President's Cancer Panel Meeting: Environmental Factors in Cancer, Transcript of Proceedings, Indianapolis, in, Oc by National Cancer Institute - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

Key Points

It is often the case that policy does not reflect advances in science—its foundations are rooted in other factors such as economic interests and social and political characteristics of the

parties involved.

Farm workers are disproportionately affected by pesticides due to heightened exposures,

more limited access to health care, and lower socioeconomic status. Research shows that farm

workers are unaware of all of the risks involved with pesticides, especially those associated with cumulative and synergistic exposures. Risk perception and acceptance are affected by

variables such as age, gender, personal sense of control, and various economic pressures.

Older workers tend to be more aware of pesticide exposure than younger workers, but

regulation is needed to protect all workers.

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), administered by the EPA, governs the registration of pesticides in agricultural workplaces. Many assume that this

regulation ensures the safe application of pesticides and protection of agricultural workers.

However, the reality is that the process is burdened by uncertainty, bias, and general

ineffectiveness. Safety data of many pesticides vary or are unknown. And a cost benefit

analysis unique to environmental protective regulations is often used, whereby matters of

human health are weighed against industry’s economic interests.

Farm worker advocates often question the logic of having the EPA administer the Worker

Protection Standard (WPS)—a regulatory task more suited to the Occupational Safety and

Health Administration. The WPS is developed by states with the EPA retaining supervisory

authority, resulting in a nationally inconsistent pattern of monitoring and enforcement

practices. Enforcement is sporadic and when fines are issued, they are often negotiated

downward.

Indianapolis, IN

15

October 21, 2008

Despite regulations, there are many practical barriers that farm workers face when carrying out the WPS recommendations. Employers may not post the required information about

pesticides, or post it incorrectly. Workers often do not have access to clean water and soap in the fields, nor to regular facilities for washing clothes.

Farm workers should have the right to organize and demand adequate working conditions

(i.e., put pressure on policy makers to change regulation). However, farm workers have been

excluded from many of the nation’s laws that protect workers’ rights to organize.

The demand for workers migrating from Mexico continues to be high and immigration

reform policies create fear and anxiety among these workers, making them afraid to voice

concerns about unsafe working conditions.

Regulatory change often stems from grassroots efforts. Grassroots movements have

developed new strategies of applying pressure directly on visible corporate end users of

agricultural products in order to increase farm workers’ wages. Farm workers have also

globalized and are starting to look to other countries for alternative solutions to the

environmental issues they are facing.

Increasing farm worker knowledge about pesticide risks and safety practices is important; educational campaigns should focus on both farm workers and their families. Research has

found that while farm workers may not always be concerned about their own health, they are

very concerned about their families’ health (particularly children’s).

Farm workers should be encouraged to inform doctors that they work on a farm and with

various hazardous chemicals when seeking health care for themselves and their families.

DISCUSSION: