The $1 billion pest has done it before. It beat crop rotation during the 1990s when a new strain of the western corn rootworm began breeding opposite fields so they’d be ready for corn planting in the following year. “Up until then rotation of corn and soybeans was a pretty good control strategy,” University of Illinois entomologist Michael Gray told Food Safety News.


After that came the controversial genetically modified Bt seeds–from Monsanto and licensed to others—that came with built-in toxins to slay the destructive corn rootworm.  And everyone from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that approved them to Monsanto who developed them to Land Grant universities who monitor the performance of American agriculture—all said use of the Bt seeds would reduce pesticide use.




Herbicide-tolerant and Bt-transgenic crops did result in some reduced pesticide use. Charles Benbrook at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources figures Bt crops reduced insecticide use by 10-12 million pounds annually in the period from 1996 to 2011. There is USDA data showing an even more dramatic decline.


But in the last couple years, the billion dollar pest with a new immunity has begun striking back against Monsanto’s Bt seed. And America’s corn farmers—who are planting a near record 97.3 million acres this year—are responding with the only weapon in their arsenal by dramatically upping their pesticide use.


Any reduction now looks to be history. Coming off two extraordinary years when acres dedicated to corn produced $77 and nearly $80 billion, respectively, in 2011 and 2012 with corn prices of $6.22 and $7.40 per bushel, growers are not pulling back and pesticides are now one of their big “inputs” in the corn crop.


Even though $2 corn was a reality as recently as 2005, they see too many competing uses for their product to be gloomy about the future. Beverages, high fructose corn syrup, starch, cereals and sweeteners are among uses of corn in food. Corn-fed beef, poultry, pork and dairy are its principal feed uses. And then on the fuel front ethanol demands are around 500 million bushels of corn.


More pesticide bought to control another break-out of the western corn rootworm is seen by most growers as just a little more insurance, according to both Gray and Benbrook. Gray, who discovered severe rootworm injury in a Cass County, IL cornfield in June 2012, says most growers made decisions about pesticide use this year based on their harvest experiences last fall.


Earlier in 2013, Gray meet with Illinois corn and soybean growers at five locations in the state. He used hand-held “clickers’ to survey growers, finding on average 92 percent planned to plant a Bt hybrid for corn rootworm protection in 2013, but on average 46.66 percent also plan to apply insecticides at planting.


After his meetings with almost 600 Illinois growers, Gray predicted the sharp increase in planting-time soil insecticides with corn rootworm Bt hybrids. Last week, that prediction was verified with the Wall Street Journal reporting surging insecticide sales for companies like American Vanguard Corp. and Syngenta AG.


Corn growers, according to Gray, are “covering their bets” by upping their pesticide use while sticking with a Bt hybrid for corn rootworm. Benbrook agrees growers are “all in in their bet on corn.”


Gray’s work with Illinois corn growers even brought a response from Monsanto last year. The giant agri-business suggested growers using their product should rotate their crops and traits, and buy their dual of mode action products. At this point, Monsanto’s dominance in America’s cornfields is not threatened. That could change if one of its topline products is breaking down.


For 2013, more acres have been planted with genetically modified corn than ever, and its being planted with more pesticides than in more than a decade. USDA’s current forecast for harvest time is for corn selling for around $4.50 a bushel.


That would be enough to cover the “inputs” and clear a profit. Droughts or disease that reduce yields could increase prices. Memories of last fall’s corn futures of $8.50 continue to dance in the heads of growers.


With more than 40 states contributing to the U.S, corn crop, growers continue to have significant political clout. They no longer get direct payment from the USDA if prices go south, but the taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance program takes up the slack.

]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=4117/feed 0 [물] 프랑스 생수 5병 중 1병에 살충제·의약품 찌꺼기 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3851 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3851#comments Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:55:01 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3851

프랑스 생수 5병 중 1병에 살충제·의약품 찌꺼기


김보미 기자 bomi83@kyunghyang.com

경향신문 입력 : 2013-03-26 22:09:41ㅣ수정 : 2013-03-27 13:54:49
http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art_view.html?artid=201303262209415&code=970205

ㆍ“금지된 성분 나와 놀랍다”
ㆍ먹는 샘물 강국 이미지 먹칠

‘먹는 샘물’ 강국인 프랑스에서 시중에 유통되는 생수 5병 가운데 1병꼴로 살충제나 의약품 찌꺼기가 발견됐다. 프랑스 소비자보호협회인 ‘6000만 소비자’는 물 관련 비정부단체 ‘프랑스자유재단’과 함께 시중 생수 브랜드 47개의 잔여물을 조사해 그 결과를 지난 25일 발간한 4월 소비자보고서에 실었다. 이 가운데 10개 생수 브랜드에서 처방전이 필요한 의약품과 살충제 성분이 나왔다.

특히 유방암 치료에 쓰이는 합성 호르몬인 타목시펜이 검출된 것은 놀라운 점이라고 가디언이 전했다. 이 성분이 검출된 브랜드는 ‘몽 루쿠’ ‘상티요르’ ‘살브타’ ‘생타망’, 카르푸의 저가 생수인 ‘셀린 크리스탈린’ 등이다. 말초순환장애 치료제(부플로메딜성분)와 혈관 확장제(나프티드로푸릴) 성분은 ‘헤파르’와 ‘생타망’에서 발견됐다. 또 다른 생수 브랜드인 ‘비텔’ ‘볼빅’ ‘코라’ ‘크리스탈린’에서는 2001년 금지된 살충제 성분이 나왔다.

