Filipino farmers and labourers do not take adequate protection
from pesticides. Their beliefs on how illness is brought about,
perceptions and beliefs on pesticides, as well as their functional
definition of health and its maintenance, have inevitably led to
Table 4 Farmers’ reinterpretations of the pesticide
dichotomy
Description
Positive
characteristics Negative characteristics
Selfish person Gives effort Killer
Insincere Shows good Has bad intentions
Politician Externally good Hiding his true identity
Friend Good Bad when taken too seriously
Usurer Gives money Charges high interest
Albularyo/healer Finds a cure May do more harm than good
Table 5 Contributing factors on the willingness to pay for
personal protective equipment (PPE)21
* Significant at α = 0.05.
† Significant at α = 0.10.
‡ Significant at α = 0.01.
Gloves Mask
Variable Farmers Labourers Farmers Labourers
Intercept –1.92 –2.04 5.43 –26.3*
Age (log) –0.5 0.01 –3.07† –0.87
Education (log) 2.01* 0.21 0.61 1.50
Farm size (log) 1.75 0.21 0.85† 0.54
Income (log) –0.03 –0.05 E(+4) 0.36 2.93‡
Belief in pasma –2.90‡ –2.72‡
by guest on August 11, 2015 http://jpubhealth.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from
OUR FARMERS AT RISK 47
certain actions that hampered their taking preventive measures
to protect themselves from the ill-health effects of pesticides.
The belief of immunity, that some (particularly the young)
are not susceptible to the adverse health effects of pesticides, has
contributed to farmers’ thinking that they are not at risk. There
is a need therefore to stress that everyone is at risk to acute or
chronic pesticide poisoning, especially when one is exposed to
pesticides on a regular basis. Thus, the need to promote the
importance of PPE and safety practices when using pesticides.
The dichotomy in the belief of pesticides as both medicine
and poison has put the medicine concept above the poison
concept. Health education programs should then stress the
poison side of pesticides. The proper choice of words is critical
in educational campaigns for safety practices in using pesticides.
Health educators should promote and emphasize the
use of the word lason (poison) and not gamot (medicines) to
refer to pesticides. This is particularly important to counter
information disseminated by chemical companies that stress
the ‘medicinal’ effects of pesticides on plants when they promote
their products.
All these beliefs and perceptions relate to how farmers and
labourers are willing to pay for PPE. Many of them see no
point in spending on things that just might cause other illnesses
such as pasma as in the case of using gloves to protect the hands
from pesticides spill over and sprinkles.
A health education program promoting greater awareness
among farmers and labourers about pesticides is highly needed.
This awareness should tap the belief system. It should include
relevant information that explicitly takes into account farmers’
beliefs and perceptions about pesticides and specific details of
how pesticides can enter the body, who are those at risk and
how they can reduce their exposure.
The promotion of integrated pest management and the introduction
of new, less toxic chemicals may help reduce the risks to
farm families. However, many farmers and labourers are
exposed to pesticide hazards, which they could reduce if they
had more information about health hazards and appropriate
safety measures. In addition, the use of protective equipment
suitable for tropical farm workers should be promoted. Governments,
particularly in developing countries, should take the lead
in spearheading well-targeted and culturally appropriate health
education programs. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
and even the pesticide industries should also provide information
on pesticide hazards and precautionary measures.