Read this before ever using.
by Caroline Cox
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/ FALL 1999 · VOL.19, NO. 3
SUMMARY
Inert ingredients are among pesticides' strongly held
secrets. They are chemicals used in pesticide products to make the pesticide
more potent or easier to use. For years, pesticide manufacturers have claimed
that they were trade secrets and it was almost impossible for pesticide users or
concerned activists to find out about them. Despite their misleading name,
inerts are neither chemically, biologically, or toxicologically inert. Although
they are only minimally tested, many of them are known to state, federal, and
international agencies to be hazardous.
A 1996 court decision opened the possibility of getting
some information about inert ingredients via the federal Freedom of Information
Act. While manufacturers are still able to withhold this information if they can
justify their claim to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), most of
the companies EPA has contacted so far have been willing to identify inerts.
Only 8 manufacturers, out of 38, have withheld information about inerts.
NCAP, with the help of over 250 supporting organizations
and attorneys general in 7 states, has petitioned EPA to require that all
pesticide ingredients be identified on product labels. All of us are exposed to
pesticides on a daily basis; at the very least, we have the right to know the
identity of the chemicals to which we're being exposed. EPA needs to act soon on
NCAP's petition and implement our right to know.
Imagine, with tongue in cheek, that pesticide companies
were forthcoming. "Why yes," their representatives would say as they
showed their newest products. "These are toxic, designed to kill, but they
shouldn't cause any unreasonable problems. And yes, we use them on your food, in
your house, in your schools and parks, and lots more places, but we do need to
protect the investment we've made in developing these products. So most of
what's in them is going to be kept a secret, unless you really make an effort
and we have to tell you."
Absurd as this little story sounds, it's not far from the
truth. Cookies, shampoo, cat food, contact lens solutions, body lotion, and
over-the-counter painkillers, to name a few, all provide a lot more information
about what's in them than do pesticides. Most pesticide ingredients are
misleadingly identified only by the words "inert" or
"other." (For a definition, see "What is an 'Inert'
Ingredient?" below.) These ingredients often make up the bulk of a
pesticide product.
The absurd story inspires a string of questions. Why do we
need information about inerts? Why are so many pesticide ingredients
unidentified? How can we identify inerts? Will manufacturers provide any of this
information? Which companies are forthcoming? Which ones are not? Answers to
these questions follow.
What is an "Inert" Ingredient?
Inert, when applied to pesticide ingredients, does not mean
biologically, chemically, or toxicologically inert. Under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the U.S. pesticide law,
inert ingredients are defined simply by excluding active substances.
Active ingredient: An ingredient that will
prevent, destroy, repel, or mitigate any pest. (Under FIFRA, four other
categories of biologically active chemicals are included in the definition of an
active ingredient: plant growth regulators, defoliants, desiccants, and nitrogen
stabilizers.)(1)
Inert ingredient: Any pesticide ingredients
other than an active ingredient. They are used as solvents, surfactants,
diluents, carriers, catalysts, synergists, intensifiers, and more than 30 other
uses.(2) Recent EPA policy allows the term "other" to be substituted
for the term "inert" on pesticide labels.(3)
According to EPA policy, inerts are intentionally added
substances, not contaminants. They do not include adjuvants, chemicals added by
the pesticide user during application.(4)
The mixture of active and inert ingredients in a commercial
pesticide product is called the full formulation.
1. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Sec. 2(a). Available at www.epa.gov/pesticides/fifra.htm.
2. FIFRA. Sec. 2(m)
3. U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticide Programs. 1997. Pesticide regulation (PR) notice 97-6. www.epa.gov/opprd/inerts/pr97-6.html.
4. U.S. EPA. 1987. Inert ingredients in pesticide products; Policy statement. Fed. Reg. 52(77): 13305-13309, Apr. 22. Also available at www.epa.gov/opprd001/inerts/fr52.htm.
A. Mosher
Like all pesticides, lawn care sprays have many
unidentified 'inert" ingredients.
Inerts Are Important!