보고서는 “극소량이더라도 깨끗한 물인지 의문을 갖게 하는 성분들”이라며 “잠재적인 칵테일 효과에 대한 우려가 크다”고 설명했다. ‘칵테일 효과’는 복수의 물질을 섞을 때 예상치 못한 결과가 생길 수 있는 위험성을 뜻한다.

해당 업체들은 이 같은 성분이 검출됐다는 결과에 반발해 재조사를 의뢰했다. 프랑스 유명 물 브랜드인 ‘페리에’와 ‘케작’은 이번 조사에서 잔여물이 나오지 않았다.

보고서 편집자인 토마스 로란츠는 “한 가지 생수만 위험한 것이 아니라 많은 브랜드에 걸쳐 나타났다는 것이 문제”라며 “이번 조사 결과는 생수 업체의 양심을 거론할 수준은 아니지만 인간이 초래한 환경오염에 따른 것이라는 측면도 있어 우려가 된다”고 말했다.




]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3851/feed 0 [GMO오픈세미나자료]GMO, 과연 안전한가? – 프랑스 세라리니 팀의 연구결과를 통해본 GMO의 유해성 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=group&p=5084 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=group&p=5084#comments Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:29:32 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=group&p=5084 GMO, 과연 안전한가?
- 프랑스 세라리니 팀의 연구결과를 통해본 GMO의 유해성
최근 GMO관련 장기독성 연구를 진행한 프랑스 세라리니팀의 연구결과를 둘러싸고 세계적인 논쟁이 일어나고 있습니다. 이 주제에 대해 아래와 같이 오픈세미나를 진행했습니다. 
발제자료를 첨부하니 관심있으신 분들은 첨부파일을 다운로드 받으세요. 의 많은 참가 바랍니다. 발제자료는 박상표 선생님의 주발제문만 있습니다.
첨부된 자료 중 한가지는 한글문서로 발제문이고 나머지 한가지는 발제문을 PPT파일로 요약한 자료입니다. 
일시 : 11월 8일(목요일) 저녁 7시30분
장소: 건강과대안 사무실(종로3가역 7번출구 또는 안국역 4번출구)
패널 : 박상표(건강과대안 운영위원)
        최준호(환경운동연합 생명활동국장)
        김병수(시민과학센터 부소장)
        이상윤(건강과대안 책임연구원)

]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=group&p=5084/feed 0 [GMO] 미국, 16년동안 유전자조작 곡물 재배로 농약사용량 더 늘어 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3542 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3542#comments Fri, 12 Oct 2012 18:23:50 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3542

유전자조작(GM) 곡물은 농약 사용량을 감소시킨다는 고장난 레코드처럼 계속 되풀이되는 주장과 정반대로 오히려 글리포세트(라운드업) 내성 잡초의 증가로 제초제의 사용량이 늘어나서 실제 농약 사용량이 늘어났다는 연구결과가 나왔습니다.

유기농센터(The Organic Center)의 수석 과학자인 Charles M Benbrook 박사는 미 농무부 자료를 분석하여 미국에서 1996년~2011년 16년 동안 유전자조작 곡물 재배와 살충제 사용량의 영향에 관한 연구 결과를 피어리뷰 학술지인 최신호에 발표했습니다.

Charles M Benbrook 박사는 1979년부터 미국 워싱턴 DC에서 농업정책, 과학, 규제에 관한 이슈를 다루었으며, Council for Environmental Quality, executive director of the subcommittee of the House Committee on Agriculture, and executive director of the Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences 등에서 활동했습니다.

1999년부터 지속적으로 유전자조작 곡물의 재배와 살충제 사용량에 대한 분석을 해왔습니다. (http://www.nlpwessex.org/docs/benbrook.htm)
















2009 Report (3.7m pdf)
Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years


2004 Report (2.8m pdf)
Genetically Engineered Crops and Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Nine Years


2003 Report (869k pdf)
Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the United States: The First Eight Years


2001 Report (457k pdf)
Factors Shaping Trends in Corn Herbicide Use
(Including Impact of Herbicide-Tolerant Corn on Herbicide Use)


2001 Report (458k pdf)
Troubled Times Amid Commercial Success for Roundup Ready Soybeans
Glyphosate Efficacy is Slipping and Unstable Transgene Expression Erodes Plant Defenses and Yields (Executive Summary)


1999 Report (280k pdf)
Evidence of the Magnitude and Consequences of the Roundup Ready Soybean Yield Drag from University-Based Varietal Trials in 1998



=============
* 미국에서 1996–2011년 16년 동안 유전자조작 곡물의 살충제 사용 영향

1996~2011년 16년 동안 미국에서 제초제 내성 작물 재배로 인한 제초제 사용량은 2억3900만kg 증가하였으며, Bt 곡물은 살충제 사용량을 5600만kg 감소시켰다.  따라서 농약사용량은 1억8300만 kg 늘어났다.(증가율 7%)

이러한 증가율을 유전자조작 옥수수와 콩에 사용하는  2,4-D의 사용량에 적용해보면, 농약  2,4-D 농약 사용량이 50%나 증가했음을 알 수 있다.

===============

Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. — the first sixteen years

출처 : Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:24 doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-24
Charles M Benbrook (cbenbrook@wsu.edu)


http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/2190-4715-24-24.pdf  (원문 첨부파일)

Abstract

Background

Genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crops have been remarkable commercial successes in the United States. Few independent studies have calculated their impacts on pesticide use per hectare or overall pesticide use, or taken into account the impact of rapidly spreading glyphosate-resistant weeds. A model was developed to quantify by crop and year the impacts of six major transgenic pest-management traits on pesticide use in the U.S. over the 16-year period, 1996–2011: herbicide-resistant corn, soybeans, and cotton; Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn targeting the European corn borer; Bt corn for corn rootworms; and Bt cotton for Lepidopteron insects.

