What's new

agriculture field relic hunters be cautious :: Two Novel Fluorinated Herbicides Cleared For America's Staple Crops

dognose

Silver Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
4,547
Reaction score
13,096
Golden Thread
0
Location
Indiana
Detector(s) used
Fisher F70

New herbicides approved for major US crops amid health concerns and legal battles.​


The Environmental Protection Agency has cleared two fluorinated pesticides never before sprayed on American soil for use on the country's two biggest food crops, corn and soybeans.

The approvals of diflufenican and epyrifenacil were announced by the Center for Biological Diversity on 30 June 2026, alongside expanded food uses for a third fluorinated insecticide, bifenthrin, and the first US food registration of the plant regulator chlormequat.

Campaigners describe all of these as long-lasting compounds tied to serious health harms, a characterization the EPA firmly rejects. The clearances landed five days after the Supreme Court sharply curtailed Americans' ability to sue pesticide makers over cancer warnings, sharpening a fight that has split the president's own base.

The EPA registered diflufenican and epyrifenacil for use on corn and soybeans, with epyrifenacil also approved for wheat. Both are new to the American market and had not been sprayed on any US crop before this decision.

Corn and soybeans together cover more than 70 million hectares of American farmland each year, so the reach of the approvals is vast. Both are herbicides used to kill weeds rather than insects, and each is expected to leave residues that linger well beyond a single growing season.

On the same day the agency broadened the use of bifenthrin, an older fluorinated insecticide, to coffee, kiwifruit, peas, kale and broccoli. It also approved the first US food use of chlormequat on wheat, barley and oats, a growth regulator already detected in the urine of roughly 90% of Americans and linked in studies to reduced fertility and reproductive toxicity.

The approvals arrived after Kyle Kunkler, a former lobbyist for the American Soybean Association, was installed as deputy assistant administrator for pesticides. The soybean association had lobbied in favour of both new herbicides through the public docket. They mark the third and fourth PFAS pesticide clearances under the current administration, following cyclobutrifluram and isocycloseram.

A Contested Definition Of What Counts As A Forever Chemical​

The central scientific dispute is whether these compounds are PFAS at all. In a formal fact check published on 26 November 2025, the EPA said single fully fluorinated-carbon compounds are not forever chemicals and pose no safety concern when labels are followed. The agency notes its 2023 PFAS definition, set under the Biden administration, deliberately excludes molecules with only one fluorinated carbon.


The Center for Biological Diversity counters that the pesticides meet a broader PFAS definition endorsed by more than 150 researchers and used by nearly every US state. It says the EPA quietly removed a reference to that competing definition from its own website weeks after publishing it. The group also points out that diflufenican and epyrifenacil break down into trifluoroacetic acid, a persistent water contaminant that the European Chemicals Agency has recommended be classified as toxic to reproduction.

Regulators abroad have already drawn harder lines. Denmark has banned diflufenican over its contribution to groundwater contamination, and epyrifenacil has never been cleared for use in Europe.

On the cancer question, the EPA rates epyrifenacil as 'not likely to be carcinogenic' at low doses, yet the pesticide causes liver tumours in animal studies, and a diflufenican breakdown product shares a toxicity profile with aniline, a compound the agency itself classifies as a probable human carcinogen.

Supreme Court Ruling Narrows The Path To Sue Pesticide Makers​

The timing has amplified the alarm. On 25 June 2026 the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims. Writing for the majority, Justice Brett Kavanaugh held that state juries cannot force a pesticide label to carry warnings 'in addition to or different from' those the EPA approves.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented, writing that the decision 'misunderstands FIFRA's requirements' and leaves the plaintiff without a remedy. The case grew from a Missouri jury award to farmer John Durnell, who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after decades of Roundup use. Bayer welcomed the ruling as good for regulatory clarity, and analysts expect it to close out most of the roughly 100,000 pending Roundup claims.

Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity, called the fresh approvals 'a national outrage' coming days after the court 'limited the American people's right to sue pesticide companies.' He argues the agency has approved hundreds of poisons it has itself linked to cancer. The EPA maintains its reviews follow gold-standard science and that the compounds are safer than the older chemicals they replace.


Whether the courts, Congress or a fractured Make America Healthy Again movement can reopen the door the EPA has just widened will now shape what ends up on America's dinner plates for a generation.