NCAP has been working for a decade to learn the identities
of the inert ingredients in pesticide products. It's important to remember just
why we need this information and why we're fighting to get it.
NCAP's answer to these questions is four-pronged. First,
the ethical questions in any discussion of inert ingredients are powerful. We're
exposed to pesticides every day, and most of these exposures are ones over which
we have no control. We are entitled, at the very least, to complete
identification of all of the ingredients to which we're being exposed.
Second, inerts are inadequately tested. In order to be
registered for use in the U.S., pesticides undergo a series of tests that assess
their toxicity and environmental fate. Most of the testing, however, ignores
inert ingredients; this includes tests of the pesticide's ability to cause
cancer, genetic damage, and birth defects. The full formulation is tested mainly
for short-term effects: eye irritation, skin irritation, and tests to determine
lethal doses.(1) Some toxicology testing is separately required of chemicals
used as inerts, but even EPA calls these requirements "minimal."2
Third, many inerts are hazardous. Despite their limited
testing, of the almost 2300 chemicals3 that EPA believes are currently used as
inert ingredients, over 600 (26 percent) have already been classified as
hazardous by state, federal, and international agencies.(4) This includes
chemicals listed under the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking
Water Act, and others. Examples of hazardous and commonly used inerts include
crystalline silica (causes cancer and genetic damage),5 naphthalene (causes
anemia and liver damage),6 xylenes (cause headaches, confusion, and fetal
death),7 and erioglaucine (FD&C Blue Dye No. 1; causes malignant tumors in
laboratory tests).(8),(9) How many inerts would have identified hazards if they
were comprehensively tested? It is impossible to know.
Finally, inerts put people's health at risk. A recent
incident in New York powerfully illustrates how complex inerts' health impacts
can be. In April of 1996, and again in August, Terminex International Co.
treated the home of the Trimper family in Rotterdam for termites with an
insecticide, probably Dursban TC.(10) Dursban TC is a commonly used termiticide
containing chlorpyrifos.(11) The Trimpers had asked for another chlorpyrifos
insecticide, Equity,10 but Terminex applied Dursban instead.(12)
Following the second treatment, three-year-old Kyle Trimper
became ill with unexplained high fevers and respiratory problems. His parents
were also ill, and his mother suffered two miscarriages during the following
year.(10)
In early 1997, the family complained to the New York
Department of Environmental Conservation about the lingering odors in their
home, and the health problems Kyle was having. The agency came to their house,
along with the Department of Health, and collected air samples several times.(10)
Because Terminex asserted that the insecticide applied in the Trimper home was
Equity, even though the applicator who had done the treatment admitted
otherwise, the agencies looked at inert ingredients in the air of the Trimper's
home.(12) (This analysis for inerts as part of an enforcement investigation is
extremely rare.) Equity's inert ingredients are identified by Dow AgroSciences,
its manufacturer, as "proprietary emulsifiers, proprietary solvents, and
propylene glycol."13 Dursban TC's inerts, according to Dow, are also
proprietary, but include "xylene range aromatic solvent."(14)
The air samples were, in a word, frightening. The agencies
found a mixture of solvents, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes,
and trimethyl benzenes. The Department of Health analyzed the components of a
sample of Dursban TC, and then compared it with what they found in the Trimper's
house. The result was "a very close match."(10)
The benzene in the Trimper's house was particularly
frightening. Benzene is "carcinogenic to humans,"15 according to the
International Agency for Research on Cancer because people who are exposed to it
are at increased risk for leukemia. In laboratory studies it has caused tumors
in multiple organs and also causes genetic damage.(15) EPA classified benzene as
"of toxicological concern" in 1987 and asked pesticide manufacturers
to stop using it.(2) By 1991 EPA had removed benzene from its list of pesticide
inert ingredients16 because the agency believed that it was no longer being
used. So why was it in the Trimper's house? Because Dursban TC contains "a
mix of petroleum distillates" according to EPA's Kerry Liefer.(10) And that
mix contained benzene.
