ENVI Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
7. OTHER VULNERABLE GROUPS
7.1 The entire population is vulnerable to contaminants circulating in the environment, but to varying degrees. Geography has an influence on the level of the risk to which the public is exposed. Researchers have shown that pollution is high in the basins of the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River where most Canadians live. Because of the grasshopper effect and the characteristics of certain substances, contaminants also accumulate in Canada's North. The literature provided by the witnesses indicates that three categories of the population are especially vulnerable to the presence of pesticides. In the first group are women and children who, because of their body types, are more sensitive to contaminants. The second group comprises people in poor health (including older people), who are likely to have reduced defences against chemical stresses. The portion of the population in more frequent contact with pesticides makes up the third group, which includes workers who handle pesticides on the job and people who live in areas where pollutants accumulate, and who also fish, hunt and collect fruit to feed themselves.
Reasons for Vulnerability Factors
7.2 The preceding Chapter showed how children's bodies are particularly sensitive to pesticides, which in the opinion of the members of the Committee makes them the most vulnerable population group. Women, whose bodies contain greater proportions of fatty tissue, are more likely to accumulate persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Some researchers assume on the basis of this fact that women exposed to pesticides may run a higher risk of developing breast cancer.91 The Sierra Club of Canada stressed the vulnerability of women examined in several studies, including one begun in Windsor in 1995 on the occupational backgrounds of 1,000 people suffering from cancer. This study showed that women living in a farm setting displayed a high rate of pre-menopausal breast cancer.92 Although a number of studies were cited in support of this hypothesis, it remains difficult, even impossible, to link breast cancer directly with pesticides. A study carried out in Hawaii in 1997, for example, suggests that volcanic soil and acid rain can aggravate the effects caused by pesticide contamination of drinking water and ground water by dieldrin.93 According to Dr. Kelly Martin, a member of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment who appeared before the Committee on December 1, 1999, a host of parameters can influence the impact of contaminants, making it almost impossible to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship. This does not prevent the Association from fearing that pesticides are indeed causing, among other things, breast cancer among women.
7.3 People who suffer from asthma or allergies, people with multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) and older people make up a second vulnerable group. According to information available on the Internet site of the Nova Scotia Environmental Health Centre, a group that treats and researches environmental sensitivity problems, some people can have more violent reactions following contact with pesticides than other people who are in better health. For example, people with MCS can suffer a wide of range of symptoms including burning eyes, breathing problems, muscular weakness, headaches, fatigue, asthma, allergies and chronic infections.94 Dr. Nicole Bruinsma of the Canadian Public Health Association raised this problem before the Committee, but pointed out that the impact of pesticides on this population group are still poorly understood, just as they are in the case of other vulnerable groups:
| There are also multiple-chemical-sensitive people with less than perfect health, including those with asthma or allergies, as well as individuals with a chemical sensitivity, who suffer the effects of pesticide exposure more severely than those without. We have to wonder how those people became so sensitive to begin with. Is it because of the multiple exposures they've received throughout their foetal and adult life? For such people day-to-day life can present challenges, since there is not often anywhere to hide from the widespread and persistent use of these toxins.95 |
7.4 In its evidence to the Committee, the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), which represents 2.3 million workers in the public and private sectors, did not hesitate to assert that workers are the primary victims of chronic illnesses caused by pesticides. The CLC pointed out that most of the findings used by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) come from studies of occupational exposure.96 It added that people who handle pest control products as part of their work (farmers and their families, forestry workers, exterminators, grounds keepers, municipal and railway employees, employees in pesticide manufacturing plants, etc.) are sometimes exposed to very high doses of pesticides. In addition to suspected long-term effects, these workers are likely to suffer from chronic effects of pesticides if they do not follow handling precautions. The Canadian Public Health Association told the Committee that pesticides can persist on the skin for many months after exposure and some studies indicate that the children of adults exposed can be effected by the residues.97 The Association told the Committee that non-Hodgkin's lymphoma seems to be observed principally among people who are most exposed to pesticides, namely those who work with them. Some researchers have succeeded in demonstrating a significant dose-response relationship between fields sprayed with herbicides and the risk of contracting non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,98 while others have not succeeded in statistically demonstrating this link between the presence of pesticides and the various illnesses observed.99 Dr. Nicole Bruinsma who belongs to the former group states,
| Patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, they have a very peculiar gene mutation on one of their chromosomes. It's when one of the genes actually lifts out of the DNA and turns itself around, which is called an inversion mutation. It's very rare. We find it in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Where else do we find it? We find it in those people who have had the greatest exposure to pesticides. We find it in workers who handle concentrated technical formulations, in farmers and other agriculture workers, in exterminators, in pesticide applicators, in lawn and golf-course owners, and in Vietnam War veterans who have been exposed to large doses of 2,4-D or Agent Orange in the Vietnam War.100 |
