first I would like to express my sincere sympathy and concern for the victims of the horrific terrorist attacks.

Excuse me please: my English is too poor to write some thoughts and feelings in English which are not written 1000 times.

I only want to write:
I hope deeply that it will be possible to have a reduction of violence.

At this newsletter you first can read the URLs and the subject-lines. When you are interested you can read the whole article at part 2.

When you want to unsubscribe this newsletter please send me an email.

I wish all good and healthy days

Ingrid Scherrmann, www.safer-world.org.   , info@safer-world.org 

SAFER WORLD is a private independent  international internet-network for a safer environment.

=========================================================

From P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service, BASF Subsidiary Charged with Illegal Pesticide Sales September 21, 2001

============================================================

Symposium Thursday, October 25, 2001  Silent Killers How Our Health, Fertility And Brain Function Are Being Threatened

=============================================================

GOVERNMENT.  THE ENVIRONMENT AND PARKINSON'S

==============================================================

EU chemical testing plan will "kill innovation",  Environment Daily 1053, 05/09/01

==============================================================

NEW WEB SITE ESTABLISHED FOR INFORMATION ON CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE (CCA) AND ITS USE AS A WOOD PRESERVATIVE

==============================================================

CHEMICALS MAY BE CONTRIBUTING TO EARLY PUBERTY

==============================================================

P A N U P S, Pesticide Action Network Updates Service,  Handful of Corporations Dominates Commercial Agriculture, September 10, 2001

==============================================================

P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service, GE Crops Expand in China, August 31, 2001

==============================================================

From Pesticide Action Network Updates Service, Resource Pointer #264, September 13, 2001

==============================================================

PART 2: The whole articles, sites, information:

==============================================================

P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service

BASF Subsidiary Charged with Illegal Pesticide Sales

September 21, 2001

Last week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) charged Micro Flo Company--a wholly owned subsidiary of BASF Corporation--with importing and selling millions of pounds of illegal, counterfeit pesticides in the U.S. over several years. EPA's charges against Micro Flo, a pesticide formulator and distributor headquartered in Memphis, Tennessee, constitute the largest enforcement case ever brought by the U.S. government for pesticide-related violations. EPA assessed a fine of US$3.7 million and has listed 673 separate violations by Micro Flo of the U.S. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act. Micro Flo has 30 days from the date they received the complaint to respond to EPA's charges by either contesting them or paying the fine.

In May 2000, EPA officials conducted inspections at Micro Flo's primary pesticide formulation plant in Sparks, Georgia and at Micro Flo's warehouse located in Tifton, Georgia. Based upon the findings at these inspections and EPA's review of records submitted by Micro Flo, EPA determined that the company was in violation of U.S. law. EPA's alleges that Micro Flo offered pesticide products and active ingredients for sale whose composition differed from the description in their registration. EPA also charges that Micro Flo falsified notices accompanying shipments of active ingredients claiming that they were produced by an EPA-approved producer, United Phosphorus. In reality, the imported chemicals were from foreign companies whose products were not approved by EPA.

Permethrin and acephate were two chemicals imported illegally. While they are both registered for use in the U.S., they must be imported from EPA-approved companies. During 1999, Micro Flo imported large quantities of both of them from unapproved sources. For example, EPA documents show that over 400,000 pounds of acephate, a nerve toxin and possible human carcinogen, were imported using falsified documents.

The case originated when United Phosphorus, an Indian-based producer of generic pesticides, discovered that Micro Flo had registered with EPA various pesticides produced by United Phosphorus in India. EPA granted those registrations based on Micro Flo's certifications that its products would contain only United Phosphorus' active ingredient pesticides.

Independent of the EPA lawsuit, United Phosphorus is pursuing separate legal action against BASF and Micro Flo, seeking over US$50 million in damages. United Phosphorus is the fourth largest generic agrochemical company in the world and one of the largest pesticide producers in India.

