Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Atrazine Threat to Male Sexual Development Revealed
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, North Carolina - Male rats exposed before birth to low doses of the weedkiller atrazine are more likely to develop prostate inflammation and to go through puberty later than non-exposed animals, finds a new study conducted by federal government scientists.
Atrazine is sprayed on an Iowa cornfield. (Photo credit unknown)
One of the most common agricultural herbicides in the United States,
some 80 million pounds of atrazine are applied across the country every
year to control broadleaf and grassy weeds in crops such as corn and
sugar cane. It is the main ingredient in about 40 name-brand herbicides.
"Atrazine is a staple product for producers, who use it as a critical tool for weed control in growing the vast majority of corn, sorghum and sugarcane in the United States. Use of atrazine fights weed resistance, reduces soil erosion and increases crop yield," according to the Triazine Network, an association of growers and researchers.
But atrazine and its byproducts are known to be endocrine disrupters that are persistent in the environment, making their way into both surface water and groundwater supplies.
This study on how atrazine affects male rats was led by Suzanne Fenton, PhD, and Jason Stanko, PhD, of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health. The scientists tested male rats using atrazine concentrations close to the regulated levels in drinking water sources.
The current maximum contamination level of atrazine allowed in drinking water is three parts per billion.
"We didn't expect to see these kinds of effects at such low levels," Fenton said, releasing the findings Tuesday.
Dr. Fenton, a reproductive endocrinologist, will be presenting the research findings in September to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as part of its ongoing reassessment of atrazine.
In 2009, the EPA began a comprehensive new evaluation of atrazine to determine its effects on humans. At the end of this process, in September 2010, the agency has said it will decide whether to revise its current risk assessment of atrazine and whether new restrictions are necessary to better protect public health.
This is the third time since the early 1990s the EPA has evaluated atrazine. In each of the two previous reviews the EPA ruled in atrazine's favor, most recently in 2006 after considering 6,000 studies and 80,000 public comments.
"We hope that this information will be useful to the EPA, as it completes its risk assessment of atrazine," said Linda Birnbaum, Ph.D., director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program.
Fenton began the work as a researcher at the EPA, but completed the research at NIEHS, working closely with NIEHS pathologists. Both agencies provided financial support for the study.
The researchers found that the incidence of prostate inflammation went from 48 percent in the control group of rats to 81 percent in the male offspring who were exposed to a mixture of atrazine and its breakdown products before birth. The severity of the inflammation increased with the strength of the doses.
"It was noteworthy that the prostate inflammation decreased over time, suggesting the effects may not be permanent," said David Malarkey, DVM, PhD, an NIEHS pathologist and co-author on the paper.
The scientists also found that puberty was delayed in the animals who exposed to atrazine.
This new study is Fenton's second paper showing low dose effects of atrazine metabolite mixtures.
Fenton was the senior author on a 2007 paper which demonstrated low doses of the atrazine mix delayed mammary development in female siblings from the same rat litters used in this current study.
Fenton points out that these findings may extend beyond atrazine alone, and may be relevant to other herbicides found in the same chlorotriazine family, including propazine and simazine. All three of the herbicides create the same set of breakdown products.
Fenton says more research is needed to understand the mechanism of action of the chlorotriazines and their metabolites on mammary and prostate tissue.
"These tissues seem to be particularly sensitive to the effects of atrazine and its breakdown products," Fenton said. "The effects may be due to the stage of fetal development at the time the animals were exposed."
Another point of view on the safety of atrazine and the related chemicals comes from the Triazine Network. A five-person executive committee leads the network: Jere White, chairman, Kansas Corn Growers and Kansas Grain Sorghum Producers Associations; Dan Botts, Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association; Joel Nelsen, California Citrus Mutual, Stephanie Whalen, Hawaii Agriculture Research Center, and Gary Marshall, Missouri Corn Growers Association.
In a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, the Triazine Network argues that atrazine is safe and necessary to growers.
The growers say they are "increasingly concerned by the serious irregularities in the EPA's current re-review of the herbicide atrazine."