Results

Herbicide-resistant crop technology has led to a 239 million kilogram (527 million pound)
increase in herbicide use in the United States between 1996 and 2011, while Bt crops have
reduced insecticide applications by 56 million kilograms (123 million pounds). Overall,
pesticide use increased by an estimated 183 million kgs (404 million pounds), or about 7%.

Conclusions

Contrary to often-repeated claims that today’s genetically-engineered crops have, and are
reducing pesticide use, the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds in herbicide-resistant weed management systems has brought about substantial increases in the number and volume of herbicides applied. If new genetically engineered forms of corn and soybeans tolerant of 2,4-D are approved, the volume of 2,4-D sprayed could drive herbicide usage upward by another approximate 50%. The magnitude of increases in herbicide use on herbicide-resistant hectares has dwarfed the reduction in insecticide use on Bt crops over the past 16 years, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.


=====================

New US Study Shows GM Crops Increase Use of Herbicides


October 2, 2012 in Sustainable Agriculture, by henry Share with



The latest study published by Washington State University research professor Charles Benbrook finds that the use of herbicides in the production of three genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops — cotton, soybeans and corn — has actually increased. This counterintuitive finding is based on an exhaustive analysis of publicly available data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Statistics Service. Benbrook’s analysis is the first peer-reviewed, published estimate of the impacts of genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant (HT) crops on pesticide use.


Dr. Charles Benbrook, research professor, WSU Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. Photo courtesy Washington State University. Click image to download hi-resolution version.


In the study, which appeared in the the open-access, peer-reviewed journal “Environmental Sciences Europe,” Benbrook writes that the emergence and spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds is strongly correlated with the upward trajectory in herbicide use. Marketed as Roundup and other trade names, glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide used to kill weeds. Approximately 95 percent of soybean and cotton acres, and over 85 percent of corn, are planted to varieties genetically modified to be herbicide resistant.


“Resistant weeds have become a major problem for many farmers reliant on GE crops, and are now driving up the volume of herbicide needed each year by about 25 percent,” Benbrook said.


The annual increase in the herbicides required to deal with tougher-to-control weeds on cropland planted to GE cultivars has grown from 1.5 million pounds in 1999 to about 90 million pounds in 2011.


Herbicide-tolerant crops worked extremely well in the first few years of use, Benbrook’s analysis shows, but over-reliance may have led to shifts in weed communities and the spread of resistant weeds that force farmers to increase herbicide application rates (especially glyphosate), spray more often, and add new herbicides that work through an alternate mode of action into their spray programs.


This latest study again rocks the GMO industry following on as it does from the recent study out of France showing that Roundup and GM maize could cause cancer.


Major Findings


Herbicide-tolerant and Bt-transgenic crops now dominant U.S. agriculture, accounting for about one in every two acres of harvested cropland, and around 95% of soybean and cotton acres, and over 85% of corn acres.


Over the first six years of commercial use (1996-2001), HT and Bt crops reduced pesticide use by 31 million pounds, or by about 2%, compared to what it likely would have been in the absence of GE crops.


Bt crops have reduced insecticide use by 10-12 million pounds annually over the last decade. From 1996-2011, Bt crops have reduced insecticide use on the three crops by 123 million pounds, or about 28%.


The annual per acre reduction in insecticide use on acres planted to Bt corn and cotton has trended downward since 1996, because of the shift toward lower-dose insecticides and the expansion of Bt corn onto acres that would not likely be treated with an insecticide.


The relatively recent emergence and spread of insect populations resistant to the Bt toxins expressed in Bt corn and cotton has started to increase insecticide use, and will continue to do so in response to recommendations from entomologists to preserve the efficacy of Bt technology by applying insecticides previously displaced by the planting of Bt crops.


Herbicide-tolerant crops worked extremely well in the first few years of use, but over-reliance led to shifts in weed communities and the emergence of resistant weeds that have, together, forced farmers to incrementally –



  • Increase herbicide application rates (especially glyphosate),
  • Spray more often, and
  • Add new herbicides that work through an alternate mode-of-action into their spray programs.

Each of these responses has, and will continue to contribute to the steady rise in the volume of herbicides applied per acre of HT corn, cotton, and soybeans.


HT crops have increased herbicide use by 527 million pounds over the 16-year period (1996-2011). The incremental increase per year has grown steadily from 1.5 million pounds in 1999, to 18 million five years later in 2003, and 79 million pounds in 2009. In 2011, about 90 million more pounds of herbicides were applied than likely in the absence of HT, or about 24% of total herbicide use on the three crops in 2011.


Today’s major GE crops have increased overall pesticide use by 404 million pounds from 1996 through 2011 (527 million pound increase in herbicides, minus the 123 million pound decrease in insecticides). Overall pesticide use in 2011 was about 20% higher on each acre planted to a GE crop, compared to pesticide use on acres not planted to GE crops.


There are now two-dozen weeds resistant to glyphosate, the major herbicide used on HT crops, and many of these are spreading rapidly. Millions of acres are infested with more than one glyphosate-resistant weed. The presence of resistant weeds drives up herbicide use by 25% to 50%, and increases farmer-weed control costs by at least as much.


The biotechnology-seed-pesticide industry’s primary response to the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds is development of new HT varieties resistant to multiple herbicides, including 2,4-D and dicamba. These older phenoxy herbicides pose markedly greater human health and environmental risks per acre treated than glyphosate. Approval of corn tolerant of 2,4-D is pending, and could lead to an additional 50% increase in herbicide use per acre on 2,4-D HT corn.


