Painting the RosesRed: Michigans Latest Food Safety Testing Results
by Merrill Clark
The Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA) has released its second annual report on the Michigan Food Safety Testing Program. This program is meant to determine the extent of pesticide residue on fresh fruit and vegetables sold in the state.
Perhaps readers have seen or heard news accounts of these results. An MDA's news release headline reads: "Residue Levels Below Tolerance." More specifically, it states that there are "no-to-low pesticide residues on all fresh fruit and vegetable samples in 1993." According to MDA Director Gordon Guyer, "The news continues to be good for Michigan consumers. Finding zero to minimal amounts of approved pesticides on the majority of samples tested means the Michigan food supply is safe."
We would like to suggest that the opposite might be closer to the truth. A through study of the details of the report suggests that the MDA has put a very creative, yet misleading 'spin' on the actual results.
According to the Department's own test summary, which was not included in the official, one-page press release, "A total of 225 samples were analyzed of which 109 (48%) had detectable residues" (emphasis added). Out of the twelve foods sampled, only two foods, mint and cauliflower, had "zero" residue. The report further noted that 19 of 20 (95%) apple samples showed the presence of one or more pesticides as did 19% of the asparagus samples, 100% of the blueberry samples, 100% of the peach samples, 95% of the plum samples, 70% of the grape samples and 16% of the potato samples. We feel that these results can hardly be characterized as showing categorically that "Michigan food supply is safe."
The Department's rosy view of this troubling situation is itself troubling. In the first place, it suggests that with respect to pesticide use and residue, existing levels are "low" and, therefore, "of no toxicological concern." They carry "no significant risk." In the second place, it appears that the Department is managing public perception by selectively interpreting and withholding information. Indeed, some Michigan consumers might have actively disagreed with MDA's analysis had they been made aware of the actual results.
Lets Look at Apples
Traces of nine pesticides showed up on 19 of 20 apple samples. The fungicide captan, which is classified by the EPA as a probable human carcinogen, was detected on 13 samples. The following pesticides each showed up on one to seven apple samples: dimethoate, propargite, phosmet, endosulfan, carbaryl, azinphos-methyl, ethion.
Parents, physicians and nutritionists all urge children to eat lots of apples and apple products. At the same time, pesticides can pose a greater risk to small children than to adults (National Academy of Sciences, 1993) Most consumers know little to nothing about these pesticides and are often suspicious of the tolerances that others have determined are acceptable for them. Add to this the fact that the tolerances only characterize the "safety" of one pesticide at a time, and that no agency gauges the potential health affects of seven different accumulated pesticide residues on one apple, it would appear that the "all's well" assurance from the MDA is distorted and irresponsible.
A look at Grapes
Twelve different pesticides were detected on between five and 20% of the table grape samples. In addition those pesticides noted for apples, these were iprodione, methyl parathion, 1-napthol, chloropyrifos (Dursban), dicofol and dicloram.
Peaches Not So Peachy
Of the 11 pesticides detected on peaches grown and sold in Michigan in 1993, six were detected on 23-50% of the samples. All peach samples showed some pesticide residue. Also, three peach samples showed residues for pesticides for which no tolerance had been established at all! Two samples showed residues above EPA tolerances.
Finally, Blueberries
Eighty percent of the blueberry samples (i.e., 16 of 20 samples) showed traces of benomyl. Malathion was detected on 50% of the samples; all blueberry samples showed some pesticide residue. The highly toxic captan was detected on 70% of the blueberry samples.
Pears and plums fared no better. Captan, "tolerated up to 100 ppm, showed up on 10% of the pears and 37% of the plums. Two pesticides for which no tolerance exists also showed up plums.
Conclusion
It is clear pesticide residues are still posing a problem on Michigan food. Instead of bringing these details to the public's attention, MDA preferred to issue a glossed-over PR release that characterized these pesticide traces as acceptable and of no real significance. When it comes to contaminated food, most consumers want to make their own decisions about risk, but they have to have the information from which to form a judgement.
For example, "(t)he principal concern about the risk posed by captan is that its use on agricultural crops poses a risk of cancer to humans through dietary exposure" (Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 120, June 21, 1985). Canada has reduced its tolerance to 5 ppm on grapes; Sweden's tolerance is 15 ppm. In the U.S., by contrast, captan has allowances of up to 50 and 100 ppm.
This and other information about detected pesticides deserves to be shared with the public. And since residues are a problem, the Department of Agriculture and other agencies need to propose solutions. Pesticide use needs to be reduced or eliminated; alternative management practices need to be put into place across the state to relieve the state's natural resource base of additional contamination. Organic and sustainable agricultural systems have completely precluded the need for synthetic pesticides, including fungicides. The MDA needs to be moving toward the support of better farming techniques instead of massaging the bad news about residues into glowing accounts of "safe and healthy food."
Last year, MDA "food safety" results showed only 21% of the foods sampled had detectable residues. This year, 48% of the samples taken showed residues. This can hardly be billed as improvement; assuring the consumer that all is well simply won't do.
Solutions exist. The agricultural community, indeed all residents in the state, need to recognize these solutions and set their sights on achieving them. All who share the Earth and eat the foods from the Earth will benefit.
To obtain a copy of the MDA's food safety testing results contact:
Dr. David Wade, Toxicologist,
c/o Michigan Department of Agriculture, Pesticide and Plant Pest Management Division,