Author: YourVoiz

Independent insights on the environment, health and human rights

Bolsonaro’s Environmental Denialism

Monica Piccinini

6 May 2021

“A man proceeds towards his announced goal of the conquest of nature, he has written a depressing record of destruction, directed not only against the earth he inhabits but against the life that shares it with him”, Rachel Carson in her book “Silent Spring”, first published in 1962.

Since taking office in 2018, Brazil’s President, Jair Bolsonaro, and his environment minister, Ricardo de Aquino Salles, have been crystal clear about their views and objectives on environmental policies in Brazil.  Their words and actions have served to weaken and dismantle structures and mechanisms of the environmental protection laws, as well as cutting resources for the environment.

Bolsonaro’s policies have encouraged miners, land grabbers and illegal ranchers to cut down the forest for national development. Cattle ranching for industrial meat and soya farms have also contributed for the deforestation not only of the Amazon, but also the Cerrado region in central Brazil.

In May 2020, the government transferred responsibility for leading anti-deforestation efforts in the Amazon from environmental agencies to the armed forces, despite their lack of expertise and training.

Under Bolsonaro’s administration, an area of 2.7 million acres of the Amazon forest, seven times the size of London, was lost in a single year. The rainforest has suffered the worst deforestation for 12 years, according the INPE, Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research.

Scientists warn that if 5-8% more of the Amazon is lost to deforestation, it could reach a tipping point, meaning the rainforest will not be able to produce enough rain to sustain itself. Around 17-20% of the Amazon rainforest has already been destroyed.

Bolsonaro called NGOs working in the Amazon, a “cancer”, a group that he “can’t kill”, accusing them, without proof, of the destruction of the rainforest. He also blamed Indigenous people and small farmers for Amazon fires.

This week, a group of 40 UK firms threatened to stop sourcing products from Brazil over land reforms by signing an open letter calling on Brazil’s legislature to reject a bill, which could legitimise the private occupation of public land.

It is worth pointing out that 2 of the signatories in this letter include the firms Pilgrim’s UK and Moy Park. JBS S.A., a Brazilian company and one of the largest meat processing companies in the world, owns 80% of Pilgrim’s Pride. Moy Park is also owned by JBS, a company linked to the destruction of Brazil’s rainforest.

“Supermarkets need to go beyond their sustainability rhetoric by setting strict requirements for their suppliers, banning deforestation, monitoring their suppliers for compliance, and dropping contracts with the worst offenders like JBS,” said Mighty Earth.

The Amazon rainforest and the cerrado regions are not the only ones being threatened by Bolsonaro and his administration. Any institution or individual who opposes to Bolsonaro’s views and policies, have also been subject to intimidation and vicious attacks.

At the Climate Leaders Summit this year, Bolsonaro pledged to work with the Indigenous communities and protect the Amazon, but instead he has being accused of using intimidation tactics towards the indigenous peoples.

A week after the Climate Leaders Summit, two indigenous leaders and activists, Sônia Guajajara and Almir Narayamoga Surui, were both summoned for questioning by the federal police over allegations of defamation of Bolsonaro’s government.

“The persecution of this government is unacceptable and absurd. They will not silence us”, Guajajara said on an April 30 Twitter post.

Brazil’s environment minister, Ricardo Salles, has recently made a statement about rubber tapper leader, Chico Mendes, who was murdered in 1988, saying, “What difference does it make who Chico Mendes is at the moment?” Later on, Salles mentioned that he was unaware of who Chico Mendes was.

Chico Mendes’ initial aim was to protect the “seringueiras”, rubber tappers, in the Amazon region, that were exploited in large-scale projects and expansion of agribusiness in the country. He also helped establish the Worker’s Party (PT) in Brazil.

“Chico Mendes was a worker, activist, social leader, rubber tapper, parliamentarian, politically persecuted, an example of struggle. He gave his life for the environment and was cowardly murdered by the system. Respect Chico Mendes, minister”, wrote a parliamentarian on Twitter.

The agribusiness industry in Brazil is one of the most powerful lobby groups today, made up of the largely land-owning elites, the very ones Chico Mendes was fighting against. This is an example of how dangerous life can be for environmental activists in Brazil, and now more than ever.

Since 2019, many Brazilian scientists have also been under Bolsonaro’s attacks. He accused the National Institute for Space Research (INPE) for lying about data showing increase deforestation in the Amazon and then fired its director, physicist Ricardo Galvão, for defending the data.

According to Science magazine, online harassment appears to have escalated to physical attacks. Biologist Lucas Ferrante, a doctoral candidate at INPA, published articles in high-profile journals (including Science) criticising Bolsonaro’s environmental and health policies, his cellphone and social media accounts lit up with threatening messages.

In November 2020, Ferrante suffered an attack by a man driving an Uber vehicle he had hailed; the man told Ferrante he “needed to shut up” and attacked him with a pointy object. Since then, Ferrante is reluctant to leave his house and carries a cellphone that isn’t linked to his name.

One more concern for environmentalists in Brazil is Bolsonaro’s government’s release of a staggering 1,059 pesticide registrations since January 2019. One third have already been banned in the European Union due to the risks to health and the environment. A quarter of Brazilian municipalities have a mix of 27 pesticides in the water; 51% of the food contains pesticide residues.

Recently, there have been reports of pesticides being launched by plane over children and communities in Brazil in disputes over land. There are growing complaints from rural communities of symptoms of pesticide poisoning, said to originate from pesticide spraying from farmers’ airplanes.  It is said that the farmers want those communities to depart the land. The Brazilian state is not responding to the seriousness of the problem.

