User:Ejps19/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Sociology of Food:

-Needs more information in the overview section. -Nowhere near enough references. The information is derived from only two sections making the body of knowledge for the topic very limited. -I do not think that there was enough covered in the "sociological perspectives" section given that it is the section most directly related to the topic. -I feel as though that section could have been much better developed. It could have covered food and social class/status etc. -Chose a limited US based perspective when food & sociology definitely has international implications. -The article is rated on the lower end of the spectrum as Stub: "A very basic description of the topic. However, all very-bad-quality articles will fall into this category."

Food desert -Fairly thorough article. Gives definitions, qualifications and ways to actually measure what food deserts are. -Article was purely descriptive and somewhat limited. No talk about the overall food justice movement or really the reasons why food deserts exist. -Ample sources. -Listed under the Wiki Food and Drink section rather than sociology or social justice. -The article is rated low-medium on the scale as Start: "An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete. It might or might not cite adequate reliable sources." -A lot of discussion in the "talk section". There were some extremely biased comments and opinions: "This is such a b*llsh*t topic lol. Made up." But also some professional expertise. -There has apparently been many sections that were deleted in the past that connected to other topics-- probably why this article stayed very limited.

Works Cited “Acute Pesticide Poisoning Associated with Pyraclostrobin Fungicide — Iowa, 2007.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, vol. 56, no. 51/52, 4 Jan. 2008, pp. 1343–1345. JSTOR [JSTOR], www.jstor.org/stable/23318186.

Ahmed, M., and S.n.h. Naqvi. “Pesticide Pollution, Resistance and Health Hazards.” Pesticides - The Impacts of Pesticides Exposure, 2011, doi:10.5772/13758.

Bouchard, Maryse F. “Prenatal Exposure to Organophosphate Pesticides and IQ in 7-Year-Old Children.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 119, no. 8, Aug. 2011, pp. 1189–1195. JSTOR [JSTOR].

Harris, Jeremy. Chemical Pesticide Markets, Health Risks and Residues. CABI Pub., 2000.

Harrison, Jill Lindsey. Pesticide Drift and the Pursuit of Environmental Justice. MIT Press, 2011.

Holst, Rw. “Spray Drift Exposure Assessment.” Pesticide Formulations and Application Systems: Third Symposium, doi:10.1520/stp32486s.

Jacobs, Miriam, et al. Silent Invaders: Pesticides, Livelihoods, and Women's Health. Orient Longman, 2004.

Lee, Soo-Jeong, et al. “Acute Pesticide Illnesses Associated with Off-Target Pesticide Drift from Agricultural Applications: 11 States, 1998-2006.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 119, no. 8, Aug. 2011, pp. 1162–1169. JSTOR [JSTOR].

Levine, Marvin J. Pesticides: a Toxic Time Bomb in Our Midst. Praeger Publishers, 2007.

Mattews, G. A., and Roy Bateman. “Standards Relating to Pesticide Application.” Pesticide Application Methods, 2014, pp. 499–501., doi:10.1002/9781118351284.app1.

Matthews, G. A. Pesticides: Health, Safety and the Environment. Wiley Blackwell, 2016.

Miller, Paul. “The Measurement of Spray Drift.” Pesticide Outlook, vol. 14, no. 5, 2003, p. 205., doi:10.1039/b311466j.

Murphy-Greene, M. Celeste. “THE OCCUPATIONAL, SAFETY, AND HEALTH OF FLORIDA FARM WORKERS: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN THE FIELDS.” Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, vol. 25, no. 3, 1 Dec. 2002, pp. 281–314. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/25790645?ref=search-gateway:ff8310c4ba6900513249cec20994e07f.

Ngowi, Aiwerasia, et al. “Pesticide Health and Safety Challenges Facing Informal Sector Workers.” NEW SOLUTIONS: A Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy, vol. 26, no. 2, Dec. 2016, pp. 220–240., doi:10.1177/1048291116650262.

