Analytical methods for detecting pesticide switches with evolution of pesticide resistance
A Study on Pesticide Effects to the Rice Farmers and to the Environment in Kolambugan and Maigo, ...
-
Upload
independent -
Category
Documents
-
view
0 -
download
0
Transcript of A Study on Pesticide Effects to the Rice Farmers and to the Environment in Kolambugan and Maigo, ...
1
AES BIOFLUX Advances in Environmental Sciences - International Journal of the Bioflux Society
A Study on Pesticide Effects to the Rice Farmers and to the Environment in Kolambugan and
Maigo, Lanao del Norte Ferlyn Villaroya Logronio
1 Department of Biological Sciences, Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of
Technology, Iligan City, Philippines, [email protected]
Abstract. This article discusses the pesticide effects to the rice farmers’ health and to their environment
in the Municipalities of Kolambugan and Maigo in the Province of Lanao del Norte, Mindanao, Philippines.
Data were collected from randomly selected 100 rice farmers through one-on-one interviews between December 2013 and January 2014 using a semi-structured questionnaire to elicit demographic
information, various aspects of farming life, types and extent of pesticides use, exposure means and
manifestations of pesticide poisoning among the farmers. Reports showed that farmers were experiencing manifestations of pesticide poisoning which includes excessive sweating, skin allergies,
severe dry throat, dizziness and headache. There were also serious nail problem reported by the respondents. Moreover, environmental effects were felt during the use of pesticides which includes air
contamination, water contamination and occurence of dead small insects and animals in the farm.
Key Words: Rice farmers, rice production, impact of pesticides.
Introduction. Rice remains the staple food of Filipinos, despite rising per capita income
that had led to a more diversified diet in neighboring Asian countries. An average of one
hundred nineteen kilograms (119kg) of rice had been consumed by a Filipino within the
year 2009 - 2010. And four point thirty-five (4.35) million hectares of land area had been devoted to rice production in the Philippines (rappler.com 2012). The Philippine
population had rapidly grown from 60.7 million in 1990 to 76.3 million in 2000; 88.7
million in 2007; and 90.4 million in 2008. On the other hand, total rice production was
only 16.24 million tons (Bureau of Agricultural Statistics data) as compared to the needed volume of 18.5 million tons of rice in 2007. There is a shortfall of more than 2
million tons of rice, and this has to be imported from a thin world market (only 6-7
percent of world rice produced are traded in the world market) (Regalado 2010). Moreover, population in rice growing countries were increasing at a faster rate than food
production in the 1950s and 1960s. Because of these trends, several authorities predicted large-scale food shortages in Asia resulting in famines and social upheavals, by
the 1970s (Khush & Toenniessen 1991). Thus, giving birth to the green revolution, the
technological response to a world-wide food shortage (Fitzgerald & Parai 1996). When
the Green Revolution package was introduced to the Philippines, it promised to increase production of rice crops (Parveen & Nakagoshi 2001) to meet the growing needs of the
growing population. This "green revolution" was accompanied by an expanded use of
chemical inputs (Dolan 1991) and had doubled rice production (Maclean et al 2002).
Agriculture productivity in the country started to increase as a consequence of improved agricultural structure, especially irrigation, a massive increase in the application of
chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and the introduction of a new crop varieties known as
high-yield varieties (R. Tirado and D. Bedoya, 2008). A fundamental contributor to the
Green Revolution has been the development and application of pesticides for the control
2
of a wide variety of insectivorous and herbaceous pests that would otherwise diminish the
quantity and quality of food produce (FAO 1996). On the other hand, the usage of these pesticides had detrimental effects. It had been
devastating to humankind. The biggest impacts among human populations have been on
the farmers who face the occupational hazards of working with, and often living in close
proximity to, these toxic agents. (Kedia and Palis, 2008). In a subsequent report of the
World Health Organization issued between 1990 and 2002, estimated that from one to five million cases of pesticide poisoning occur among agricultural workers resulting in an
approximately 20,000 fatalities. Fourteen percent (14%) of all occupational injuries are
due to exposure to pesticides and other agrochemical constituents, and 10% of these
injuries - around 17,000 per year - are fatal. However, the reality of pesticide-related illness could actually be far worse, as no large-scale epidemiological studies have been
conducted anywhere in the world. The chemicals in pesticides may injure humans in a
variety of ways. Each chemical has a different effect and causes different symptoms.
Some are toxic to the liver, kidneys, and nervous system. Some affect the blood. Others may injure the lungs or the brain. Symptoms of pesticide poisoning range from
headache, nausea, and dizziness to convulsions, vomiting, and unconsciousness
(University of Minnesota Extension 2011).
