Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Pesticides poison 6,000 Canadians a year, report says

JOANNA SMITH

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 8:02 AM EDT 21/06/07

Suzuki Foundation calls on Ottawa to create a national database to accurately record the number of poisonings ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: New way of looking at the world: perfect lawns give me the creeps.
  2. Al Suba from Trenton, Canada writes: To make all those assumptions and accusations based on a self-admitted 'Information about the severity of symptoms or method of exposure was also unavailable', goes well beyond a quantum leaping to conclusions. Suzuki's assertions are once again at best, specious, and should not have been published by a purportedly reputable national newspaper.
  3. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Canada writes: Pesticides are also the cause of many miscarriages, especially early on. So a Pro-Lifer who sprays his lawn is a hypocrite, or worse.
  4. Michael Powers from Canada writes: Another questionable report from the David Suzuki Foundation. I suspect that they left out information that did not agree with their view and enhanced some that did. They have an agenda and will always slant their reports to that end. It is our responsibility to make sure that we understand where they are coming from and discount it accordingly. Just don't panic
  5. A J from somewhere, Canada writes: Al, whatever you think of Suzuki should be second to the point of the article. There are companies benefitting from spraying poison on large surface areas (lawns) around the houses people live in and where children play. Whether or not there are drinking wells involved.

    Nutri-lawn sprayed that poison on my front lawn a few years ago while I was at work. Needless to say I was p!ssed. They claimed a mistaken address and no attempt was made to talk to the homeowner before spraying their poison.

    I hope these companies are forced out of existence. More frustrating is the fact that half the city councellors here (large city) so far SUPPORT this poisoning.

    A J
  6. Robert Dryburgh from Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada writes: I don’t believe Suzuki or his organization. Their reports appear to be heavily slanted and taken as gospel by the media. I don’t recall ever reading or viewing opposing views to these “reports”
  7. Michael Powers from Canada writes: I remember a couple of years ago, a company in Ottawa, sprayed a lawn by mistake. The young, very upset couple was interviewed by the Ottawa Citizen. They demanded that the lawn company replace all of the earth on that lawn - I don't think that happened.
    The big laugh was that the interview was carried out on their front lawn and the photo showed them standing on the treated grass in their bare feet. I don't think they got anything other than an apology.
  8. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Michael: I remember that article! I pointed to friends that irony that here is a couple SOOOO concerned about having pesticides thrown on their lawn while they are standing on it in their bare feet!

    My issue with the pesticide ban is the BAN part. I really think people are way too eager to give up control of their lives to the Government.
  9. C J from Canada writes: In response to Michael Powers:

    I find it quite hilarious that you are worried about an “agenda&8221; that is concerned about your health and environment. How is an organization such as this a threat to anyone? Why would you be so eager to discount their findings? I suppose you could argue that a report such as this may have an adverse affect on the pesticide industry; however, if organizations like the David Suzuki foundation don&8217;t make an attempt to alert us of health and environmental hazzards then I don&8217;t think we will have to worry much about the profitability of the pesticide industry. So, &8220;just don&8217;t panic&8221; Michael, I don&8217;t think the DS Foundation will do you any real harm.
  10. D K from Canada writes: Doesn't mean they were exposed by someone treating their lawn. Number of poisonings does not equal how exposed.
  11. S B from Toronto, Canada writes: i don't know why people use lawm treatments. when you go to the suburbs there is this twisted obsession with the lawn and how green it is. it reminds me of a 1950's mentality that has been carried forward. it has a lot to do with people feeling that how your lawn looks says about you -- which is just plain weird. a ban is what is needed. in theory we vote in government to create laws that protect us. why is that such a strange idea to people like Harper is Da Man types (usu. Conservative)? The irony is, these are the same people that want to protect us all from gay marriage and the further 'encroachment' of secularism. Worry about things that are slowly killing us than things that aren't people!
  12. Mark H from Columbus, IN, United States writes: 'How do you know David Suzuki is being misleading?'

    'His lips are moving.'