Substantial volumes of Bt toxins are produced per acre planted to Bt corn and cotton. The volumes of these toxins produced by the plants on an acre exceed in nearly all cases the volume of insecticides displaced by the planting of a Bt cultivar. For example, Bt corn targeting the corn rootworm and related soil insects expresses one to two pounds of Bt toxins per acre, while displacing about 0.19 pound of insecticide per acre. The first GE crop expressing eight traits, so-called SmartStax corn, produces 3.7 pounds of Bt toxins per acre and displaces around 0.3 pounds of insecticides.


Reductions in pesticide-related environmental and human health risks have been among the benefits thought to be associated with the shift to glyphosate-based HT crops and Bt corn and cotton. Over the last 16 years, there has been dramatic growth in the volumes of both Bt toxins and glyphosate required to bring crops to harvest. The levels of glyphosate and Bt in the ambient environment, animal feed, and food have markedly increased, creating a myriad of new exposure pathways.


Much new research will be required to translate emerging data on higher exposures to glyphosate and Bt toxins into estimates of human, farm and companion animal, and environmental risks.


Important Terms and Definitions


“Pesticide” is the term used by the U.S. EPA, and pest control experts and scientists, to describe any chemical sprayed or applied to control insects, weeds, plant disease, and rodents. “Pesticide” encompasses herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, rodenticides, and fumigants. “Pesticide use” on a given crop refers to the volume of pesticides applied during a production season, either per acre/hectare or across all acres/hectares planted to the crop. Pesticide use is typically measured as the sum of the pounds of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and other types of pesticides applied.


“Genetically-engineered (GE) crops” have been transformed to express a novel trait using the tools of molecular biology. The new traits in GE crops are derived from a foreign species that is not sexually compatible with the transformed crop (e.g., a bacterium, a fish, an animal, a tree).


“Herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops” are genetically engineered to withstand the application of specific herbicides over the top of the crop, killing or stunting weed growth, while leaving the crop unharmed.


“Herbicide-resistant weeds” have developed the capacity to withstand or overcome applications of herbicides that once killed or controlled the weed.


“Bt-transgenic (Bt) crops” refer to varieties of corn and cotton genetically engineered to biosynthesize in plant cells one or more protein endotoxins produced by subspecies of the bacterium Bacillus thuriengiensis.


Full Study: gmoevidence.org


Source: cahnrsnews.wsu.edu

 

]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3542/feed 0 [식품안전] 농약 치는 염전, 함초·게 제거한다고 제초·살충제 마구 살포 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3024 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3024#comments Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:58:11 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3024

[단독] 농약 치는 염전          
천일염 생산 방해되는 함초·게 제거한다고 제초·살충제 마구 살포

‘무공해’ 믿음 산산조각

출처 : <세계일보>입력 2011.08.16 (화) 00:00, 수정 2011.08.16 (화) 10:30 
http://www.segye.com/Articles/News/Society/Article.asp?aid=20110816000100&ctg1=01&ctg2=&subctg1=01&subctg2=&cid=0101080100000  







염전 명칭은 취재진이 방문한 순서에 따라 알파벳으로 표현함.

바닷물과 햇볕, 바람이 어우러져 만들어 내는 천일염. 자연의 결정체라서 깨끗하고 안전할 것으로만 여겨온 소비자들의 믿음이 산산조각나고 말았다. 일부 염전에서 제초제와 살충제 등 농약을 치는 사실이 확인됐다. ‘녹색 악마’로 불리는 ‘그라목손’과 유엔이 각국에 사용금지를 권고한 ‘지오릭스’도 포함돼 있다. 염전에서는 수십 년간 관행적으로 농약을 사용해 왔으나 관계 당국은 실태조차 파악하지 못하고 있다. 그러다 보니 잔류농약 검사 대상에서 빠져 있고 허용 기준도 마련돼 있지 않다.


세계일보 취재팀이 7월26일부터 29일까지 전남 해남군과 신안군, 영광군의 염전 8곳을 찾아 취재한 결과 8곳 모두에서 농약을 친 흔적을 확인했다. 염전 8곳 모두에서 쓰고 버린 것으로 보이는 농약병과 농약봉지가 발견됐다. 병과 봉지가 발견된 농약은 제초제인 ‘그라목손안티온’과 ‘풀방패’, 살충제인 ‘스미치온’과 ‘지오릭스’, ‘충모리’ 등 10가지 제품이다.


염전 중에서도 농약 살포 흔적이 집중적으로 발견된 곳은 바닷물을 증발시키는 1차 증발지(난치)와 주변 둑, 2차 증발지(누태) 일부 주변이었다. 7월 말이면 한해살이풀인 함초(鹹草)가 무성하게 자라 초록빛이어야 할 염전은 검붉게 변해 있었다. 염전 주변에 서식하는 게와 소라, 조개, 물고기도 집단 폐사해 수생생물을 찾아보기 힘들었다. 일부 염전 창고에서는 쓰다 남은 농약 상자, 등에 지는 농약 분무기, 모터로 살포하는 고속분무기가 발견됐다.


소금을 만드는 과정에서 왜 농약을 치는 것일까. 제초제는 염전에 그늘을 만들어 소금 생산에 차질을 주는 함초를 말려 죽이기 위해서다. 살충제는 염전에 구멍을 내 바닷물이 새어나가게 하는 게를 없애려고 친다. 한 주민은 “함초 싹이 자라는 6월과 가장 무성한 8월에 농약을 친다는 건 염전 주변 사람이라면 다 안다”며 “농약 치는 걸 외부에 보이지 않으려고 오전 일찍 작업을 한다”고 전했다.


