For years, I’ve looked to Europe as a bastion of hope when it comes to resisting international pressure within the agricultural chemical arena.

For example, Europe has stood strong against GMOs (genetically modified organisms) for decades.

The European Union is reported to have the most stringent GMO regulations on the planet. GMOs, as well as irradiated foods, are considered new food and are subject to extensive science-based studies by the European Food Study Association (EFSA).

Following a chain of command, the EFSA reports to the European Commission, which then drafts proposals for granting or refusing authorization.

Though not entirely opposed to GMOs (49 have been authorized as of September 2014), the Commission has steadfastly protected European countries from the vast influx that would’ve otherwise been pushed into use by the U.S. and Canada, had those countries had their way.

However, this is where praise for the European Commission ends and news of its capitulation to international industry/politics begins.

“The EU plans to regulate hormone-damaging chemicals found in pesticides have been dropped because of threats from the U.S. that this would adversely affect negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) according to a report in The Guardian. Draft EU regulations would have banned 31 pesticides containing endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that have been linked to testicular cancer and male infertility.” ~ arstechnica.co.uk

A U.S. business delegation visited EU officials in 2013 to demand that the proposed regulations governing EDCs should be thrown out in favor of a proposed impact study.

The European Commission has been recorded in minutes of a meeting with the U.S. delegation as saying: “Although it wants the TTIP to be successful, it would not like to be seen as lowering the EU standards.” However, shortly afterward, the EC gave in to U.S. pressures.

Is this another case of American politics and future financial gains winning over what most of us would see as disastrous to human/animal health?

What are endocrine disruptors anyway?

The endocrine (hormone) system is especially sensitive to certain chemicals. I first studied this when I had little ones and wondered about all the plastic toys available for infants that were manufactured from a petroleum base, as well as our use of plastic food containers, baby bottles, plastic wrap on food items, etc.

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that, at certain doses, interfere with the hormone system in mammals. These disruptions can cause cancerous tumors, birth defects and other developmental disorders.

Any system in the body controlled by hormones can be affected by hormone disruptors. The endocrine system includes the thyroid, pineal gland, pituitary gland, ovaries, testes, parathyroid, hypothalamus and adrenal gland.

From the brain to the reproductive system, endocrine glands are the masters of our well-being. Hormone disruptors are the bane of the modern, post WWII world.

Endocrine disruptors have been associated with the development of learning disabilities, ADD, ADHD, autism, cognitive and brain development problems, deformations of the body, breast cancer, prostate cancer, thyroid and other cancers and sexual development problems.

Exposure to hormone disruptors for pregnant women and fetuses, as well as young children whose systems are still developing can be a critically sensitive time. As the fetus develops from a fertilized egg into a fully formed infant, it undergoes specific protein and hormone balances that are easily thrown off with lifelong effects.

A rise in the health issues mentioned above has been documented since the development of the petroleum, plastics, agricultural and chemical industries, with their huge contribution of endocrine disruptors to the food chain.

The weakening of the EU’s position, despite promises that it would not jeopardize European health and safety standards, shows just how much influence the TTIP agreement has had on the future of any other regulations the EU might consider.

Just what is the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) or the (Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA)?

Is it a boost for national economies as popularly touted or a way for corporations to undermine democracy? Here are some facts.

• It is being negotiated behind closed doors between the U.S. and the European Union.

• If successful, it will be the biggest trade agreement in history.

• It will affect export businesses as well as areas of everyday life, such as the online world.

• “Opponents fear it could undermine many of Europe’s hard-won laws protecting online privacy, health, safety and the environment, even democracy itself. For example, it could effectively place US investors in the EU above the law by allowing companies to claim compensation from an EU country when it brings in a regulation that allegedly harms their investments—and for EU companies to attack US laws in the same way.” ~ arstechnica.co.uk

• A traditional trade agreements looks to lower tariffs between countries to promote trade, but the tariffs between the U.S. and the EU are already below 3 percent, so what is this agreement trying to lower? Non-tariff barriers.

• Non-tariff barriers include regulations that would potentially protect the environment and online privacy for Europeans. The trade agreement at hand is much more than it appears on the surface. It poses a threat to civil liberties and rights.

The EU claims that health and safety will not be compromised upon reaching a TTIP agreement. But by appeasing the U.S., the EU takes a chance at compromising the health budget for Europe’s citizens. The approximated economic boost for Europe through the agreement is 100 billion sterling, whereas the health costs of EDC’s alone are between 113 and 195 billion sterling per year.

US demands trump the safety of the European people, in this sad scenario.

Canada has also been capable of politically strong-arming the EU in the past. A similar trade and investment deal called CETA (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) promoted the use of Canada’s tar sands in Europe. The EU’s Fuel Quality Directive would have originally given the tar sands fuel a 20 percent higher carbon value than conventional oil. Such a value would have steered business away from tar sands fuel use.

In the end, the FQD was watered down by the EU and the higher emissions standard was nullified as Canada had demanded.

It remains to be seen what will come of the talks, but it is expected that final decisions will not occur before 2016.

There is still time for the people to voice their protest.

 

More information is available on the links provided below.
http://www.euractiv.com/trade/ttip-deadline-2016-experts-news-533668 News on finalization of TTIP talks
http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/ttip-threat-democracy-standards-and-jobs Further reading on actions against the TTIP
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/february/tradoc_153136.4.6%20Pesticides.pdf Fact Sheet on Pesticides in TTI
http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/new/recentimportant.htmP Studies on Hormone Disruptors

sources: The Guardian, arstechnica.co.uk

 

Author: Monika Carless

Editor: Evan Yerburgh

Image: Flickr