Nicolai, Dave, et al. “Suspect Pesticide Drift? What to Do and How to Prevent It from Occurring.” The Corn & Soybean Digest, 22 June 2017.

Otto, Stefan, et al. “Estimating Ecotoxicological Effects of Pesticide Drift on Nontarget Arthropods in Field Hedgerows.” Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry / SETAC, vol. 28, no. 4, Apr. 2009, p. 853. PubMed.

Pivato, Alberto. “An Integrated Model-Based Approach to the Risk Assessment of Pesticide Drift from Vineyards.” Atmospheric Environment, Pergamon, 9 Apr. 2015, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223101530008X.

Slovic, Paul. “Perceptions of Pesticides as Risks to Human Health.” Hayes' Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology, 2010, pp. 1381–1391., doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-374367-1.00063-x.

Susan L. “Current Assessment of the Effects of Environmental Chemicals on the Mammary Gland in Guideline Rodent Studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.”

Wang, Anthony, et al. “Parkinson's Disease Risk from Ambient Exposure to Pesticides.” SpringerLink, Springer Netherlands, 20 Apr. 2011, link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-011-9574-5.

Pesticide Drift Article Outline

Types: The different types of pesticides that lead to drift (soil fumigants, liquids, gases, etc)

Herbicide Volatilization: The evaporation and breakdown of chemical pesticides into less harmful substances.

Environmental Impacts: Impact of pesticide drift on non-target species and environmental features (waterways, ozone depletion, etc)..

Health Effects: The health effects that result from the inhalation and/or exposure to pesticides in humans.

Public Concern: Due to its toxic nature, when humans are exposed to pesticide drift it becomes a public health issue. Avenues for those affected by it to voice their concern become essential. (Note: In the original Wiki article, the only content in this section is a sentence minimizing the importance of pesticide drift in comparison to point source pollution).

Regulation: Describing the standards that have been enacted to prevent and mitigate the effects of pesticide drift. In addition, identifying the ways in which federal, state and local governments respond to emergency instances of exposure or neglect to do so completely.

Activism: The work that has been done to bring justice on behalf of those who are impacted by pesticide drift in order to affirm their rights.

___________________________________________ ==Pesticide Drift First Draft==

Types of Pesticide Drift
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences conducted a study that investigated 2,945 cases of agricultural pesticide drift between 1998 and 2006 in 11 different states. Soil fumigant applications are responsible for forty-five percent of these cases while aerial applications caused about twenty-four percent of drift incidents. Both soil fumigants and aerial applications created the bulk of drift incidents, so this is where the focus on reducing drift related incidents should be placed. Adverse weather conditions, failure to seal off the fumigation site and overall negligence and carelessness on the part of pesticide applicators were the most common and pervasive causes of drift.

Health Implications
Both acute and cumulative exposure to pesticides results in health issues, according to scientists. Long-term effects include cancer, infertility, neurological defects, poisoning that leads to kidney, lung or liver damage, and developmental disorders in children. It should be noted that children are more sensitive to pesticide hazards.

Public Concern
The issue of pesticide exposure receives attention due to the health impacts that are oftentimes associated with it. Concerns about the issue of pesticide drift are global. The United States and other developed countries use 80 percent of pesticides produced, however more than half of pesticide induced deaths happen in developing and undeveloped countries. Researchers affirm that there is a strong link between the level of acceptance of pesticide use among the population and the creation/implementation of policies that regulate pesticide use. Higher levels of public concern lead to increased pressure for revised regulation. There are a few factors which are associated with higher concern and risk perception of pesticides. Sex is an important factor because women are more concerned about the health risks of pesticides than men. Age is also crucial, with younger adults reporting higher perceptions of pesticide risk than older adults. Finally, levels of education play a role as well. More highly educated individuals to display more concerns about the acceptability of pesticide use.