Illegal deforestation, destruction of the environment, invasion of indigenous territories, intimidation tactics and violence towards environmental activists, indigenous leaders and scientists, is abhorrent, unacceptable and must be addressed for the sake of Brazil and humanity. 

Brazil’s History Repeating Itself?

Monica Piccinini

30 Apr 2021

It is 1978 in beautiful sunny coastal city of Praia da Costa, southeastern Brazil, and President Geisel is in town. This is my very first memory as a child of Brazilian politics and dictatorship.

My mother grabs my hand, in the same way other mothers grabbed the hands of their children, and we all were rushed to the main city road.  One hand in our mother’s hand, the other waving a Brazilian flag frantically as Geisel passes by in his uniform followed by his entourage.

Unknown to us at the time, we were not only waving flags at Geisel, we were waving away our rights and accepting the unacceptable.  Many unaware of the conditions we were forced to live in. The 70’s was a turbulent time in the country, a time of restricted public liberties and violation of human rights, a culture of fear and repression, enforced on the population by a military junta.

Little did we know that Brazil would continue to be governed by the armed forces for seven more years.

Ernesto Geisel, an army general, President during the dictatorship, from 1974 to 1978, has been accused of authorising the torture, murder and disappearance of political prisoners. This information was included in a memo written in 1974 and released in 2018 by the director of the CIA, William Colby, addressed to Henry Kissinger, US secretary of state.  

In 1975, the death of journalist Vladimir Herzog, director-in-charge of the department at TV Cultura in São Paulo and culture editor for Visão magazine, marked a period of revolt in the country. Herzog was found dead by hanging in one of the cells of the Operations Centre for Internal Defense, known as DOI-CODI. Additionally, there were reports by the press about the disappearance and execution of countless members of the Brazilian Communist Party (PCB), and whoever opposed the regime.

In 2014, a final report was presented holding 377 people responsible for the crimes committed during the military regime, including 5 presidents.

According to a recent report published by Human Rights Watch, in May 2020, a federal court dismissed charges against people involved in the torture and killing of journalist Vladimir Herzog.

The criminals of human rights abuses from 1964 to 1985 dictatorship have been protected from justice by a 1979 amnesty law that the Supreme Court upheld in 2010, violating Brazil’s obligation under international law. Since 2010, federal prosecutors have charged about 60 former agents of the dictatorship with killings, kidnappings, among other crimes. Lower courts have dismissed most cases.

Memories of the dictatorship are still fresh and have not been forgotten by most Brazilians who lived during these unnerving, distressing and turbulent years. At the same time, Brazilians now have as a leader President Jair Bolsonaro, former military, who has repeatedly praised the dictatorship.

Bolsonaro has sought to minimise human rights violations during the years of dictatorship and has spread “misinformation” about the military regime, according to 5 United Nations rapporteurs.

Human rights have been violated in many areas during Bolsonaro’s administration. Since taking office, Bolsonaro, his allies, and government officials have been accused of lashing out at reporters over 400 times. In one instance, the federal police was asked by the government to investigate presumed defamation by two journalists and a cartoonist who criticised the president.

It is no secret the fact that Bolsonaro’s government has weakened environmental laws in Brazil, having transferred the responsibility for leading anti-deforestation efforts in the Amazon from environmental agencies to the armed forces. He also accused indigenous people and NGO’s of being responsible for the destruction of the rainforest, without any proof. Furthermore, the government also gave green light to criminal organisations engaging in illegal deforestation in the Amazon, who used intimidation and violence against forest defenders.

According to Human Rights Watch, the Bolsonaro administration has sabotaged environmental law enforcement agencies, falsely accused civil society organizations of environmental crimes, and undermined Indigenous rights. These policies have contributed to soaring deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon, an ecosystem vital for containing climate change.

Another point of concern is the recently sharp increase of violence in Brazil. In 2019, police killed a staggering 6,357 people, 80% of them were Black, one of the highest rates of police killings in the world. Police killings rose 6% in the first half of 2020 and homicides rose 7% during the same period.

According to the Human Rights Watch report, Bolsonaro’s government has also been accused of violating women’s and girl’s rights, environmental rights, sexual orientation and gender identity rights, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers rights, disability and children’s rights, amongst many others.

It is grim when one looks back in history and realises that Brazil remains a society of masters and slaves, continuously failing to invest in health, education, and tackle systemic corruption. Many other important issues, such as civil rights, discrimination, inequality, social justice, socioeconomic exclusion, political participation and environmental degradation continue to be deprioritised.

Examples from today and recent history should be a constant reminder that, unless the rotten trees are removed from their roots, the disease will continue to resurface and spread freely every four years for a very long time to come.

Brazil’s Looming Covid-19 Mutant Storm

Monica Piccinini

26 Apr 2021

Brazil’s tragic and growing covid-19 death toll is second only to the United States, according to Our World in Data, with the total number of lives lost to covid-19 close to 400,000. In terms of confirmed cases, Brazil ranks third globally, only behind the USA and India. 

Brazil faces the perfect storm of a unique combination of mutations and a Covid-19 denier President.

President Jair Bolsonaro criticized governors who took restrictive measures to try to contain the spread of the covid-19 in Brazil.

“The time is coming for Brazil to give a new cry for independence. Because we cannot admit that some pseudo-governors want to impose the dictatorship among you using the virus to subdue you, ” he said at an event in Bahia this week.