    This radical environmentalism has got to stop. Org's like this are a threat, because if enough nuts line up behind them, their stupid assertions might actually become law, when there's no good reason. The greenies don't have the right to change my way of life, the same way some rabid f*ck-the-Earch corporation doesn't.
  13. S B from Toronto, Canada writes: Mark H: The rapib f
  14. Ruth Wright from Canada writes: Maybe instead of touting half-cocked comments re pesticide 'dangers' it's time to check out how many people die from medically-prescribed-drug reactions. Everyone knows that children and adults are over-prescribed medications. Side effects, including death are so very common. Michael Powers is right - this is another questionable report from the DSF !!
  15. S B from Toronto, Canada writes: ruth: you're so right. there CAN be only one thing wrong that we should focus on at once. wow, you're so smart.
  16. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Hey S B: Try noting the '?' in my name...It's called a QUESTION MARK. This would infer that my confidence in Harper is eroding somewhat.

    My God...Just using the word 'Harper' gets you extremists in a lather doesn't it. Try getting out of your apartment building once in a while won't you?
  17. jens gessner from Canada writes: I have been using plain white vinegar the same way I used to apply Round-up. It does the job.
  18. R M from Ottawa, Canada writes: DSF can sensationalize things, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. How about all the people who have lived near the Experimental Farm in Ottawa (and other similar places) exposed to pesticides and other agricultural chemicals? The incidences of Parkinson's Disease and other debilitating conditions in these folks is way higher than normal, and NOTHING has been done to directly address what has taken place and compensate these people. Just a big cover-up being ignored - now here is a good place for a federal inquiry. Oh, the MP's just left early for vacation (I mean work in their home ridings)....
  19. paul sheridan from Hawkestone, ON, Canada writes: Nice report. They don't have figures for Manitoba and the Territories. so they guessed. Agriculture is the biggest user of pesticides and herbicides. That's why the food grown in this country is plentiful and economical. Priorities people. Maybe the Suzuki foundation could turn it's attention to sugar, trans fats, alcohol and tobacco.
  20. Aaron Treacher from vancouver, Canada writes: Ah yes..
    David Susuki is making up poisoning reports.
    You people are jackasses.
    By the way.. the vast majority of pesticide poisonings are going to be from people mishandling them or from children playing with the products. Here is a hint for you.. even if warfarrin isn't acutely toxic to you its not a good idea to let your kids eat the stuff.
  21. Alan Wong from Richmond Hill, Canada writes: "Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: ...

    My God...Just using the word 'Harper' gets you extremists in a lather doesn't it. Try getting out of your apartment building once in a while won't you? "

    From where I'm standing, you're all extremists to me. Now excuse me, as I give my daily offering of bananas and cucumbers in my shrine for Freud. May he help us overcome our obsession with polidics.
  22. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is de man: Man, if you think concern about pesticides is giving up control of one's life to government, then your logic is just as funny as that of the couple standing bare feet on a pesticide-sprayed lawn and complaining about it.
  23. Aumharan G from Canada writes: All the posters who say David Suzuki is being misleading do all of us a favour by either locking yourself in your garage with your 8CYL Suburban running or take some of that "harmless" pesticides and be sure to mix it in with your bathing and drinking water and provide it to your kids.
  24. S B from Toronto, Canada writes: Harper is Da Man? I assumed that you're not a die hard Conservative, but the fear of the nanny state is always bestowed by conservatives. I do know some, ya know, so there's where I construed your political bent.

    It's almost as if it doesn't matter what the topic, it's always the same fear and I find truthiness to be a tiring thing.
  25. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Oh yes Aaron...I just gave my kid a 5L bag of the stuff last night as a birthday present! He just loves how the little white granules "pop" when he crunches them.

    Jens...Really? See, now that is a productive comment. I'll give it a try for fun. Nobody here is going to protest me using Vinegar on a walkway now, right? Oh who am I kidding...this is the G&M forum after all.
  26. S B from Toronto, Canada writes: p.s. calling someone an extremist for wanting get rid of chemicals and help the environment also tends to be a mark of a right winger.
  27. Aumharan G from Canada writes: Actually calling someone an extremist to help out other humans by getting rid of chemicals and help with the environment doesn't tend to be the mark of the right wing...IT IS the right wing.

