Maryse Bouchard clearly states her expectations: “Health Canada must thoroughly review its risk assessment processes, particularly those for human health,” says this environmental health expert.
She is now a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Pesticides, which made headlines last year because of the dramatic resignation of one of its key members, Bruce Lanphear.
“I am concerned that the Scientific Advisory Committee (and my role as co-chair) may provide a false sense of security by giving the impression that PMRA is protecting Canadians from toxic pesticides,” he wrote in his resignation letter.