Despite this, pesticide drift continues to be an issue that affected populations suffer in silence. The invisibility of this phenomenon is attributed to the populations that drift often affects. The victims of exposure to pesticide drift are most often farmworkers and their families which are living near or working on farms. In California, for instance, these immigrants are often impoverished, have low levels of education, access to medical care or lack of political representation due to largely being unauthorized to live in the United States. The powerlessness and vulnerability of this population have kept their suffering relatively silent. In California, many instances of pesticide drift are not reported or poorly handled by regulatory response officials.

Regulation
The duties of regulating pesticide use and application--including issues like drift-- was shifted from the USDA to the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, this was mandated by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) in 1972. Minimizing drift has been an increasing priority for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA conducts a pesticide registration process enacted through the Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIRA). Registered pesticides are evaluated through risk-assessment. Standards for their proper use and application is then determined. In addition, pesticide applicators undergo training and once completed, receive a certification in order to use pesticides that are especially dangerous. However, the agricultural industry has maintained that the “no unreasonable adverse effect” provision allows for some drift to be accepted as inevitable-- a natural part of the agricultural process. However, this has prevented agricultural industries from internalizing the true costs of the damage that pesticide drift imposes on crops, human health and the environment. Due to the lack of regulation of this issue by the free market economy, the governmental regulatory agencies have had to intervene with policies, i.e. Pesticide Registration Notice 2009-X (PRN 2009-X) which often encounter backlash from agricultural producers.

The California State Legislature places the responsibility of pesticide regulatory response on appointed county agricultural commissioners (CAC). CAC's are charged with the task of both promoting the local agricultural industry and regulating its' pesticide use. Factors that produce regulatory failures include wrongdoing and corruption within institutions responsible for managing regulation. Residents in the community who report exposure can be faced with slow, dismissive and/or insufficient regulatory response from local officials which can discourage future reports.

Investigations conducted by the U.S. EPA in 2009 has led to more stringent restrictions on soil fumigants in order to mitigate their negative impacts on human health. Pesticides labeled as “restricted use products can only be applied by pesticide applicators who are licensed to do so.

Pesticide drift continues to present a problem to those living and working near sites of agricultural production. This can be seen as a result of the increasing demand for agricultural products which demands that land for this purpose will be expanding, encroaching further into where people live, play and work.

Activism
Oftentimes, the context that pesticide drift occurs under social oppression and marginalization. In states like California, engaging farmworkers and other victims of pesticide activism is considerably more difficult due to various social factors. This is a group which is politically disenfranchised and socially subordinated. More than 90% of the population are Mexican immigrants who experience poverty, job insecurity, and lack legal status. Pesticide activism started with the United Farmer Workers (UFW) unionizing farm workers and making demands that included pesticide protection on the job. From there, this activism expanded to focus on pesticide drift and tightening regulations and restrictions on the most toxic and drift-prone pesticides in California agricultural communities.

As a response to major pesticide drift incidents in California from the 1990's to 2000's, affected communities banded together into local organizations to address pesticide drift regulation concerns. Later these community organizations partnered with NGO's to form regional coalitions (e.g. Central California Environmental Justice Network). The overarching goal of these advocacy organizations is to secure regulatory restrictions on the most hazardous and pervasive pesticides. They carry out this mission by doing everything from educational "toxic tours" to lawsuits against regulatory agencies. Something important to note from recent activism is the fact that inequalities within these victimized populations undermine the ability for existing regulations to be effective. For instance, some victims may not be able to afford a doctor's visit after exposure and thus unable to fulfill a report of the incidence. Others may be notified when pesticides are being applied in an area but have limited resources for mobility or relocation from these areas. Lastly, there is often a fear of reporting these incidents due to a fear of job loss or deportation as retaliation. A few of the notable successes of the pesticide drift activists in California are: (1) the passing of the Pesticide Drift Exposure Response Act, (2) the creation of the Kern Environmental Enforcement Network.