In 2000, BASF ranked as the seventh largest agrochemical company in the world, with global sales of US$2.2 billion comprising 11% of the world market. The company predicts an almost 50% increase in agrochemical sales this year, expecting 2001 sales to hit US$3.1 million. Sources: U.S. EPA Enforcement and Compliance Update, September 18, 2001; U.S. EPA Civil Complaint, FIFRA-04-2001-3000, September 11, 2001; Wright & Sielaty Press Release, September 14, 2001; AGROW, April 13, 2001,

Contact: PANNA., PANUPS is a weekly email news service providing resource guides and reporting on pesticide issues that don't always get coverage by the mainstream media. It's produced by Pesticide Action Network North America, a non-profit and non-governmental organization working to advance sustainable alternatives to pesticides worldwide. You can join our efforts! We gladly accept donations for our work and all contributions are tax deductible in the United States. Visit http://www.panna.org/donate.   To comment, send a message to:panna@panna.org   To subscribe, send a blank message to: panups-subscribe@igc.topica.com

 Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), 49 Powell St., Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94102 USA, Phone: (415) 981-1771, Fax: (415) 981-1991, Email: panna@panna.org , Web: http://www.panna.org

=====================================================

Symposium Thursday, October 25, 2001

Silent Killers. How Our Health, Fertility And Brain Function Are Being Threatened

Come and learn about - The dangers and the alternatives to pesticides - Why we need a ban in Montréal on the cosmetic use of pesticides.

Featured Speaker: Scientist of international experience Dr. Elizabeth Guillette (Toxic Legacies - The Study In Mexico) Will present her outstanding research on the effects of pesticides on child development.

* See the evidence and draw your own conclusions.

* Are the warning signs already a reality?

SPEAKERS:

Dr. Shiv Chopra, DVM., Ph.D., Scientist, Fellow of the World Health Organization TITLE: Brief History of Pesticides and Related Legislation

Dr. Elizabeth Guillette, Ph.D., Visiting Scholar, Center for Bioenvironmental Research, Tulane and Xavier Universities

TITLE: The dangers of irresponsible use of Pesticides: Lessons from Mexico

Edith Smeesters, Biologist, Author of "Pelouses et couvre-sols"

TITLE: Alternatives to Pesticides: Gardening without Pesticides

Paul Maloney, Entomologist

TITLE: We all live in Bhopal: Building Ecological Communities

Dr. Michèle Brill-Edwards, MD., FRCPC

TITLE: The Public's Right to Know: Versus the Culture of Deception

The Symposium will be held at: Robert Palmer Howard Theatre, McIntyre Medical Building, 6th Floor,, 3655 Drummond Street , Montreal, QC 6.30 PM to 10.00 PM THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25

Simultaneous Translation French/English

Suggested donation five dollars ($5.00)

Funded And Sponsored By The Coalition For Alternatives To Pesticides - CAP Sponsored By The Canadian Association Of Physicians For The Environment (CAPE) CKUT McGill, The McGill School Of Environment, QPIRG McGill, The Urban Ecology Centre (to be confirmed Monday), The Regional Council Of The Environment Of Montreal and The Breast Cancer Action Montreal.

Contact: Rohini Perris or Michel Gaudet Email: michgaud@videotron.ca  

==============================================================

High costs attached to European Commission proposals for enhanced testing of up to 30,000 "existing" chemicals "would probably kill development of new products in Europe and severely reduce the role of traders," a business group has warned. The Austrian economic chamber (WKO) called for safeguards to reduce impacts on smaller companies. WKO's statement on the Commission's February white paper on EU chemicals policy was launched yesterday in the European parliament, where debate is getting under way on a plan by Swedish MEP Inger Schörling to strengthen the proposed testing requirements even further (ED 09/08/01 http://www.environmentdaily.com/articles/index.cfm?action=article&ref=10411 )

A broader response to the white paper based on WKO's position is expected to emerge shortly from the European representative body for national chambers of commerce, Eurochambres. WKO's focus on the costs of improved chemicals testing echoes earlier statements from chemical producers' association Cefic. Whereas the Commission's white paper puts required expenditure at euros 2.1bn over 30 years, Cefic estimated the real total would exceed euros 20bn (ED 14/02/01 http://www.environmentdaily.com/articles/index.cfm?action=article&ref=9311 ).

