A study on aerial pesticide spraying commissioned by the Department of Health (DOH) in a sitio of Hagonoy, Davao del Sur was roundly criticized for being “half-baked” or “flawed” by the banana industry and members of the media who managed to get copies of the findings when the study was presented in Davao City last Tuesday.
Most of the 11-man study team led by a Dr. Allan R. Dionisio, principal investigator, attended the presentation. Dr. Dionisio’s co-investigators were Drs. Lynn Crisanta R. Panganiban, Carissa C. Dioquino, Nelia P. Cortes-Maramba, Annabelle Yumang, Joselito C. Pascual, Jose Paciano T. Reyes, Lurenda H. Suplido-Westegaard, Erle S. Castillo and Nerissa M. Dando and engineer Ana T. Francisco-Rivera. They belong to either the Philippine Society of Clinical and Occupational Toxicology and the National Poison Management and Control Center of the University of the Philippines.
The study was conducted among 38 residents — 16 adults and 22 children — of Sitio Camocaan, Barangay Aplaya, a depressed community next to the banana plantation of the Guihing Agricultural and Development Corp. (Gadeco), owned by Lapanday Foods Corporation, in Hagonoy, Davao del Sur.
A cross-sectional study was also conducted in Sitio Baliwaga, Barangay Tuban, Sta. Cruz, Davao del Sur which was used as the control group as it is 15 kilometers away from the nearest banana plantation, and thus qualified the area to be a good comparison against Sitio Camocaan.
However, a perusal of the study showed that the findings failed to establish a direct correlation between distance of residence from plantation and the diseases linked to aerially-sprayed pesticides.
“During the date of the examination, review of systems showed Baliwaga residents had more complaints than the residents from the Camocaan group. Physical examination revealed that Baliwaga residents had significantly more anemia, dental caries and impacted cerumen compared to the Camocaan group,” said one of the conclusions of the study.
While admitting the need for further investigation, the joint study team has recommended among others that aerial spraying of pesticides should be stopped.
“(Their) call for a ban on aerial spraying was not consistent with their own findings. The data generated by the study is inadequate and shows no correlation between the health concerns raised by the Camocaan respondents and insignificant and non-detectable levels of supposedly toxic chemicals officially ‘detected’ by the researchers in the village. Yet, their conclusion was still for the ban on aerial spraying,” said Malaya columnist Ducky Paredes.
The held belief that aerial spraying was directly responsible for illnesses was already established by the researchers even in the introductory portion of the study.
“Pesticides are poisons. The health hazards for those directly exposed to pesticides…are obvious. Studies in other countries demonstrate that communities (in close proximity to farms and plantations) can, in fact, be contaminated by pesticides that inadvertently spread from the agricultural to the residential area,” said their introduction.
To this, Paredes retorts: “Why even gather data when one’s conclusion was already pre-determined and is not supported by the collected data?”
Condrado R. Banal of the Philippine Daily Inquirer ridiculed the Camoocan research as “our award for the most outstanding stupid study of the year.”
Banal was amused over the Dionisio team’s aerial ban recommendation despite the “statistically negligible” levels of fungicide anywhere in the area.
“The most logical conclusion is clear. And that is, according to the study, the government should ban aerial spraying. Really? My only comment is, well, what has that got to do with the price of egg in China?” said Banal sarcastically.
Jojo Robles of the Manila Standard said the findings of the joint study showed that the researchers failed to establish a clear link between health issues and aerial spraying by not taking into consideration basic conditions like income, eating preferences and even medical conditions that could have been the result of pregnancy, malnutrition, smoking, alcoholism, poor diet in the residents of the village that they studied, instead of exposure to fungicides sprayed from above.
The Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA) headed by Stephen Antig said the drastic recommendation by the two research groups on the ban was not consistent with at least five of their official findings, which betrayed the “inadequacies” of the study and showed no correlation between the health concerns raised by the Camocaan respondents and the insignificant, if not nondetectable, levels of supposedly toxic chemicals detected by the researchers in the village.
“If pesticide residues detected are within the US EPA permissible level, is the conclusion to ban aerial spraying a logical one?” asked Dr. Emily Fabregar, head of Research and Development of Lapanday, in noting that their procedure of fungicide use has been approved by the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority.
PBGEA also said that two more findings of the joint study should have also prevented the two research groups from making their conclusion on the supposed link between the health issues and aerial spraying.
These are the poor economic conditions, and eating preference of the residents, of Camocaan in comparison to Baliwaga’s, adding that with the average monthly income of a measly P2,550 in the former village, malnutrition was at a very high rate of 40.9 percent as against only 4.0 percent in Baliwaga.
“The ongoing controversy over aerial spraying in the banana plantations of Davao will not die just on the say-so of the agency. If anything, because of its sloppy work and its penchant for grabbing headlines, the department may have just pushed back the deadline for finding out the truth, “ columnist Robles said.
Aside from the case now in the Court of Appeals on the constitutionality of the Davao City Ordinance banning aerial spraying, there are two proposed bills in the Senate and the House of Representatives on the same subject.
The PBGEA is also reportedly preparing a formal letter of complaint about the “half-baked” study on Sitio Camocaan.
