SIMPOSIUM KIMIAANALISIS KE-17

(SKAM-17)

Swiss Garden Resorts, Kuantan, Malaysia

August 24–26, 2004

ALAR ON APPLES, IS IT STILL

A SCARY DILEMMA??DR. ARBA’AT HASSAN

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudaiarbaat@yahoo.com

ISSUES

APPLES …

… OHHH … APPLES

Consumer Report (May

1989)

Chemical (alar) sprayed on

apples became a hot

issue …

Time Magazine(March 1989)

Do You Dare to Eat an Apple?

(… sprayed with alar)

Consumer Report

(May 1989)

Bad apples. Alar is NOT

gone, neither it is forgotten !!!

Consumer Report

(May 1989)Ratings of

apples and the apple products (… sprayed with

alar?)

Consumer Report

(May 1989)

…another apple report and its

products

… more report

… chemical residue report

Newsweek

How Safe is Our Food?

… poisonous

apples?

Southern Illinoisan

May 14…also

raised alar issue on

apples

Southern Illinoisan

May 16…

environment- alists wanted

alar to be banned

Southern Illinoisan

May 14

…EPA wanted to ban alar

Introduction..1

…is alar really

poisoning children?

…carcinogenic

apple

…more toxic issue in apple

products

…apple is the No. 1

contaminated food

BACKGROUND

Introduction..1 Issue: Spraying of Alar on Apples Consequences: creation of panic

among Americans Why: … People believe that

consuming apples treated with Alar was the most potent causing cancer substance

Introduction…2

Scenario: American public was panic and got out of control

Reactions: Schools removed apples from menus. Parents poured apple products down sink drains. Stores pulled apples out from shelves. Apple industries stopped using Alar-treated apples

Introduction…2

Introduction…2

Apple sauce

Apple pie

Introduction…2

Apple custardApple juice

Introduction…2

Apple sauce

Apple pie

Introduction…2 Scenario: American public got

panic and out of control Reactions: Schools removed

apples from menus. Parents poured apple products down sink drains. Stores pulled apples out from shelves. Apple industries stopped using Alar-treated apples

Introduction…2 Scenario: American public got

panic and out of control Reactions: Schools removed

apples from menus. Parents poured apple products down sink drains. Stores pulled apples out from shelves. Apple industries stopped using Alar-treated apples

Introduction…2 Scenario: American public got

panic and out of control Reactions: Schools removed

apples from menus. Parents poured apple products down sink drains. Stores pulled apples out from shelves. Apple industries stopped using Alar-treated apples

Introdction…3

Trademark name: Alar Common name: Daminozide Chemical names: N-

dimethylaminosuccinamic acid, succinic acid 2,2-dimethylhydrazide, and butanedioic acid mono (2,2-dimethyl-hydrazide)

Other trade names: Kylar, SADH, B-nine, B-995, and Aminocide

Group: growth regulator, pesticide

Advantages of Alar … delay ripening on fruits … attain a better deeper red color,

and a firmer texture …prevent premature dropping, thus

provides apple growers a better yield of a uniform crop

…enable entire orchard be harvested just once, instead of periodically over 6 weeks

… uniformly apple shapes can extend the usual six- to eight-month shelf life or more

Disadvantages of Alar Alar is absorbed through leaves,

roots, and stems. It is translocated and accumulated

in roots, fruits, and elsewhere. Alar penetrates the apples’ pulp

and cannot be washed, cooked or peeled off. Thus, chemical is consumed as we eat apples.

Apples The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) officials said Alar is used majority on red apples (like McIntosh, Cortland, Jonathan, and Red Delicious)

Alar is not used on green apples, like Granny Smith variety, although it is used on Golden Delicious apples

Apples

McIntosh Cortland

Apples

Jonathan Red Delicious

Apples

Granny Smith Golden Delicious

RESEARCHES

Methodology

1. Reviewing newspapers, journal articles, reports, and internet. Journals and newspapers published more than 300 articles. The internet listed more than 600 sources. All sources were on Alar related issue!

2. Requiring information, printed data, plus telephone interviews from the Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago Branch, USA.