    I mean they believe god is going to save us all and take care of us so it's all good we can continue to destroy everything in sight because hey birth defects, asthma, lead poisoning are all acts of Satan right? God fordid they should sacrifice their H2 Hummer, and Green lawns.
  28. lad lladie from Canada writes: Al Suba: If you read the article again you might find out why " the information on the severity of the symptoms and method of exposure were unavailable." Once you find out then you should ask yourself why is it hard to get that kind of information.
  29. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: Not all pesticides are chemicals, just as not all chemicals are pesticides. There are natural pesticides, such as Bacillus Thuringiensis or BT, which when coated so it will pass into the stomach of larvae to bypass the acid in their ingestive system will kill them.
    LESSON ONE: Not all pesticides are bad.
    There are natural substances that when taken in too great quantities will kill humans, e.g. water, remember the case in California this past year where a woman in order to win a contest, drank so much water that she died?
    LESSON TWO: It isn't the substance that will kill you, it's the dosage.
    In the interest of bio-diversity it is likely better to have lawns that become habitats for native species, however, because of all the travelling and shipping humans do, native species often succumb to invasive foreign species.
    LESSON THREE: We may wind up with a lot of Purple Loosestrife instead of Thistles, Deadly Nightshade, Crabgrass and Bindweed. Happy gardening.
  30. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Lad,

    My main issue is with people who think the solution to every problem in the world is through the implementation of a BAN. It's an easy word to throw around, yet in many cases it is impossible to enforce. Additionally, at what point will it become the list of things ALLOWED by the state is shorter than those not permitted? What's the end game? Ban everything that may cause someone, somewhere to get upset or hurt?

    I'm not going to say that bans should not exist. For instance, I think a ban on handguns is a good idea. However, banning everything from cigarette smoke outside to cologne to pesticides to idling vehicles to watering a lawn, to a list that goes on way too long is just silly and short sighted. The more unenforcable bans you put in place, the more dilluted all of them become.

    So in this case, what would you do? Have pesticide sniffing dogs? Train a special task force whos only mission is to test lawn Ph levels? How would you prove a neighbour used pesticides? His lawn too green is the tip off? x amount of weeds within a square yard? A snitch line you can call to report your neighbour? Where does it end?

    Anyways...I haven't used the stuff in about 4 years now
  31. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: The problem with a study such as the one quoted in the article is that its companion study "HOW MANY CANADIAN LIVES WERE AMELIORATED OR SAVED BY PESTICIDES?" was not done. Only after such a study is done can a rational person weigh the pros and cons of the use of pesticides or of the modification of such use.
    By not doing that study, the DSF is slanting the discussion one way, which makes the study automatically suspect and therefore useless.
    Until such a study is done any discussion of the DSF study is a waste of time and probably counter-productive.
  32. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: First you had a problem with "government", now it's the Globe and Mail. Man, I thought only lefties whined. You're not a leftie, now, are you?
  33. Seb D from Ottawa, Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: Last I checked, my pipes weren't made of lead, my insulation wasn't asbestos, and my disinfectants didn't contain mercury.