Two problems were discussed by witnesses that, in the Committee's opinion, make workers even more vulnerable to pesticide exposure. First of all, the information provided to farmers by pesticide suppliers via the product label, which consists of warning them about the risks linked to handling their products, may be inadequate. Secondly, according to Mr. Yussuff of the Canadian Labour Congress, the precautions (protective equipment, waiting time after an application) suggested to those who handle pesticides may be less effective than commonly thought, and may not protect users from the chronic effects of pesticide exposure:
| Limited controls are possible for acute worker exposures, such as personal protective equipment and re-entry times for workers to re-enter sprayed fields, but these are inefficient and far less efficacious in practice than they are in theory. They also fail to protect workers from the chronic health effects of pesticides, which are, in industrialised countries such as Canada, much more important than acute effects.101 |
7.5 The Canadian North is loosely defined as the territory above the 60th parallel (the Arctic and subArctic), from the Beaufort Sea in the west to Davis Strait in the east, from Ellesmere Island in the north to Hudson's Bay in the south.102 This area makes up 40% of Canada's land mass and has a population of 80,000 including more than 40,000 native people. Like people who work with pesticides, northern populations are in greater contact with these contaminants than are other Canadians. One reason for this, as discussed earlier in the chapter on pesticides and the environment, is that certain substances, specifically those that are persistent, end up in the North through atmospheric transportation, even though their use is virtually unknown in the Arctic (figure 4.2). Organochlorines, one cateogory of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), are still found in significant amounts in our environment. Most are now banned in Canada because of their characteristics, but some countries still use them. Native people in the North have a traditional diet of game and fish, which are often contaminated with chemicals, thus their total exposure to contaminants is higher.103 The Committee learned from David Stone, Director of the Northern Science and Contaminants Research at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada that, because of their higher consumption of wild animal flesh, people living in the North have considerably higher concentrations of POPs in their blood than do people in southern Canada. The Inuit are particularly affected by the accumulation of toxaphene, chlordane and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in their bodies. Fetuses and nursing infants are primarily susceptible to POPs absorbed through the placenta and breast milk respectively. According to current findings, concentrations of organochlorines in Inuit breast milk in women from Nunavit are from two to ten times higher than those measured in a non-aboriginal population in the South.104
7.6 While these results are known to people in the North, and are of concern, representatives of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada explained to the Committee that the traditional diet plays a vital role in the life of the Inuit because of the economic, social and health aspect which make consumption of traditional foods essential and inevitable. It has been estimated, for example, that it would cost close to $35 million a year to replace traditional foods with commercial products. Researchers also consider the traditional diet healthier and more nutritious than food brought in from the South. According to the results of Phase I of the Northern Contaminants Program, directed by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, a drop in the consumption of traditional foods would result in a wide range of negative consequences for the populations concerned, such as less physical activity, obesity, dental cavities, anaemia, reduced resistance to infection and diabetes. Hunting and fishing are also important socio-cultural activities.The Inuit are encouraged, and do continue, to include traditional foods in their daily diet.105 Experts consider that the risks associated with not consuming traditional foods are greater than the risks associated with long-term exposure to the contaminants present in those foods. The Committee has concluded that it is vitally important to allocate sufficient resources to the problem of northern contaminants for the population to be better protected.
Research on Protecting Vulnerable Groups
7.7 The problem of contaminants in traditional foods led to the formulation of a research program on POPs, the Northern Contaminants Program (NCP), the first phase of which (NCP-I) was completed in 1997. The annual budget of $5.4 million for Phase II comes from Treasury Board and the following four departments, which are also participating to different degrees in management of the Northern Contaminants Program: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Health Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Environment Canada. For example, Health Canada's Health Protection Branch (HPB) advises on the risks posed by certain POPs and devotes about $1 million a year to research into the potential problems associated with them.106
7.8 The thrust of the NCP is to evaluate the risks of contamination associated with traditional foods consumed by Aboriginal peoples. Phase I of the Program mapped the distribution in space and over time of contaminants in the North and confirmed the hypothesis that the contaminants come from the South. These findings made an important contribution to our knowledge about contamination of traditional foods. NCP-I made it possible to prove, among other findings, that toxaphene is the main organochlorine contaminant found in all fish analysed in the Canadian Arctic, even though this pesticide has not been in use in Canada since 1982. This demonstrates the importance of considering all pesticides when studying their effects, even those that have been discontinued.
