Bayer and Syngenta hid toxicity studies from the European authorities that they did deliver to the United States
Two agrochemical giants are in the crosshairs. The German Bayer and the Swiss Syngenta could have been hiding from the European Union (EU) studies that reveal toxic effects on brain development of some of the pesticides what do they make. That at least reveals a recent scientific investigation that has just been published in the journal ‘Environmental Health’.
At the moment, the European Parliament has already demanded a hearing with those responsible for both companies to demand explanations. Both Bayer and Syngenta maintain that they have met all regulatory requirements.
The research focused on 35 studies conducted between 1993 and 2005 on developmental neurotoxicity. Surprisingly, all those studies were submitted to the US Environmental Protection Agency, but nine of them were not delivered to the EUallegedly contravening what is required by current legislation.
The worst part of the case is that in seven of these nine studies, the researchers who have discovered the concealment identified in the pesticides analyzed actual or potential regulatory impacts on brain development.
The studies that never made it to the EU were conducted on pregnant rats, and sought to test whether offspring exposed to the compounds suffered from developmental problems. In seven cases it was observed decreased weight gain, delayed sexual maturation, and impaired motor activityamong other side effects.
Of the nine pesticide compounds, four have already been withdrawn from the EU market, while another four are currently under review..
protect human health
The authors of the investigation that points to Bayer and Syngenta indicate that not delivering the studies to the community authorities is a “recurring phenomenon“, which “may introduce bias into the regulatory risk assessment” and therefore “make it difficult for authorities to reliably seek a high level of protection of human health as required by law.”
“Without full access to all the toxicity studies carried out, there can be no reliable evaluation of the safety of pesticides by the EU authorities,” the researchers note. Hence, they suggest to the EU authorities that they cross-check their data sets with their counterparts in other jurisdictions, especially the United States.
“Applications for pesticide approval should be checked against lists of studies conducted at test facilities operating under Good Laboratory Practices (GLP), to ensure that all studies have been submitted to authorities,” the researchers note.
They also propose that amend existing rules so that future studies are commissioned by authorities instead of companies. “It is absolutely necessary to remove the responsibility for testing chemicals from producers and return that responsibility to the authorities,” they stress.
“This would ensure knowledge by the authorities of the existing studies and would prevent the economic interest of the company from influencing the design, performance, reporting and dissemination of the studies“, they add.
Rules or practices also need to be reviewed, according to the researchers, to ensure that non-disclosure of toxicity studies carries “significant legal risk for pesticide companies,” in the form of fines and other penalties. “There must be legal and serious consequences for companies if they do not comply with the law“, they stand out.
The companies deny the allegations.
In the EU, the evaluation of the safety of plant protection products is based to a large extent on toxicity studies commissioned by the companies that produce them. The law requires that all studies carried out be included in the file presented to the authorities when the approval or renewal of the active substance is requested.
Bayer and Syngenta, responsible for three undelivered studies each, rejected the conclusions of the Swedish scientists’ research. The German company assures that it “always” presented the studies required at all times by community standardswhich have changed over time,
Syngenta, for its part, stressed that it complied with all the data requests required in the EU and Switzerlandand that the studies now in question were conducted on an adjunctive basis “to comply with United States regulatory guidelines.”
Meanwhile, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has noted that stricter legislation in this area came into force in the EU two years ago, requiring companies to share “all safety studies” on their products.
Although studies in rats are not directly applicable to humans, the focus of research on effects on brain development is protect people from chemicals that could affect their attention span, concentration, coordination, learning, memory, and IQ. “This is about protecting our children’s brains,” Ruden stresses.
Pesticides are used in agriculture to protect crops from weeds, insect pests, and diseases. Since most active substances used for this purpose are designed to be toxic to living organisms, their approval is highly regulated and involves extensive testing for efficacy, toxicity, and ecotoxicity.
Reference report: https://phys.org/news/2023-06-firms-withheld-pesticide-toxicity-eu.html
…….
Contact of the Environment section: [email protected]