Agrochemicals and Health: An Anthropological Perspective

Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients,  Jan, 2001  by Tim Batchelder

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

Novel, human-made, chemicals in the environment are increasingly linked to a variety of health disorders including cancers and chemical sensitivities. By far the greatest source of these chemicals is modern agriculture. While the negative biological effects of these chemicals is clear, the more difficult societal questions of why we continue to use them and how we can effectively control their use, remain unanswered. In this column we'll go to the source of these problems and discuss the shifting roles and health effects of agrochemicals from a broader environmental and cultural perspective, concentrating on their use among the population with the greatest exposure: farmers. Finally, we'll discuss the natural foods industry as a viable solution to some of these problems. This analysis draws heavily on several recent articles in Human Organization by Thu et al. (1998) and Grey (2000).

The Green Revolution

Agriculture in the United States is applauded as a model of productivity and efficiency in the post World War II era. Industrialized agriculture is defined by the replacement of human labor with capital intensive tools and inputs heavily dependent on fossil fuels, the consolidation of farm land, and increasingly centralized control over the distribution of food resources (Thu and Durrenberger 1998). This has led to the greatest concentration of agricultural land, the fewest number of farms, and the smallest proportion of the total population (2%) involved in farming in US history. There are 1.9 million farms in the US at present which is the lowest number since the Civil War and 50% of all US agricultural land is owned by 4% of the owners (USDA Economic Research Service 1992).

Health Effects of Agrochemical Use

Perhaps one of the best indicators of the dangers of agrochemicals is the alarming public health crisis currently occurring among farmers, farm workers, and their families. The National Safety Council's (NSC) annual survey of occupations shows that over the past 20 years agriculture has trailed only mining in the annual number of work-related fatalities. In 1996, there were 24 fatalities on average for every 100,000 agricultural workers compared to the average of 4 fatalities per 100,000 workers for all US industries combined (NSC 1996). NSC data indicate that agricultural workers suffer the second highest rate of work-related illness (NSC 1996) among all occupational sectors, including respiratory and zoonotic diseases (animal transmitted), increased risk for certain cancers, hearing deficits, musculoskeletal problems, and numerous skin conditions.

Respiratory disease is a very common type of agricultural health problem. Toxic gases and dusts on the farm cause such conditions as chronic bronchitis, occupational asthma, organic dust toxic syndrome, farmer's lung, and silo filler's disease. Farmers are disabled by lung disease more often than any other occupational group (Mutel and Donham 1983). Almost 30% of U.S. swine producers suffer from at least one chronic respiratory problem including chronic bronchitis, occupational asthma, and organic dust toxic syndrome (Thorne et al. 1996). Organic dust is the major threat for agricultural production workers. These problems are most common among countries with industrialized agriculture but as more confined livestock production technologies are exported to developing areas such as Southeast Asia and Central America these threats are increasing for workers there (Thu, Zwerling, and Donham 1998).

Farmers and farm workers also suffer from cancer at higher rates than the general population. Cancers of the stomach, brain, prostate, and skin, as well as leukemia, non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, and multiple myeloma have been found to occur at higher rates in the farming population (Blair et al. 1992). Kidney, bladder, prostate, lymphoma, and large bowel cancers also occur at higher rates among farmers.

Skin diseases occur at higher frequencies in agricultural workers in the US than any other occupation (NSC 1996). Occupational skin disease may account for up to 70% of all occupational diseases among agricultural workers in certain regions of the U.S. Common sources of contact dermatitis on the farm include fertilizers, plants, and pesticides. Of particular note is dermatitis from contact with livestock feed. Feeds containing additives such as antibiotics can result in allergic dermatitis. Farmers also suffer .from high rates of skin cancer. Epidemiological research indicates that farmers are at higher risk for squamous cell carcinoma than nonfarmers (Hogan and Lane 1986).

Economic Costs of Agrochemical Exposure

Significant losses in economic efficiency and productivity most likely result from these types of widespread health problems among farmers. However, current economic research methods are notably biased in this area. Conventional measures of economic productivity and efficiency in US agriculture typically calculate the cost and amount of inputs relative to the price received and level of outputs. For example current measures include livestock feed cost per unit of animal, seed costs per acre, or bushels produced per acre. Land, machinery, seed, feed, veterinary supplies, insurance, and fertilizers are some of the highly selective units measured. These standard models do not include the massive health toll of industrial agriculture on the health of farmers, farm workers, and their families. A Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Nebraska report (Wirka 1996) showed that farmer health and injury problems result in significantly higher health insurance claims and costs compare with the general population. However, such cost s are not incorporated into standard economic models of agricultural efficiency and productivity.