Comparison of Generic Pesticides (Emsal BKÜ) with Original Pesticides (Orijinal BKÜ)

10 Questions and Answers about Generic Pesticides (Emsal BKÜ)

1. Question: Is there a difference in the quality and effectiveness between generic pesticides (Emsal BKÜ) and original pesticides (Orijinal BKÜ), or are they the same?
   Answer: There is no difference between original pesticides and the generic pesticides in terms of chemical, physicochemical, biological properties, and effectiveness. The Ministry conducts quality control analyses (market inspections) every year to verify if the pesticides released into the market maintain their properties according to the registration requirements. The inspection results confirm that there is no difference in effectiveness or quality between original and generic pesticides.

2. Question: Is the residue of generic pesticides higher than that of original pesticides on agricultural products?
   Answer: No. The part of the pesticide that leaves residue on agricultural products is the active ingredient. The active ingredients in both generic and original pesticides are the same, and their quantities are identical. Therefore, there is no difference in the potential residue levels between the two types of pesticides on agricultural products.

3. Question: It is claimed that the impurities in the active ingredients of generic pesticides are different and more dangerous. Is this true?
   Answer: The impurities in the active ingredient are formed during its synthesis. The higher the purity (percentage) of the active ingredient, the lower the amount of impurities. Different production methods can result in different impurity levels. The FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) has set specifications for the maximum allowable impurities in active ingredients used in plant health products. The Ministry strictly controls these impurities both during the registration and importation processes. Therefore, the claim that impurities in generic pesticides are “different and more dangerous” is an unfounded argument by those opposed to the generic pesticide system and does not reflect the truth.

4. Question: Is the issue with agricultural products rejected by the European Union due to “high pesticide residues” caused by generic pesticides?
   Answer: Absolutely not! This claim is not scientifically accurate. Residue levels are related to the active ingredient in the pesticide, not the formulation. The active ingredients in both generic and original pesticides are identical, and their quantities are the same. If residue levels exceed the MRL (Maximum Residue Limits), it must first be determined which pesticide was used in the product. Once identified, the source of the residue can be determined.

5. Question: Farmers often complain that generic pesticides “don’t work, they’re defective.” Is this true?
   Answer: Generic pesticides make up about 75-80% of the pesticides on the market. It is natural that complaints are more common for generic pesticides due to their larger share. However, what is important is whether the pesticide is genuinely defective after investigation and inspection. According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry’s complaint investigations, the vast majority (likely 99%) of generic pesticides meet the approved specifications and are not defective. This demonstrates that generic pesticides are just as effective and of the same quality as original pesticides.

6. Question: Generic pesticides are cheap, and original pesticides are expensive. “If something is cheap, it must be of low quality.” Is it possible for generic pesticides to be both cheap and high-quality?
   Answer: Active ingredients are developed and produced by large multinational companies with strong R&D capabilities, and they hold patents for these ingredients, making them expensive. Original pesticides are expensive because these companies want to recover the costs of developing these active ingredients. Once the patent expires, other manufacturers can produce the same active ingredients, increasing competition and reducing prices. Generic pesticides in Turkey are made using these expired-patent ingredients, allowing them to be sold at a much lower price, but the effectiveness, quality, toxicology, and physical and chemical properties are identical to those of the original pesticides. The only difference is that generic pesticides are cheaper.

7. Question: It is claimed that original pesticides with patented active ingredients are much safer for human and environmental health. Is this true?
   Answer: We must carefully examine whether patented active ingredients are safer or whether the active ingredients with expired patents, which have had few adverse effects over time, are safer. Pesticides are among the most researched and studied chemicals because of their toxicity. However, some of these chemicals, like DDT, BHC, and heptachlor, were once considered safe but were later found to be harmful to human and environmental health. Therefore, it is possible that some active ingredients considered safe today may pose risks after 15-30 years of use. Consequently, the idea that generic pesticides are more dangerous is not correct. In fact, generic pesticides, made with older active ingredients, may be as safe, or even safer, than newer patented pesticides.

8. Question: Can resistance to generic pesticides or original pesticides be different for a harmful organism?
   Answer: No, it cannot. Resistance is related to the active ingredient in the pesticide, not the formulation. Harmful organisms can only develop resistance to the active ingredient. Since both generic and original pesticides contain the same active ingredients in the same proportions, resistance will be the same for both types of pesticides.

9. Question: What would happen if Turkey only imported finished pesticides and did not have domestic production?
   Answer: If Turkey stopped domestic pesticide production and relied solely on imports, several issues could arise:
   a) The pesticide market would be entirely controlled by foreign companies.
   b) Pesticide prices would increase by 5-10 times.
   c) During the agricultural production season, it may become difficult for Turkish farmers to access pesticides at the right time and at affordable prices.
   d) In case of global disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic, Turkey might face difficulties obtaining pesticides.
   e) In case of geopolitical tensions, some foreign pesticide companies might refuse to supply Turkey or delay shipments.

   In such cases, harmful organisms in our country’s plant products will increase, and the amount of harvestable products will decrease significantly. A food shortage will emerge in the market. Food prices will rise excessively, and more food will have to be imported. This is a scenario that no one can afford.

   However, if local PPP production is maintained, in the event of such a situation, domestic PPP producers can quickly supply the raw materials needed through their existing foreign connections and continue producing PPPs in the country to meet the needs of our farmers. What is needed for this is not money, but “love for the country and awareness.” This is abundantly present in our local companies. Since agriculture is a “strategic sector” for our country, our domestic and national PPP industry should be considered as a strategic sector, supported, and sustained.

10. Question: Since Turkey wants to become a member of the EU, wouldn’t it be more beneficial to adopt and implement the EU approval system?
    Answer: If the EU regulations were accepted now, local companies in Turkey would purchase active ingredients registered in the EU from EU-registered producers to manufacture PPPs. These EU companies that sell PPP active ingredients already have representation in Turkey and operate in the Turkish market. Can our local and national PPP industry firms (including those with foreign capital) purchase the active ingredients from EU-registered manufacturers, produce PPPs, and compete with these companies? No! It is not possible! In this case, some of the local entrepreneurs will leave this sector, and others will shift towards importing finished PPP products. Our country’s PPP market would fall under the control of these international large companies! Monopolization would occur! Turkish agriculture would fall under the control of multinational companies. PPP prices would increase by 5-10 times! Our farmers would suffer. Our plant health and, consequently, our food sovereignty would be at risk! For this reason, “EMSL PPP IS THE ECONOMIC INSURANCE OF OUR FARMERS.”

    Therefore, adopting the EU regulations before becoming a member of the EU would mean the end of our domestic and national PPP industry.