Against Europe and the United States, Brazil promises to relax rules on the use of agrochemicals | Nature

This is what the researcher Larissa Mies Bombardi, from the Laboratory of Agrarian Geography of the University of São Paulo (USP), author of the Atlas Geography of the use of agrochemicals in Brazil and Connections with the European Union 2017, which maps the use of these substances across the country and compares it with the use in EU countries.

"To get an idea, they (the Europeans) have just banned the use of insecticides called neonicotinoids, which are among the best-selling in the world because surveys show a relationship between them and mortality bees, "he told BBC News. Brazil.

"Here, these substances are still used, and now, with the new bill, we will further expand the range of agrochemicals available on the market."

The project, originally proposed by former Senator and current Minister of Agriculture Blairo Maggi (PP-MT) and whose rapporteur is MP Luiz Nishimori (PR-PR), also gives more powers to the Ministry of Agriculture, Breeding and Food. perform the toxicological evaluation of substances and approval of their use, reducing the control and inspection skills of the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) and the l & # 39; Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (Ibama).

The debate has sparked controversy among ruralists, in favor of PL, and bodies like Anvisa, Ibama, Fiocruz, the National Cancer Institute (INCA) and the National Council for Food and Nutrition Security (Consea), which They oppose, saying that the change reduces the levels of security for the consumer.

Farmers complain about the delay in the release of pesticides and say that when the government allows the demand, the products are already obsolete. People in favor of the new bill say that it is more effective and in line with international standards of substance use.

Opponents, meanwhile, say the new measure would only favor the manufacturers of chemicals, facilitating the entry of products potentially harmful to health and the environment in the market.

The PL was approved in the committee after at least eight attempts to vote, which were the scene of heated debate, swearing in between deputies and maneuvers to delay the decision on the subject. The text does not yet have a date to enter at the plenary session of the House.

The Embrapa (Brazilian Agricultural Research Society, linked to MAPA), as well as the organizations and trade unions representing the producers of the substances used in the crops, spoke in favor of this measure.

On the other side, besides Anvisa, Ibama and Consea, environmental organizations and even celebrities like Caetano Veloso, Bela Gil and television actors, who call the project "PL of Poison".

Learn the main controversial points of the measure:

One of the main controversies of the project is the idea that pesticides will be banned in the country only if they present an "unacceptable risk", defined as "a level of risk deemed unsatisfactory as dangerous for the man or the environment, even with the implementation of risk management measures ".

Law 7.802 / 1989, which regulates the use of pesticides, is more rigid and specifically prohibits substances revealing teratogenic, carcinogenic or mutagenic characteristics (causing cancer or modifications of embryos or DNA), according to the results of experiments the scientific community that cause hormonal disturbances and damage to the reproductive system, which are more dangerous to humans than laboratory tests on animals, have been able to demonstrate and cause damage to l & # 39; environment.

"In practice, this proposal is a big setback because it puts an end to our precautionary measure: how do we know what is an unacceptable risk, how does it define it exactly?", Explains Bombardi.

"We are already much more permissive in the limit of substances that we allow to use in plantations and that are in food and water. For example, we allow a level of glyphosate in the water. water (considered carcinogenic to animals and possibly to human Cancer Research) up to 5,000 times more than what the EU allows. "

According to the atlas, the maximum allowable residue limit in some foods in Brazil is 400 times higher than in the European Union. In the case of water, this difference can be 5 thousand times more.

The definition of unacceptable risk, according to the PL, would be made by technicians charged with conducting a risk badessment, another novelty introduced in the project.

Risk badysis not only of danger

Currently, Brazilian agencies are badessing the danger posed by pesticides, that is, the danger they pose to health and the environment, according to science, according to the law. . In other countries, such as the European Union and the United States, a risk badysis is also carried out at the same time as the hazard badessment.

This badysis takes into account the daily exposure of people to the product, if applied in the correct manner defined by the company that manufactured it.

"It's the big advance of PL: enabling product badysis not just by chance, but also by risk, which is the modern concept of evaluating any substance and any process, a more complex procedure but much safer in José Otávio Menten, professor at the Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture of the University of São Paulo (Esalq / USP) and chairman of the Agricultural Scientific Council (CCAS), told BBC News.

The point is that each pesticide must have a dosage and a correct way to apply it to different products, making the risk badysis complex and "not as objective", according to Menten.

"This procedure requires more experienced technicians because it is not so objective, it's one of the procedures that require the most qualification and preparation of technicians capable of understanding what we can and what can not do, "he explains.