    It seems some bans do work, and are desirable.
  34. lad lladie from Canada writes: Steven Koning: I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned anything that requires that others get sick for others to be well is a non-starter.
  35. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: And how many Canadians suffer the ill effects of the residual pesticides that are allowed to be used by the countries whose food we eat but are not allowed to be used by Canadian farmers? Why is the DSF not checking that story? Got any Colgate made in China?
  36. Michael Powers from Canada writes: It is always good for a laugh when the enviromental extremists get involved. They insist that everything that they say is the truth and call anyone who disagrees with them some pretty wicked names. That is a sure way to be ignored. Perhaps if they would stop being so extreme, more people would be willing to give their ideas a second look.
    I'll continue to look after my lawn the way I see fit using legal products. They can scream and holler all they want, it is a legal product and it is my property.
  37. Kurt Eby from Ottawa, Canada writes: It's funny how the conversation on this board almost immediately focused on lawns. Read the article again, it never mentions the word 'lawn' or the word 'grass.' All it says is pesticides. Point being: "lawn fertilizers, weed killers, and all soaps and household cleaners that make 'germ killing' or 'antibacterial' claims on their labels are regulated as pesticides by the Environmental Protection Agency."
    This includes insect repellants, mold and mildew cleaners, as well as kitchen, laundry and bath disinfectants and sanitizers. For all we know, Suzuki's study includes poisonings from these products as well. Given that we keep them under our kitchen and bathroom sinks, it seems far more likely that they are causing the majority of poisonings.
    So while we get up in arms about what people are spraying on their lawns and gardens where kids and pets might play, lets think about what we are using in our houses, where kids live, sleep, eat and bathe.
    Vinegar is sounding better and better.
  38. Steven Koning from Bloomfield, ON, Canada writes: lad, what if someone only gets a little bit sick and as a result someone else does not die. Are you sitll absolutist about that?
  39. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Aumharan G:

    I love how you say "helping other humans"...This is the hallmark of the left...People NEED to be "helped" because God knows, they can't help themselves! They NEED regulation!!!!

    Secondly, a BAN is an extreme reaction to an issue. By supporting a ban, you are an extremist...How is this hard to follow?

    Third: Atheism was cool a decade ago...You missed the boat dude. By slamming God now, you just sound like a Godless wannabe NDP'er. And no, I'm not a "God fearin'" man either so don't bother attacking me on religious viewpoints.
  40. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Seb: And yet fast-food companies are now tripping over themselves to use trans fat free oil and all this without a ban...Curious isn't it?
  41. M j from Canada writes: Koning, BT is not as harmless as you suggest. The toxin does bioaccumulate. You may not eat the insect, but something else does (bird, fish, rodent) and that animal then takes the dose. If the insect dies and decays, the load goes into the soil. The prevalence of BT-modified crops in North America is also starting to cause problems, not the least of which is BT resistance, which appeared very quickly after the first BT crops were planted.

    Poison is bad. It's really that simple. If you wouldn't rinse your food in it, you probably shouldn't be spraying on the ground, where it will seep into the water table or be carried by run-off into the lake. The lake that provides your drinking water, in Toronto anyway. That's just common sense.

    Michael Powers, your 'legal' argument is asinine. It's obvious that the companies manufacturing pesticides don't care much about human costs. DDT, that old demon? Still on sale in 3rd world countries, because it's perfectly legal there. If you lived in Peru, would you use DDT in your garden, or are you too smart for that? Why do you believe that the new poison is safer than the old poison?
  42. Cheap Shots From The Cheap Seats from Zambia writes: Suzuki is right on the cutting edge. Ban pesticides. Love is wild. If you love your garden let it grow. A garden is not a putting green. Lawns look better with weeds and dandelions, unless you're playing croquet.Come out of the 19th Century. Add these 6000 to the 23,000 Canadians every year who die in hospitals due to "medical errors" and we have a national disaster on our hands. And speaking of cutting edge, with an aging population the next disaster now starting to happen in Canada is unneccesary surgery, botched surgery and uninformed non-consensual experimental surgery.
  43. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: I find interesting that you consider any ban on watering the lawn is "silly and just shortsighted". A few years ago, during a black-out due to power shortage, Harris asked people to refrain from watering lawns and wash veichles. In my neighborhood, everyone complied except one. After he finished washing his veichle, he started spraying pebbles off his driveway. Would you have approached the young man and inform him that 'we" as a community, could not afford to frivolously waste water? And if you did would you feel like the water-nazi of the neighbourhood? Or, would you have just minded your business? As far as the other bans you're talking about they represent enforcing a little common sense. Government worries me when they enact homeland security laws, where you can be picked up at any time and thrown in jail without the right to a lawyer or a phone call. Government worries me when they place cameras everywhere in the name of security, it worries me when it arrogates for itself the right to break privacy laws, when someone in a hospital setting decides to place you in seclusion and make you sleep on the floor without you knowing exactly who give the order and why, -this happens more often then you might think. And government worries me about a lot of other things much more serious than bans on cologne, smoking, or what have you.
  44. Michael Powers from Canada writes: M J from Canada - it must upset you knowing that you can't do a thing to impact how I look after my lawn. Call me names if you want but someday you might be able to afford to own (not rent) your own place. At that time, you can make your choices on what legal products to use and I won't be able to force you to change. Until then, butt out of my life.
  45. lad lladie from Canada writes: Steve: If someone gets a little sick and as a result someone does not die might be OK. But there is still a problem: who gets to define "a little sick" when it comes to being made "a little sick" by pesticides? In any event, even if it could be defined why go with an absurd product that makes people sick so others may live? Frankly, Steve, I find the argument itself somewhat absurd.
  46. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: We should all become luddites and do our own organic farming. That should appease the minority here.

