Biologically Based Technologies for Pest Control Page: 19
208 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this report.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Chapter 2 The Context 1 19
In early 1989, the television show 60 Minutes and other media sources focused public attention on a
report from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) charging that children were particularly at
risk from exposure to residues of cancer-causing agents in their food. The NRDC report identified as an
example Alar, a chemical widely used in apple production to enhance fruit color and to keep fruit from
falling off trees. Demand for fresh apples plummeted and concern about the presence of other chemical
residues on produce increased. Losses to apple growers caused by diminished sales exceeded $100
million that spring.
The N RDC report stated that Alar is a potent carcinogen and that children face particular risk. The sci-
entific information underlying this assertion was inconclusive, however. In 1973, scientists in Omaha,
Nebraska, had found evidence that unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine (UDMH), a chemical comprising
1 percent of Alar, was carcinogenic to mice at very high doses. EPA declared these results "unscientific"
because the mice received excessively high doses of the chemical. Subsequent tests found effects on
mice only at extremely high doses and no effects on rats at any level of exposure. Neither U.S. nor British
regulators found sufficientjustification in the research to ban the use of Alar.
Alar, like other plant growth regulators, is regulated as a pesticide by EPA. The strong public outcry
against Alar following the media coverage forced EPA to reassess its findings. The agency subsequently
determined that the risks of Alar were too high and pulled the chemical from the market.
Uncertainty was the real issue underlying the debate about Alar. Because there was no proven risk,
government regulators and industry assumed that the chemical was safe. In contrast, the possibility that
Alar might cause cancer led NRDC and parent groups to call for the chemical's prohibition-especially in
light of the high consumption of apples and apple products by infants and children and the uncertainties
regarding long-term effects of exposure to carcinogens early in life.
SOURCES: E. Marshall, "A is for Apple, Alar, and . . . Alarmist?" Science 254(5028):20-4, Oct. 4, 1991; J.D. Rosen, "Much Ado
About Alar," Issues in Science and Technology 6:85, Fall 1990; D. Warner, "The Food Industry Takes the Offensive," Nation's
Business 79(7):42-45, July 1991; and F.E. Young, "Weighing Food Safety Risks," FDA Consumer 23(7):8-14, September 1989.Concern about pesticide food safety issues
gained new impetus in 1993 with the release of
the National Research Council's highly publi-
cized report on "Pesticides in the Diets of Infants
and Children." The study concluded that children
and infants may be uniquely susceptible to the
toxic effects of pesticides and are at greater risk
than adults from some chemicals. Past risk
assessments may not always have adequately
protected infants and children because they did
not explicitly account for these differing impacts,
as well as for differences between adults and
children in diet and other factors-and hence in
pesticide exposure levels (241).
Consumer worries about food safety have
fueled a 20 percent annual growth in the market
for organically grown products since 1989. Sales
by U.S. companies amounted to $2.3 billion in1994 (226). Pest control professionals also report
growing public concern. In the 1993 Sandoz sur-
vey of pest control professionals, 76 percent
reported greater public concern about the envi-
ronmental impacts of pest control than five years
previously (302). One response to this growing
concern has been a reduction in pesticide use. In
a 15-state survey of 9,754 farmers conducted in
1994, 82 percent reported using less or the same
amount of pesticides than five years ago, com-
pared with only 6 percent reporting an increase
in pesticide use (131).
1 Pesticide Resistance
An increasing number of pests-insects, weeds,
and plant diseases-have become resistant to
pesticides that formerly were effective in con-
trolling them. Alternative control technologies
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. Biologically Based Technologies for Pest Control, report, September 1995; [Washington D.C.]. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc39770/m1/26/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.