염전의 농약 사용에 대한 당국의 관리감독은 전무한 실정이다. 염관리법에는 소금에 비소 등 중금속이 들어있는지를 검사하도록 하는 규정이 있을 뿐이다. 염전에서 농약을 칠 것이라고 미처 생각하지 못해 농약 기준을 만들지 않은 탓이다. 2008년 소금의 분류가 광물에서 식품으로 바뀌었으나 농약관리법이나 식품위생법의 적용 대상에서도 제외돼 왔다.


농림수산식품부는 취재가 시작되고 나서야 이 사실을 파악했다고 한다. 농림부 관계자는 15일 “취재 요청을 받고서 염전하는 사람들에게 물어봤더니 함초를 없애려고 일부 염전에서 농약을 뿌린다는 사실을 확인했다”면서 “곧 실태 조사에 나서겠다”고 밝혔다.


전문가들은 염전에서 농약을 쓴다고 해서 바로 국민 건강이 위협받는 건 아니지만 사용 및 잔류농약 기준을 만들어 엄격히 통제할 필요가 있다고 지적했다. 서울대 농업생명과학대 김정한 교수는 “염전에서 농약을 친다는 사실은 충격적”이라며 “소금도 다른 농산물처럼 품질관리 규정을 만들어 적용해야 한다”고 말했다.


특별기획취재팀= 박희준·신진호·조현일·김채연 기자

=======================


서·남해안 천일염 생산 실태<세계일보>


  • 입력 2011.08.16 (화) 02:08

염전업자 골칫거리 함초 알고보면 약초<세계일보>


  • 입력 2011.08.16 (화) 02:09

[사진] ‘농약 염전’서 생산한 천일염<세계일보>


  • 입력 2011.08.16 (화) 02:16, 수정 2011.08.16 (화) 09:36

염전 곳곳에 농약병… 물고기 수천마리 죽은 채 ‘둥둥’<세계일보>


  • 입력 2011.08.16 (화) 02:04, 수정 2011.08.16 (화) 09:24



]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=3024/feed 0 [GMO] 미국에서 유전자조작 작물 도입 후 13년간 농약 사용 분석 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1642 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1642#comments Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:22:26 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1642 농약 사용에 관한 유전자조작 작물의 영향 (미국유기농센터의 연구결과)

유전자조작 옥수수, 콩, 면화 등 유전자조작(GM) 작물이 미국에 처음으로 상업적으로 도입된 1996년부터 2008년까지 13년 동안 농약사용에 어떤 영향을 미쳤는지에 대해 미 농무부(USDA) 자료를 근거로 실증적으로 분석한 연구결과입니다.

저자는 제초제 사용량이 엄청나게 늘어남에 따라 살충제 사용량이 줄어들었는데… 그 원인은 유전자조작 옥수수, 콩, 면화 등 유전자조작(GM) 작물때문이라고 분석하고 있습니다.

제초제 사용량의 증가는 제초제 내성 잡초의 출현을 불러왔습니다. 농업분야는 농약의 독성 공해 문제뿐만 아니라 기후변화와 세계인구 증가라는 2개의 도전에 직면해 있습니다.

유전자조작 산업(생명공학산업)은 이러한 문제를 해결할 수 있다고 광고하고 있습니다. 그들은 유전자조작 곡물이 농약사용량을 감소시킬 것이라고 약속한 바 있기도 합니다.

저자는 우리가 유전자조작 산업계의 이러한 광고와 약속을 문제의 해결책으로 수용하기 전에 이들의 처음 약속에 관한 기록들을 추적하여 냉정하게 데이터에 근거한 평가를 해봐야 한다고 주장합니다.

유전자조작(GM) 작물은 미국에 처음으로 상업적으로 도입된 1996년부터 2008년까지 13년 동안 3억1840만 파운드의 농약을  사용함으로써 제조체 내성 및 Bt 종자를 사용하지 않은 비유전자조작 작물과 비교해 볼 때  엄청나게 많은 농약을 사용했습니다.

Bt 옥수수와 면화는 지난 13년 동안 6420만 파운드의 살충제 사용을 감소시켰습니다. 그러나 제초제 내성 잡초들로 인해서 지난 13년 동안 3억 8260만 파운드의 제초제 사용량이 증가했습니다.

게다가 최근 GM 작물로 인한 제초제 사용량은 가파르게 상승하고 있습니다. 특히 옥수수, 콩, 면화 등 3가지 작물 경작에 사용된 제초제 사용량은 2007년과 2008년 경작년도에 48%나 증가했습니다. 제초제 내성 잡초들로 인한 제초제 사용량은 2007년과 2008년 경작년도에 31.4%나 증가했습니다.

유전자조작 작물은 상업적 도입 최초 3년간(1996~1998년)은 농약 사용량이 1996년 1.2%, 1997년 2.3%, 1998년  2.3%로 감소했습니다. 그러나 농약사용량은 2007년 20%, 2008년 27% 증가했습니다. 

이렇게 일반작물에 비해 유전자조작 작물의 농약사용량이 엄청나게 증가한 이유는 글리포세이트(glyphosate) 내성 잡초가 급격하게 많이 출현했기 때문입니다.

미국 농무부의 자료에 따르면,  유전자조작 작물이 재배되기 시작한 1996년 이후 글리포세이트(glyphosate) 사용량이 면화농장에서 3배씩, 콩농장에서 2배씩, 옥수수농장에서 39%씩 증가했습니다.(글리포세이트는  국내에서도 근사미,근자비,라운드업,글라신골드 성보글라신 등 다양한 명칭으로 상품화되어 판매되고 있으며, 몬산토에서 생산하는 대표적 농약이기도 합니다)

해마다 글리포세이트 사용량은 평균적으로 면화에서 18.2%, 콩에서 9.8%, 그리고 옥수수에서 4.3%씩 증가했습니다.

