Canadians Against Pesticides - ABOUT CAPS
Home About Us Message Health The Ban Solutions The News Mission Email Us
-Bernard Frazer
December 23, 2000
The controversial herbicide, Killex is on the chopping block again. Victoria man, Ingmar Lee is on a crusade to have the weed killer pulled from retail shelves. His plight is not based on the toxins 'inside' of the product, but the cunningly concealed warning labels on the 'outside'.

"I have now shown (KILLEX) to many people and asked them to carefully inspect the labelling for any health warnings, including the entire Victoria City Council, and not one person was able to locate (a Health Warning Label)."

He contends that, without clear warning labels, consumers may not realize the serious health threats posed by exposure to the product, especially among children. A good many scientists and doctors would agree.

Arguably the most widely used herbicide in Canada, Killex employs the active ingredient 2,4-D, a chemical that is the subject of considerable health concern. In recent studies, 2,4-D exposure has been linked with soft tissue sarcomas, including non-Hogkin's lymphoma (see references below). So it comes as no surprise that a groundswell of public support to ban 'cosmetic-use' pesticides, like Killex, has swept across the country.

The question in Lee's mind is, how many children have been unwittingly exposed to the toxin as a result of profoundly insuffiecient labelling? A child's exposure can be as simple as playing on a recently treated lawn. If Dad doesn't see a warning label, he may not realize that a child's physical contact with the pesticide, days or even weeks after it's application, might result in a parent's worst nightmare.

In a letter to Pest Management Regulatory Agency Executive Director, Claire Franklin, Lee points to the May 16, 2000 report "Pesticides, Making the Right Choice for the Protection of Health and the Environment" (by House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development). The 200 plus page document refers to a litany of studies demonstrating grave health risks from pesticide exposure, including 2,4-D. He refers to its assertion that children are particularly vulnerable, espcially to those products used in and outside of the home.

Lee writes:
"I carefully inspected the labelling (of "Ready to Use Killex" Reg.#18,295 and "Concentrated Killex" Reg.# 9,350) for the health warnings, which after reading (this report), I expected to find front and centre. To my amazement, there were no visible health warnings to be seen on the labelling, and, even the word "herbicide" was only mentioned on the French side."

In fact, the warnings are not 'on' the labels at all. If one is able to read "microscopic fine print", it would direct you to 'peel back' the rear label for further information... that is, as Lee suggests, if you can get it off.

He calls this "Criminally Deceptive" and therefore demands an "Immediate nationwide recall of all Monsanto products which carry this kind of labelling".

Franklin agrees that the labelling requires improvement but, in a response to Lee, she only eludes to steps being "underway to improve this (problem)...".

The lack of clear and direct action angers him. In a final missive, Lee holds Franklin personally responsible for any health ramifications:

"In choosing not to take immediate action you personally, as Executive Director of the (PMRA), are abusing your responsibility and risking the health and safety of Canadian children."

As he continues to hammer away at the Feds, Lee asks Canadians to be aware of the real hazards posed by improper storage or insufficient safeguards when applying Killex. He also urges homeowners to consider the myriad of "organic alternatives" to using pesticides. Afterall, you may be saving a child's life.

-Bernard Frazer

  • Leiss, Savitz. Home Pesticide Use and Childhood Cancer. 1995 American Journal of Public Health 85:249-252
  • Hoar SK, Blair Aeal. Agricultural herbicide use and risk of lymphoma and soft-tissue sarcoma. Journal of the American Medical Association 1986; 256:1141-1147.
  • Hoar ZS, Blair A, Holmes FF, Boysen CD, Robel RJ. A case referent study of soft-tissue sarcoma and Hodgkin's disease: farming and insecticide use. Scand J Work Environ Health 1988; 14:224-230.
  • Hoar ZS, Weisenburger DD, Babbitt PA, Saal RC, Vaught JB, Cantor KPea. A case-control study of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and the herbicide 2,4 - dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) in eastern Nebraska. Epidemiology 1990; 1:349-356.
  • Persson B, Dahlander AM, Fredriksson M, Brage HN, Ohlson CG, Aselson O. Malignant lymphomas and occupational exposure. Br J Ind Med 1989; 46:515-520.
  • Wigle DT, Semenciw RM, et al.. Mortality study of Canadian male farm operators: non-Hodgkins's lymphoma and mortality and agricultural practices in Saskatchewan. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1990; 82:575-582.
  • Woods JS, Polissar L, Severson RK, Heuser LS, Kulander BG. Soft tissue sarcoma and non-hodgkin's lymphoma in relation to phenoxyherbicide and chlorinated phenol exposure in western Washington. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1987; 78:899-910.
  • Ritter L, For the Ad Hoc Panel on Pesticides and Cancer. Report of a Panel on the Relationship between Public Exposure to Pesticides and Cancer. Cancer 1997; 80:2019-2033.
  • Hardell, L., M. Eriksson, P. Lenner, and E. Lundgren. 1981. Malignant lymphoma and exposure to chemicals, especially organic solvents, chlorophenols and phenoxy acids: a case-control study. Br. J. Cancer. 43:169-176.