Bolsonaro has refused to promote mask wearing, defended the use of ineffective drugs such as chloroquine and invermectin.  He has rejected lockdown and self-distancing measures in order to curb the spread of the virus and failing to develop vaccination strategy in the country.

This has led to a health system that is totally overwhelmed. In many areas, ICU beds are no longer available and many people have died waiting days and even a week for a bed. There are so many dead that they are not being prepared properly for burial.

The situation in Brazil is beyond desperate, without a solution in sight and with no apparent desire from federal government to address the issues.  Hospitals are overcrowded and at their limits, with ICU bed occupancy rate having reached its limits across all major states.

It has been recorded the death of a large number of patients who never managed to get an ICU bed, having waited for days on end. One example was mother and daughter in Espírito Santo, both died waiting for an ICU bed for about a week, and this is not an isolated incident.

In Amapá, the exchange of bodies have been reported, as the system is currently unable to cope, leaving families traumatised.  “A room where they simply throw the bodies, because there isn’t even a morgue, all thrown together with the hospital waste, without any preparation. The patient dies, they take him to that room. As it stands, they only take the body and put it in the coffin, ”described the nephew of a victim who died on March 16. 

Brazil’s rampant and uncontrollable increase in infections has worried many experts, researchers and scientists across the world, with the sudden appearance of new strains of the virus, including the one identified recently in Belo Horizonte, which has 18 unknown mutations and similarities with more contagious variants from South Africa, the UK and Manaus.

“Brazil has its doors open to the virus and its mutations. Mutations are expected, as they happen in a random way and are the result of a bigger viral circulation.” Jesem Orellana, researcher and epidemiologist from Fiocruz (Oswaldo Cruz Foundation) explained. “The Federal Government has made countless mistakes, including the lack of governance with no experience of public health and health emergencies and the fact they did not take adequate precautions to contain the virus and made no effort to set out an efficient vaccination plan.”

Fiocruz mentioned that hospital supplies are at a critical level, and health professionals are physically and emotionally exhausted. The current context not only compromises care for cases Covid-19, but also other diseases and conditions, in addition to favor the increase in lack of health care, contributing to for excess mortality.

The scenes at hospitals in Brazil are catastrophic and it could get much worse, with intubation drugs running out in at least 30% of private hospitals across the country. Some hospitals are now having to dilute these drugs in order to make them last. Without these “intubation kits”, the risks involved when removing patients from respiratory support equipment increase considerably, it can be extremely painful and cause further health complications to the patients.

Another serious concern is the death rate amongst children and babies in Brazil. According to the Ministry of Health, between Feb 2020 and March 2021, 852 children up to the age of 9 years old and 518 babies under 1 year old died due to covid-19, but these are conservative numbers due to underreporting, as some doctors are still reluctant to test young children, with general concept that the virus does not affect the younger population.  

Doctor Fatima Marinho, who is also a senior adviser to the international health NGO Vital Strategies, estimates that the virus in fact killed 2,060 children under nine years old, including 1,302 babies.

Hospital Tacchini in Bento Gonçalves, Rio Grande do Sul, reported that in March there was a sharp increase of covid-19 critical patients admitted to their hospital, reaching 160% occupancy in their adult ICU.

When Tacchini was asked about the hospital’s biggest challenge, it pointed out to the management of “intubation kit”. With the scarcity of analgesics, sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in the Brazilian market, the hospital had to import these drugs directly. However, delivery of the cargo is not scheduled until May 15.  So far, they have been supplied with purchases in the national market in very small quantities and sporadic cargo sent by the federal government and distributed by the state government.

So far, none of the 2,000 professionals working at Tacchini Hospital have died from Covid-19 so far, this may be due to very strict measures being adopted by the hospital.

As for immunisation, Fiocruz researchers mentioned that Brazil is still far from the values ​​necessary for the country to have a situation of control. Vaccination in Brazil continues to advance, as the doses are made available. The country has vaccinated 13% of the population over 18 years old with the first dose and 3.68% with the second dose. Researchers from Fiocruz believe that only a national lockdown, with a minimum duration of two weeks, is capable of containing the progress of covid-19 in Brazil.

“There is a need for convergence and integration of the different powers of the Brazilian State (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary), as well as the different levels of government (municipal, state and federal), with the participation of companies, institutions and civil society organisations (of local to national level) to face this very critical and serious moment of the pandemic ”, Fiocruz researchers warn.

Attempts have been made by local governors and mayors in order to contain the spread of the virus by promoting social-distancing, mask-wearing and even local lockdowns.  However, their efforts are thwarted as any actions that restrict the movement of people can only happen if decreed by Bolsonaro, with approval of Congress.

Bolsonaro called governors as “poor” and “petty”, for defending measures in order to contain covid-19. “There is no way for you to live without a job and without an economy. And the mediocre ones lack this vision. São Paulo is a state that has suffered a lot from this”. “We hope that everything will return to normal as soon as possible. Only in this way can Brazil walk on its own legs”, he added.

On April 14, OAB, the Brazilian Bar Association, concluded that the president committed a crime of responsibility, which would lead to an impeachment process, as well as the complaint of a crime against humanity before the International Criminal Court.

Time will tell if the political hierarchy in Brazil have any appetite to remove Bolsonaro.  In the meantime, Brazilians continue to pay a very high price, their own lives, for Bolsonaro’s populist denialistic leadership style. Lessons have not been learned, as he continues to dismiss the pain and the suffering of his own people and ignore the increasing death toll, as the world watches by.

