Chattanooga Times Free Press

Are pesticides safe to use on fruits and vegetables? The debate continues

- BY ROGER SCHLUETER

Q: What is the importance of the pesticides/ herbicides that the Environmen­tal Protection Agency recently ruled on? Are these chemicals dangerous or not? What is the real answer?

A: If I had the answer to those last two questions, I’d be wearing a lab coat and perhaps be contending for a Nobel Prize. Just like the Alar controvers­y of the 1980s, chlorpyrif­os has been in the crosshairs of the most recent fight over pesticides, and, while it survived the latest skirmish, the battle to ban it goes on.

You remember Alar, don’t you? Manufactur­ed by the Uniroyal Chemical Co., it was a chemical sprayed on fruit to regulate plant growth so that, for example, apples didn’t fall off the tree prematurel­y. Then in 1985, tests on mice and hamsters suggested it was a carcinogen. Four years later, the National Resources Defense Council issued a report that children were being put at risk from ingesting even legally permissibl­e amounts of potentiall­y lethal chemicals, including daminozide (Alar).

Using the NRDC report, “60 Minutes” made Alar a household word (and worry) in February 1989 when it did a segment on the product. Experts at the American Council on Science and Health and others countered that the tests that produced the Alar scare would have required children to drink 5,000 gallons of apple juice — per day. Washington apple growers sued CBS and the NRDC for $100 million, but the suit was dismissed.

Consumers Union now says Alar may cause five cases of cancer in a million. Today, Alar, which is now banned for use on food crops, is listed as a “possible” carcinogen by the Internatio­nal Agency for Cancer Research and a “probable” threat by the EPA, which usually takes action when a cancer risk exceeds one in a million.

The same controvers­y has been dogging chlorpyrif­os for years. Introduced by the Dow Chemical Co. in 1965, chlorpyrif­os is better known by such familiar trade names as Dursban, Lorsban, Hatchet and Warhawk. It works by attacking an insect’s central nervous system, preventing its ability to break down the neurotrans­mitter acetylchol­ine.

It apparently does its job well. By 2007, chlorpyrif­os was the most commonly used organophos­phate pesticide in the United States and the 14th most common pesticide overall with roughly 10 million pounds applied to crops across the nation. According to Dow, it is used in nearly 100 other countries around the world, most notably on cotton, corn, almonds and fruit trees such as oranges, bananas and apples. It also has been used on golf courses and in ant and roach baits.

But just as it affects insects, some studies indicate that chlorpyrif­os affects humans, especially infants and children, whose bodies cannot detoxify the chemical as readily. In multiple human studies, exposure during pregnancy or in childhood has been linked with lower birth weight, slower motor developmen­t and attention problems. In experiment­s on rats, short-term, lowdose exposure produced lasting neurologic­al effects.

Other studies have found that acute exposure or repeated low-dose exposure can produce health problems in adults. In one, it was associated with higher risks of lung cancer among those who apply it frequently compared with 49 other pesticides. In 2011, New Zealand scientists said it likely caused the death of several tourists in Thailand who developed myocarditi­s, but Thai researcher­s disputed the claim.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States