Several chemicals used in agriculture are banned in the European Union (EU) but are still allowed in the United States. The EU takes a more precautionary approach to chemical regulation, while the U.S. tends to rely on different thresholds for risk and exposure. Here is a list of some notable agricultural chemicals that are banned in Europe but still used in the U.S.:
1. Atrazine
Use: Herbicide for controlling broadleaf and grassy weeds, particularly in corn and sorghum crops.
Reason for Ban in EU: Atrazine has been banned in the EU since 2004 due to concerns about water contamination and potential endocrine-disrupting effects.
U.S. Status: Widely used, especially in corn production.
2. Chlorpyrifos
Use: Insecticide used on crops like corn, soybeans, and fruit trees.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned in 2020 due to concerns about developmental neurotoxicity and its impact on children’s brain development.
U.S. Status: It was widely used, but restrictions began in 2021. However, state-level bans vary, and it is still in use in some areas.
3. Paraquat
Use: Herbicide used to control weeds and grasses before planting crops.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned due to its high toxicity and links to Parkinson’s disease and other health concerns.
U.S. Status: Still in use but regulated with strict safety measures due to its toxicity.
Use: Insecticides used on crops like corn, soybeans, and cotton.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned in 2018 due to concerns about their impact on pollinators, particularly honeybee populations.
U.S. Status: Still in widespread use despite growing concerns about their environmental impact.
5. Diquat
Use: Herbicide for controlling aquatic weeds and pre-harvest desiccation.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned due to concerns over environmental and health risks, including its potential to cause harm to human health.
U.S. Status: Still used in some agricultural applications, particularly in potatoes.
6. Carbendazim
Use: Fungicide used to control fungal diseases in fruits, vegetables, and other crops.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned due to concerns about reproductive toxicity and potential harm to human health.
U.S. Status: Still in use, particularly on citrus fruits.
7. Lindane
Use: Pesticide and insecticide used in agriculture and formerly in pharmaceuticals.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned due to concerns about neurotoxicity and links to cancer.
U.S. Status: Banned for agricultural use but still allowed in pharmaceutical treatments for lice and scabies.
8. Glyphosate (Roundup)
Use: Widely used herbicide for controlling weeds in various crops.
Reason for Ban in EU: Although not fully banned in the EU, there are significant restrictions and debates about further limiting its use due to concerns about its potential carcinogenic properties.
U.S. Status: Glyphosate is widely used in agriculture despite ongoing legal battles and health concerns.
9. Acetochlor
Use: Herbicide for controlling broadleaf and grassy weeds.
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned due to concerns about water contamination and potential health risks.
U.S. Status: Still commonly used in corn production.
10. 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid)
Use: Herbicide used to control weeds in crops, particularly in conjunction with genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Reason for Ban in EU: Banned or restricted in some EU countries due to concerns about potential cancer risks.
U.S. Status: Still in widespread use, especially in GMO crops like corn and soybeans.
These chemicals often face tighter regulations or outright bans in Europe because of environmental concerns, health risks, and precautionary principles guiding EU policy. However, in the U.S., regulatory standards may allow for continued use based on different risk assessments.
In addition to specific bans, we should change our regulatory approach to be more like that of the EU. From Grok:
The EU’s approach to regulating chemicals, especially pesticides like glyphosate, involves a precautionary principle, where substances are assessed for potential risks to human health and the environment with a high degree of scrutiny. For instance, the EU’s considerations on glyphosate include detailed assessments by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which recently concluded no critical areas of concern but highlighted some data gaps. In contrast, the US system, primarily through the EPA, might approve chemicals based on risk assessments that balance benefits against risks, often allowing higher residue levels or longer use of chemicals that the EU might restrict or ban.
The EU tends towards precaution and consumer choice through labeling, whereas the US might prioritize agricultural efficiency and economic benefits, often with less stringent chemical use restrictions.
Good points. Plus many more ag chemicals. I look forward to contributing and to reading additional comments as this topic moves forward.
I hope the comments stay open for a good long time, as many of us are prepping for Hurricane Milton, after just being hit by Helene & Debbie. Thank you!
While I recognize the importance of protecting the environment and ensuring safe agricultural practices, I’m hesitant to fully support a broad ban on agricultural chemicals simply because they are banned in Europe. Agricultural systems and climates differ between regions, and a one-size-fits-all approach may not account for the specific needs and challenges faced by U.S. farmers. I believe it would be more prudent to evaluate each chemical on a case-by-case basis, using up-to-date research to ensure a balanced approach that considers both sustainability and agricultural productivity.
For any chemical used to grow food or any added to food that is banned in any other country for safety, give companies one year to prove safety or it gets banned in the US.
We tried the whole Organic thing for 10,000+ years and a lot of people starved. Traditional GMO’s that have been bred for decades are not the problem. Neither are most of the chemicals you’ve listed if applied properly.
It’s a terrible mistake to ban any farming tool based entirely on successful activism somewhere in the world. Determing whether a farming tool is harmful MUST be done by conducting proper scientific study without steering the results to a desired conclusion. Sri Lanka nearly starved its people banning the things you suggest and chemical fertilizers. We cannot do the same in America
The EU has a very bad habit of banning any kind of newer less damaging pesticides while still allowing older more dangerous pesticides to remain in use.
We should also ban US companies from producing and selling these dangerous chemicals abroad as they cause issues there and often return to our food supply.
I’ve worked with many of these Chemicals spraying the Weeds and overhanging Trees on State and Federal Roads, and the sheer amount of Marijuana that grows along those roads is like a miniforest running along both sides of the roads, and needs to be Controlled…
That said, I’m not against people growing their own Weed, hey I like Beer, so if you smoke it, Grow it on your own Land, just like I buy beer from my local Booze Keeper…
On the other hand, we should BAN GMOs, this alone would help minimize the use of Unnecessary pesticides and Herbicides…
@jasonkiesel This is an excellent post! Thank you for describing many of the troubling chemicals so that those new to the topic can better understand.
I would suggest going a step further and promoting a law that requires a certain percentage of farm land be used for Organic farming. With subsidies or incentives for those willing to purchase destroyed farm land and convert it back to healthy soil.
All wheat production must be harvested naturally without chemical sprays. At least 50% of wheat production should be ancient wheat strains / non GMO wheat.
i’d like to go a step further and BAN ALL Artificial food enhancing/modifying/stimulating/growing/etc sources. Promote natural regenerative farming methods, and self reliance per family. recommendation for families to own chickens, and other meat sources like rabits if on small property.
Many GMOs LITERALLY lower pesticide use. Farmers don’t want to have to use pesticides. They are expensive both in buying them and the labor to apply them. They have to be applied only at certain stages of growth and only certain times of day to avoid harming beneficial insects. That’s why farmers love GMO tech bc it either eliminates some pesticides altogether or makes one work so well they can use less of it and only when it makes sense.
FYI- one of the most common insecticides used in ORGANIC farming is Neem Oil. It is banned in the UK. The active ingredient’s scary-sounding name is azadirachtin and there are scary-sounding health warnings if it is misused like practically everything in farming and food. You can’t declare Europe and UK to be so much wiser than America in everything food and farming. They have all the competing players in the industries we do
Every state should get to decide how it wants to grow its food and raise its animals. I am typically a locals get to decide except no one should have control of wind and rain so if a neighboring county uses chemicals they can effect/affect other neighboring counties. There really is no way to mitigate. In this case, the state should decide by a state wide vote and try to mitigate effects along borders with other states. Like IF a states votes Yes(highly unlikely) then only interior counties can use the chemicals so as to lessen harm to neighboring states.