Moreover, the use of pesticides also had an adverse drawbacks on the environment
(Tejada et al 1995). Pesticides as a biologically active substance intended to be effective against certain groups or organisms (Tarazona & Dohmen 2008). Once applied, many
pesticides are mobile in the environment. This movement can be beneficial if the
pesticide is carried to a specific target area, like a plant's root zone, or if it helps to
ensure that degradation occurs at the proper time and place. Sometimes, however, nontarget insects, plants and other organisms come into contact with the pesticide. This
can result in reduced control of the target pest and injury to non-target plants and
animals (Joern & Lohman 1994). It also kills organisms, wildlife, birds, fish, bees,
beneficial insects, and pest’s natural enemies (Panganiban 2005). On the other hand, widespread application of pesticides leads to drifting and contamination of land and
waterways. It causes also the contamination of groundwater which is a subject of
national importance because groundwater is used for drinking water by about 50 percent
of the Nation's population. This especially concerns people living in the agricultural areas
where pesticides are most often used, as about 95 percent of that population relies upon groundwater for drinking water (Perlman 2014). In addition to the harmful effect of
pesticide use is related to air pollution. According to the Stockholm Convention on
Persistent Organic Pollutants, 9 of the 12 most dangerous and persistent organic
chemicals are pesticides that move long distances, taken up the food chain and accumulate everywhere.
Most documented studies related to pesticide exposure have included small groups of
farmers in a selected few countries and have been primarily based on self-reports or
extrapolation from vital statistics. This is likely due to the challenges associated with clearly establishing the casual links of the chronic health symptoms with prolonged
pesticides exposure and the pesticides effects to the environment. These studies have,
however, consistently reported the negative impacts of pesticides use. The primary goal
of this paper are: (1) To know the common pesticides being used by the farmers;
(2) To ascertain pesticide exposure risks associated with a particular farming
population, Filipino rice farmers in 2 municipalities of Lanao del Norte, namely,
the Municipalities of Kolambugan and Maigo;
(3) To name the manifestation of pesticide poisoning experienced by the farmers; (4) To identify the most common environmental problems evident in the area.
Material and Method. The Province of Lanao del Norte, in the Island of Mindanao,
Philippines, consistently ranks second in Region 10 in terms of total Provincial Palay Production. In 2007, its production increased by 6.8% from 134,751 metric tons in 2006
to 143,905 metric tons. It was accompanied by the increase in the total area harvested
by 4.3% or 1,619 hectares and the average yield per hectare at 3.7 metric tons/hectare
3
(PIO Lanao del Norte, 2013). The Municipalities of Kolambugan and Maigo in the Province
of Lanao del Norte was selected as the study site as both municipalities were among the eleven rice producing municipalities in the province. Kolambugan and Maigo has the
geographical coordinates of 8.1167° N, 123.9000° E and 8.1500° N, 123.9667° E,
respectively. The Municipalities of Kolambugan and Maigo are accessibly located along
the Panguil Bay area facing Ozamiz City in the Province of Misamis Occidental, 47 kilometers west of the capital town of Tubod. Both are centrally located northwest of the
Province. The Municipality of Kolambugan is bounded by the Panguil Bay on the North,
Municipality of Tangcal and Magsaysay on the South; the Municipality of Maigo on the
East; the Municipality of Tubod on the West. On the other hand, the Municipality of Maigo is bounded by the Panguil Bay on the north, Municipality of Munai; Municipality of
Kauswagan on the East; and the Municipality of Kolambugan on the west. (Figure 1).
A field work was done during December 2013 to January 2014 in the Municipalities of
Kolambugan and Maigo. A random sampling of 100 farmers in the municipalities were purposely selected. Study participants were men and women who had been actively
involved in farming and pesticide application for at least one year. This study also
included rice farmer and farm workers as well as those who manages farmland. A semi-
structured questionnaire was used. A quantitative and qualitative questions were used to
collect data on demographics, pesticides being used, frequency of application, pesticide exposure, container disposal, and self-reported illnesses. The original English
questionnaire was translated into the local dialect. Courtesy calls were done to barangay
captains prior to the conduct of the study. List of farmers were also provided by the
respective barangay chairmen for reference. The interviews were done on one-on-one discussion with the respondents in their respective houses or in the farm where they
work. Interviews were also done at solar dryer areas where many farmers gathered to
wait for the rice they dried.
The data were then tabulated and were analysed using the available online tool that automatically computes a statistical mean value found at www.mathisfun.com and other
quantitative data were entered into Microsoft Excel and analysed using the formulas that
were already included in MS Office.
Figure 1. Geographical Location of the two study municipalities, marked with yellow stars.
Inset on the lower right-hand portion is the map of the Philippines with an arrow pointing to Mindanao. Inset on the upper left-hand portion is the map of Mindanao with an arrow pointing Lana del Norte.