According to WKO, the Commission may not have taken into account a series of costs set to fall on business under the new policy. These include staff costs for dedicated personnel to manage projects and fees and charges levied by national authorities for notifications or assessments.

The cost of generating hazard data packages will be higher than the Commission estimates, the Austrian body adds. "Base-set" testing of chemicals produced in small quantities will cost up to euros 100,000 per substance, it says, and not euros 85,000 as the Commission says.

More detailed "level 1" testing will cost euros 300,000 rather than euros 250,000, and the most detailed "level 2" tests up to euros 800,000 or even more rather than the Commission's figure of euros 350,000.

WKO's prescription for dealing with these costs is to maintain flexibility over how much testing is required for specific chemicals by putting a greater emphasis on assessing risks rather than hazards and ensuring that data requirements are kept proportional to exposure routes and potential risks. Industry "should be given the opportunity to propose its own deadlines for data package provision," it says, and the EU should do more to build on existing international review programmes. There should also be specific data sharing provisions to minimise the cost burden on small enterprises.

Follow-up: WKO http://wko.at/  , tel: +43 1 50105, and EU chemicals review position paper http://www.environmentdaily.com/docs/chems2.doc   .

=========================================================================

NEW WEB SITE ESTABLISHED FOR INFORMATION ON CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE (CCA) AND ITS USE AS A WOOD PRESERVATIVE

EPA has posted a new Web site to provide background information on chromated copper arsenate (CCA), a chemical mixture consisting of arsenic, chromium, and copper which is registered for wood preservative uses. This Web site provides a variety of EPA's consumer resource documents, recent press releases, and relevant links. Examples include:

* Commonly-asked questions about CCA's uses as a wood preservative;

* Information for consumers and builders on minimizing risk when working with CCA-treated wood;

* Information on EPA's health and environmental safety review of CCA, including children's exposure from playground equipment; and,

* Industry and Federal efforts to increase awareness about safer use and handling of CCA-treated wood.

EPA will continue to update this Web site to address new developments and opportunities for public participation. Please review this new CCA

Web site at www.epa.gov/pesticides/citizens/1file.htm.  

========================================================================

P A N U P S, Pesticide Action Network Updates Service: Handful of Corporations Dominates Commercial Agriculture

September 10, 2001

In the past decade, the worldwide value of corporate mergers and acquisitions increased from US$462 billion in 1990 to over US$3.5 trillion in 2000, roughly 12% of total world economic output. This concentration of corporate power has affected most sectors of the global economy at the same time as disparities between the rich and poor have grown sharply: according to the United Nations Development Programme, the richest 1% of the world's population receives as much income as the poorest 57%.

The agriculture industry has been affected by such concentration: the top 10 seed firms now control 30% of the US$24.4 billion commercial seed market and the top 10 agrochemical corporations control 84% of the US$30 billion agrochemical market.

Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) has monitored corporate concentration in the food and agriculture industries for several decades. Under its new organizational name, the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (or the ETC Group) has released a report analyzing corporate concentration in the food, agriculture and health sectors. Entitled "Globalization, Inc. -- Concentration in Corporate Power: The Unmentioned Agenda," the report provides a brief sector-by-sector analysis of the leading companies involved in the closely related fields of pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, genomics, seeds, agrochemicals, food and beverage processing and mega-grocery retailers. Arguing that international bodies cannot address world food security without addressing corporate ownership, control and consolidation, the report calls for strengthening the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization's economic division to monitor the impacts of multinational corporations and new technologies on world food security. Agricultural Biotechnology (ag biotech) is not a crowded field in terms of numbers of 'major player' companies. Following two decades of fast-paced mergers and acquisitions, five major "Gene Giants" dominate the market: Pharmacia, DuPont, Syngenta, Aventis and Dow. Despite industry analysts' hestitations about and the recent public outcry against genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the ETC Group cautions that it is "premature to write ag biotech's obituary." Although some companies such as Novartis, AstraZeneca and Pharmacia have sold off their ag biotech interests, the German-based agrochemical companies Bayer and BASF each announced plans in the past year to invest heavily in ag biotech.