SOURCE: https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/epa-approves-new-fluorinated-pesticides-1806171
 
Upvote 0
8 weeks
DFF's residual activity may last 8 weeks. Diflufenican inhibits carotenoid synthesis, without which photosynthesis begins to fail and the plant is vulnerable to damage from sunlight, causing growth cessation and necrosis. It is absorbed by germinating seedlings.



Epyrifenacil exhibits limited residual activity, allowing for day-of-planting applications in corn, soybean, and wheat, and a 3-day preplant interval in canola.

Residual Activity and Preplant Use​


Epyrifenacil is a selective PPO-inhibitor herbicide (Weed Science Society of America Group 14) that controls a broad spectrum of broadleaf and some grass weeds, including biotypes resistant to other PPO inhibitors. Its residual activity is limited, which means it does not persist long in the soil, allowing crops like corn, soybean, and wheat to be planted on the same day as application. For canola, a 3-day preplant interval is recommended to ensure crop safety and effective weed control (EPA registration review) regulations.govregulations.gov.

Mechanism of Action and Systemic Properties​

The herbicide works by inhibiting protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO), an enzyme critical for chlorophyll biosynthesis. Inhibition leads to accumulation of protoporphyrin IX, which generates reactive oxygen species under light, causing rapid cell membrane damage and plant necrosis benchchem.combenchchem.com. Unlike some PPO inhibitors that act mainly as contact herbicides, epyrifenacil is systemic, meaning it is translocated within the plant, improving control of both broadleaf and certain grass weeds regulations.govregulations.gov.

Environmental Fate and Metabolism​

Studies in mammals indicate that epyrifenacil is rapidly metabolized to an ester-cleaved metabolite (S-3100-CA), which is primarily excreted and shows limited persistence in tissues American Chemical SocietyAmerican Chemical Society+1. While these studies focus on mammalian metabolism, they suggest that the compound is not highly persistent, supporting its limited residual activity in agricultural settings.

Practical Implications​

  • Day-of-planting flexibility for corn, soybean, and wheat enhances operational efficiency.
  • Short preplant interval for canola ensures crop safety while maintaining effective weed control.
  • Broad-spectrum weed control, including some PPO-resistant species, makes it a valuable tool in integrated weed management and resistance management programs regulations.govregulations.gov.
    In summary, epyrifenacil’s limited residual activity and systemic properties allow for flexible preplant applications while providing effective control of a wide range of weeds, making it suitable for modern crop management systems.
 
[ each is expected to leave residues that linger well beyond a single growing season.]

Not what is going on with proper application. Same as Gly getting a bad rap when not applied per instructions.
Who grows crops and has a goal of applying more chemicals /money than needed?
Does anyone not understand that if you force a mouse to drink two gallons of water in a minute the mouse will die?

Anyone stating "residues" exist beyond a single growing season needs to provide their evidence of harm as a result after proper application and quit playing the clickbait game.
Such B.S. does not benefit agriculture; or consumers.
 
Well, I've seen farmers wearing gas masks in their tractors while they sprayed their shit on the fields. Potatoes in Idaho, soy beans in Ohio. These were air-conditioned cabins not open air. Please excuse those of us who do not want to eat poison and are a wee bit skeptical.
 
Well, I've seen farmers wearing gas masks in their tractors while they sprayed their shit on the fields. Potatoes in Idaho, soy beans in Ohio. These were air-conditioned cabins not open air. Please excuse those of us who do not want to eat poison and are a wee bit skeptical.

If the instructions say to wear respiratory protection , wear respiratory protection. for both herbicides and pesticides.

Gly (glyphosate) is the bogyman .
Not because of the results where properly applied. Because of improper use and application.
Just because someone isn't wearing a respirator don't think it's safe for you.



I don't use pesticides or chemicals. But I'm not farming for a living either. I grow a lot of weeds.
This years plot is taken over with haresfoot clover. Again. Were I trying to make money I'd be in the red too far to get out this year.
Sooner or later ag. industries want to harvest plants in a productive (profitable) manner. That involves controlling both weeds and pests.
Herbicides burn plants and prevent uptake in their stems.
Pesticides are a very different matter.
Both should demand a respirator be worn during application and application be done on a non windy day..

There are weeds becoming resistant to common herbicides.
Who is going to grown crops if weeds exceed thier desired crop?
Who will have to pay more for less as consumers?
Consumers (non growers) should be encouraging safer alternatives.
Who's involved in doing so?