이러한 상태에서는 유전자조작 작물을 재배하는 미국의 농가의 입장에서도 경제적 이윤을 내기 힘들 것이라고 합니다. 왜냐하면 몬산토, 카길, 다우, 신젠타 등 유전자조작 기업은 유전자조작 종자를 로열티를 붙인 비싼 가격으로 판매하고 있으며, GM 종자와 패키지로 농약까지 판매하고 있기 때문에 수지타산을 맞추기가 어렵다는 분석입니다.

유전자조작 기업들은 비싼 특허종자를 판매하는 명분으로 농약사용량을 줄여서 재배농가가 더 많은 경제적 이윤을 획득하게 될 것이라고 홍보했었는데… 결국 이러한 홍보가 사실이 아니었다는 연구결과가 나왔다고 해석해야 할 것 같습니다.

=====================

Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years
November 2009
by Charles Benbrook

Accessing the report
The full report – pdf (3.68 MBs, 69 pages)
Executive Summary – pdf (1.44 MBs, 15 pages)
Supplemental Tables – pdf

Extracts collected and summarized by GMWatch

출처 : http://www.gmwatch.org/component/content/article/11696-cherry-picking-new-report-on-gm-and-pesticides
 
On the report’s purpose

This report explores the impact of the adoption of GM corn, soybean, and cotton on pesticide use in the United States, drawing principally on data from the US Department of Agriculture. The most striking finding is that GM crops have been responsible for an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the U.S. over the first 13 years of commercial use of GM crops (1996-2008).
 
This dramatic increase in the volume of herbicides applied swamps the decrease in insecticide use attributable to GM corn and cotton, making the overall chemical footprint of today’s GM crops decidedly negative. The report identifies, and discusses in detail, the primary cause of the increase — the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds.
 
The steep rise in the pounds of herbicides applied with respect to most GM crop acres is not news to farmers. Weed control is now widely acknowledged as a serious management problem within GM cropping systems. Farmers and weed scientists across the heartland and cotton belt are now struggling to devise affordable and eff ective strategies to deal with the resistant weeds emerging in the wake of herbicide-tolerant crops.
 
But skyrocketing herbicide use is news to the public at large, which still harbors the illusion, fed by misleading industry claims and advertising, that biotechnology crops are reducing pesticide use.
 
In addition to toxic pollution from pesticides, agriculture faces the twin challenges of climate change and burgeoning world populations. The biotechnology industry’s current advertising campaigns promise to solve those problems, just as the industry once promised to reduce the chemical footprint of agriculture. Before we embrace GM crops as solution to these new challenges, we need a sober, data-driven appraisal of its track record on earlier pledges.
 
While the USDA continued to collect farm-level data on pesticide applications during most of the 13 years covered in this report, the Department has been essentially silent on the impacts of GM crops on pesticide use for almost a decade. This is why this report by Dr. Charles Benbrook was commissioned.
 
On the impacts of GM crops on pesticide use
 
GM crops have increased overall pesticide use by 318.4 million pounds over the first 13 years of commercial use, compared to the amount of pesticide likely to have been applied in the absence of HT (herbicide tolerant) and Bt seeds.
 
Bt corn and cotton have delivered consistent reductions in insecticide use totaling 64.2 million pounds over the 13 years. HT crops have increased herbicide use by a total of 382.6 million pounds over 13 years. HT soybeans increased herbicide use by 351 pounds (about 0.55 pound per acre), accounting for 92% of the total increase in herbicide use across the three HT crops.
 
Recently herbicide use on GM acres has veered sharply upward. Crop years 2007 and 2008 accounted for 46% of the increase in herbicide use over 13 years across the three HT crops (corn, soy and cotton). Herbicide use on HT crops rose a remarkable 31.4% from 2007 to 2008.
 
GM crops reduced overall pesticide use in the first three years of commercial introduction (1996-1998) by 1.2%, 2.3%, and 2.3% per year, but increased pesticide use by 20% in 2007 and by 27% in 2008.
 
Two major factors are driving the trend toward an increase in the pounds of herbicides used to control weeds on an acre planted to HT seeds, in comparison to conventional seeds:
*The emergence and rapid spread of weeds resistant to glyphosate, and
*Reductions in the application of herbicides applied on non-GM crop acres.
 
USDA NASS data show that since 1996, the glyphosate rate of application per crop year has tripled on cotton farms, doubled in the case of soybeans, and risen 39% on corn. The average annual increase in the pounds of glyphosate applied to cotton,
soybeans, and corn has been 18.2%, 9.8%, and 4.3%, respectively, since HT crops were introduced.
 
HT crops account for the lion’s share of total GM trait acreage – 72% over the first 13 years of commercial use and around three-quarters in most years. HT soybeans account for almost one-half of all GM trait acres. This is why HT soybeans are so important in terms of the overall impact of GM crops on the pounds of pesticides applied.
 
On the impact of Bt crops on pesticide use
 
The methodologies used by USDA to project pesticide use on conventional and GM-crop acres require a number of assumptions and projections, which may not be true.
 
1. One assumption is that Bt crop growers apply no chemical insecticides for the pests targeted by these traits, including cotton rootworm. But University of Illinois entomologists have documented spotty performance of Bt corn for Corn Root Worm control, especially under high population pressure, and reported that some growers have applied soil insecticides on Bt corn acres. So this assumption overstates the benefits of Bt technology regarding reducing insecticides.
 
2. Another assumption is that Bt corn planted for European Corn Borer and Southwestern Corn Borer can be credited with displacement of all the pounds of organophosphate or synthetic pyrethroid insecticides that would be applied to corn without the Bt trait. This assumption would overstate the benefits of the Bt technology regarding reducing insecticides, since a portion of most of these insecticides are applied by farmers for the control of other insects, including the Corn Root Worm.
 