Toxic Brexit

Monica Piccinini

20 Mar 2021

Since Brexit, many questions have been raised regarding the dismantling of UK regulations and the weakening of pesticide standards via trade deals, which would mean that a large number of chemicals that have already been banned could be authorised for use in the UK. This could have a catastrophic impact on our health as well as the environment.

“The UK public has made it very clear that we don’t want post-Brexit trade deals to lead to any weakening of UK pesticide standards. It’s vital that the Government listens to consumers and protects their health by refusing to allow food imports which contain larger amounts of more toxic chemicals”, PAN UK, Pesticide Action Network, commented.

“If UK pesticide regulations are weakened as a result of EU exit, it could lead to a rise in pesticides in our food, farms and urban spaces, thereby increasing the exposure of UK citizens and our natural environment to their harmful impacts. Pesticides previously banned because of their impact on human health or the environment (such as bee-toxic neonicotinoids) could once again be allowed for use the UK”, PAN UK added.

Pesticides affect our environment, damaging ecosystems by disrupting natural food chains and pollination, contributing to soil degradation, contamination of ground water and destruction of wild life.

These chemicals are also the cause of serious health issues, considered probable carcinogen, capable of causing different types of cancer, including Leukaemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, are an endocrine disruptor (EDC’s), which interferes with hormone systems, therefore causing birth defects, developmental disorders, infertility and sexual function. In addition, they are considered a neurotoxin affecting nerve tissues and the nervous system. Children and expectant mothers are the most susceptible to the effects of pesticides.

If pesticide regulations are weakened as a result of Brexit, UK consumers could have no choice but to consume food containing high level of chemicals that are currently banned, due to trade deals with countries like the US, Australia, India and Brazil, where pesticide regulation is less rigorous. Post-Brexit pesticide regulations could include the approval of harmful chemicals such as asulam, glyphosate, neonicotinoids and chlorpyrifos, among others.

UK agriculture and farmers will also be directly affected by allowing crops grown more cheaply on a larger scale to be imported. This could lead to UK farmers having no option but to resort to the use of more pesticides domestically.

The UK and the EU follow the “hazard-based” approach to pesticide regulation, meaning that if a substance is judged to be dangerous and too harzadous to be used safely, then it should be banned. Other countries like the US and Australia work on a “risk-based” approach, meaning that if a pesticide is harmful to human health, then it might be banned while a risk-based is introduced with measures, such as the use of PPE for users or instructions not to spray the chemical in certain areas.

Food regulations in the US are much less stringent than those in the UK and EU. A potential trade deal with the US means great opportunity for foreign lobby groups, such as the US agrochemical industry, to put pressure on domestic regulators in order to approve even more chemicals, expanding the list of pesticides that are already in use in the country.

According to a Toxic Trade report published by PAN UK, Pesticide Action Network, and Sustain, American grapes are allowed to contain 1,000 more times the amount of the insecticide propargite than in the UK. This chemical has been linked to cancer and considered as a developmental and reproductive toxin. An Australian apple can contain 30 times the amount of buprofezin, an insect growth regulator and a possible carcinogen, than a UK apple. This is just an example of the issues the UK could be facing if deciding to weaken pesticide regulations.

A total of 33 organophosphates (synthetic compounds that are neurotoxic in humans) are permitted in Australia, 26 in the US and 4 in the UK and EU. Of a group of 7 active substances considered highly toxic to bees and pollinators, mostly neonicotinoids (harmful to bees, mammals, birds and fish), are banned in the UK, all but one are permitted in Australia and the US.

Over the last 50 years, the US has experienced pesticide resistance due to overuse, allowing the development of “super weeds”, forcing farmers to use greater quantities and a wider range of mixtures, causing the “cocktail effect”, which is significantly more harmful than using single chemicals.

According to PAN UK and Soil Association, pesticide mixtures have been associated with obesity and impaired liver function, even when the doses of individual chemicals are below the safety levels set by regulators. Several pieces of research conducted on human cells and tissues have highlighted that pesticide mixtures can lead to the creation of cancer cells and disruption of the endocrine system, among other health problems. The UK’s regulatory system continues to assess the safety of one chemical at a time, failing to account interactions between multiple chemicals.

As reported by BrasilWire, a joint committee was recently formed by Brazil and the United Kingdom where both countries will work together on issues related to trade in agricultural goods, envisaging potential future trade agreements. A document was signed between the UK’s Secretary of State for Environment, George Eustice, the UK’s Minister for Pacific and Environment, Zac Goldsmith, and Brazil’s Minister of Agriculture, Tereza Cristina, for the creation of a Joint Agriculture Committee (CCA) between both countries. Tereza Cristina is responsible for breaking a record and supporting the approval of 967 pesticides during the Bolsonaro’s administration.

Another worrying factor related to pesticides is poisonings. A recent study published by the BMC Pubic Health Journal report that pesticide poisonings have dramatically increased globally. There are about 385 million cases of acute poisonings each year, meaning that 44% of the global population working on farms are poisoned every year. 

“These numbers are shocking, but unsurprising”, says Dr. Keith Tyrell, Director of PAN UK. “The tragedy is that these poisonings are avoidable – safe and sustainable alternatives exist, and experience from countries like Sri Lanka shows that banning pesticides can be done at low cost with little or no impact on productivity”.

Towards the end of 2020, Qu Dongyo, the Director General of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), announced his intention to develop a partnership with CropLife International (Bayer/Monsanto, Syngenta, Corteva, Basf and FMC), a collection of private agrochemical companies, which means that the pesticide industry may have a strong ally and the effects of this partnership could be devastating, especially for LMIC countries.