Anvisa and Ibama complain about the lack of resources for the preparation of professionals to evaluate more quickly, according to the law in force, the applications for the registration of pesticides. In a technical note on PL 6922/2002, Anvisa says that, the country does not currently have the structure to carry out the risk badysis of pesticides.

"There are risk badessment strategies that are not yet pacified at the international level, which requires regulatory maturity, the need for studies to quantify exposure in Brazil and specialized technicians in number enough to meet the demand.Brazilian reality right now, "says the agency.

For Menten, however, these are "limits" that the country can overcome. "Our technicians may need to be recycled, updated, this is not something that will happen overnight, but we can not stand still for lack of technicians.

More substances on the market temporarily

The current law on pesticides does not set deadlines for the registration of new products to be granted. In practice, the process can take between five and eight years and producers complain that this slowness prevents Brazil from using more efficient and less toxic products in the international market.

With the new PL, deadlines of 30 days are established – for the special temporary registration of a product that must be used for academic research – up to 24 months (two years) for products completely new to Brazil.

However, if these deadlines are not respected by federal agencies, companies can, according to the bill, request a temporary registration for their products, and place them on the market pending approval (or disapproval) ) of the Ministry of Agriculture

To achieve this temporary registration, it is sufficient that the product has been similarly authorized by three countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an organization that includes some of the most developed countries in the world.

"The OECD has 37 countries, Japan and the European Union, which can be examples in the use of agrochemicals, but also Mexico, Turkey and Chile, which are not always good examples, "says Larissa Bombardi.

The bill states that the three countries that have already approved the pesticide must comply with the FAO International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, the United Nations Organization for the Protection of Pesticides and the United Nations. ;food.

"One-third of the 504 agrochemicals allowed in Brazil are banned in the EU." The other 10 pesticides banned by Brazil could be banned. be evaluated and authorized, "explains the researcher.

The possibility of temporarily placing agrochemicals on the market as proposed in the PL does not exist in the European Union, stresses the researcher.

For José Otávio Menten, who is in favor of the new draft law, provisional registration is the most "delicate" and "most disturbing" point.

"If this registry serves as a stimulant for faster badysis, it is even valid.It is a way to lobby for more efficiency.But we must fight for improvement. Ibama and Anvisa to use this device of the law in rare cases, which is no rule, "he questions.

"We have about 30 products already registered in other countries and not in Brazil, and if they are registered in countries where they have been the subject of a well conducted badysis, I think that the chances of having problems with them are low, that they would only enter the market after consulting our organs, and that they would be agile.

Currently, Anvisa has 32 new pesticides – that is to say, whose molecules have never been registered in Brazil – waiting for the notice that may allow the registration of 39, be sold in the country.

The agency, however, is only one part of the equation, which involves the opinion of Ibama and the Ministry of Agriculture. Ibama has five products still being badyzed in the list published on its website. Until the closing of this report, the Ministry of Agriculture had not disclosed the number of pesticides pending registration in Brazil.

No rebadessments determined by law

According to Larissa Bombardi, PL also missed the opportunity to implement a cyclical re-evaluation of pesticide registrations, as in developed countries.

In the United States, they should be re-evaluated every 15 years. In Japan, all three. In Europe it is 10 years old. After this period, authorizations should be reviewed based on new scientific research available. In any case, the company may also request a rebadessment.

In Brazil, a substance is re-evaluated only upon request. Glyphosate, for example, has been reevaluated since 2008. In the EU, its license was renewed last year but is still being challenged by health institutions. France has decided that the product will be banned from 2022.

Menten, however, says that the Brazilian system is "smarter". "We should stop other services to do this review, if it was implemented, but whenever there is a new fact, we can examine it," he says.

Agrochemicals x Phytosanitary x Pesticides

The controversy over the bill even reached the name used to refer to chemicals used in agriculture.

Initially, PL suggested that the name of agrochemicals be replaced by "phytosanitary products". In response to a complaint from opponents, the project's rapporteur, Luiz Nishimori, decided on the term "pesticides".

"In addition to being pejorative, the term agrotoxic is only used in Brazil," the report says.

In the main languages ​​of the world, the variants are adopted with the same etymology: pesticide (Spanish), pesticide (English), pestizide (German), pesticides (French), pesticides (Italian), pesticides (Danish and Swedish), pesticides ( Dutch), пестициды (pestitsidy – Russian) and international treaties and agreements use the term pesticides.

For Menten, the name is not relevant, but the term "pesticides" is, in fact, inadequate.

"The pesticide is not suitable either, it's any product that kills pests." If I'm just talking about products for agricultural pest management, the correct thing is that they're phytosanitary measures, but of minor importance ".

Already Larissa Bombardi, who also opposes this change, says that the problem is not "just semantics".