3. A third assumption is that some portion of the acres planted to Bt corn displace insecticides. But before the commercial availability of Bt corn seed, some farmers were not treating their fields with insecticides. Historically, only around 35% of corn acres have been treated each year with an insecticide for control of the European Corn Borer, Southwestern Corn Borer, Corn Root Worm, and other insect pests. So this assumption overstates the benefits of Bt technology regarding reducing insecticides.
 
4. A fourth assumption is that the Bt toxins manufactured within the cells of Bt crops do not count as insecticides “applied” on Bt-crop acres. Opinions differ among experts on whether it is appropriate to count Bt toxins manufactured inside GM plants as equivalent to a Bt liquid insecticide sprayed on the outside of the plant.
 
One factor to bear in mind when considering this question is that liquid sprays expose pest populations to short-lived selection pressure, thereby reducing the risk of resistance. Bt liquid sprays are applied only when and as needed, consistent with the core principles of integrated pest management (IPM).
 
Bt plants, however, produce the toxin continuously during the growing season, not just when needed, and in nearly all plant tissues, not just where the toxins are needed to control attacking insects. In a year with low pest pressure, farmers can decide not to spray insecticides on a corn field, but they cannot stop Bt hybrids from manufacturing Bt toxins in nearly all plant cells.
  
On glyphosate-resistant weeds
 
Glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds were practically unknown before the introduction of RR crops in 1996. Today, nine or more GR weeds collectively infest millions of acres of U.S. cropland. Thousands of fields harbor two or more resistant weeds. The South is most heavily impacted, though resistant weeds are rapidly emerging in the Midwest, and as far north as Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Farmers can respond to resistant weeds on acres planted to HT crops in five ways:
*Applying additional herbicide active ingredients,
*Increasing herbicide application rates,
*Making multiple applications of herbicides previously sprayed only once,
*Through greater reliance on tillage for weed control, and
*By manual weeding.
In the period covered by this report, the first three of the above five responses have been by far the most common, and each increases the pounds of herbicides applied on HT crop acres.
 
GR pigweed (Palmer amaranth) has spread dramatically across the South since the first resistant populations were confirmed in 2005, and already poses a major threat to U.S. cotton production. Some infestations are so severe that cotton farmers have been forced to abandon cropland, or resort to the preindustrial practice of “chopping cotton” (hoeing weeds by hand).
 
GR weeds are not only driving increases in the use of glyphosate, but also the increased use of more toxic herbicides, including paraquat and 2,4-D, one component of the Vietnam War defoliant, Agent Orange.
 
On how GR weed problems will impact health and the environment
 
Growing reliance on older, higher-risk herbicides for management of resistant weeds on HT crop acres is now inevitable in the foreseeable future and will markedly deepen the environmental and public health footprint of weed management on over 100 million acres of U.S. cropland. This footprint will both deepen and grow more diverse, encompassing heightened risk of birth defects and other reproductive problems, more severe impacts on aquatic ecosystems, and more frequent instances of herbicide-driven damage to nearby crops and plants.
 
On the road ahead for GM crops
 
Crop year 2009 will probably mark several tipping points for RR crops. The acres planted to HT soybeans fell 1% from the year before, and will likely fall by a few additional percentage points in 2010. Farmer demand for conventional soybeans is outstripping supply in several states, and universities and regional seed companies are working together to close the gap. Reasons given by farmers for turning away from the RR system include the cost and challenges inherent in dealing with GR weeds, the sharply increasing price of RR seeds, premium prices offered for non-GM soybeans, the poorer than expected and promised yield performance of RR 2 soybeans in 2009, and the ability of farmers to save and replant conventional seeds (a traditional practice made illegal with the purchase of HT/RR seeds).
 
In regions where farmers are combating resistant weeds, university experts are projecting increases of up to $80 per acre in costs associated with HT crops in 2010. This increase represents a remarkable 28% of soybean income per acre over operating costs.
 
The economic picture dramatically darkens for farmers combating resistant weeds under average soybean yields (36 bushels) and market prices ($6.50 per bushel). Such average conditions would generate about $234 in gross income per acre. The estimated $80 increase in 2010 costs per acre of HT soybeans would then account for one-third of gross income per acre, and total cash operating costs would exceed $200 per acre, leaving just $34 to cover land, labor, management, debt, and all other fixed costs. Such a scenario leaves little or no room for profit at the farm level.
 
Monsanto and Syngenta are now offering to pay farmers rebates on the order of $12 per acre to spray herbicides that work through a mode of action different from glyphosate. Monsanto’s program will even pay farmers to purchase herbicides sold by competitors, a sign of how seriously Monsanto now views the threat posed by resistance to its own product.
 
While corn, soybean, and cotton farmers view the spread of resistant weeds as a slow moving train wreck eroding their bottom line, the seed and pesticide industry sees new market opportunities and profit potential arising in the wake of resistant weeds. A large portion of industry R&D investments are going into the development of crops that will either withstand higher rates of glyphosate applications, or tolerate applications of additional herbicides, or both. In short, the industry’s response is more of the same.
 
One major biotech company has applied for and received a patent covering HT crops that can be directly sprayed with herbicide products falling within seven or more different chemical families.

]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1642/feed 0 [농약/살충제] 2011년 이후 고독성 농약 퇴출될 듯 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1407 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1407#comments Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:46:44 +0000 건강과대안 http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1407

2011년 이후 고독성 농약 퇴출될 듯


출처 : 연합뉴스 2009/11/16 07:11 송고


 
(서울=연합뉴스) 정성호 기자 = 2011년 이후에는 독성이 강한 고(高)독성 농약이 퇴출될 것으로 보인다.


