I was very happy to read M. Green’s ‘Foiling Zika’ in the March 3rd Goat.

Zika’s supposed connection to Brazil’s microcephaly outbreak and recently Health Canada warning women to stay clear, are big news. Further research led to an article in Tech Times. Within it, another article by Physicians in Crop-Sprayed Towns (PCST) was referenced noting that in 2014 the larvicidal chemical Pyriproxyfen (which produces malformations in mosquitoes) was injected into Brazil’s water supplies through a massive government-run program.

Pyriproxyfen is manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical, which PCST has referred to as a subsidiary of Monsanto.

Though the coincidence of the government program using a developmental malformation chemical to control insects in the same areas that women are having microcephaly births seems too large to ignore, the overwhelming news is about connecting these birth defects to the Zika virus itself.

Shocked, I read further that microcephaly was not indicated at all in any prior outbreaks of Zika; in some cases 75% of a countries population had been infected with no such birth defects reported.

At present, many Columbian citizens (including some 3177 pregnant women) are infected with Zika but they are either carrying normal fetuses or have given birth to healthy babies.

The hypothesis forwarded by PCST of direct cumulative chemical damage from extended endocrine and immunological disruption, has been ignored or ruled out by the Brazilian government, and the Brazilians are supported by an article in Fortune magazine, defending, not surprisingly, Monsanto, and saying (quite misleadingly with a false quote) that the Tech Times article clears up Monsanto’s relationship with Sumitomo.

While Monsanto denies its own connection to the Zika virus and microcephaly through its products, the mega corporation also distances itself from Pyriproxyfen and ‘ownership’ of Sumitomo, explaining that it is a ‘business partner’ in ways not related to Pyriproxyfen, and that Sumitomo supplies pesticides to Monsanto.

Sumitomo defends allegations citing that Pyriproxyfen’s extensive toxicological testing yielded no reproductive system or nervous system effects in mammals, and use in 40 countries for 20 years, has shown no correlation to microcephaly.

While it may very much be the case that there is a localized mutation of Zika causing the defects, there is no conclusive data to support it, and this despite massive efforts to find a link, and equally massive hype on TV. It seems strange that the angle of possible chemical damage is not being explored visibly by the scientific community, or the TV media.

Is it possible that had the Brazilian government known about using the marigold essential oil (Green’s article, Mar 3rd Goat), instead of this industrial chemical, so many tragic birth defects would have been avoided? Only time and further study will tell the full story.

Rob Mercereau,
Dunster and Valemount

One thought on “Letter re: Zika insecticide article”

Comments are closed.