    You know what is really bad for the world? Electricty. I say we should ban all forms of generation except wind and solar.

    We should also be forced to walk or bike to work. If you live more than 5 blocks from work then MOVE.

    And no more red meat. Do you have any idea how much methane a cow puts out??? Methane dispensers I tell ya.

    And eliminate China. Those guys are the source of all evil. Between population and pollution, they will kill us all.

    Happy happy Joy Joy feelings throughout!
  47. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: I find interesting that you consider any ban on watering the lawn is "silly and just shortsighted". A few years ago, during a black-out due to power shortage, Harris asked people to refrain from watering lawns and wash veichles. In my neighborhood, everyone complied except one. After he finished washing his veichle, he started spraying pebbles off his driveway. Would you have approached the young man and inform him that 'we" as a community, could not afford to frivolously waste water? And if you did would you feel like the water-nazi of the neighbourhood? Or, would you have just minded your business?

    Personally, I really don't think I would have cared. But, you can bet your bottom dollar that if I did care, I would have approched the man rather than calling by-law, or writing the editor in favour of a ban. Too many people out there are eager to reach out and impose their will on others through law than have a discussion and educate.
  48. Rick Drysdale from Sidney, Canada writes: I guess it helps to have friends in the press when you want to spread the baloney.
  49. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: Except for eliminating China (if we eliminate China then we have to eliminate Canada, since we're the worse polluters in the world per capita) those bans you talk about actually make sense. And I won't be so sure that only a minority will go for them.
  50. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper is Da Man: I did care. I didn't call or write to anyone and tried to have a discussion. He walked away and in the house. Ten minutes later his mother knocked at my door to tell me what a mean neighbour I was. But you didn't comment on the second half of the post.
  51. steve allan from Welland, Ontario, Canada writes: Indisputable facts, that's what the Suzuki Foundation is reporting. They haven't made these numbers up, they are compiled and archived on public records. Suzuki is merely making these stats available to the general public.

    You green lawn freaks are psychotic. Anyone willing to sacrifice their health and that of their children and pets for the sake of a weedless lawn is a pathetic human being.
  52. Harper is Da Man? from Ottawa, Canada writes: Lad,

    In response to the second half you mentioned...

    In short - two wrongs don't make a right. I agree with you on the homeland security and cameras...It would appear the Gov't is getting into prying into citizens lifes a bit too much for my liking. But, not to deliberately turn the tables...But, what's the big deal? If you're not doing anything wrong, why should you care.....Right? It's right up there with being in favour of a pesticide ban...they're just dandelions...why should anyone care.....Right?
  53. Frank N. Stein from Canada writes: I have to spray my lawn. When my ants/weeds get out of control, the city gives me a notice to fix the problem or they will move in and do it at a rediculous huge cost to me. I bet my lawn would be classifed as toxic waste if i ever had it tested. But the grass looks oh so nice.
  54. John Silverman from Canada writes: All I can say is - how irresponsible a person do you have to be to ignore reports based on facts just because the originator has the word "Suzuki" attached to it. Like that's got to be the most irresponsible, dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

    So just because I have a problem with Harper if he tells me the law in Canada is changing I can just ignore it? How does that make any sense?