Despite industry claims that ag biotech is implemented and accepted by diverse groups of farmers growing diverse crops worldwide, the introduction of genetically engineered (GE) crops over the past five years is better characterized by uniformity, industrial agriculture and corporate concentration. In 2000, commercial GE crops were not diversified. Only four crops -- soybean, maize, cotton and canola -- accounted for virtually all crops planted. In the same year, 98% of all GE crops were grown in three countries: the U.S., Argentina and Canada. Three-quarters of the area devoted to GE crops last year was engineered for a single trait: herbicide tolerance. The rest was engineered for Bt crops, insect resistance or a combination of the two traits. Finally, only one company's GE seed technology -- Pharmacia (Monsanto) -- accounted for 94% of the total area sown to GE crops last year.

A University of California at Berkeley study illustrates the degree to which the Gene Giants control key patents and technology. At the end of 1998 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had granted 1,370 ag biotech patents to the top 30 patent assignees. Three-quarters (74%) of the ag biotech patents (of those awarded to the top 30 assignees) were held by six Gene Giants: Pharmacia (Monsanto; 287 patents), DuPont (279 patents), Syngenta (173 patents), Dow (157 patents), Aventis (77 patents) and Grupo Pulsar (38 patents).

The closely interlinked nature of the ag biotech, seed and agrochemical industries is clear: seven top ag biotech companies or "Gene Giants" (the top five plus Bayer and BASF) rank as the world's top seven agrochemical corporations. These seven Gene Giants also rank among the world's top 10 seed corporations.

The top two companies -- Syngenta and Pharmacia -- control 34% of the global agrochemical market, valued at US$29,880 million in 2000. Last year, the second year of decline, global agrochemical sales fell by 0.6%. According to industry analysts, sagging pesticide sales are a reflection of the global farm crisis -- the combination of overproduction and rock bottom commodity prices. Sales in North America, which account for nearly 30% of the world's total agrochemical sales, were up by 2.8% partly due to soybean plantings. One analyst predicts that the agrochemical market will grow by 1% per year over the next five years.

Top 10 Seed Companies (Ranked by sales in 2000)

2000

Seed Sales (US$, millions)

1. DuPont (Pioneer) -- USA $1,938

2. Pharmacia (Monsanto) -- USA $1,600

3. Syngenta -- Switzerland pro forma $958

4. Groupe Limagrain -- France $622

5. Grupo Pulsar (Seminis) -- Mexico $474

6. Advanta (AstraZeneca & Cosun)- U.K. and Netherlands $373

7. Dow (+Cargill North America) -- USA $350

8. KWS AG -- Germany $332

9. Delta & Pine Land -- USA $301

10. Aventis -- France $267

Source: ETC Group (Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration), "Globalization Inc. -- Concentration in Corporate Power:

The Unmentioned Agenda" July/August, 2001, available at http://www.rafi.org .

Contact: ETC Group (formerly known as Rural Advancement Foundation International, or RAFI). P.O. Box 68016 RPO Osborne, Winnipeg MB, R3L 2V9, Canada; phone 204-453-5259; fax 204-925-8034; email rafi@rafi.org ; Web site http://www.rafi.org .

PANUPS is a weekly email news service providing resource guides and reporting on pesticide issues that don't always get coverage by the mainstream media. It's produced by Pesticide Action Network North America, a non-profit and non-governmental organization working to advance sustainable alternatives to pesticides worldwide.

To comment, send a message to: panna@panna.org

To subscribe, send a blank message to: panups-subscribe@igc.topica.com  

Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) 49 Powell St., Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94102 USA , Phone: (415) 981-1771, Fax: (415) 981-1991 Email: panna@panna.org  Web: http://www.panna.org 

===================================================================

P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service, GE Crops Expand in China

August 31, 2001

In 1988, China's genetically engineered (GE) tobacco became the first GE crop in the world to be grown commercially. Production of the crop was halted in the mid-1990s, however, due to rejection of GE crops in export markets. Undeterred by this false start, Beijing has recently forged ahead into the brave new world of biotechnology, testing over 100 genetically engineered crops since 1997. Despite recent regulation of GE crops and products, government-supported research continues as China looks for ways to achieve self-sufficiency in food production and gain an edge in the growing biotech industry.