4
Results and Discussion. Among the 100 farmers included in this study, there were 72% or 72 males and 28% or 28 female. The respondents were composed of sixty-nine
male sprayers, eleven female sprayers, and the remaining population (20%) were
involved in other farm works like in the land preparation, ploughing, weeding, planting
and harvesting. Female participation in the rice production was noted in the area. This may be the cause where available labour sources increasingly scarce such as in the rural-
urban migration of male agricultural labour (Huvio 1998) additional reasons for the
involvement includes as replacement for their husbands’ absence due to illnesses, sole
responsibility to the family (single parenthood) and to help their husband in the work. Majority of this study population (43% or n=43) belonged to 41-50 age group, followed
by 51-60 (29%, n=29), both age group belonging to 31 - 40 and 61 - 70 had 10% or ten
respondents respectively and below 20 - 30 and above 70 age bracket had 4% or 4
respondents each (Table 1). It was observed that the age bracket of 41-50 was the most prevalent age in this study because during this age bracket men were said to be most
productive since they have a stronger work ethics compared to younger men (Blauth et
al 2011). This age bracket of the respondents further attested the findings in a study that
much of the youth today shun farming as a profession or business undertaking because
of its perceived hardships, and many farming families were part of the Philippines’ poor sector (Cariño 2013). Moreover, educational attainment showed that most of the
respondents or 43% had high school education. Followed by 40% or 40 farmers who
attended and finished elementary education. 13% or 13 farmers were at college level,
3% or 3 farmers had vocational trainings and 2% or 2 participants had not attended school (Table 1). It was prominent that most of the farmers got high school and
elementary levels and did not pursue college education. It was further observed that
people with college and vocational background choose to work on different field rather
than farming. Others on this educational attainment just tend to manage the farm and do not do actual field works. Respondents with high educational attainment had higher
awareness on the effects of pesticides exposure thus hiring people to do the spraying of
the chemicals to their farms. The average household size of the respondents ranged from
1 to 16 family members. Majority (91%) of these farmers were renting or tenanting the
rice field that they were working on. Table 1
Study Population Demographics (N=100)
Frequency (n) Percent (%)
Gender
Male 72 72.0 Female 28 28.0
Age group
<20 - 30
31-40 41-50
51-60
61-70
>70 Education
No schooling
Elementary
High school
College Vocational Course
Land ownership
Own
Rent
4
10 43
29
10
4
2
39
43
13 3
9
91
4.0
10.0 43.0
29.0
10.0
4.0
2.0
39.0
43.0
13 3.0
9.0
91.0
Ninety-eight percent of the farmers in this study used agrochemical pesticides in their respective rice fields to control weeds, insect infestation and diseases. While 2
5
respondents practice organic farming methods. When those who used substances as
pesticides were asked what chemicals they applied in their farms, the participating farmers provided a rather extensive list of brand names, often with similar or the same
chemical base, yielding 37 agrochemicals, in which 26 were insecticides (24 were found
at the Registered List of Pesticides in the Philippines and 2 were named by the farmers
but not found in the list of pesticides nor at any web search engine), 5 were herbicides, 3 were molluscicides, 1 was rodenticides and 2 were fungicides (Table 2).
Table 2
Types of Pesticides Used Annually by Active Ingredient as reported among rice farmers
Pesticide Type and Active
Ingredient
Product Name EPA
Toxicity
Category^
Frequency
of the
Farmers
Herbicides
2, 4-D Amine
Butachlor + 2, 4-D IBE 2, 4-D Amine
Butachlor
Glyphosate IPA
Shelter 2, 4-D Amine
Rogue Hedonal Liq. SL 400
Machete
Round up 48% SL
II
III II
IV
IV
13
36 15
5
2
Insecticides
Fipronil Cypermethrin
Chlorothalonil + Cypermethrin
Chlorpyrifest BPMC
Cypermethrin Cypermethrin
Cartap hydrochloride
Beta cypermethrin
Cypermethrin Cypermethrin
Deltamethrin
Lambdacyhalothrin
MIPC
Lambdacyhalothrin Lambdacyhalothrin
Methomyl
Malathion
Dinotefuran Cartap hydrochloride
Diazinon
Chlorpyrifos
Fenithrothion Endosulfan
Etofenprox
Molluscicide
Niclosamide Metaldehyde
Metaldehyde
Rodenticides
Zinc Phospide
Fungicide Difenoconazole + Propiconazole
Benomyl
Ascend 50 SC Attack 5R
Blink EC
Brodan 31.5 EC
Bull’s Eye Bushwack
Cartap ES
Chix 2.5 EC
Cymbush 5 EC Cypermethrin 5 EC
Decis-R
Descarte 2.5 EC
Hytox 50 WP
Jolina 2.5 EC Karate 2.5 EC
Lannate 40 SP
Malathion
Oshin 20 Sg Padan 50 SP
Parafest D 400 EC
Paraulod 300 EC
Sumithion 50 EC Thiodan EC
Trebon Excel 10 EC
Bayluscide 250 EC Porsnail 45 WP
Snailkill 6%P
Zinc Phospide 80 DP
Armure 300 EC
Protekur 50 WP
III IV
II
II
IV IV
III
III
IV IV
IV
II
III
II II
II
IV
IV III
II
II
II II
IV
IV IV
IV
II
III
IV
1 1
3
7
15 4
21
2
2 10
9
4
2
4 27
1
37
1 4
5
1
2 3
1
1 2
6
13
1
1
^II = moderately hazardous chemicals; III=Slighty toxic and slightly irritating; IV= Practically non-toxic and
not an irritant (EPA Toxicity Categories) Note. Respondents were allowed to give multiple responses.
6
The pesticides mentioned by the farmers contained hazardous chemicals as listed
and classified by the EPA which can be potentially harmful to the environment and to human health. Among the identified 37 pesticides, 37.8% or 14 are classified under Tox
Category II or moderately hazardous chemicals and another 14 products were classified
under Tox Category IV or practically non-toxic and not an irritant. In addition, 7
pesticides (18.9%) belonged to Category III or slightly toxic and slightly irritating. It was noted that pesticides under Toxicity Category II was still being widely used and common
among farmers in spite the fact that they were moderately toxic and caused moderate
irritations. Collective reasons of the farmers for using such chemicals were for their low
prices which can be afforded by poor farmers. It was also reported that those common chemicals under Tox Category II were effective in killing the common pest in the rice
fields. So regardless of their effects to the farmers and to the environment they were
commonly used because of their low prices and for their efficacy.