"No one cares more about the safety of the herbicide atrazine than those of us who use it in the fields where we raise our families," says the letter, signed by White. "We drink the local water. We swim and fish in local lakes, rivers, and ponds. We look forward to passing our way of life onto our children and grandchildren. Simply stated, we care about keeping our environment healthy and our foods safe and abundant."
"Atrazine and its companion triazine herbicides have a 50-year history as safe and effective weed-control products used on more than 30 commodities in over 40 states and 60 countries," the growers state in their letter.
"Five decades of continued and rigorous EPA testing has shown time and again that atrazine poses no danger to public health. Over the last half century, more than 6,000 atrazine studies have been submitted to EPA. These studies confirmed, and EPA agreed, that atrazine does not affect human health," the letter asserts.
"EPA's current 3 parts per billion limit for lifetime exposure or the 298 ppb limit for short-term exposure, are standards that are more than 1,000 times safer than a level shown to have no effect," maintains the Triazine Network.
But Professor Tyrone Hayes in the Department of Integrative Biology at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in the study of atrazine, calls the chemical, "a potent endocrine disruptor with ill effects in wildlife, laboratory animals and humans."
"Atrazine chemically castrates and feminizes wildlife and reduces immune function in both wildlife and laboratory rodents," says Hayes, who has published research showing that exposure to atrazine caused male tadpoles to turn into hermaphrodites - frogs with both male and female sexual characteristics.
"Atrazine induces breast and prostate cancer, retards mammary development and induces abortion in laboratory rodents," Hayes warns. "Studies in human populations and cell and tissue studies suggest that atrazine poses similar threats to humans."
Other scientists support the use of atrazine when it is used correctly. Purdue University weed scientist Bill Johnson says, "Farmers need to understand both the rate restrictions of atrazine for different soil types and the setbacks from water sources. Like any chemical, they shouldn't apply atrazine right before a big rain in order to prevent runoff."
Other safe-handling techniques include establishing 66-foot grass buffer strips along bodies of water and ditches to help filter out atrazine from water flowing across fields and choosing crops that don't require the use of atrazine when planting near water sources.
"There are a lot of herbicides labeled for corn, but only a select few control as many weeds at as low a cost as atrazine," Johnson said. "Herbicides with more narrow spectrums drive up costs and eliminate the simplicity atrazine offers."
But in March, 16 communities in six Midwestern states filed a federal lawsuit seeking to force atrazine manufacturer, the Swiss company Syngenta, to pay for removal of the herbicide from their drinking water. The class action lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois by 16 towns and villages in Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, and Iowa.
Atrazine has been banned in Europe, even in Switzerland, the home of manufacturer Syngenta.
Click here for more information about the EPA risk assessment.
- Posted in



28 Comments so far
Show AllGreat, just great! As someone who used to spray, with gusto as a eager young helper, these poisons on weeds and invasive plants in farm fields, lanes and ditches in the Midwest these articles confirm my worst fears. How many farmers have been sickened and killed by these petro-based chemicals and others? And now their heirs! I'm not an agronomist but I have family members who did the same work as myself and have cancer. In a 30 mile radius of my uncle's farm there are many stomach and other types of cancer in the farmers. The farmers then knew things were not right but needed to keep up to support large families and so they did the one thing you cannot do: trust corporations and your gov't to choose people over deadly profit. I can't read these things because they sicken me. Enough is sometimes way too much!
"'There are a lot of herbicides labeled for corn, but only a select few control as many weeds at as low a cost as atrazine,' Johnson said. 'Herbicides with more narrow spectrums drive up costs and eliminate the simplicity atrazine offers.'"
Well, if it saves money for agribusiness in Amerikkka and it makes profits larger, then, according to Johnson, the effect it has on wildlife and humans doesn't really matter. :-(
This is indeed horrible.
I blame the MSM as much as anyone. Stuff like this gets virtually nil coverage in the MSM.
Yet when someone gets serious about banning the stuff, you'll hear plenty of stories about dire economic consequences and the emphasis will be on the jobs that will (supposedly) be lost. All this guaranteed to rile up the average knee-jerk voter. So it's OK if my son mutates into my daughter as long as corporate profits are preserved and no "jobs are lost".
