This year marks the 10th anniversary of the great Alar scare. A "60 Minutes" episode in 1989 contended that Alar, a chemical applied to apples to prolong their life, could cause childhood cancer. The Environmental Protection Agency announced a ban on Alar would take effect in June of 1991.
The fears proved to be unfounded, but the economic repercussions were substantial. Sales of apple-products plummeted following the "60 Minutes" program. The testing procedures were shaky and referred to as "junk science." Cancer tests in lab animals were inconclusive even though it was reported that the animals' dosage was equivalent to feeding a human 28,000 Alar-treated apples a day for life.The Alar saga serves as a backdrop for the EPA's ban of two pesticides announced Monday -- methyl parathion and azinphos-methyl. The EPA claims that the two pesticides can overstimulate the nervous system and cause nausea, dizziness, confusion and, at high exposures, respiratory failure and death.
To many fruit growers in Utah, it's another example of the EPA's use of junk science. Nile Easton, the Utah Farm Bureau's vice president for communications, said the EPA banned the chemicals "without much study." Environmentalists are also mad at the EPA, saying the two pesticides in question along with others should have already been banned. They cite the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act, which is intended to protect children in particular from harmful pesticide exposure.
Clearly, if the pesticides are as dangerous as the EPA claims, they should be banned. That danger needs to be clearly documented. Utah fruit growers note that methyl parathion has been used for 30 years and, as far as they know, there has never been a problem with it. They are fearful that banning the two pesticides will reduce their yield by half.
Fruit growers have already reduced pesticide use through the integrated pest-management program. Previously orchard owners sprayed on a regular schedule. But now, the Utah Department of Agriculture traps insects to check whether crop-devouring bugs are in the orchards, and farmers spray only when they are present.
Regarding the latest controversy, what is needed is good and convincing documentation. Then, if a ban is warranted, the next step would be to find an alternative for the two banned pesticides. Otherwise, growers and consumers would be put at risk.