Since 2015, IARC, the WHO’s International Agency for Research and Cancer, declared Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, as a possible human carcinogen. Since then, the manufacturer, Bayer/Monsanto, has been battling with thousands of lawsuits alleging that exposure to the company’s glyphosate-based products caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Germany has decided to implement glyphosate legislation and ban glyphosate by 2024. According to a Reuter’s report, German farmers will need to gradually reduce the use of glyphosate and stop using it completely by 2024.

“The exit from glyphosate is coming. Conservationists have been working toward this for a long time. Glyphosate kills everything that is green and takes away insects’ basis for life”, said Germany’s environment minister Svenja Schulze in a statement.

In January, the UK government authorised the emergency use of the chemical neonicotinoid thiamethoxam on sugar beet seeds, but has recently overturned its decision on the use of the chemical, which has been linked to the falling numbers of honeybees, wild bees and other pollinators.  One third of the food we consume rely on pollination mainly by bees.

Recently, Brussels diplomat, Michel Barnier threatened to suspend the Brexit deal if the UK ignores EU standards. One of the issues in question was pesticide regulation. He added that the UK would be stripped of its zero-tariff and zero-quota with the bloc if it lowers European standards.

“With our agreement, the UK can now export goods without quotas or tariffs to the EU. “However, he [Boris Johnson] announced his intention to deregulate in three areas: financial services, pesticides and working hours”, he added.

“How the UK chooses to govern pesticides will have profound implications for the health of citizens, the natural environment, and the future of UK farming”, said Sarah Haynes, collaboration coordinator at Pesticide Action Network UK.

At the beginning of March CHEM Trust, with more than 20 health and environment NGOs, wrote to UK ministers to urge the Government not to weaken plans for chemical regulations now we have left the EU. In the letter, CHEM Trust stressed that the industry’s proposals would “significantly reduce the ability of the regulator to take action to protect the environment and public and workers’ health from hazardous chemicals.”

In order to protect the environment and safeguard our health, the UK government must decrease the number of pesticides used in the country, avoid the weakening of regulations and at the same time develop sustainable agricultural practices, supporting farmers by adopting a nature-based IPM, Integrated Pest Management. This decision should not be taken lightly and the results will have an irreversible lifelong impact on all our lives and nature.

Populist Virus

Monica Piccinini

6 Feb 2021

Is President Jair Bolsonaro’s inadequate response to the COVID19 pandemic, with its resulting horrendous loss of Brazilian lives, a symptom of a much bigger Brazilian virus? 

A virus that has been contaminating Brazilian politics and its social fabric for decades.  The result being an erosion of trust, a belief that everyone is out for themselves, a breakdown of social cohesion, the net effect being the rise of populism.  A wave that Bolsonaro has ridden.

How did an ex-military, far right populist politician with extremist views manage to win the 2018 election in Brazil?

Since his election, Bolsonaro has seemingly actioned a strategy to create a culture of ‘denialism’ across all levels of Brazilian politics and society, a similar approach used by his friend and apparent role model, former US President, Donald J. Trump.  This denialism giving license to deny and set a ‘false truth’, which suits a politician’s own agenda.  In the early 2000’s, the term ‘spin doctor’ was common.  Politicians like Bolsonaro, Trump and many of their followers have taken that term to a new level.  No longer spinning a truth to reflect a different viewpoint, but now actively denying the truth and instead instilling a falsehood.

The start of the social and political virus can be seen in earlier times.  Matias Spektor, Associate Professor and Founder of the School of International Relations at FGV, Fundação Getulio Vargas, believes that perhaps, due to the high incidence of violence that started to rapidly increase in Brazil in 2017, reaching 64,000 homicides that year alone, combined with the lack of belief in a political system that continuously failed to provide good governance, incessant corruption scandals, high degree of inequality, as well as the fact that a newcomer who spoke a language that was reminiscent to a language spoken during the dictatorship (1964-1985) claiming he would end endemic corruption, loosen gun laws, give police force autonomy in order to fight violence, made him an ideal candidate for president at the time. He also mentioned that Bolsonaro may not be the cause of democracy decay in Brazil, but rather a symptom.

Perhaps the very populism that put Bolsonaro in to office in 2018, will be the force that removes him.  The very visible and real effects of the COVID 19 virus may actually cause the end of one strain of the social and political virus that has permeated Brazil for decades.

We can’t forget that 225,000 (as of February 2) Brazilians have lost their lives to Covid-19 so far, the second highest number of deaths in the world, and the numbers keep rising.

Brazil has been facing many crises due to the pandemic and a new covid-19 variant, initially detected in Manaus, and spreading ferociously across the country. Brazilians have a negligent president as a leader, who has constantly refused to take adequate measures in order to contain the spread of covid-19 and protect its population from further unnecessary deaths.

In the past few weeks, across many Brazilian states and across the world, Brazilians have gone out in the streets protesting against Bolsonaro’s leadership and requesting for his impeachment. Bolsonaro and his government may also face charges of genocide and crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court for the way they handled the pandemic.

Recently, 63 requests for impeachment of the president were presented to Rodrigo Maia, speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, but unfortunately, on February 1, Maia’s last day in office, he took the decision and refused to open an impeachment case against Jair Bolsonaro. Maia was replaced by Arthur Lira, who is one of Bolsonaro’s allies. Lira faces charges of taking bribes in the Car Wash scandal and other probes.