IMG_0323.webp
 
It's good to not be ignorant.
That doesn't mean accepting claims that aren't true about herbicides.
First find the studies supporting the claim of harmful residues as long as claimed.
I don't find such evidence. Making the source of alarm that didn't provide it/their own supporting evidence /sources , an insult to herbicides.


[Trump Approves Toxic Cancer-Linked Forever Chemical Pesticides On Major Food Crops Never Before Used In America​

New herbicides approved for major US crops amid health concerns and legal battles.​

By Chelsie Napiza
Published 01 July 2026, 1:06 PM BST]

Chelsie is a U.K. "Content writer".
Does Chelsie farm? No.
Does Chelsie hold a chemical degree? No.
Feel free to research Chelsie's credentials regarding American agricultural health and herbicide applications and residues.
Her greatest strength is in writing negative articles about Trump.
Which has what to do with her lack of concern about American potatoes herbicide residue contents she offers no proof of?

[Idaho Herbicide Residue Studies​

Idaho has active research programs tracking both herbicide resistance and soil herbicide residue effects on crops, with University of Idaho and Idaho Weed Science providing key resources.

Herbicide Resistance Tracking​

The Idaho Herbicide Resistance Tracking Map (PNWHRI) documents resistance in target weeds across Idaho counties. Examples include:

  • Kochia (Bassia scoparia) – Glyphosate resistance (Roundup®, Rodeo®, Accord®, etc.) reported in Ada, Bingham, and Blaine counties Experience Builder System.
  • Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum) – Glyphosate resistance in Bannock County Experience Builder System.
  • Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) – Resistance to clethodim, sethoxydim, pinoxaden, quizalofop, pyroxsulam, mesosulfuron, triasulfuron in multiple counties Experience Builder System.
These reports help growers identify resistant species in their fields and adjust herbicide programs accordingly.

Soil Herbicide Residue Research​

A 2025 University of Idaho study linked soil herbicide residue levels to sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) stand and growth reduction ACSESS - Wiley Online Library. Six herbicides were tested:

  • Flumioxazin, mesotrione, metribuzin, rimsulfuron, imazamox, terbacil.
  • Even at levels below the limit of detection in lab tests, some herbicides caused >50% stand density and biomass loss:
    • Rimsulfuron: >50% stand density, 25% biomass loss.
    • Metribuzin: ~40% stand density, 25% biomass loss.
    • Flumioxazin: 50% stand density, 50% biomass loss.
    • Mesotrione: >50% reduction even below LOD.
  • Imazamox and terbacil caused minimal damage at low residues.
Key takeaway: Laboratory residue analysis should be paired with bioassays to predict crop damage from carryover ACSESS - Wiley Online Library.

Practical Implications​

  • For growers: Monitor for resistant weeds using the Idaho resistance map and adjust herbicide selection.
  • For crop managers: If suspecting herbicide carryover, test soil for residues and conduct bioassays to assess crop impact.
  • For researchers: These studies inform best management practices for rotating crops and managing herbicide use to reduce resistance and carryover risks.
You can access the Idaho Herbicide Resistance Tracking Map and related research reports via the Idaho Weed Science and PNWHRI websites.]
 
The immediate penalty for over application is carryover of killing plants.
Don't let a writer confuse that potential carry over in a study mean human injury.
Someone sprays to kill the cover crop before seeding and plant too soon doesn't mean a potato has herbicide in it.
Think about that. Almost as if you don't want to do that because you lose money by doing so in multiple ways.


Here's info on Gly used in no till. Gly the scariest bogyman , (until Chelsie Vs. Trump anyways).
( And no till is far better than watching soil blow away.)
Application was spraying. Not using wicks which no tills might depending on weeds and any perennial choices.

Don't like current herbicides? Provide the Ag. industry an alternative.
Or boycott potatoes I guess.


 
Farmers exposed to Paraquat which was "safe" until it wasn't, have unusually high incidents of Parkinson's disease. It now has been positively linked to the exposure to Paraquat. Guess which is the only country that didn't ban its use? Yep, us. There are law suits now and it may have been banned very recently like just weeks ago. Hard working farmers don't deserve to spend their retirement suffering. Like everything else it boils down to money. Farming can be done without deadly chemicals and they are deadly period. Big ag is like every other big money industry putting money ahead of safety until they are forced to change. Common sense tells you not to poison the food you eat.
 