The other Dursban inerts found in the Trimper's home are
also hazardous. Toluene causes confusion, memory loss, nausea, and can harm
unborn babies when their mothers are exposed.(17) Trimethylbenzenes damage the
nervous system and are irritating to eyes.(18) Xylenes cause headaches, nausea,
confusion, kidney damage, and fetal death.(7)
The Trimper case is unlikely to be just an isolated
incident since Dursban TC is one of the most widely used liquid termiticides in
the U.S.(10) However, when termite treatments cause problems, attention almost
always focuses on the active ingredient. It is rare that there's any
consideration of inerts. As a result, it is impossible to know how often
incidents like the Trimper's occur.
The Trimper story shows that the inerts issue is basically
simple. It sets our health and our right to know up against the profits and
competitive advantages of a relatively small but powerful group, pesticide
manufacturers. Pesticide regulation has traditionally deferred to manufacturers,
but our activism can bring the balance back toward the public interest.
Why Are So Many Inerts Unidentified?
Fundamentally, the reasons for inert ingredient secrecy can
be summed up in one word: expediency. Regulating pesticides on the basis of
their active ingredients means that EPA can focus its limited resources on
roughly 900 active ingredients instead of over 20,000 pesticide products.(19)
Alternate formulations may boost this number to 60,000.(20) Pesticide
manufacturers have the freedom to adjust ingredients based on market conditions,
availability, and other factors without close regulatory oversight. "Pes
ticide manufacturers play the market on inert ingredients," said EPA
insecticide product manager Phil Hutton. "The inerts vary and if it's
xylene, or petroleum distillates, or whatever, as long as their chemists or
toxicologists think it's safe, they use it."(21)
While pesticide manufacturers often claim that inert
secrecy allows them to maintain a competitive advantage over their rivals, this
argument is weak. State-of-the-art laboratory equipment gives most manufacturers
the ability to accurately identify the ingredients in their competitors'
products.(22)
Getting Information About Inerts
There is currently no easy, or completely successful, way
that either pesticide users or people concerned about pesticide use can get
information about inerts. A combination of the following approaches is the best
tactic to take:
Medical emergencies: Physicians, other medical
professionals, and public health agencies who are assisting patients who have
been poisoned by a pesticide need immediate access to information about inert
ingredients. Such access is allowed by EPA regulations when "disclosure is
necessary in order to treat illness or injury or to prevent imminent
harm"23 EPA relies on manufacturers to provide this information. However,
there is no formal requirement that they identify inert ingredients.(24)
Material safety data sheets: Also known by their acronym,
MSDS, these are documents produced by pesticide manufacturers under the mandate
of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.(25) They provide information about
the hazards of chemicals, and sometimes identify some of the inert ingredients
in a pesticide product. MSDSs are available by calling the manufacturer of a
specific product, by asking a pesticide retailer, or by visiting a
manufacturer's web site. In general, MSDSs identify those inert ingredients that
have been classified as hazardous by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration,(26) but not all companies interpret the requirements of the law
in the same way. If inert ingredients are identified on an MSDS, it is usually
only a partial list.
Freedom of Information Act requests: Federal law (called
the Freedom of Information Act, FOIA) guarantees public ac cess to EPA's
pesticide documents except for specific classes of documents that are exempt
from the law.(27) Since pesticide manufacturers submit forms that identify
inerts to EPA, these documents, at least theoretically, are available through
FOIA. For many years, pesticide manufacturers routinely claimed that these
documents were exempt from FOIA because that law protects trade secrets and
confidential business information from disclosure.
As a result of a lawsuit filed by NCAP in collaboration
with the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides, a federal court
ruled in 1996 that inert ingredients do not meet the statutory definition of a
trade secret, and can only be protected as confidential on a case-by-case basis.