Actually ther would be more jobs and a better economy if we reverted back to the old ways. We have 22% unemployment among the young: they could use these food connected jobs. It's all about Big Agribusiness and I personally hate what they've done to something as sacred and spiritually nourishing as feeding our fellow citizens. The MSM is just a cheerleader: does anyone really believe these news people are eating the junk advertised on TV? Not if they can help it!!!
I always find it funny how the pro-business right will always insist that "free enterprise" is so great becasue it is dynamic, creative, hyper flexible, and can create wealth in unlimited amounts to all that are innovative and hard-working - never a zero-sum game. But then, when it is suggested that a few harmful materials be banned, their wonderful dynamic economy suddenly becomes a un-dynamic and rigid as the stereotype of a Soviet 5-Year Plan, facinge ruin and catastrope if this or that material - for which just slightly more expensive alternatives are avaialble - gets banned by big-bad government.
The capitalists are more full of bullshit than the day is long.
with corn the major crop given to warrant the use of atrazine, one must ask:
what value the corn, that outweighs health?
from the department of agriculture's predictions for corn in the next ten years, found here:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/Baseline/crops.htm
in their estimation, corn appears to be destined, primarily, for ethanol and livestock feed and high fructose corn syrup...
why would these things supplant viable reproduction and fetal development in our world?
oh, yeah...to pay the mortgage...
atrazine and diabetes, groundwater concentrations, fishkill, deadzones. prostate inflamation, delayed puberty.
tea anyone?
Oh! Such predictions of dire consequences if Atrazine is banned!
But Atrazine is banned in Europe. Are European farmers all going out of business? Are Europeans unable to afford food, or facing food shortages?
European manufacturers are also required to have programs in place for the convienient collection and disposal of all hazardous or toxic substance in any product before the product is allowed on the market. For example, the disposal of TV or any other electronic goods in the trash is strictly prohibited. instead, the consumer merely calls an appliance store and the TV gets picked up for disposal. the Socialism! The un-freedom of it all!
The persistence of atrazine and the fact that it was showing up in ground water in lots of locations caused me to quit using atrazine a few years ago. There are adequate alternatives. Do remember, however, that there have been many thousands of studies that show no ill effects from atrazine and the ones that do show harm, do not appear to be overly alarming. When one considers that there are thousands of other chemicals in the environment that have had relatively few studies and with infinite chemical interactions possibly causing harm, this great unknown likely harbors more sinister dangers.
Yes, there have been thousands of studies. But unfortunately, they dealt primary with acute toxicity, which is completely different from endocrine disruption. As of this date, the EPA has not even so much as determined how to identify and evaluate endocrine disruptors, since in many vital ways, they break the rules of traditional toxicology going back all the way to Paracelsus, who invented the dictum: the dose makes the poison.
In this case, it's not functioning as a poison. It is functioning as information and this information is what determines how an organism develops sexually - in all its dimensions. That's what sex hormones do and if you go mucking with the levels, it should not be a surprise at all that this impacts sexual development. For Atrazine, as with many other endocrine disruptors, the effects are more profound at lower levels, because again, they function as information, not as a poison per se. So the safe level is much lower than where the limits are at now.
I agree there are many other lesser studied chemicals, but I submit that your confidence in the "safety" of this chemical based on acute toxicity is profoundly misplaced. Especially given the volumes and massive geographical region in which Atrazine is used.
Thank you for stopping the use of atrazine on your farm. The risk is evidently strong enough for Europe to ban it. We should not play dice with our baby boys (or girls).
Joe
I'll echo Joe's sentiments. Your concern and thoughtful decisions are appreciated. I'm sure you're aware of many other farmers who are absolutely unwilling to consider any challenge or change to their existing belief system. I applaud your integrity and understand the difficult decisions you have to make in order continue operating a working farm in today's world. Keep the faith--if there were more like you, we all be better off.
Peace, brother
Can you comment further on adaquate alternatives?