“Jair Bolsonaro has gone beyond all limits and is in no condition to continue governing the destiny of more than 200 million Brazilians. In addition to committing crimes of responsibility since the first day he stepped in the Planalto Palace, the president acts irresponsibly and criminally during the coronavirus crisis “, explains Congresswoman Fernanda Melchionna on her official website and who was present in the impeachment request protocol in the Chamber.

A recent study and investigation by NGO Conectas Derechos Humanos and São Paulo University (USP), obtained by Spanish newspaper EL PAÍS, accuse Jair Bolsonaro of allowing Covid-19 to spread freely across Brazil.

“Our research has revealed the existence of an institutional strategy to spread the virus, promoted by the Brazilian government under the leadership of the President of the Republic.”

According to Luiz Henrique Mandetta, doctor and former health minister, who was dismissed by Bolsonaro in March last year due to a disagreement over the use of chloroquine and action guided by the World Health Organisation’s advice, this new variant could trigger a mega-pandemic in Brazil over the next two months.

“We had a new disease and a system with old problems. I had to protect this system and reorganise within a government environment extremely hostile to any reorganisation initiative,” said Mandetta, recalling that he chose to have direct communication with the population. “As there was no government campaign and the president did the opposite, I started to communicate with society so that it could build a line of defense”, he commented on his disagreements with Jair Bolsonaro.

During an interview at Manhattan Connection in January 27, Mandetta spoke about the five critical crises Brazil has been going through in the last year.

Mandetta mentioned that the first crisis took place when Bolsonaro decided to sabotage the prevention system. He dismissed the danger of covid-19 and called it “the sniffles”. Bolsonaro was firmly against the use of masks and social distancing measures. His refusal to act in order to contain the spread of the virus was an indication of his advocacy to herd immunity. “This is a neurosis. 70% of the population will catch the virus. There is nothing I can do. It’s madness”. Bolsonaro said in May last year.

The second crisis arose when Bolsonaro decided to ally with former US President, Donald Trump, and together they created a narrative with the exact same speech, defending the use of chloroquine, contaminating the treatment policy and undermining preventative measures. Bolsonaro mentions the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for covid-19. His government was betting on the use of this drug to diminish the pandemic in the country, instead of establishing an adequate vaccination strategy.

“I have been talking about the use of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of covid-19 for 40 days. The use of chloroquine is increasingly found to be effective”, said Bolsonaro outside Planalto Palace last April. Last October, he insisted on the issue saying “In Brazil, if you take chloroquine at the onset of the symptoms, you have 100% cure”.

Mandetta articulated that the lack of a testing system was Brazil’s third crisis. At the end of November, the newspaper “O Estado de S. Paulo” revealed that 7.1 million tests are in the ministry’s warehouse, that is, they were not sent to SUS (Brazil’s health care system) in the middle of a pandemic. Of the total stockpiled, 96% (about 6.86 million units) expired between December 2020 and January 2021.

The fourth crisis hit Brazil when Bolsonaro decided to turn his back on a key solution, a vaccination strategy, joining the anti-vaccine movement. Brazil’s vaccination program has not been short of mishaps and confusion, leaving its population lost and in despair.

Bolsonaro’s government failed to set up an efficient vaccination program, even with the fact that Brazil has a long history of successful vaccination campaigns and its state funded facilities are able to produce and distribute vaccines on a large scale.

According to Pfizer, Bolsonaro’s government missed the opportunity to order 70 million doses of the vaccine back in August with delivery in December 2020.

Astra Zeneca was Brazil’s main choice for its vaccination program. On June 27 2020, Brazil signed and agreement to start manufacturing the 30 million doses of the vaccine locally, by Fiocruz Institute. On August 31, Bolsonaro’s government signed another agreement with Astra Zeneca, this time to produce 100 million doses of the vaccine. On January 22, 2021, Astra Zeneca sent Brazil 2 million doses of the vaccine, sourced in India, as an emergency use.

Fiocruz and Butantan Institutes were expected to manufacture the Pfizer and Sinovac vaccines respectively, but due to lack of the active ingredients needed to make the vaccines, the project has been delayed until February/March 2021. This delay may have been the result of Bolsonaro’s open criticism to China.

On January 17, the National Health Surveillance Agency, Anvisa, authorised the emergency use of both the CoronaVac (developed by Chinese Sinovac in partnership with Butantan Institute) and the Astra Zeneca vaccines in Brazil. CoronaVac was the first covid vaccine shot administered in Brazil in January 17.

In less than one year, Brazil had three health ministers. Luiz Henrique Mandetta, doctor and politician, who trusted WHO guidelines and against the use of chloroquine, was dismissed by Bolsonaro. Nelson Teich, oncologist and health consultant, was appointed to Health Minister soon after his Mandetta’s departure. Teich was in power for less than one month and resigned in May 2020 due to a disagreement with Bolsonaro on topics such as the use of chloroquine and isolation measures.

Eduardo Pazuello, former Army General and no previous health experience, was appointed to health minister. At this point, it was clear that Bolsonaro’s government switched their vaccination strategy, betting on the use of hydroxychloroquine alone to fight Covid-19.

Bolsonaro announced publicly he would not take the vaccine himself and started a misinformation campaign about the vaccine’s terrible side effects.