7.9 The findings of NCP-I were also used in a similar circumpolar study published in 1997-98 by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP). NCP-II, which will continue until 2003, aims to identify the main species that are exposing northern populations to the most contaminants, as well as the regions and populations at highest risk.107 Given the importance of traditional foods in the life of northern residents, the continuation of this Program is essential.
7.10 The Committee was disturbed by suggestions from some witnesses that the Program, like a number of other government-sponsored scientific projects, has been hard hit by budget cuts. The Committee understands that the NCP is grappling with a lack of financial resources. Dr. Joe Losos of the Health Protection Branch at Health Canada stated:
| The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has a program on toxins in the north. We support them with our health assessments. We have long-term studies on some of these toxins to see if the effect is long-term. So it really depends on the toxin. We are putting about $1 million worth into this program. It was one of the victims of program review cuts, if you will, so we don't do as much as we would like to do in that area.108 |
7.11 With respect to research on workers who come in contact with pesticides, the Health Protection Branch (HPB) at Health Canada is monitoring the potential effects of pesticides on farming communities in Canada, via the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control. The HPB is also participating in a research program on diet and a national inquiry into breast milk, which are providing data on Canadians' exposure to a whole range of potentially harmful substances, including pesticides.109 The Department of Health also informed the Committee that it promotes projects in certain priority areas, such as endocrine disruptors, under the Toxic Substance Research Initiative. The Department's representative told the Committee about plans to reorganize the HPB, which entail development of an action plan for a new environmental health strategy, designed to increase the ability of the Department and the Branch to reduce the dangers that environmental risks pose to health.
7.12 Despite all these studies, which appear to be both numerous and relevant, the Committee heard criticisms of the type of research done on worker exposure. According to Merryl Hammond, founder of Citizens for Alternatives to Pesticides, studies done on worker exposure are not satisfactory because the research protocols (number of samples, sampling time, differences between the pesticide analysed and pesticide actually registered) are poorly formulated:
| The very limited tests done on agricultural workers for occupational exposure are totally inadequate ... Generally the larger the sample the better. Okay, that's great. I would look for thousands, frankly ... A chemical was accepted for use in Canada; thirteen farmers were occupationally exposed to it. |
| For how long? It's a new chemical. We don't know what it's going to do to anybody. For how long should we expose this large sample? Ideally a full season or two of use to see what might happen. |
| For four to seven hours they were exposed -- one working day. Half of them were in enclosed tractors; some were in open-cab tractors. That's four to seven hours and thirteen farmers. |
| But it gets worse ... The chemical that was being registered was called Imazethapyr, but the surrogate chemical we accepted was totally different. They said it was chemically similar, but it was metabolized differently in the human body. The company told us that. |
| So in this country in March 1994, we registered Imazethapyr, nicknamed Pursuit, but the tests had been done on a pesticide called Assert. Those tests I've just told you about -- on thirteen farmers for four to seven hours -- were on a totally different chemical. But because of the system we have, that was deemed adequate. That was the occupational safety test for Imazethapyr. The decision document is dated March 30, 1994.110 |
7.13 Health Canada is currently implementing a strategy on environmental health. The Department is looking at science capacity, interaction between internal and external experts, and international linkages that will enable it to obtain the latest scientific information. It is also considering possible changes to its risk-management framework, with a more specific focus on especially vulnerable populations. A representative of the Department noted the existence of a Study Centre funded by Health Canada, and the completion of projects on the cumulative effects of toxic products sponsored by the departments of Environment and Health.111 Health Canada also makes information available to the public on multiple chemical sensitivity, but this syndrome is not legally recognized in Canada as a true medical condition.
7.14 After this series of hearings, the Committee is in a position to say that while the scientific evidence remains incomplete, pesticides do represent a sufficiently disturbing threat to human beings and the environment to justify special attention. For one thing, the vulnerability of children and the other groups listed is increasingly recognized and for another, the scientific data are insufficient and additional research is necessary. It also seems probable that workers may be less well protected and informed than we had believed, in terms of the information made available to them for their protection. The members of the Committee consider that the government must protect Canadians by implementing pro-active pesticide management. Good management must begin with a recognition of the danger that pesticides pose to the population, and by adequate funding for the research that will make it possible to define that danger more accurately.
