BANNED

Reviewed 6/28/2015

Banned, by Frederick Rowe Davis

Access to this book courtesy of the
San Jose, CA Public Library
BANNED
A History of Pesticides and the Science of Toxicology
Frederick Rowe Davis
New Haven: Yale University Press, November 2014

Rating:

4.5

High

ISBN-13 978-0-300-20517-6
ISBN-10 0-300-20517-1 264pp. HC/BWI $40.00

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the synthesis of pesticides raced well ahead of pesticide science — meaning the understanding of the impacts of pesticides on plants, animals, and people. The early twentieth century saw the replacement of inorganic agents like lead arsenate and Paris green by organic pesticides. Chlorinated hydrocarbons were the first to be developed; the most effective member of the class, DDT, was synthesized in 1937. It proved a boon to the Allied Forces in World War II, especially in the Italian Campaign, and after the war seemed for a time the answer to a prayer — sudden death on insect pests, minimally harmful to animals and humans. This was especially important because the insecticides then in common use had brought about a number of tragedies.1 These prompted the development of toxicology laboratories to assess the danger of newly developed chemicals.

DDT's early promise faded in a few years, as mosquitoes and houseflies became immune to it and evidence of the harm it caused to animals and beneficial insects began to accumulate. A sort of arms race began. Different chlorinated hydrocarbons were synthesized, but none surpassed DDT. A new class, the organophosphates, was developed; its members included parathion, perhaps the most toxic pesticide known. Organophosphates as a class were more dangerous than their predecessors, acutely toxic in minute doses. However, they decayed quickly in the environment, so could be used on crops if sufficient care was taken. By contrast, much more of DDT and its cousins was required for acute poisoning; but they persisted in the environment and could build up in fatty tissues if ingested, representing a poorly understood threat of chronic damage.

"Just as exploring the sources of Silent Spring revealed its roots in science and policy, analysis of developments in its wake uncovered a tragic irony. The story of the book that launched the environmental movement became much more complicated after the ban on DDT when some of the most toxic chemicals known came to dominate the pesticide market. Although there have been many studies of DDT and the chlorinated hydrocarbons, few scholars have explored the history of organophosphates and the toxicology of this large class of pesticides. For the most part, historians have divided the history of pesticides into three periods: pesticides before DDT, pesticides during the DDT era, and pesticides after DDT (still largely unexamined)."

– Page xi

When Rachel Carson researched and wrote Silent Spring in 1962, these pesticides — and especially DDT — were regarded as largely beneficial by the pesticide industry and the public. Wildlife biologists, however, had a different view — and so did many scientists in the Public Health Service and the FDA. Well before the publication of Silent Spring, scientific papers were documenting the harm DDT was wreaking on populations of animals and beneficial insects. The health of wildlife and the environment did not count for as much in those days, before NEPA and the Endangered Species Act. Proof of widespread harm to humans would have made a big difference. However, documentation of impacts on humans was perfunctory, unconvincing to Congresses eager to see crop yields expand to feed a growing population. Most tellingly, no solid evidence that DDT or other pesticides caused cancer in humans could be adduced. As a result, though safety rules were enacted, they lagged behind the problems pesticides presented.

As the author documents in this book, regulation of pesticides was consistently (though not universally) fought by the manufacturers,2 and to a considerable degree by the USDA.3 The problem was exacerbated by frequent reorganizations of government agencies, with consequent shifts in responsibility. The EPA was created in 1970, and evaluation of DDT was among its first responsibilities. It finally banned DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons for agricultural use within the USA in late 1972, leaving an exemption for outbreaks of vector-borne diseases like malaria. The author points out how the pesticide industry shifted to other classes of pesticide, notably the organophosphates — among the most toxic chemicals known. History since the ban has recorded numerous cases of human deaths from these compounds, as well as significant harm to wildlife.

"As Daniel, Langston, Oreskes and Conway, and Rosner and Markowitz and others have brilliantly demonstrated through numerous incisive examples, industry successfully captured regulatory agencies in the U.S. across the twentieth century to the detriment of the health and wellness of millions of Americans and others worldwide. In the case of pesticides, Daniel argued: "[USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS)] possessed enormous power, for its label approval function licensed pesticide formulations. It garnered enormous power in its multiple roles as clearinghouse, coordinator, regulator, and research center. To have their way, ARS bureaucrats bullied, plotted, lied, and misled. A culture emerged within the service that justified pesticides at all costs, and staffers bent research, reports, and testimony to serve this mission."

– Pages 184-5

The most impressive thing about this book is the magnitude of its research. It presents a detailed history of the development and regulation of pesticides from the early twentieth century forward. This history is well supported, averaging 17 citations of archives and research papers per chapter. However, the length and density of its chapters, its highly detailed and sometimes repetititive writing, and its extensive use of technical terms make it a difficult read for the general public — which is the group that needs to receive its core message. They can get the gist of that essential message by reading just the Preface, the final chapter, "Roads Taken" and the Epilogue, which brings the history up to date with information on the latest class of insecticides to reach the market, the neonicotinoids. I consider Banned most valuable for those developing, regulating, or using pesticides; while they may know much of the information it contains, it would be useful to fill any gaps that might exist in their knowledge. Its notes, and some references mentioned in the text, provide a long list of sources for those wishing to probe deeper. For its high information content and its relative lack of errors, I'll give it a 4.5 rating.

1 These early pesticides, bad as they were, were not the major impetus behind the development of toxicology. Elixir Sulfanilimide (See pp. 18-28) was the worst offender. The problem was not the sulfamilimide, but the liquids used as vehicles for it — liquids like diethylene glycol, merely assumed to be safe.
2 The high-water mark in this respect was set by Beech-nut (then the Beech-Nut Packing Company.) Based on in-house research beginning in 1947, they set a near-zero tolerance level for pesticide residues in their products. (See pp. 146-148.)
3 Much like the old AEC, the US Department of Agriculture had a built-in conflict of interest: It was tasked with promoting the agriculture industry while regulating that industry's practices — including what pesticides "Big Agro" used and how it used them.
4 "As Daniel, Langston, Oreskes and Conway, and Rosner and Markowitz and others have brilliantly demonstrated through numerous incisive examples, industry successfully captured regulatory agencies in the U.S. across the twentieth century to the detriment of the health and wellness of millions of Americans and others worldwide. In the case of pesticides, Daniel argued: "[USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS)] possessed enormous power, for its label approval function licensed pesticide formulations. It garnered enormous power in its multiple roles as clearinghouse, coordinator, regulator, and research center. To have their way, ARS bureaucrats bullied, plotted, lied, and misled. A culture emerged within the service that justified pesticides at all costs, and staffers bent research, reports, and testimony to serve this mission." (pp. 184-5)
Valid CSS! Valid HTML 4.01 Strict To contact Chris Winter, send email to this address.
Copyright © 2015-2016 Christopher P. Winter. All rights reserved.
This page was last modified on 19 April 2016.