Methodology 3. Questionnaire survey to Baptist

Student Center (BSC) residents, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, USA, and

4. Opinionnaire-telephone interview to selected apple orchard owners in Carbondale and Murphysboro, Illinois.

FINDINGS

Results Results are categorized into four

aspects: 1a. Journals + newspapers provided

information, facts, toxicological tests, and public concerns on Alar.

1b. Internet listed more than 600 references. All sources were on Alar related issue!

Results 2. Conducted studies by Carson’s

(1964), Oser (1966), Toth (1970, 1973, & 1977), National Cancer Institute (1978, 1979), Lapsley (1985), and Environmental Working Group (1998) served as toxicological basis, indicated that Alar broke down into UDMH.

Samples found to develop several kinds of cancer (kidney, liver, blood vessels, uterine, and blood vessels).

Results 3. EPA Chicago, Illinois provided printed

materials on Alar. An environmental group (1989) claimed

that children face a massive health problems from pesticide residues in food which caused cancer and nerve damage.

They charged EPA failed to responsible on the exposure tolerance levels of children and infants.

Results Forefront in the public’s eye is the

issue of Alar on apples. The EPA said effects on humans

consuming fruits treated with Alar were unknown.

The toxicity studies were conducted using animals because to administer such chemical tests to human, it is illegal.

Results4. Results on the use of Alar on apples

from 150 questionnaire surveys distributed to Baptist Student Center residents, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Illinois can be summarized as follow:

A. Majority of them were not certain if Alar was a health risk. They wanted more evidence in deciding about the safety use of Alar on apples;

Results

B. They were not sure the laboratory tests using animals were consistent. They needed more knowledge and convinced data about the certainty in laboratory tests for humans;

Results

C. A high percentage of BSC residents concerned about chemicals on their food. Yet, they lacked certainty whether or not Alar to be banned. They seemed to lack of knowledge about Alar on apples; and

Results

D. The BSC residents were not sure whether or not to ban Alar because EPA had not decided to ban Alar. If Alar was banned, it was due to the tremendous influence of the media like newspapers, journals, and TV shows.

Yes No UncertainFig 1: The BSC Residents’ Opinions Toward the Use of Alar on Apples

15.5

11.4 14

.1

31.3

14.1

15.2

15.3

24.9

70.4 73

.4

70.6

43.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Health risk Data reliable Concerned onchemical

Banned Alar

PER

CEN

T (%

)

ResultsSummary of the four orchard

apple owner opinions are as follows:

1. The Grammers Orchards used Alar but discontinued in 1990. The owner disagreed to ban Alar because it used mainly in banana, not on apples. The discontinuation was due to the public displayed of an uneased and concerned on economic reason;

Results

2. The Flamms Orchards discontinued using Alar many years due to the scare that people did not buy their apples. The Company experienced the decrease in purchasing of apples from public due to the Alar issue;

Results3. The Eckert Orchards discontinued

using Alar many years due to public fear.

The manager said, “Alar was good because it increased shelf life, provided apples with pretty color, and a firmer texture. But, due to the public concern and to maintain economy and security of the orchards, the use of Alar on apples was discontinued”; and

Results4. The Minton Produce manager

disagreed to ban Alar. He said, “The sign of not applying

Alar on apples was just gimmick. Alar did not pose danger to people. A person must consume 70,000 lbs apples treated with Alar everyday to be at risk of cancer. We discontinued using Alar on our orchard because we concerned on our economic”.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions

Several conclusions are made:1. The 1964, 1966, 1970, 1973,

1977, 1978, 1979, 1985, & 1998 experiments using animal samples did not reflects exactly to human beings. The doses applied to the samples might also have different impacts if applied to humans.

Conclusions

2. EPA did not confirm to ban Alar on apples. Data from experiments and tests did not convince public … the use of Alar on apples was definitely dangerous or caused severe illnesses, not to mention about cancers.

Conclusions3. Baptist Student Center residents

said, “They lacked of knowledge on Alar ... not certain whether or not to ban Alar, even though they concerned about chemicals in their foods. EPA had not decided in banning of Alar. The influence on the banning was due to the media.”

Conclusions

4. Apple orchard owners interviewed had mixed opinions. Majority were not aware if using Alar posed dangers. They concerned about public views but at the same time they needed to maintain economy and security of the orchards. Thus, they decided to discontinue using Alar.

THANK

YOU