The court also ruled that inerts did not have special protection under FIFRA,
the national pesticide law.(28) This has opened up an avenue by which inert
ingredient information is potentially available to the public. In the three
years since the favorable decision in NCAP's lawsuit, NCAP, other organizations,
and people acting on their own behalf have filed FOIA requests for the identity
of inerts in literally thousands of products. EPA has now responded to several
hundred of these requests.(29)
There are three major drawbacks to the FOIA process. First,
it is only available to people who are familiar with the law and know how to
make an official request. Second, it is slow; most of NCAP's requests have
required months or years to complete. Third, under the process outlined by the
decision in NCAP's lawsuits, pesticide manufacturers can claim that the inerts
in a particular product are confidential if they justify such a claim to EPA.(29)
Some manufacturers continue to withhold the identity of some or all of the
inerts in their products. We have a long road to travel before full disclosure
of inert ingredients is a reality.
Which Manufacturers Withhold Information About
Inerts?
Does Anyone Really Know ?
Can anyone accurately identify all of the ingredients in a
pesticide? Chances are that the answer to this question is no.
We assume pesticide manufacturers know what's in their
products, but this is an oversimplification. The Trimper story shows that
pesticide manufacturers can identify inert ingredients as mixtures that leave
hazardous ingredients unidentified.(1)
We also assume that EPA knows the ingredients in pesticide
formulations. This also is not true. Although manufacturers provide EPA with
lists of the ingredients in each of their products, EPA's Office of the
Inspector General found that EPA's pesticide database contained hundreds of
chemicals that were identified only as "chemical name not available."
A random sample of database entries found that almost half contained errors in
the identification and coding of inerts.(2) For example, NCAP asked EPA for a
list of products that contained the inert ingredient naphthalene. EPA located
three products containing naphthalene and reported that there were coding errors
that made a complete list impossible.(3) A quick scan through an MSDS
compilation(4) located 22 products, and there are likely hundreds more.
At this time, accurate laboratory analysis is probably the only way to know with certainty what the ingredients in a pesticide are.
1. Darcey Publications. 1999. Dursban TC inerts benzene, trimethylbenzene, suspects in boy's illness following termiticide mishap. Pesticide Report 3(1):1-8, June 12.
2. U.S. EPA. Office of the Inspector General. 1991. Report of audit. Inert ingredients in pesticides. Washington D.C., Sept. 27.
3. Personal communication between Holly Knight, NCAP, and Calvin Furlow, EPA Public Information and Records Integrity Branch. Spring 1997.
4. MSDS reference for crop protection chemicals. Fourth
edition. 1992. New York; Chemical and Pharmaceutical Press.
What Next?
Getting information about inerts in pesticides is currently
a frustrating, time- consuming, and unacceptable process. Not even medical
professionals have easy access to complete information. Material safety data
sheets are a relatively easily accessible source of information, but they don't
identify all inerts; many MSDSs identify none. The Freedom of Information Act
process is cumbersome, time-consuming, and does not always provide the
information we are seeking. Clearly, we need a better way.
In January 1998, NCAP and 180 supporting organizations
submitted a rule-making petition to EPA asking the agency to require that all
pesticide ingredients be identified on product labels. A parallel petition was
submitted by the attorneys-general from New York, Alaska, Connecticut, Guam,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin. Eighty additional
organizations signed on to the petition in 1999.
This regulatory change would make inert ingredient
information easily available to pesticide users and the general public. Since
most pesticide manufacturers, based on NCAP's experience, will identify inerts,
there should be no major obstacle blocking EPA's action. However, EPA has not
yet decided how to respond to the petition.
Conclusion
Information is one of the cornerstones of a democracy; without accurate facts it is impossible for citizens to make responsible decisions. The popular support for all kinds of right-to-know programs demonstrates just how important information is to our society. Inert ingredients in pesticides should be no exception.
Although existing methods for getting information about inerts are awkward and time-consuming, a majority of the pesticide manufacturers approached through the Freedom of Information Act have been willing to stop withholding information about inerts. EPA needs to require that the other manufacturers join with their competitors and provide this information. It's time to end inert secrecy and identify all pesticide ingredients on product labels.
Pesticide labels should identify all ingredients.
About Companies | About Inerts | References |
[ Pesticide Site Map] * [Site Map]