August 2017

Carcinogens in our food

EU policy provides that people are not exposed to carcinogens1. This means that alleged 'safe levels of exposure' (thresholds) shall not be applied to carcinogens and any exposure to these chemicals prevented. The industry sector has been attacking EU's policy on carcinogens for decades as one of their major lobby campaigns and has been promoting time and again the introduction of 'safe' thresholds.

July 2017

Flaws in Glyphosate Toxicity Assessment

This report by PAN Germany's Senior Toxicologist, Peter Clausing, argues that in their assessments leading to the possible re-authorisation of Glyphosate, EU authorities failed to acknowledge its toxicity, using highly questionable arguments, and in clear violation of existing guidance documents.

Political decision-makers should not play along with the pesticide industry in this scientifically questionable and, as it seems, interest-driven game. Instead they should be objective in their assessment of glyphosate, ensure that the existing scientific evidence is evaluated correctly, and apply the precautionary principle to guarantee a high level of protection for humans and the environment.

The health of 500 million EU citizens is at stake.

(Please find versions in other languages: ItalianFrenchSpanishGerman)

June 2017

PAN Europe Annual Activity Report 2016

PAN Europe reports its major policy actions and campaigns in the year 2016.

May 2017

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals and Future Generations: Time for the EU to Take Action

Following the growing evidence on the hormone-related adverse health effects in human and wildlife due to exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), the European Union has taken the initiative to regulate and minimise human and environmental exposure to these substances.

May 2017

Impact assessment of the criteria for endocrine disrupting pesticides

Criteria could lead to no endocrine disrupting pesticide being banned at all

April 2017

Mid term review of EU Ombudsman's verdict regarding DG SANTE's pesticide decision-taking methods

PAN Europe in 2013 submitted a complaint to the EU Ombudsman regarding the massive (mis)use of a so-called 'confirmatory data' regime in the approval of pesticides. In case of observed high risks for the environment (birds, mammals, arthropods, fish, etc.) industry was granted the opportunity to submit additional information to show that those high risk do not exist, AFTER approval of their chemical.

February 2017

Bee Emergency Call : How Member States keep using banned neonicotinoids and how the European Commission does nothing to stop them

February 2017 - Executive Summary

Bees are still under threat from abuse of pesticides. Four pesticides which are highly toxic to bees (including neonicotinoids and fipronil) were banned in 2013. However, the pesticide and seed industry, farmers and many EU Member States are continuing to use these pesticides. This is through a loophole in the Pesticides Regulation that allows for ‘emergency authorisations’.


November 2016

AOP, the trojan horse for industry lobby tools?

AOP, the adverse outcome pathway, is a very interesting research topic. With AOP scientists try to find out HOW adverse effects develop in the body. AOP could be used in some future for screening of chemicals with unknown toxicity if it matures and shows good predictability of adverse effects.

October 2016

PAN Europe Annual Report 2015

PAN Europe discusses its major policy actions and campaigns in the year 2015

July 2016

Measures against endocrine disrupting chemicals

The importance of taking action against endocrine disrupting chemicals

The harmful effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals have been known for years. Now that political leaders are about to take crucial decisions on their regulation, WECF, PAN Europe and Wemos want to create awareness and disseminate knowledge about the risks and regulatory possibilities. We want the Dutch government to implement protective measures both here and in the European context. The measures taken by France, Denmark and Sweden, which we have analysed in this report, are examples of effective policy.

© Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe), Rue de la Pacification 67, 1000, Brussels, Belgium, Tel. +32 2 318 62 55

Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) gratefully acknowledges the financial support from the European Union, European Commission, DG Environment, LIFE programme. Sole responsibility for this publication lies with the authors and the funders are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.