    FACTS ARE FACTS PEOPLE! You can't hide from the truth because you don't like the source, that's what a 6 year old child does. Grow up already.
  55. Toby Maloney from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Okay, some people don't want a "ban" because that's too much government/nanny state, etc, but the biggest user of pesticides in an urban area is the government itself.

    Can we at least agree that cosmetic use of pesticides by civic and provicial governments, crown agencies, school divisions and health authorities is a stupid waste of tax money, and an imposition of some level of health risk (we may disagree on the level) upon small children and pets? Or do you libertarians agree with that use of government authority?
  56. Frustrated Taxpayer from Cape Breton, Canada writes: One of my neighbours is a lawn freak. She has it sprayed twice a year in addition to the other things that are spread on it. I have informed her on several occasions that my water supply is from a shallow well about fifteen feet my side of the property line. I have to use bottled water for drinking. Our city doesn't have the courage to ban pesticides and herbicides. They offer a voluntary "education" program instead. Talk about a week-kneed solution. I have contacted many people about this including the Dept. of the Environment, my local councillor, etc. Nobody is interested in doing anything except to collect their paychecks.
  57. Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Pesticides stink, and give you a bad taste in your mouth. A lot of pesticide makes you sick and causes respiratory reactions. That is your body letting you know they are poisonous - an excellent design feature of human bodies. Scary there are so many who don't trust their own warning systems.

