Viewpoint: ‘Green’ anti-pesticide activists spread misinformation about more environmentally-friendly sulfoxaflor insecticides

Credit: Dow AgroSciences
Credit: Dow AgroSciences

Sulfoxaflor is a new class of insecticides effective against certain insects that are increasingly resistant to older pesticides. The EPA conducted a thorough review of sulfoxaflor under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, concluding that its use doesn’t cause unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. But in their lawsuit, [Center for Food Safety] and [Pollinator Stewardship Council] claimed the EPA didn’t properly evaluate how this new class of insecticides would impact pollinators.

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

Sulfoxaflor’s proponents submitted additional scientific research to the agency about its long-term effects on pollinators. The EPA then conducted a new comprehensive risk assessment and concluded it could safely restore all of the 2013 registrations, added some new uses, and removed some 2016 application restrictions.

But CFS and PSC still weren’t happy.

…

If CFS and PSC are really so concerned about the environment and pollinator health, why are they fighting so hard to block a new insecticide that will be better for the environment and pollinator health? It makes absolutely no sense.

…

I certainly can’t answer for the activist groups’ baffling actions. But my hunch is that they want to block sulfoxaflor, not because it’s actually bad for pollinators, but because the organizations have an anti-pesticide agenda. Perhaps they believe that farmers will just forego any pesticide use if their only options are older insecticides that are becoming ineffective. It’s completely illogical (and not the slightest bit realistic), but not completely unheard of.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-09-22-at-12.26.15-PM
‘Forever chemical’ concerns: Separating hysteria from reasonable concern in the debate over PFAS danger
AI Doctor with a Digital Neural Head
Utah becomes first state to empower AI to bypass doctors and prescribe certain drugs
Radioactive-Americana-Collage-2
The kooky logic behind the raft of spurious cancer claims from Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health
AI-Force-Uniform-Insignia-Close-Up
Trump wants an AI Force like Space Force, but that could make AI’s risks harder to manage
Screenshot 2026-07-29 at 10.40
The COVID vaccine turbo cancer scare is back. Science still proves it’s wrong.
Screenshot-2026-09-22-at-10.54.12-AM
‘They misunderstand science’: Research attempting to tie autism to changes in the gut microbiome comes under fire
Screenshot-2026-09-28-at-11.26.17-AM
Viewpoint: Wellness movement activists reposition nicotine from a killer addictive drug into a cure-all for brain ills
Screenshot-2026-10-07-at-2.00.02-PM
9 wellness myths busted
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.