| The Committee recommends that Health Canada take the necessary steps to bring about legal recognition of multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome. |
| The Committee recommends that the government fund Health Canada and its government partners so that they can assess the relevance of existing research protocols involving vulnerable population groups, draft new protocols where necessary and pursue current research on the impact of pesticides on human health, particularly on vulnerable groups. |
7.15 The existing legislation does not seem to provide special protection for vulnerable population groups.112 This was the assertion of the World Wildlife Fund and the Canadian Institute of Child Health to the Committee. In the United States, the Food Quality Protection Act is an example of legislation that has been specifically amended to protect children (see the next Chapter).113
Ms. Sandra Schwartz, Director, Environmental Programs, Canadian Institute for Child Health, added:
| The Food Quality Protection Act, the 1996 US pesticide reform law, was motivated in part by this particular book, entitled Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, a 1993 National Academy of Sciences study. It found that the regulatory process in the US did not account for children's special vulnerabilities. It recommended that the process be changed to better safeguard the health of infants and children. The law was adopted unanimously, based on the overwhelming evidence presented in that report. |
| In order to protect Canadian children from pesticide exposure, we need similar child-centred protection strategies within our own government structures.114 |
7.16 The Committee was struck by these observations, and has concluded that the Canadian government should take recent child protection developments in the United States as its model, extending the protection to all vulnerable groups.
| The Committee recommends that the new Pest Control Act give priority to protection of the environment and human health, and especially to the protection of all vulnerable population groups. |
| The Committee recommends that the government ensure legal protection, through the new Pest Control Act, for the most vulnerable groups: fetuses, children, seniors, women, Aboriginal people, persons suffering from multiple chemical sensitivity or in poor health, and professional users of pesticides. To this end, decisions on pesticides should be based on the protection of the most vulnerable groups. |
91 A.P. Hoyer, P. Grandjean, T. Jorgensen, J.W. Brock, H.B. Hartvig, "Organochlorine Exposure and the Risk of Breast Cancer," Lancet, 352(9143), 1998, p. 1816-1820.
92 Sierra Club of Canada, Brief to the Committee.
93 R.H. Allen, "Breast Cancer and Pesticides in Hawaii: The Need for Further Study," Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol.105, 1997, p. 679-683.
94 Nova Scotia Environmental Health Centre, Web site, January 2000; The Environmental Hypersensitivity Association of Canada, Web site, January 2000.
95 Evidence, Meeting No. 4, November 16, 1999.
96 Canadian Labour Congress, Brief to the Committee, Evidence, Meeting No. 7, November 23, 1999.
97 Canadian Public Health Association, Brief to the Committee.
98 D.T. Wigle, R.M. Semenciw, K. Wilkins, D. Riedel, L. Ritter, H.I. Morrison, Y. Mao, "Mortality Study of Canadian Male Farm Operators: Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Mortality and Agricultural Practices in Saskatchewan," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 82, No. 7, April 4, 1990; H.I. Morrison, K. Wilkins, R. Semenciw, Y. Mao, D. Wigle, "Herbicides and Cancer," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 84, No. 24, December 16, 1992.
99 A. Blair et al., "Occupational and Environmental Risk Factors for Chronic Lympholic Leukaemia and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma," 1997 UHPHS Workshop Proceedings: Determining the Role of Environmental Exposures as Risk Factors for B-Cell Chronic Lymphoproliferative Disorders; G. deJong, G.M. Swaen, J.J. Slangen, "Mortality of Workers Exposed to Dieldrin and Aldrin: A Retrospective Cohort Study," Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 54, 1997, p. 702-707; P.C. Oloffs et al., "DDT, Dieldrin and Heptachloroperoxide in Humans with Liver Cirrhosis," Clinical Biochemistry, Vol. 7, 1974, p. 297-306.
100 Evidence, Meeting No. 4, November 16, 1999.
101 Evidence, Meeting No. 7, November 23, 1999.
102 J. Jensen, K. Adare and R. Shearer, Canadian Arctic Contaminants Assessment Report, Northern Contaminants Program, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 508 p., 1997.
103 There are other native populations elsewhere in Canada that also have a traditional diet, such as groups in Saskatchewan that collect berries, mushrooms and wild rice, and where aerial spraying may well deposit pesticides on the vegetation. These groups are also very likely to be vulnerable to pesticide exposure, but the Committee did not receive any evidence on this point.
104 Evidence, Meeting No. 16, December 14, 1999.
105 Evidence, Meeting No. 16, December 14, 1999; Inuit Circumpolar Conference and Inuit Tapirisat of Canada, Brief to the Committee.
106 Evidence, Meeting No. 2, November 2, 1999; Evidence, Meeting No. 16, December 14, 1999.
107 Evidence, Meeting No. 16, December 14, 1999.
108 Evidence, Meeting No. 2, November 2, 1999.
109 Evidence, Meeting No. 2, November 2, 1999.
110 Evidence, Meeting No. 10, November 30, 1999.
111 Evidence, Meeting No. 126, June 1, 1999.
112 Evidence, Meeting No. 5, November 17, 1999.
113 S. Schwartz and G.W. Chance, "Children First," Alternatives Journal, 25:3, Summer 1999.
114 Evidence, Meeting No. 4, November 16, 1999.