scholarly journals (Q) SAR tools for the prediction of mutagenic properties: Are they ready for application in pesticide regulation?

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (10) ◽  
pp. 3316-3325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Herrmann ◽  
Andrea Holzwarth ◽  
Soyub Rime ◽  
Benjamin C Fischer ◽  
Carsten Kneuer
Keyword(s):  
Pesticide Regulation

Expansion of the Low-Risk Substances in the Framework of the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Diane C. Robin ◽  
Patrice A. Marchand
Keyword(s):  
Plant Protection ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Part D ◽  
Natural Substances ◽  
Commission Regulation ◽  
Pesticide Regulation ◽  
Active Substances ◽  
Initial List ◽  
Protection Commission

Abstract Signed in 2009, the plant protection Commission Regulation EC No 1107/2009 created a new category of active substances, the low-risk substances, with specific status defined in Article 22. The initial and specific criteria, not suitable for microorganisms and natural substances, were modified in 2018, and the first low-risk substance, allocating Part D of Regulation EC No 540/2011, was granted in the same year. Since then, thirty-three low-risk substances have been granted with this specific status through approvals and renewals, while a larger list of potential low-risk substances from already-approved active substances was published. This list is only exploited during renewals, and this process would take another five years to complete. After four years of the implementation of this status, the number of such substances is still low, but is intended to increase slowly. Two more low-risk substances are already pending in 2021, which will bring the number of low-risk substances to thirty-five, while the initial list of potential low-risk substances (only renewals) included fifty-seven substances.

scholarly journals Emerging pesticides responsible for suicide in rural Sri Lanka following the 2008-2014 pesticide bans

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manjula Weerasinghe ◽  
Melissa Pearson ◽  
Flemming Konradsen ◽  
Suneth Agampodi ◽  
J.A. Sumith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sri Lanka ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Government Regulations ◽  
Curve Estimation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Important Means ◽  
Pesticide Regulation ◽  
Cluster Randomized

Abstract Background Sri Lanka has reduced its overall suicide rate by 70% over the last two decades through means restriction, through means restriction, through a series of government regulations and bans removing highly hazardous pesticides from agriculture. We aimed to identify the key pesticide(s) now responsible for suicides in rural Sri Lanka to provide data for further pesticide regulation.Methods We performed a secondary analysis of data collected prospectively during a cluster randomized controlled trial in the Anuradhapura district of Sri Lanka from 2011-16. The identity of pesticides responsible for suicides were sought from medical or judicial medical notes, coroners’ records, and the person’s family. Trend analysis was done using a regression analysis with curve estimation to identify relative importance of key pesticides. Results We identified 337 suicidal deaths. Among them, the majority 193 (57.3%) were due to ingestion of pesticides while 82 (24.3%) were due to hanging. A specific pesticide was identified in 105 (54.4%) of the pesticide suicides. Ingestion of carbosulfan or profenofos was responsible for 59 (56.2%) of the suicides with a known pesticide and 17.5% of all suicides. The increasing trend of suicides due to carbosulfan and profenofos over time was statistically significant (R square 0.846, F 16.541, p 0.027). Conclusion Ingestion of pesticides remains the most important means of suicides in rural Sri Lanka. The pesticides that were once responsible for most pesticide suicides have now been replaced by carbosulfan and profenofos. Their regulation and replacement in agriculture with less hazardous pesticides will further reduce the incidence of both pesticide and overall suicides in rural Sri Lanka.

Pesticide regulation in the European Union and the glyphosate controversy

Weed Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Kudsk ◽  
Solvejg Kopp Mathiassen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Conservation Agriculture ◽  
Farm Income ◽  
No Tillage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Pesticide Regulation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe glyphosate controversy before the renewal of the authorization of glyphosate in the European Union (EU) once again turned the spotlight on pesticide regulation in the EU. In the EU, pesticides are attracting more public attention than in other parts of the world, and many nongovernmental organizations specifically target pesticide regulation, trying to influence politicians and other decision makers. Following an overview of the EU pesticide legislation and the impact hitherto on EU agriculture, this paper outlines the glyphosate controversy and presents the outcome of desk studies conducted in Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and Sweden on the potential effects of a glyphosate ban on agricultural productivity and farm income. All studies concluded that the loss of income depends very much on farm type and cropping practice, but they all reached the conclusion that particularly no-tillage farming/conservation agriculture will be facing severe problems without glyphosate to control weeds and terminate cover crops. No-tillage/conservation agriculture is viewed as an effective strategy to prevent soil erosion and loss of nutrients, which could become larger problems without glyphosate. Other issues highlighted in the studies were the impact on resistance management, as glyphosate is largely seen as a “herbicide-resistance breaker.” Without glyphosate, fundamental changes in farming practices in the EU are required, and it is hard to imagine that they will come without a cost, at least in the short term.

scholarly journals Preventing suicide through pesticide regulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Eddleston ◽  
David Gunnell
Keyword(s):  
Pesticide Regulation

The pattern of pesticide regulation in Western Europe

1973 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 91-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Wright
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
International Agencies ◽  
Pesticide Regulation ◽  
Pesticide Usage ◽  
Pesticide Registration

The increasing scope and complexity of pesticide registration procedures impose strains on the resources of governments and industry. International uniformity would bring benefit to both sides but is harder to achieve in industrialized countries which have to modify long-established laws than in developing countries which can model new schemes on experience elsewhere or take advice from international agencies such as FAO. Active cooperation by industry at both national and international levels is advocated in framing realistic, scientifically-based regulations and in concentrating on those aspects of pesticide usage which pose real, not hypothetical hazards.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document