Moreover, 34.91 percent (n=37) personally decided on the brand of the chemicals they were going to use. This was based on their previous experiences with a certain
brand which they perceived to be effective and worked better in their area. Thirty-five or
33.02% of the respondents followed the advices of agriculture technicians that would
come to their locale either from the local government or from local pesticide
manufacturers promoting their products. Furthermore, the remaining respondents either imitated the brands used with their neighbours which were perceived to be effective or
sought advices from the local storekeepers on the effective and most saleable pesticide
on hand. Most of the pesticides were bought from the nearby cities of Ozamis and Iligan.
Other farmers got their pesticides from local agri-vet store in the neighbouring municipalities of Maigo, Tubod and Lala, all of Lanao del Norte which would lessen their
cost of transportation. Reportedly, 53% of the farmers kept on changing the brand of the
chemicals that they were using, most common reason for the action was that chemical
brands would be dependent on the kind of the pest that attacked on a specific area. Another reason for changing the brand of the pesticides used was to avoid the immunity
defence of the insect to a certain chemical, they said that if they kept on using the same
chemicals the pest will develop tolerance to these medicines thus reducing its
effectiveness. Another common reason for changing the brands of chemicals was due to
the recommendation of the agriculture technologists that came to their area and promoted their new products or gave them incentives like free sample to use or apply.
And another reason would also be dependent on the available cash of the farmers, if they
had much money they would buy the expensive medicines and vice-versa. Furthermore,
90% of the respondents did not buy chemicals without proper labels. Most of the respondents said that they were doubtful especially in using chemicals which were not
labelled that is why they were precautious. They said that pesticides were already
harmful so they would not venture on none-labelled one. Moreover, on an accredited
agricultural supplies store in the area, all of the pesticides that they were selling had proper labelling and had the recommended pesticides to be used by farmers. Meanwhile,
a population of 3% was able to acquire none-labelled pesticides from transient peddlers
who were offering the pesticides in low prices without the labels and they seemingly said
that it was ineffective. On the other hand, the remaining 2% of the study population that did not use agro-
chemical pesticides on their farms were practising organic farming. Their common pest
control was the application of organic pesticides made from fermented herbs such as
garlic, hot pepper, ginger, lemon grass, “panyawan”, and other materials present in the
locality. The fermented juice of this mixture was then applied to the farm and said to reduce the occurrence of black bugs and any other insect that would infest on the rice
and eventually affecting productivity. Moreover, there were seminars and trainings
regarding natural farming system and other farming techniques that would prevent the
farmers from using chemical pesticides thus, reducing the farmers’ exposure to toxic chemicals but it was sad to note that these trainings and seminars were unsuccessful.
Majority of the farmers in the study area were not practicing what they learned from
those activities. They said that the use of organic farming and any other natural farming
system would give lesser yield to the farmers thus eventually resulting to hunger.
7
Moreover, there were less opportunities and venues that taught the farmers
regarding the proper use of agro-chemical pesticides in the area. Lack of appropriate information concerning the safe handling of agrochemicals and their possible health and
environmental impacts contributed to the participating farmers’ chronic pesticide
exposure and causing related illnesses (Kedia & Palis 2008). Sixty four percent of the
respondents who applied pesticides in this study did not have appropriate information or trainings about the proper handling and proper precautions in using pesticides. They only
got information on pesticide use from other farmers, prior experiences, and information
that was being passed from their parents. The remaining thirty-six percent of the study
sample got trainings from agricultural technician promoting their products or from the Municipal Agriculture’s Office. Nonetheless, those trainings and information were not
applied by the farmers.
Based on the information gathered in this study, the period of farmer’s exposure in
the field ranged from one year to sixty-six years with the statistical mean of 25.144 years. Farmers were working at a mean of 4.81 hours a day at an average of 6.47 days
in a week. Most of the pesticide exposure for the rice farmers in this study came from the
multiple applications in each cropping period with the average of 9.5, from mishandling of
agrochemicals and from a lifetime environmental exposure through working and
inhabiting areas barraged with pesticides. Farm workers were exposed to pesticides directly and indirectly. People can be
exposed to pesticides in three ways: Inhaling pesticides, absorbing pesticides and getting
pesticides in the mouth or digestive tract or oral exposure (Amoguis, et. al., 2010).