    Apparently a lot of G&M readers don't know the first rule of living: "You will be issued a body. Take good care of it. It is the only one you get."
  58. Elly Pat from Freddytown, Canada writes: Thank god no one on our street uses pesticides. We have big native trees, beautiful lawns made of grass, dandelions, golden mosses and all kinds of wildflowers. We have fat healthy honeybees and every other imaginable kind of bug, as well as hundreds and hundreds of healthy birds who eat the healthy bugs. Property on our street sells the day after it comes up for sale. A small building lot recently sold for $93,000.00, in one day. If you just "say no to pesticides", you too could live in a place like this.
  59. harry carnie from NORTHERN,B.C., Canada writes: Waaah!.............to anyone who does not belive that pesticides are harmful............go drink a cupful...
  60. lad lladie from Canada writes: Harper Da Man: Arhar also said what's the big deal. If you haven't done anything there is nothing to worry about. Then he found himself being tortured in Syria. (of course Arhar never said that)
  61. Roland Neissinger from Latteville, Canada writes: I stopped using pesticide about 12 years ago, could not stand the acrid, penetrant smell. Lawn sprouts all sorts of small flowers at times, which look nice and once every week or two weeks if it is really dry it gets a 'haircut'.
    Even on my exercise bicycle tours in local town surrounding, I am amazed by the stench following the Anti-Weed Spray Mongers.
    I don't know what these boys and men get paid to 'spritz' around their poisons, but it sure is not good for them themselves either.
    Hopefully they are not joining an increase in the cancer statics in some years time.
    For environmental shake, rethink what you all weeds, some of them flower quite nicely, and are healthy for you and your pets too.......
  62. Leon Russell from Gatineau, Canada writes: Looks like the majority of posters here don't think poisons are bad for you. Is it because you just haven't died yet?
  63. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Many extremely foolish comments here. Foolish is much worse than stupid - foolish knows better. Pesticides are toxins by design. And it doesn't matter if they are natural or synthetic. The comment about dosage is only partially correct. And displays a profound ignorance of not only biology, but chemistry and physiology. Simple, common example is a cigarette. Even light cigarettes contain enough nicotine to kill an adult almost instantly if it was ingested all at once. Tolerance due to smoking or not. And yet, because it isn't ingested all at once, and some is trapped in the filter, it doesn't kill the smoker - not even a 6 year old child. But the nicotione caught in the filter of even a regular-size, light cigarette is enough to kill a small child or infant or a cat or small dog. And then there is the impact of long term smoking - a simple and clear example of what the expression "chronic, low-level exposure" really means. Smoking the odd cigarette won't cause cancer, or any of the other problems associated with smoking. Even smoking heavily for a couple of years is safe - for most people. And it isn't the nicotine that causes the diseases associated with smoking. And yes, nicotine is a natural compound. And it was once widely used as a pesticide. So was arsenic, another naturally occurring substance. The distinction between natural and synthetic pesticides is spurious. And irrelevant. Brocolli contains compounds that are toxic and carcinogenic at high enough doses. Yet we are told to eat brocolli for its vitamin and mineral content, not to mention roughage. But eating too much brocolli might be a bad idea. As for the various pesticides one can buy at a convenience store, never mind elsewhere, without any sort of licence or other proof of knowledge of appropriate and safe handling skills, a popular product is Diazinon. Even at the levels available in convenience stores, Diazinon is extremely dangerous, especially to children under 5. It's a neurotoxin - like VX.
  64. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Pesticide is a generic term that includes substances that target either classes of organisms like plants, or insects and arachnids, or types of worms like nematodes, or fungi and molds, or mammals like rats and mice and so on. Pesticides can be broad-spectrum or selective, and can be classified on the basis of their chemical composition etc. So we get the Organo-Chlorides/Halides (OCs) - DDT, Phenoxy Acid Herbicides like 2,4-D; 2,4,5-T; Silvex, etc.; Lindane, Methoxychlor, Mirex, Chlordane, Toxaphene, Dieldrin etc. The infamous Agent Orange, of Dioxin fame, was a 1:1 mix of technical grade 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Silvex is a variant of 2,4,5-T. Then there are the organo-phospates (OPs). Common, widely available examples include Diazinon, Malathion, Parathion and Ethion. These are orders of magnitude more lethal than any of the OCs, and are, in fact, the original source and base for all of the current and earlier nerve gases. Zyklon B, Sarin and VX are all OP compounds. Funny how that works out. Most of the current OP pesticides are a direct result of research done on Zyklon B and related products. Consider the ramifications carefully. But you can buy 2% solutions of Diazinon at a convenience store, no questions asked. Suzuki's research and findings on the issue of the scale of pesticide poisonings in Canada are significant and frightening. Not just because of the issue of scale and how many children are directly affected. Not only due to parental ignorance, stupidity and complacency. But, most critically, that the specific information about trivial issues like the specific compond, exposure level and mechanism and so on are MIA from the database. Equally bad and scary is that there is no requirement that this information be recorded, collated and reported to any authorities - including the organization specifically tasked with controlling and regulating pesticide use in Canada. Those posters here who disparage Suzuki are fools. Not stupid - fools. Fools know better.
  65. Kelly Franklin from Nanaimo BC, Canada writes: Agent Orange was sprayed on CFB Gagetown New Brunswick from 1956 until 1964. I was there. Ask me about the health effects of these chemicals. Or better yet, ask Stephen Harper, who is doing his darnedest to have this - the largest poisoning of any nation's citizens by its own government - covered up.
    No federal inquiry has been launched. Instead, outfits like CanTox who are owned by chemical companies have been paid to find nothing wrong. Everything is safe in Gagetown, always has been.
    If this can happen with Agent Orange, a military-grade herbicide containing TCDD, and it IS going on right now, imagine what else is happening in Canada.
  66. otmar zambo from Canada writes: Is that some more crap out of Mr. Tshibucky?
  67. Sue me from Canada writes: It isn't the substance that will kill you, it's the dosage.
    WRONG. ask the pathologist ! the LD 50 ! make sense to you?
    perhaps 50 years ago and your funding came from Osmose/Arch.
    The reports are not at all self reported , that has not even been set up as of yet.
    Ask the cancer doc's what they are seeing coming in !
    The jury is in people, and a ban is LONG overdue, what would you like with your chemo, coffee, tea, or DDT.
  68. Bob Rollheiser from Canada writes: Dr Suzuki is in the group who's mantra is "The way to save the world is to make others sacrifice". How about if for every watt of electricity he uses above my metered consumption, I get a "credit" to use a tablespoon of weed'nfeed on my lawn?

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top