"China is very concerned about raising yields of crops to enhance its food security. Biotechnology offers high hopes," according to a Chinese agronomist quoted in a Reuters report. The government also hopes the biotech industry will continue to lure back Chinese scientists who left the country to study and work abroad.

China's biotech industry is dominated by government research institutes and universities, some of which are developing state owned enterprises to market their products. Only a few foreign firms have contracted with Chinese institutes to conduct biotech research because of China's weak intellectual property laws. Several foreign seed companies have formed joint ventures with Chinese state owned enterprises, a requirement for selling seeds of major food crops in China. Most are currently focused on the conventional seed market, but Monsanto and Delta and Pine Land have established a joint venture with the Hebei Provincial Seed Company to sell GE cotton seed.

Transgenic Bt cotton is the most widely grown GE crop in China, with estimates ranging from over 700,000 hectares to one million hectares, or about one-third of the total cotton crop. GE proponents in China point to the success of Bt cotton in greatly reducing pesticide use, and reducing overall production cost for farmers by 20%. However, according to some reports, the cotton bollworm has already developed resistance to Bt in two provinces in China.

Other commercialized GE crops include tomato, sweet pepper and petunia. Recent biotech research and development in China has spawned many more not-yet-commercialized products, including two species of Bt rice engineered to be resistant to the pyralid moth. In July, China announced development of genetically engineered tomato, eggplant and hot pepper plants that could be irrigated with seawater. Additional research is targeting rice, canola and wheat. By transferring genes of salt-tolerant plants like the mangrove into fresh-water crops, Chinese scientists claim that transgenic plants have survived seawater irrigation for four generations.

New Regulations

In May 2001, the government issued new regulations for genetically engineered products that require mandatory labeling and safety assessment. The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for certifying non-GE exports, and approving GE imports, and has the authority to ban production, processing and trading of any GE product that is proven hazardous. So far no GE imports have been banned, but the regulations imply that sales of some GE products may be restricted to certain areas within China. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce Trade Information Center, "The regulations are vague, leaving most of the details to the agencies tasked with enforcement."

Because the new regulatory process will slow crop approvals for commercialization from three months to nine months, Monsanto, the largest seller of Bt cotton in China, estimates the new data requirements will delay commercialization of its Bt maize for at least a year. Rejection of GE products by European markets and governments was the most direct cause for the new GE labeling restrictions in China. In 2000, Britain banned the import of Chinese soy sauce containing GE soybeans -- soybeans grown in the U.S., but processed in China.

Some argue China's latest regulations on GE crops serve to strengthen the domestic biotech industry while restricting competition with foreign (mainly U.S.) biotech companies. When the European Union announced its four-year GE moratorium, Chinese biotech scientist Chen Zhangliang wrote, "We can take advantage of this four-year halt to turn China into a world power in genetically modified organisms."

Meanwhile, a small but growing number of Chinese activist groups are educating the public about the risks of GE food. Lo Sze Ping of Greenpeace Hong Kong said, "I think people in Hong Kong realize that genetic engineering isn't just found in international markets anymore. Now they're wondering about what they buy at their local supermarket." Governments in Hong Kong, and in Taiwan, are advocating stricter GE food labeling standards, despite industry complaints.

Sources:

San Francisco Chronicle, April 3, 2001. The New York Times, October 7, 2000. Reuters, April 5, 1999. "The China Connection," PAN A/P Safe Food Campaign, 1998. Agence France Presse, July 11, 2001. People's Daily Online, June 7, 2001 and July 20, 2001. BIOWATCH: Genetic Engineering Newsletter, No 18, January 2001. Customs Information and Import Documentation: Genetically Modified Organisms: New Regulations. China Market Information Center: International Trade Administration. U.S. Department of Commerce, June 2001. South China Morning Post, April 18, 2001. Asiaweek.com, January 21, 2000. Agrow: World Crop Protection News, 12/01/00, 3/02/01 and 6/15/01. Public and Private Collaboration On Plant Biotechnology In China, AgBioForum, 2(1), 48-53.

