The Swiss-based multinational Syngenta - the world's largest agribusiness firm - is o­n a public relations offensive to erase the stigma associated with the herbicide paraquat, following Malaysia's decision in August to phase out the hazardous substance.

Hosting journalists to a ''media roundtable'' in Penang last week, John McGillivray, general manager of its Malaysian arm Syngenta Crop Protection Sdn Bhd, addressed what he referred to as the 'myths' surrounding paraquat.

''So what is the issue? You have got a dream product,'' he concluded, after extolling what he called the social, economic and environmental benefits of paraquat.

But even as Syngenta was feting the journalists to dinner, a 39-year-old factory worker, Gurunathan (not his real name), lay dying in a hospital in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur after consuming weed-killer in a bid to take his life.

Traces of a greenish liquid were found o­n his shirt as he lay writhing in agony o­n the ground before relatives rushed him to hospital, where his organs gradually shut down. He died around midnight.

Three weeks earlier, Gurunathan had enquired from a nephew if paraquat was lethal. Doctors say a couple of teaspoons are enough to kill an adult, but not before considerable agony.

But for McGillivray, paraquat is merely a means of suicide - not the cause of it. A ban o­n paraquat, he says, would o­nly hurt Malaysian plantation smallholders and firms.

For critics, it is a question of widespread and easy accessibility to a known toxic substance. Suicide is not the o­nly issue, though.

Constant exposure

Knapsack sprayers are regularly exposed to paraquat. Many have little protective clothing, lack training, and have little knowledge of the hazardous effects of the products they use. If protective clothing is provided, the hot, humid weather makes work unbearable.

The worst cases of exposure occur during spraying and actual handling. A two-year, in-depth study among 72 women sprayers in 17 plantations in three states o­n the peninsula, released last year, revealed a host of symptoms among the workers.

Among them were fatigue, vomiting, back pains, giddiness and nausea, breathing difficulties, skin disorders, eye irritation, headaches, tight sensations in the chest and burning sensations in the vagina.

''There have been situations where there are reports of finger nail damage as a result of paraquat,'' conceded McGillivray. ''(But) very rare these days; they happened in the early days before the lessons of the training and stewardship were well accepted,'' he said, referring to Syngenta's training of workers o­n the proper method of handling pesticides.

As in the case of all pesticides, ''major deviations from instructions o­n use and handling can result in occupational incidences'', he said.

He suggested that sprayers could have been mixing the spray solution with their bare hands without washing them later, and ''they can get some damage o­n their finger nails''.

''Again you correct the errors of their ways, you stop them doing that, you make them use gloves, make them use a stick to stir it up, you then wash after they have used, the effects are completely reversed and there is no problem.''

Not reversible

But it is untrue that the effects are completely reversible, rebuts Romeo Quijano, a doctor and professor in pharmacology at the University of the Philippines.

''I have seen cases where fingers and toes are permanently disfigured with repeated exposure to paraquat,'' he said in a telephone interview from the Philippines.

Quijano, a consultant to the Fertiliser and Pesticides Authority of the Philippines, added that paraquat causes irreversible damage to the lungs that often leads to death due to pulmonary fibrosis.

''Being a highly potent cell poison, paraquat destroys the rapidly growing and sensitive tissues such as the lining of the respiratory tract, the eye surface, skin, nails and gastro-intestinal tract,'' he said.

Long-term toxicity may occur, such as adverse reproductive effects, damage to the immune system, various organ abnormalities and even cancer, he noted. ''Paraquat has also been reported to be an endocrine disruptor, with the potential to cause abnormalities in the growth and development of children.''

But Syngenta says that paraquat is merely listed as Class 2 (moderately toxic) by the World Health Organisation and it cannot understand why the Malaysian government classifies it as Class 1B.

''It doesn't mean it's safe if the WHO classifies it as Class 2,'' said Quijano. ''There is a very thin line between Class 1 and Class 2''. A lot would depend o­n the concentration of paraquat in the formulations used, he notes.

Big business

McGillivray declined to disclose Syngenta's potential loss in sales if paraquat is phased out.

Dr Lim Jung Lee, chairperson of the Malaysian Crop Care and Public Health Association that represents the agrochemical industry, says that annual paraquat sales in Malaysia amount to RM90-RM100 million per year - or about 40 percent of a total herbicide market of RM250 million.

But more markets are at stake. Authorities and campaigners in other Asian countries are taking note of the decision of Malaysia - with a long history in the plantation industry - to do away with paraquat.

Several European countries have also banned paraquat. But McGillivray said this was because arable agriculture ''is not particularly important or significant'' in those countries, and noted that the ban was driven by green politics in some nations.

''Where agriculture is important and significant, paraquat is registered and sold,'' including in those countries with stringent regulatory requirements, he stressed.

Asked if paraquat was not banned in Switzerland in 1989, Syngenta's home country, he said: ''No. It's not sold in Switzerland. Again, it's. . .there is very, very little use (because agriculture has become a small industry),'' replied McGillivray. ''It was sold in Switzerland.''

Quijano disagrees. ''I have talked to the director of the regulatory agency in Switzerland. It was because of health and environmental concerns,'' that paraquat was not re-registered, he said.

In a November 1989 statement, the Swiss Federal Council said: The Swiss Government's sanction at this early date was a response to the high acute toxicity for humans inherent in the use - and especially the misuse - of paraquat.''

This non-approval, it noted, ''is tantamount to a ban of paraquat. . . .'' - IPS