“At Pfizer, it is very clear in the contract: we are not responsible for any side effects. If you become a chipanz … if you become an alligator, it’s your problem. I’m not going to talk about another animal here, not to mention bullshit. If you become Superman, if a beard is born in a woman or a man starts talking thinly, they have nothing to do with it. Or even worse, tampering with people’s immune systems. How can you compel someone to get a vaccine that has not completed its third trials yet?, said Bolsonaro in December last year.

As of February 1, Brazil vaccinated 2,051.29 million people, approximately 0.5% of the population.

According to Manddetta, the fifth crisis may be about to explode with the new covid variant from Manaus spreading across all states, which may create a “mega-epidemic”.

The recent events of Manaus, where people died asphyxiated due to lack of oxygen supplies and the collapse of the health system, could be replicated across the entire country.  The Ministry of Health pressured the Health Secretariat of Manaus to use anti-viral medications early in the treatment of Covid-19, such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, azithromycin, nitazoxanide, corticoid, zinc, vitamins, anticoagulant, rectal ozone and chlorine dioxide.

“Ladies, gentlemen, there is no other way out: we are no longer discussing whether this professional agrees or not. The federal and regional councils have already positioned themselves, the councils are in favor of early treatment, of clinical diagnosis”, said Pazuello during an interview in Manaus on January 11.

“The treatment must be immediate and the drugs must be made available immediately. The patient needs to take the medication and be accompanied by a doctor, no doubt about it ”, added Pazuello.

There is no question and it is clear that Bolsonaro and his government have failed Brazilians at so many levels, by lack of planning and action, as well as employing a denialism approach to a lethal and highly transmissible virus, which was left to spread freely through the entire population. Bolsonaro and his administration should carry the burden and consequences already visible and felt by most Brazilians. Unfortunately, the man hangs on to his position as fiercely as he can, without any signs of remorse. His decision to sacrifice life over the economy is unacceptable for most and may haunt him for many years to come.

Global Food Crisis

Monica Piccinini

26 Jan 2021

A radical and collective rethink is required to re-engineer many of humanities core living systems, if we are to sustain our existence on the planet.  With the global population having grown from 6.1 billion to 7.7 billion in 20 years, demand on the world’s resources is at breaking point. 

Two powerful forces are magnifying each other’s effects, creating a hurricane, which will leave devastation in its path.  These forces are not military or subversive in nature, they are basic human instincts; to feed ourselves and our families with healthy nutritious food, and the human desire for easy access to more food, more clothes, more products and more money.

The voracious demand of the worlds growing consumer base is fuelling and incentivising commercial greed, which in turn is feeding the demand within the world’s population.  A tornado that is spinning faster and faster and getting bigger, as our population gets larger and older.

Less scrupulous organisations and individuals knowingly cut corners and standards to deliver more to more, at less and less.  Often camouflaged in the respectable delivery of corporate profit and shareholder value.  This is a race to the bottom, a race in which humanity will lose.

Industrial agriculture is one such villain responsible for degradation of the land, water, and ecosystems, high green house gas emissions, biodiversity loss, hunger and nutrition deficiencies, as well as obesity and diet-related diseases.

The world’s population is set to reach nearly 10 billion by 2050, with huge concern on the need to ensure universal access to healthy food, but at the same time making sure food is produced in a sustainable way. Hunger and malnutrition is a result of the oligopoly control of the agrifood business supply chain. A high percentage of food is often lost along this supply chain before it even reaches the consumer.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, FAO, an estimated 2 billion people in the world did not have regular access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food in 2019, putting them at greater risk of various forms of malnutrition and poor health. This forecast grew worse early on in the COVID-19 pandemic, with the World Food Programme (2020) warning on 21 April 2020 that the planet was facing a famine of “biblical proportions”.

More than 30 countries in the developing world, the UN agency cautioned, could experience widespread hunger, and 10 of those countries each already have more than 1 million people on the brink of starvation. 

“We are facing acute, interconnected crises – hunger, malnutrition, biodiversity loss, the climate crisis, growing inequality and poverty. What we need are real solutions, not more greenwashing from agribusiness. Real solutions – public regulation for agroecology and Food Sovereignty – require dismantling corporate power, redistributing resources, re-localising food systems and ensuring small scale producers have control. Food is a human right not a commodity”, said Kirtana Chandrasekaran, from Friends of the Earth International.

Countries need to realise the urgent need to support small-scale food producers, such as family farming and agroecology, adopt measures to address food price volatility, better market linkages and shorter supply chain, improving coordination between producers and consumers. Agroecology contributes to reduction of greenhouse emissions and builds farming that is more resilient to climate change.

Family farming represents 90 per cent of all farms globally, and produce 80 per cent of the world’s food in value terms, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, FAO. Family farmers combined with the practice of agroecology could be key to addressing global food security, as well as the conservation of ecosystems, considering they have full government support through adequate policy, resources, services, programs and regulations and their production methods comply with environmental standards. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations has produced a document, “The 10 Elements of Agroecology”, a guide to transition to sustainable food and agricultural systems, offering a unique approach to meeting significant increases in our food needs of the future.

It is evident the dominance exercised by mega-corporations over food systems. A few corporate food empires control the majority of the food we consume and their practices have caused a serious impact on our health, environment, and farming communities. Their production is carried out on mass scales, based on intensive use of agrochemicals, hormones and antibiotics. They prioritise profit above all else.

These global agribusiness giants not only control the market price farmers get, but also what we eat, not to mention their contribution to poor health, food waste, soil erosion and soil acidification due to the use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides, wildlife destruction, ground water pollution, disease outbreaks, death, hunger and food insecurity, deforestation and climate change. According to the Climate Land Use Alliance, commercial agriculture drives 71% of tropical deforestation, posing serious risks to our global forests and climate.