Moreover, farmworkers were exposed to pesticides in a variety of ways. Workers who perform hand labour tasks in treated areas risk exposure from direct spray or contact
with pesticide residues on the crop or soil. Workers who mix, load, or apply pesticides
can be exposed to pesticides due to spills, splashes, and defective, missing or inadequate
protective equipment (Farmworker Justice 2013). In this study farmers who do the actual spraying were exposed to the pesticides during the mixing process or while pouring into
sprayers. When preparing of agrochemicals for an application, 90% of the respondents
diluted directly the concentrated liquids or powders in the sprayer chances of directly
inhaling the chemicals were high since most of the respondents, or 82% did not use any
eye protection, mask and gloves for shield. Unavailability of those protection gear was one of the main reasons why they did not use any, other reasons included as perceived
by the farmers that these gear were uncomfortable. Additional sources of dermal
exposure risk were simple and ineffective use of ordinary pants (89=n), long-sleeve
shirts (88=n), caps (86=n), and improvised masks (73=n) which were meant to strip off unhealthy pesticide exposure. According to Kedia and Palis (2008) in their article that
these local means of protection served to create a greater risk because they were porous
and soaked with pesticides by the end of an application, keeping doses of toxins close
against the skin. Most of the farmers were also bare-footed in applying pesticide, since as they said it was very uncomfortable to wear shoes when spraying or even when working
on the farm. This further exposed the skin through constant contact with newly sprayed
grounds and plants, leaving sores and cuts on feet and ankle exposed to toxins. Among
the 100 farmers interviewed, only one farmer was using a complete protective gear which included an over-all vest which was water proof, a helmet and a boots. This
protective gear was reportedly owned by the respondent’s cousin from another
municipality and will only be borrowed if the respondent will be applying pesticide in his
farm. When being asked why he did not buy his own gear he said it was very expensive
and his cousin only got it from a foreign donor. It was also noted that one female respondent practiced a habit of putting in mineral oil to herself before doing farm works
especially when applying pesticides. She said that this would prevent the direct
absorption of the chemicals into her body, thus reducing the risk of pesticide poisoning.
But on the other hand in a study conducted it was stated that the use of mineral oil in the skin would increase the risk skin cancer (International Agency for Research on Cancer
2011), this misconception of the farmer would eventually lead to another serious
problem.
8
Accordingly, there were three respondents who willingly admitted that they smoke
during the application of pesticides. They said that smoking cigarette would lessen the tiredness they were feeling in doing the work. Unknowingly, farmers who smoke during
application of pesticides were exposed to risk of having Lymphohaematopoitic cancers
(Kokouva 2011). Furthermore, 14% (n=14) of the respondents blew the nozzle of the
sprayer when it was clogged. They said that it would be easier to remove the object blocking the nozzle if they blow it using their mouth. Both practices of smoking and
blowing of the nozzle would put the farmers at risk of directly inhaling and ingesting the
chemicals, which they were unmindful of. Another noted malpractice in the application of
pesticides was the spraying of the farmers even if there were a strong winds. Agricultural
chemicals applied under unfavorable weather conditions from poorly adjusted or poorly operated equipment can drift away from the target. Crops and pastures can be damaged
from the spray drift of herbicides while people, stock and water supplies can be affected
by insecticide drift. The resulting pollution, crop damage and the potential health
hazards are things that are no longer environmentally acceptable. Additionally, pesticide that drifts away from the target reduces the efficiency of the product on the target and
spray failures are a waste of money and effort (IRRI 2009).
In addition, 83 respondents said that they took a bath after spraying and 90%
changed their working clothes after the application. This clearly showed the attitudes of the Filipino to be very mindful in terms of cleanliness. The remaining 8 respondents did
not immediately take a bath after the pesticide application because they said that they
will still work on another farm. Also, 60% of the farmers would re-enter the previously
sprayed field after a day or less to check the efficacy of the medicines they applied,
exposing them to additional risk of breathing the fine pesticides mist left on the field (Keida & Palis 2008). It was also observed in the conduct of this study that there were no
markers placed to warn the people that they were applying pesticides, thus extending the
exposure to the passers-by and other farm workers.
Even when not working in the fields, farmworker families, especially children, were also at risk of elevated pesticide exposure (Farmworker Justice 2013). Pesticides were
stored in houses of the farmers, though most of the respondents (90%) created a
separate storage area for the chemicals away from food supplies and from the reach of
the children. Moreover, 51% of the farmer respondent cleaned their empty pesticide container on canals within the rice field in which water would directly flow to the nearby
sea. Twenty-six percent (26%) washed them on the waters of the field itself and 14%
brought their empty containers at home and washed it on their water faucet which would
further extend the exposure to their family members. Majority of the farmers (73%)
buried their empty pesticide container on deep holes within the rice field or at their respective homes, others would directly throw it anywhere while others sell the empty
pesticides containers. Contaminated applicator clothing and dirt brought into the home
may also be a source of pesticide exposure indoors (Alavanja et al). Moreover, workers
bring pesticides into their homes in the form of residues on their tools, clothes, shoes, and skin. They inadvertently expose their children through a hug if they cannot shower
after work (Farmworker Justice 2013). The farmers run high risks of poisoning when
handling pesticides (Bartlett & Bijlmakers 2003).
This study was able to ascertain those risk that the respondents were manifesting while applying chemicals in their respective fields. The signs and symptoms noted from
this study was similar to the past studies that were being conducted regarding the health
effects of pesticide exposure to the rice farmers. There were reported common acute
health problems like fatigue, dizziness, burning sensation in the eyes/face, itching/skin irritation, chest symptoms and body pain. There were also reported chronic health-
related symptoms which were categorized as neurological, dermal, systemic, respiratory,
ophthalmic, gastro/renal and cardiovascular. Diseases and health issues like Alzheimer’s
Disease, asthma, birth and fetal defects, brain cancer, breast cancer, leukemia,
lymphoma, prostate cancer, soft tissue sarcoma and other cancers, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes and reproductive health
effects had also been linked to pesticide exposure. (Kedia & Palis 2008; Amoguis et al
2010; Owens et al 2010; Rola 1994; Mohd Fuad et al 2012; Abu Mourad 2005). Table 3
9
showed the most prevalent signs and symptoms that were experienced by the farmers in
Kolambugan and Maigo Lanao del Norte.