   16일 농림수산식품부와 농촌진흥청에 따르면 정부는 농약 제조업체와 협의해 2011년 이후에는 고독성 농약을 시장에 내놓지 않기로 했다.


   농약은 독성의 강도에 따라 ‘맹독성-고독성-보통독성-저독성’ 등 4단계로 분류되는데 현재 등록된 1천300여개 농약 품목 중 맹독성은 한 종류도 없고, 고독성은 15종류다.


   고독성 농약은 짧은 시간 동안 농약을 살포하기만 해도 그 과정에서 흡입한 농약으로 중독될 수 있는 농약을 말한다. DDVP, EPN 등이 해당된다.


   다만 전체 농약 중 사용량을 기준으로 한 고독성 농약의 비중은 3∼4%로 많지 않다. 대부분은 저독성 농약이다.


   하지만 고독성 농약은 음독이나 중독으로 인한 사고를 일으키는 주범이다.


   정부는 15종의 고독성 농약 가운데 농수산물 검역 과정에서 쓰이는 훈증제 형태의 농약과 산림 방제용 농약 등 3종을 제외한 12종은 2011년 이후 생산되지 않도록 한다는 방침이다.


   농촌진흥청 관계자는 “업계들과 협의해 고독성 농약은 2012년부터 유통되지 않도록 하기로 했다”며 “업계도 자율적으로 여기에 동참하고 있다”고 말했다.


   정부는 또 농촌에서 자살 기도에 가장 흔하게 쓰이는 제초제인 파라쿼트(일명 그라목손)에 대한 관리를 강화하는 방안도 마련하기로 했다. 그라목손은 독성 분류상 보통독성에 속하지만 농촌 자살에 쓰이는 농약의 70∼80%를 차지하는 것으로 추정돼 ‘녹색 악마’로도 불린다.


   농약은 잡초나 병충해 등의 제거를 위해 불가피하지만 농업인의 중독 사고나 고의적.우발적 음용에 따른 사망.장애 같은 부작용을 낳고 있다. 지하수나 농업용수 등의 오염, 토양 오염, 농산물의 잔류 농약 등도 문제다.


   정부는 이에 따라 미생물이나 천연제재를 사용한 친환경 농약의 사용을 확대하는 정책도 추진하고 있다.


   농촌진흥청 관계자는 “고독성 농약과 그라목손을 포함해 앞으로 3년 이후에는 농약으로 인한 음독.중독 사고가 생기지 않을 수준으로 농약에 대한 관리를 강화할 것”이라고 말했다.


   sisyphe@yna.co.kr


============================

파라콰트


출처 : http://enc.daum.net/dic100/contents.do?query1=10XXXX9421


파라콰트(Paraquat)는 농약 제초제(除草劑)의 일종이다. 그라목손 또는 그라목숀(Gramoxone)으로도 알려져 있으며, 독성이 매우 강하여 유럽이나 미국에서는 이미 판매가 금지되어 있고, 일본에서는 1/10 정도로 희석하여 사용하도록 하고 있다. 또한 토양에서의 반감기가 578일에 이르는 것으로 조사되어 있다.[1]


역사


파라콰트는 1961년 Imperial Chemical Industries(현재는 신젠타(Syngenta) 사) 사에 의해 상업적 목적으로 최초로 생산되었고, 가장 널리 사용되었던 제초제이다. EU는 2004년 파라콰트의 사용을 승인하였으나, 스웨덴, 오스트리아, 핀란드가 사용을 승인한 EU 위원회를 제소, 2007년 7월 11일 EU법원은 파라콰트의 사용승인을 취소하였다.[2]



독성


이 농약 제초제는 먹으면 즉사하는 것은 물론이고 피부에 닿아도 흡수가 매우 빨라 죽게 된다. 파라콰트가 인체에 들어가게 되면 인체 각 장기를 섬유화시켜 기능을 못하게 하여 사망하게 한다. 경구 투여 기준으로 2-4시간 후에 최고 농도에 달하게 되며 특히 신장과 폐에 집중적으로 퍼져 활성 산소로 변화하는데, 이는 지방의 산화 작용, 세포 기능의 저하, 세포막의 변형 등을 일으켜 호흡곤란으로 사망하게 된다. 이 농약은 산소와 친화성이 강하므로 산소가 많은 폐가 제일 먼저 섬유화되어 뻣뻣하여 져 호흡을 못해 사망하게 된다. 그러므로 산소 투여는 환자를 빨리 사망하게 한다. 산소 투여는 일반적으로 금기이다. 그러나 경험 많은 의사라면 환자의 상태에 따라 산소 투여를 할 수도 있다. 사실상 치료약은 없다. 혹시 마셔도 혈액이나 소변에 검출되지 않을 정도의 양이라면 살 수 있는 경우도 있으나 대부분 1-2주 내에 사망한다. 체력이 좋은 젊은 사람은 한 달 정도 사는 경우도 있으나 노인이라면 수시간 내에 사망할 수도 있을 만큼 맹독성이다. 치료로서는 Fuller’s earth로 위세척을 하고 위(胃)에 잔류시키는 방법, 복막 투석, 혹은 비타민 제제를 사용하기도 하나, 환자의 생사(生死)는 마신 양에 절대적으로 달려 있다. 한 모금 이상 마셨다면 거의 생존은 불가능하다.


각주



  1. ↑ 독성농약 ‘파라쿼트‘, 논.밭에 그대로 축적, 문화일보, 1999-04-06
  2. ↑ COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES PRESS RELEASE No° 45/07

]]> http://www.chsc.or.kr/?post_type=reference&p=1407/feed 0