On a report of Mighty Earth, more than one million square kilometers of the planet have been cleared of their natural vegetation to grow soy, one of the primary ingredients of animal feed used to raise meat. More than three quarters of the world’s soy is used to feed livestock.

Cargill, Bunge, JBS, ADM – Archer Daniels Midland and Tyson are the World’s largest agribusiness companies. Cargill is a US privately held company, found in 1865 by William Wallace Cargill. It was named the “worse company in the world”, according to an astonishing Mighty Earth Report. The company has been involved in scandals that go from fatal food poisonings, agricultural pollution, deforestation, contamination, to allegations of child enslaved labour. This large corporation still manages to keep a very low profile.

“The people who have been sickened or died from eating contaminated Cargill meat, the child laborers who grow the cocoa Cargill sells for the world’s chocolate, the Midwesterners who drink water polluted by Cargill, the Indigenous People displaced by vast deforestation to make way for Cargill’s animal feed, and the ordinary consumers who’ve paid more to put food on the dinner table because of Cargill’s financial malfeasance — all have felt the impact of this agribusiness giant.” These are the words of former Member of Congress and Chairman of Mighty Earth, Henry A. Waxman.

Cargill, the UK’s largest soybean importer, has been linked to the deforestation of 61,260 hectares of forests in the Brazilian Amazon and the Cerrado since March 2019. Cargill provides chicken to the UK market via Avara, the company’s joint enterprise with Faccenda foods. They supply chicken to Tesco, Nando’s and McDonald’s.

“British consumers have been talking loud and clear – they don’t want to be complicit in destroying Brazil’s precious forests. However, supermarkets are failing to protect them from eating meat fed with forest-destroying soy, ”says Robin Willoughby, director of Mighty Earth UK. “We are urging the CEOs of Tesco PLC, J.Sainsbury’s, ASDA, Morrisons and Aldi UK to take immediate steps to stop the destruction of Brazil and abandon Cargill.”

Brazil’s Cerrado and the Amazon rainforest are not the only regions that have been affected by the exploitation of Cargill. The Gran Chaco region, 110 million hectare ecosystem, spanning Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay, faced burning of their fields to make way to genetically modified soy. Home to communities of Indigenous Peoples, including the Ayoreo, Chamacoco, Enxet, Guarayo, Maka’a, Manjuy, Mocoví, Nandeva, Nivakle, Toba Qom, and Wichi.

Cargill also helped drive destruction of Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire’s forests to grow cheap cocoa, buying cocoa grown through the illegal clearing of protected forests and national parks as a standard practice. Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire are the world’s two largest cocoa-producing countries. Many other countries across the world have also been affected by the greedy practices of Cargill.

“The agricultural sectors and livestock farming in particular must shift towards sustainability to enhance their contribution to food security, nutrition and healthy diets and build back better to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic and other challenges”, FAO Director-General QU Dongyu said on September 28, 2020,  in his opening remarks to the 27th session of the Committee on Agriculture (COAG).

Many other factors affect the way our food is grown, such as the use of pesticides, which cause a huge impact on our health, soil, water and animal life. Chemicals considered harmful to our health, and also to the environment, have been sold by the world’s largest agrochemical companies: Bayer, BASF, Syngenta, and Corteva – members of Croplife International lobby group. These chemicals have been linked to increased cancer, liver disease, DNA damage, reproductive failure, endocrine disruption and also groundwater contamination, microbiome disruption, poisoning of birds, mammals, fish and bees. Although in European markets some of these dangerous products have already been banned, European companies can still produce and sell them to regions with lesser regulations. 

Recently, the UK government has allowed farmers to use a poisonous bee-killing pesticide neonicotinoid thiamethoxam on beet crops, a chemical that has already been banned in the EU. Pesticides should be replaced with safer, agro-ecological and other appropriate non-chemical alternatives.

Another great concern is the fact that the largest technology companies, such as Amazon and Microsoft, are now entering the food sector, where we have seen a strong relationship being formed between companies that supply farmers with pesticides, expensive machinery, drones, etc., and those who are in control of food distribution and collecting and storing data.  Farmers are being pushed to use their mobile phone apps, which feeds them with data as well as monitors their every movement. It is worth pointing out that small farmers can’t afford this high tech data gathering technology.

The largest agribusiness companies all have apps that cover millions of hectares of farmland, supplying farmers with information in exchange for a discount on their products. One example is Bayer, the world’s largest pesticide and seed company, where its app is being used in the US, Europe, Canada, Brazil and Argentina. This digital infrastructure is run by platforms developed by tech companies that run cloud services, such as Amazon Web Services (AWS).

The aim is to integrate millions of small farmers into a wide centrally controlled network, making it easier for corporations investing in agribusiness to control and profit by encouraging and forcing them to buy their products. Profit is definitely the main and only purpose of these global technology companies like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Alibaba, as well as agrochemical corporations, such as Sygenta/Chem China, Basf, Bayer/Monsanto, Corteva, including the involvement of international institutions supporting digital agriculture such as AGRA, CGIAR, FAO and the World Bank.

There is no question that something needs to be done in order to ensure the protection of biodiversity by developing sustainable agricultural practices. By dismantling the power of large agribusiness corporations and reconstructing sustainable agri-food systems, a more reliable, secure and healthy world will be the place where we will be able to live in harmony with the environment, and where it will provide us with our very basic human right: food. We are facing an urgent call from Nature!