Table 3
Signs and Symptoms that were experienced by the farmers while spraying pesticides
Signs and Symptoms Frequency
Severe dry throat
Excessive sweating
Dizziness
Headache Difficulty in Breathing
Skin Allergies
Salivation
Coughing Vomiting
Diarrheal
Fatigue
48
73
33
27 11
61
2
21 1
2
3
Note. Farmers were allowed to have multiple answers.
Depending upon the toxicity of the compound, dosage and exposure time, the
adverse effects of pesticides poisoning ranges from headaches, vomiting, skin irritation, respiratory problems to other neurological disorders (Jors et al., 2006). Most cases of
pesticide-related illness and poisoning were not reported because victims do not
generally consult with a biomedical doctor or hospital or because their illnesses were not
accurately diagnosed as related to pesticide exposure (Kedia & Palis 2008). In this study, for example, it was observed that those respondents who were on the lower age bracket
(>20-40 age group) did not perceived these signs and symptoms to be the effects of
pesticide poisoning, so they continue to do their work disregarding the indications they
were feeling. On the other hand, in the older age bracket professed that those were the effects of exposures to pesticides but did not have the enough financial capabilities for
medication. In addition, in the Philippines, for, example, the number of poisonings was
likely underestimated because most cases did not reach the hospital, health officers may
not always correctly diagnose pesticide poisoning (Maramba 1995; Mendoza 1995).
Furthermore, most of the farmers reported that they experienced fatigue and body pains after a daylong application of pesticides in their respective farms. They said that most
likely it was a result of the heavy weight sprayer carried on their back. Common remedy
done by the farmers, at the end of the day, would be a back massage using essential oil.
But, unknowingly, these muscle weakness and fatigue were early symptoms of organophosphate poisoning from pesticides (Schulze 1997). In addition, respondents also
experienced burning sensation on their back especially if the sprayer was full and some of
the chemicals will spill directly at the skin of the farmer. The burning sensation was
preceded by severe itching of the exposed skin. Common remedy done by the farmers would be the removal of the contaminated clothing and washing the skin with detergent
soap and running water. This chemical burns on the skin was a general symptoms that
might indicate a severe pesticide poisoning according to the Canadian Centre for
Occupational Health and Safety (2010) that of not given proper medical attention would
cause greater problem. And lastly there were also reported nail problems common in the farmers (Figure 2). Exposure to paraquat concentrates may cause blackening of the nails
and abnormal nail growth (Schulze 1997). The effects of pesticide exposure did not limit
only on those manifested signs and symptoms. During the interviews that were
conducted for this study, it was found out that there was an incidence of death that was allegedly linked to pesticide. The said farmer was severely sick of a respiratory ailment
that led to his death. That farmer was said to be a chain smoker and even smoked when
applying pesticides. Moreover, there were also reports of farmers that were severely
diagnose with chronic diseases like respiratory ailments, paralysis, Parkinson’s disease and many others.
10
Figure 2. Toe nail of a female respondent, a common nail appearance among the farmers.
Moreover, pesticides that were used to control weed, insect, and other pests on
rice farms can also be detrimental to our environment. Thus, the effects of pesticide
application did not limit only to health impacts. The environment was also affected in its
continuous use. In this study when the respondents were asked if they experienced contaminated air during the application of pesticides, 91% of the respondents said that
the air is contaminated. It was manifested by the smell of medicines mixed with the air.
Smell of the pesticides applied will reach the nearby school (in cases of Segapod Rice
Field and Kulasihan Rice field), as well as the houses near the rice field. The close proximity of agricultural fields to residential areas results in aerial drift of pesticides into
farmworkers’ homes, schools, and playgrounds. Pesticides in agriculture and urban
settings have the potential to contaminate our air, affecting human, animal and plant
health (NPIC 2011). People living near the rice fields reported signs and symptoms of pesticide poisoning which includes dizziness, difficulty in breathing and headache. There
had been no actions had been made to address this problem. Furthermore, there were
also respondents (4%) that said that application of pesticides had contaminated the
water in the study area. It was manifested by the taste and smell of the water flowing
from the water pump located within the vicinity of the rice field which was used for drinking by the farmers. Pesticides enter surface and ground water primarily
as runoff from crops and are most prevalent in agricultural areas (Pedersen 1997). The
health and environmental consequences of pesticide use are staggering, especially in
Third World countries where there are less stringent regulatory controls and less effective implementation of whatever laws there are to protect public health and the environment.
The use of synthetic pesticides and other chemicals results in contamination and
adulteration of food, degradation and pollution of soil, water and air, and increased
morbidity and mortality for the exposed population (Quijano 2003). In addition to the adverse environmental impacts brought about by pesticides application in the rice
production, 82% of the respondents said that they observed dead dragonflies, butterflies,
bees, lady bugs, frogs and small fishes within the rice paddy. These mentioned insects
were classified as beneficial organisms that played important role as pollinating agents (Fishel 2005). Furthermore, it showed that pesticide was usually capable of harming all
forms of life other than the targeted pest species. On account of this behaviour then,
they can best be described as biocides (Zacharia 2011).