Email: panna@panna.org  Web: http://www.panna.org

=============================================================

From Pesticide Action Network Updates Service Resource Pointer #264

September 13, 2001

For copies of the following resources, please contact the appropriate publishers or organizations directly. *India: Facts and Figures, 2001* Mohan M. Mathews. Provides a comprehensive overview on health, nutrition, human rights and pertinent legislation from renewable energy to biopiracy to toxics. Contains factual information that will assist non-governmental organizations,

United Nations bodies and other international organizations as well as journalists and researchers with an interest in India. 392 pages. US$28 + shipping. Contact Forlaget Hjulet, Bakkegårds Allé 9, kld., 1804 Frederiksberg Copenhagen, Denmark; phone (45) 36-44 4320; email bharat@worldonline.com.

*Pesticides in India--Environment and Health Sourcebook, 2000* Toxics Link. Discusses the pesticide industry in India, from manufacture to use. Includes graphs and charts. Provides a directory of pesticide research laboratories in India and abstracts of pesticide research publications. 173 pages. US$10. Contact Toxics Link-Delhi, H-2 Ground floor, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014; phone (91-11) 432-8006; fax (91-11) 432-1747; email tldelhi@vsnl.com ; Web site http://www.toxicslink.org.

*Trojan Horses -- Persistent Organic Pollutants in India, 2000* Srishti and Toxics Link. Critiques pesticide policy, manufacture and use in India. Discusses how most policy makers and residents know little about the effects of pesticides like DDT, poly chlorinated biphenyls and other persistent organic pollutants like dioxins and furans. Includes information on alternatives. 83 pages. US$10. Contact Toxics Link- Delhi, H-2 Ground floor, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014; phone (91-11) 432-8006; fax (91-11) 432-1747; email tldelhi@vsnl.com ; Web site http://www.toxicslink.org.

*Cloning Bhopal -- Exposing the Dangers in Delhi's Environment, 1999* Toxics Link. With Bhopal gas tragedy as a backdrop, the report focuses on the impacts of industrial pollution in India's capital, Delhi. Includes three case studies: the PVC cable manufacturing industry, the steel industry and a market where chemicals are bought and sold. Discusses health hazards, poor working conditions and environmental hazards. 25 pages. US$5. Contact Toxics Link- Delhi, H-2 Ground floor, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014; phone (91-11) 432 8006; fax (91-11) 432 1747; email tldelhi@vsnl.com ; Web site http://www.toxicslink.org  .

*Transforming the Rural Asian Economy: The Unfinished Revolution, 2000 - A study of Rural Asia Vol 1* Mark W. Rosegrant and Peter B. R. Hazell. Study by the Asian Development Bank. Analyzes the effects of public policies and strategies on economic growth, poverty and the environment. Examines achievements of and prospects for rural Asia. Provides a vision for the future of agriculture and rural development in Asia. 512 pages. US$24.95. Contact Oxford University Press (China) Ltd., 18th Floor, Warwick House East, Taikoo Place, 979 King's Road, Quarry Bay, Hong Kong; phone (852) 2516-3222; fax (852) 2565-8491; email webmaster@oupchina.com.hk ; Web site http://www.oupchina.com.hk .

We encourage those interested in having resources listed in the PANUPS Resource Pointer to send review copies of publications, videos or other resources to our office.

PANUPS is a weekly email news service providing resource guides and  reporting on pesticide issues that don't always get coverage by the mainstream media. It's produced by Pesticide Action Network North  America, a non-profit and non-governmental organization working to advance sustainable alternatives to pesticides worldwide

-------

To subscribe, send a blank message to: panups-subscribe@igc.topica.com

Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), Email: panna@panna.org   Web: http://www.panna.org

============================================

end of newsletter/English/4