Oh boy. First, none of the alternatives that I would consider "adequate" are totally wonderful and without danger. The main ingredient in the product I've been using, Status, is banvel. Banvel has the nasty habit of 'picking up' and drifting in the air, so neighbors and townfolk get a bit of this sooner than the atrazine. Banvel has not gotten the amount of attention that atrazine has, so I assume it's a bit safer. Of course assumptions are not always correct. There are certainly other choices. Perhaps they're safer. I do not know. I do know that most of the other choices are not quite as good on my weed spectrum.
Thank you for your reply.
Our government does not love us. We are the slowest of the developed nations to ban toxic substances. They think nothing of playing roulette with our lives. They only care about $$$$.
"Another point of view on the safety of atrazine and the related chemicals comes from the Triazine Network"
The author proceeds then to list the names and affiliations of eight or ten members of the pro-poison network. It's a very subtle but effective psych-op. While the reader is wondering if there exists an absolute moral standard which the society may adopt to protect life from unnecessary mutation and destruction, the media outlet answers that question by jamming moral relativist "views" down the reader's throat in familiar liberal fashion. The message is that professional status may be more important to USans than their health. This of course serves the elite enterprise, like cracking the whip on the slaves' back.
Given absolute moral standards that place nature, life and health far above economic interests, we see little justification for the poison/destruction.
They can't claim that they are "feeding the world". 40% of the food that reaches retail in the USA ends up in the landfills uneaten. The obsession with the buck churn translates into mass addiction to meat/dairy, resulting in double the crop production than is necessary. Meanwhile, world hunger persists, along with wild price swings from speculation. If they're "feeding the world" I have some land to sell you in Florida.
This is an issue for everyone who cares about birth defects, even the richest of the rich whose children will be born into this world and be exposed to the hundreds of toxic chemicals introduced in the last 100 years of earth's history. The fact that there are other chemicals that may contribute to genetic harm is not a reason to keep using atrazine. You have to start somewhere, and with what you know.
Instead of poisoning the earth and water for the sake of maximum corn production, we could cut back on corn for industrial uses, high fructose corn syrup and for animal feed. The health benefits for humans and for the earth would be innumerable.
Joe
Atrazine is an enviromental contaminate where I live, one of many. If you want to know about your area check out: http://www.scorecard.org Just put your zip code in or use the other search features. It is part of the environmental defence site. Some of the government sites also list things like soft tissue sarcoma (somewhat rare forms of cancer)as occupational risks for farmers.
Thalidomide is safe and effective too -research tests proved that.
Think how much better the world would be in the long run if every American male were rendered sterile.
Two cheers for Atrazine.
that thought did come to my mind too....................
sterile might not be too bad...
not impotent, though...
we are already 'impotent' in the face of gov/corp control....................
Atrazine is by no means the only synthetic endocrine disruptor out there, as recent news stories have made clear. All those plastic bottles, the plastic linings inside food cans, many other chemicals... They can interact synergistically thus potentially increasing toxicity. Controlled tests on such multiple, interactive exposures are very costly, and thus very rare. Besides, industry does not want the results, if any, known.
Another massive problem is the dismantling and corruption of the regulatory agencies, done intentionally by GOP administrations starting with Reagan. Part of their campaign is to instill doubt about ANY study, until the citizenry throws up its collective hands and goes nihilistic. "Cain't trust the goddam gubment." Destroy any and all authoritative criticism of the industry---that's the goal.(A really good recent example of this strategy is the war against awareness of climate change: instill doubt and hire naysayers.)
Meanwhile, another massive source of similar toxicity is the chemically treated suburban lawn. Watch those cheery ads for lawn care products, where sometimes you'd think that the dandelion is Public Enemy Number One. Watch the animated cartoon where the enemy shrivels back into the ground after the spraying. When I was a kid one of our tasks was to use a little two-pronged fork shaped tool to cut the dandelions out at the root, one by one. Probably can't even find that tool at a hardware store anymore.
Money talks. It's called Free Speech. Just ask the Supreme Court.
-30-
And the meek shall inherit the earth, says somebody's book.
John Paul Getty: " The meek may inherit the earth but not its' natural resources. "