11
Conclusions. In the two municipalities of Lanao del Norte, namely, Kolambugan and
Maigo, rice farming provides not only food for the farmer’s family but as well as food for the entire community. But coupled with the progressive rice production in the area is the
reliance of the farmers on agrochemicals. Unknowingly these agrochemicals had negative
effects on the human health not only to the farmers but as well as to their families,
people around their community and people consuming the products. Moreover, these agrochemicals also had negative effects on the environment, thus affecting the
biodiversity.
As to date there were less initiative from the Local Government Unit to advocate
against the use of pesticides in spite its known adverse effects to the farmer as well as to the people consuming their produce. Even more pressing is the fact that the exposure of
the farmers to pesticides was primarily due to a lack of information combined with
misguided local farming practices and was, therefore, avoidable. It is therefore
recommended that pesticide usage and application should be given higher priority especially in the areas of Kolambugan and Maigo, Lanao del Norte, Mindanao, Philippines
to reduce its effects.
Acknowledgements. The Researcher would like to acknowledge the Department of
Science and Technology – Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program for the funding of the research.
References.
Abu Mourad, t., 2005. „Adverse Impact of Insecticides on the Health of Palestinian Farmworkers in the Gaza trip: A hematologic Biomaker Study. International
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 11: 144-149
Alavanja, M., Blair, A., Sandler, D., Hoppin, J., Thomas, K., Pesticide Residues in the
Homes of Farm Families. Agricultural Health Study. file:///C:/Users/Windows8.1/Downloads/EDC364.pdf
Amoguis, D.M., Bontilao, S.M., Galarido, C., Lumamba, J.A., Paelmo, J.N., Rosal, R.M.
2010. Experiences in Pesticides Use among Farm Workers and Its Effect to their
Health. Nursing Research Journal, Vol. 2. P. 127-139.
Bartlett, A. and Bijlmakers, H., 2003 Did You Take Your Poison Today? IPM DANIDA Project. http://thailand.ipm-info.org/documents/Your_poison_today_
(English).pdf
Bercero, Digno II M. et. al. The High Price of Rice: Health Risk Assessment of Rice
Farmers in Lanao del Norte. A Scientific Paper 2011. Blauth, Cris, Jack Mc Daniel, et. al. Age – Based Stereotypes: Silent Killer of
Collaboration and Productivity. World Headquarters. 2011
www.achieveglobal.com
Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, 2010. Pesticides – Health Effects.
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/pesticides/health_effects.html
Cariño, C., 2013 Aging Filipino farmers to affect food security. The Manila Times.
http://manilatimes.net/aging-filipino-farmers-to-affect-food-security/12166/ Contec, Inc.. EPA Toxicity Categories.
http://www.sporicidin.com/media/literature/spo003_epa%20toxicity%20catego
ries.pdf
Cornell University Cooperative Extension. Module 9: Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning.
Pesticide Safety Education Program (PSEP) http://psep.cce.cornell.edu/Tutorials/core-tutorial/module09/index.aspx
Dolan, R., 1991. Rice and the Green Revolution. Philippines: A Country Study.
Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress.
http://countrystudies.us/philippines/ FAO, 1996. Control of Water Pollution from Agriculture. FAO Irrigation and Drainage
Paper Version 55. ISSN 0254-5284
12
Farmworker Justice, 2013 Exposed and Ignored How pesticides are endangering our
nation’s farmworkers. http://kresge.org/sites/default/files/Exposed-and-ignored-Farmworker-Justice-KF.pdf
Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority - Department of Agriculture. List of Registered
Agricultural Pesticide Products. 2007
Fishel, F., 2005. Pesticide Effects on Nontarget Organism. Pesticide Information Office, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences, University of Florida. P1-85.
Fitzgerald-Moore, P. And Parai, B.J., 1996. The Green Revolution.
http://people.ucalgary.ca/~pfitzger/green.pdf GREENPEACE, 2008. Agrochemical Use in the Philipipines and Its Consequences to the
Environment. http://www.greenpeace.to/publications/gpsea_agrochemical-use-
in-the-philip.pdf
http://clarentistechnologies.com/storage/EPA-Toxicity-Categories-081607ver.pdf http://www.rappler.com/rich-media/13748-infographic-how-much-rice-do-filipinos-
consume
Huvio, T., 1998 Women’s Role in Rice Farming. SD dimensions.
http://www.fao.org/sd/wpdirect/wpan0027.htm
International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2011 Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs. Volumes 1 -102 pp. 3, 19
International Rice Research Institute, 2009 Conducting Spray Operations. Crop
Health. http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/ipm/conducting-spray-
operations.html Joern B. And Lohman, B. 1994. Pesticides and the Environment. Cooperative
Extension Service Purdue University West Lafayette, IN.
Jors, E., Morant, R.E., Aguilar, G.C. Huici, L.F., Baelum, J. and Konradsen, F., 2006.
Occupational Pesticides Intoxications among farmers in Bolivia A Cross-Sectional Study. Environ. Health. Global Sci., 5., 10.
Kamel, Jane A. Hoppin. Association of Pesticide Exposure with Neurologic Dysfunction
and Disease. Environ Health Prospect 2004: 112(9)
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/481984_3
Khush, G., and Toenniessen, G., 1991. Rice Biotechnology. International Rice Institute. ISBN 0 85198 712 (CABI).