Farmers exposed to Paraquat which was "safe" until it wasn't, have unusually high incidents of Parkinson's disease. It now has been positively linked to the exposure to Paraquat. Guess which is the only country that didn't ban its use? Yep, us. There are law suits now and it may have been banned very recently like just weeks ago. Hard working farmers don't deserve to spend their retirement suffering. Like everything else it boils down to money. Farming can be done without deadly chemicals and they are deadly period. Big ag is like every other big money industry putting money ahead of safety until they are forced to change. Common sense tells you not to poison the food you eat.
You see the deer pictured.
They eat my plantings and I eat them. I get the uptake potential part.
I don't pay for inspections or could be certified organic tilth by now. Never mind the sins of the past and leaded fuel around the old road near.
And I could charge more for putting organic on the label.

I have not studied how those claimed to have been affected by Paraquat were exposed. Or it's effective lifespan. (7-10 days of toxicity with chemical residues for several years depending on soil acidity tells me what is in a potato?) Nor would I know if precautions were followed correctly.
Been a while since I've seen boots isolated for specific uses and decontaminated each use for example. As a youth working farms I wore the same footwear as was. Even on multiple properties. (Not good).
Someone wearing a respirator would be fine by me. I wore them in industrial work when required.
With far more use of nontoxic particle masks for other assigned tasks. Cough.
 
If the instructions say to wear respiratory protection , wear respiratory protection. for both herbicides and pesticides.

Gly (glyphosate) is the bogyman .
Not because of the results where properly applied. Because of improper use and application.
Just because someone isn't wearing a respirator don't think it's safe for you.



I don't use pesticides or chemicals. But I'm not farming for a living either. I grow a lot of weeds.
This years plot is taken over with haresfoot clover. Again. Were I trying to make money I'd be in the red too far to get out this year.
Sooner or later ag. industries want to harvest plants in a productive (profitable) manner. That involves controlling both weeds and pests.
Herbicides burn plants and prevent uptake in their stems.
Pesticides are a very different matter.
Both should demand a respirator be worn during application and application be done on a non windy day..

There are weeds becoming resistant to common herbicides.
Who is going to grown crops if weeds exceed thier desired crop?
Who will have to pay more for less as consumers?
Consumers (non growers) should be encouraging safer alternatives.
Who's involved in doing so?

View attachment 2258632
Not to correct your post, but a pesticide is a very general term, which includes: herbicides, insecticides, nematicides, growth regulators, etc.

Also- never assume an herbicide is less toxic to a human than herbicide. Paraquat (herbicide) for example is much more acutely toxic than bifenthrin (insecticide)

As a general rule the newer chemistries are gentler than their older counterparts.

Also you have the differentiation of restricted use chemicals (usually the most impactful) that can only be purchased/applied by someone with a license vs something you can buy at lowes.

Finally- all chemicals have suggested/required ppe (personal protective equipment) on their labels. Some are a long sleeve shirt and gloves, some are a respirator. The label (EPA approved) is the law.
 
Last edited:
Not to correct your post, but a pesticide is a very general term, which includes: herbicides, insecticides, nematicides, growth regulators, etc.

Also- never assume an herbicide is less toxic to a human than herbicide. Paraquat (herbicide) for example is much more acutely toxic than bifenthrin (insecticide)

As a general rule the newer chemistries are more gentler than their older counterparts.

Also you have the differentiation of restricted use chemicals (usually the most impactful) that can only be purchased applied by someone with a license vs something you can buy at lowes.

Finally- all chemicals have suggested/required ppe (personal protective equipment) on their labels. Some are a long sleeve shirt and gloves, some are a respirator. The label (EPA approved) is the law.
Would you use gly on potato bugs? Or a dedicated insecticide?

I pumped acid that ate my skin on contact , repeatedly despite wearing P.P.E..
My differentiation anymore is to only get dust on me from soil I don't use chemicals on.
Oh the temptation is there at times.
20250816_094019.webp
20250915_134837.webp
 
Last edited:
I used to hunt for relics in corn, from knee high to over my head. hunted burnt soybean hillsides in the 80s. detasseled for a few years in the early 70s. these days I stay out of the crops due to the chemicals. worked crop protection for farm bureau in the 80s which was the chemicals. now I stay out for the most part.
 
Would you use gly on potato bugs? Or a dedicated insecticide?