Kokouva, M., Bitsolas, N., Hadjigeorgiou, G.M., Rachiotis, G., Papadoulis, N.,
Hadjichristodoulou, C., 2011 Pesticide exposure and lymphohaematopoietic
cancers: A case-control study in an agricultural region (Larissa, Thessaly, Greece). http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186%2F1471-2458-11-5
Maclean, J.L., Dawe, D.C., Hardy, B., Hettel, G.P., 2002. Rice almanac (Third Edition).
Philippines, IRRI, WARDA, CIAT and FAO.
Maramba, N.P. 1995. Philippine Report on Health and the Use of Pesticides. Paper presented in the World Health Organization Western Pacific Working Group on
Health and the Use of Pesticides. Manila, Philippines. December 5-8, 1995
Mendoza, E.S., 1995. Health and the Use of Pesticides in the Philippines. Paper
presented in the World Health Organization Western Pacific Working Group on Health and the Use of Pesticides. Manila, Philippines. December 5-8, 1995
Mohd Fuad, M.J., Junaidi, A.B., Habibah, A. Hamzah, J. Toriman, M.E., Lyndon, N., Er,
A.C., Selvadurai, S., Azima, A.M., 2012. The Impact of Pesticides on Paddy
Farmers and Ecosystem. Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, 6(1): 65-
70 http://www.academia.edu/1981622/The_Impact_Of_Pesticides_On_Paddy_Far
mers_And_Ecosystem
National Pesticide Information Center, 2011. Air and Pesticides. Pesticides and the
Environment. http://npic.orst.edu/envir/air.html Owens, K., Feidman, J., Kepner, J., 2010. Wide Range of Diseases Linked to
Pesticides. Pesticides and You, Vol. 30, No. 2, p 13-21
Panganiban, L.R., 2005, Pesticides: Impact on Human Health and Environment”
EurepGAP in Asia, the Sub-Regional Workshop of the Trade and Development
13
(UNCTAD), Manila, Philippines.
http://r0.unctad.org/trade_env/test1/meetings/eurepgap/Dr%20Lynn%20Panganiban%20PPT.pdf
Parveen, S. And Nakagoshi, N., 2001. An Analysis of Pesticide Use for Rice Pest
Management in Bangladesh. Journal of International Development and
Cooperation, Vol. 8, No. 1. Pp 107-126 Pedersen, T.L., 1997. Pesticides Residues in Drinking Water. ExtoxNet FAQS.
http://extoxnet.orst.edu/faqs/safedrink/pest.htm
Perlman, H., 2014. Pesticides in Groundwater. The USGS Water Science School.
http://water.usgs.gov/edu/pesticidesgw.html PIO, Lanao del Norte. (2013). http://lanaodelnorte.gov.ph/Profile/economy.html
Quijano, R., 2003. Health and Environmental Hazards of Pesticides. HEAL TOXICS.
http://www.healtoxics.org/pesticides/key_elem.htm
RAPPLER.COM, 2012. INFOGRAPHIC: How much rice do Filipino consume? RICH-MEDIA. http://www.rappler.com/rich-media/13748-infographic-how-much-rice-
do-filipinos-consume
Regalado, A., 2010. The Philippines Rice Crisis. Harveting Hunger.
http://philrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Harvesting-hunger.pdf
Reyes Tirado and David Bedoya. Agrochemical Use in the Philippines and its Consequences to the Environment
Rola, A., 1994. Impact of Pesticides on Farmers Health: Review of Evidence from the
Philippines. Philipp. J. Crop Sci. 19 (2) 61-71
Satish K. Kedia and Florencia G. Palis. Health Effects of Pesticide Exposure among Filipino Rice Farmers. 2008
Schulze, L., 1997. Signs and Symptoms of Pesticide Poisoning. The National
Pediculosis Association, Inc. http://www.headlice.org/faq/treatments/signs-
symptoms.htm Tarazona, J., Dohmen, G.P., 2008. Ecotoxicology of Rice Pesticides. Pesticide Risk
Assessment in Rice Paddies: Theory and Practice. Pp69-71.
Tejada A. W., Varca L. M., Calumpang S. M. F., Ocampo P. P., Medina M. J. B., Bajet
C. M., et al (1995). Assessment of the environmental impact of pesticides in
paddy rice production. In: P.L. Pingali and P.A. Roger (eds). Impact of pesticides on farmer health and the rice environment. (p 167) Massachusetts:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA.
University of Minnesota Extension, 2011. Private Pesticide Applicator Safety Education
Manual 19th Edition. http://www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/pesticide-safety/ppat_manual/Intro.pdf
WHO. 2009 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and
Guidelines to Classification.
http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/pesticides_hazard_2009.pdf?ua=1 www.mathisfun.com
Zacharia, J.T., 2011. Ecological Effects of Pesticides, Pesticides in the Modern World –
Risks and Benefits, ISBN: 978-953-307-458-0.
http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/21176.pdf
Ferlyn Villaroya Logronio, Department of Biological Sciences, College of Science and Mathematics, Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of Technology, Andres Bonifacio Avenue, Iligan City 9200,
Philippines, [email protected]