I pumped acid that ate my skin on contact , repeatedly despite wearing P.P.E..
My differentiation anymore is to only get dust on me from soil I don't use chemicals on.
Oh the temptation is there at times.
View attachment 2258665View attachment 2258666
As glyphosate is a herbicide, no don’t think it would be useful on an insect. Spinosad is a decent compound for potato beetles, and depending upon the surfactant that is used can be used in organic production.
 
I don’t know why they need new chemicals around here. All the bean fields are super clean. No weeds at all. The corn this year is the best I’ve seen for the last several years.
 
You do not have to be an octogenarian to remember the astonishing (and wildly wrong) statements about Glyphosate being environmentally safe. I smell Monsanto & company all over again! Or is that BASF and Valent?
 
As glyphosate is a herbicide, no don’t think it would be useful on an insect. Spinosad is a decent compound for potato beetles, and depending upon the surfactant that is used can be used in organic production.
Exactly.
When I state herbicide I refer to weeds.
And pesticides= insects.

The D.D.T. sprayings weren't for weeds.
It and leaded fuel residues for us barefoot ditch scrounging kids were complimented by who knows what burned on push mower exhausts from deliberate drip tubes and handle mounted tanks.
The potential of weed killers being effective when crops are growing is slighter than the life of insecticides can be expected to be. Why kill or reduce your crop you're trying to grow?
Compared to bug killer staying effective for a long period of time didn't use to upset consumers.


Surfactants do vary. Crop oil. Aluminum sulfate with hard water which is common around me, or nitrate.
I still smell vinegar and dish soap outside the house now and then.
The salt mixed with it I don't care to have in the soil but I'm not the one using the stuff on weeds either. Or growing flowers and plants around the house.
 
Exactly.
When I state herbicide I refer to weeds.
And pesticides= insects.

The D.D.T. sprayings weren't for weeds.
It and leaded fuel residues for us barefoot ditch scrounging kids were complimented by who knows what burned on push mower exhausts from deliberate drip tubes and handle mounted tanks.
The potential of weed killers being effective when crops are growing is slighter than the life of insecticides can be expected to be. Why kill or reduce your crop you're trying to grow?
Compared to bug killer staying effective for a long period of time didn't use to upset consumers.


Surfactants do vary. Crop oil. Aluminum sulfate with hard water which is common around me, or nitrate.
I still smell vinegar and dish soap outside the house now and then.
The salt mixed with it I don't care to have in the soil but I'm not the one using the stuff on weeds either. Or growing flowers and plants around the house.
Pesticide = all pests (weeds, insects, fungus, etc)

Insecticide = insects
 
Pesticide = all pests (weeds, insects, fungus, etc)

Insecticide = insects
Now ; back to DDT as originally intended as an insecticide. Yet harming plants as if a pesticide.

[DDT is generally harmful to plants, particularly oil-rich seeds, as it can inhibit germination and stunt growth, leading to negative environmental impacts.

Negative Effects on Plants​

  1. Germination Inhibition: Studies have shown that DDT can significantly inhibit the germination of certain plants, especially oil-rich seeds like peanuts and mustard. This inhibition can lead to reduced plant growth and development shuncy.comshuncy.com.
  2. Growth Retardation: DDT exposure can cause stunted growth in plants. Research indicates that the presence of DDT in soil can adversely affect ion uptake, particularly calcium and potassium, which are essential for healthy plant growth shuncy.comshuncy.com.
  3. Environmental Concerns: The long-term use of DDT has raised significant environmental concerns. Its persistence in the environment can lead to accumulation in the food chain, affecting not only plants but also animals and humans. This accumulation can disrupt ecosystems and harm wildlife gardenerbible.comgardenerbible.com.

Indirect Effects​

While DDT is not a fertilizer and does not provide nutrients to plants, it can indirectly influence plant health by controlling insect pests that damage crops. However, the potential benefits of pest control must be weighed against the long-term environmental consequences of DDT accumulation in soil, which can outweigh any short-term advantages gardenerbible.comgardenerbible.com.

Conclusion​

In summary, DDT is not good for plants due to its harmful effects on germination and growth, as well as its negative environmental impact. Sustainable pest management practices and biopesticides are recommended as safer alternatives to DDT for protecting plant health and promoting agricultural productivity.]

https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=5404...L2FydGljbGUvZG9lcy1kZHQtaGFybS1wbGFudHM&ntb=1
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom