Daminozide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Alar)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Alar" redirects here. For other uses, see Alar (disambiguation).
Daminozide
Skeletal formula of daminozide
Identifiers
CAS number 1596-84-5 YesY
PubChem 15331
ChemSpider 14593 YesY
UNII F6KF33M5UB YesY
EC number 216-485-9
KEGG C10996 YesY
MeSH daminozide
RTECS number WM9625000
Beilstein Reference 1863230
Jmol-3D images Image 1
Properties
Molecular formula C6H12N2O3
Molar mass 160.17 g mol−1
Appearance White crystals
Melting point 159.24 °C; 318.63 °F; 432.39 K
Hazards
LD50
  • >1,600 mg kg−1 (dermal, rabbit)
  • 8,400 mg kg−1 (oral, rat)
[1]
Related compounds
Related alkanoic acids Octopine
Related compounds
Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C (77 °F), 100 kPa)
 YesY (verify) (what is: YesY/N?)
Infobox references

Daminozide — also known as Alar, Kylar, B-NINE, DMASA, SADH, or B 995 — is a plant growth regulator, a chemical sprayed on fruit to regulate their growth, make their harvest easier, and keep apples from falling off the trees before they are ripe. This makes sure they are red and firm for storage. Alar was first approved for use in the U.S. in 1963, it was primarily used on apples until 1989 when it was voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturer after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed banning it based on concerns about cancer risks to consumers.[2]

It has been produced in the U.S. by the Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc, (now integrated into the Chemtura Corporation) which registered daminozide for use on fruits intended for human consumption in 1963. In addition to apples and ornamentals, it was also registered for use on cherries, peaches, pears, Concord grapes, tomato transplants and peanut vines. On fruit trees, daminozide affects flow-bud initiation, fruit-set maturity, fruit firmness and coloring, preharvest drop and market quality of fruit at harvest and during storage.[2] In 1989, it became illegal to use daminozide on food crops in the US, but it is still allowed for use on non-food crops like ornamentals.[3]

The campaign to ban Alar[edit]

In 1985, concern developed in the U.S. public over the use of Alar on apples, over fears that the residues of the chemical detected in apple juice and applesauce might harm people. The outcry led some manufacturers and supermarket chains to announce they would not accept Alar-treated apples.

The Natural Resources Defense Council had for years urged the EPA to ban daminozide and in a 1989 report, largely using the government's own figures, they reported that on the basis of a two-year peer reviewed study children were at "intolerable risk" from a wide variety of potentially lethal chemicals, including daminozide, that they ingest in legally permissible quantity. By their estimate "the average pre-schooler's exposure was estimated to result in a cancer risk 240 times greater than the cancer risk considered acceptable by E.P.A. following a full lifetime of exposure."[4]

In February, 1989 there was a broadcast by CBS's 60 Minutes featuring a report by the Natural Resources Defense Council highlighting problems with Alar (daminozide).

This followed years of background work. According to Environmental Working Group:

Prior to 1989, five separate, peer-reviewed studies of Alar and its chemical breakdown product, unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH), had found a correlation between exposure to the chemicals and cancerous tumors in lab animals. In 1984 and again in 1987, the EPA classified Alar as a probable human carcinogen. In 1986, the American Academy of Pediatrics urged the EPA to ban it. Well before the 60 Minutes broadcast, public concern had already led six national grocery chains and nine major food processors to stop accepting apples treated with Alar. Washington State growers had pledged to voluntarily stop using it (although tests later revealed that many did not). Maine and Massachusetts had banned it outright.[5]

In 1989, following the CBS broadcast, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided to ban Alar on the grounds that "long-term exposure" posed "unacceptable risks to public health." However before the EPA's preliminary decision to ban all food uses of Alar went into effect, Uniroyal, the sole manufacturer of Alar, agreed in June 1989 to halt voluntarily all domestic sales of Alar for food uses.[6]

Backlash[edit]

Apple growers in Washington filed a libel suit against CBS, NRDC and Fenton Communications, claiming the scare cost them $100 million.[7] The suit was dismissed in 1994.[8]

Elizabeth Whelan and her organization, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), which had received $25,000 from Alar's manufacturer,[9] stated that Alar and its breakdown product UDMH had not been shown to be carcinogenic.

Current views[edit]

There remains disagreement and controversy about the safety of Alar and the appropriateness of the response to it. Daminozide remains classified as a probable human carcinogen by the EPA and is listed as a known carcinogen under California's Prop 65.[9] Its breakdown product UDMH is also listed as a Prop 65 carcinogen, IARC classifies it as "possible" carcinogen, and EPA classifies it as a "probable" carcinogen.[10]

The degree of exposure to Alar necessary for it to be dangerous may be extremely high.[11] The lab tests that prompted the scare required an amount of Alar equal to over 5,000 gallons (20,000 L) of apple juice per day.[7] Consumers Union ran its own studies and estimated the human lifetime cancer risk to be 5 per million, as compared to the previously-reported figure of 50 cases per million.[12] Generally, EPA considers lifetime cancer risks in excess of 1 per million to be cause for action.[13]

Among those who think the Alar response was overblown, the term "Alar scare" has been used as shorthand for an irrational, emotional public scare based on propaganda rather than facts.

References[edit]

  1. ^ "Daminozide toxicity, publication date: 9/93". Extension Toxicology Network. Retrieved 10 September 2013. 
  2. ^ a b United States Environmental Protection Agency, "Daminozide (Alar) Pesticide Canceled for Food Uses" (press release), 7 November 1989
  3. ^ United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides And Toxic Substances (September 1993). "R.E.D. Facts: Daminozide". EPA-738-F-93-007. 
  4. ^ Oakes, John B. (1989-03-30). "A Silent Spring, for Kids". The New York Times. 
  5. ^ "Myth of 'Alar Scare' Persists; How the chemical industry rewrote the history of a banned pesticide". Environmental Working Group. 1999-02-01. Retrieved 2007-07-14. 
  6. ^ Environmental Regulation: Law, Science, & Policy by Percival, et al. (4th ed.) Page 391.
  7. ^ a b Smith, Kenneth; Raso, Jack (Feb 1, 1999). "An Unhappy Anniversary: The Alar 'Scare' Ten Years Later". American Council on Science and Health. Retrieved Apr 4, 2012. 
  8. ^ "Appellate Brief (1994) for CBS in Alar Case". Food Speak: Coalition for Free Speech. CSPI. Retrieved Apr 4, 2012. 
  9. ^ a b Neff RA, Goldman LR (2005). Free full-text "Regulatory parallels to Daubert: stakeholder influence, "sound science," and the delayed adoption of health-protective standards". Am J Public Health. 95 Suppl 1: S81–91. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.044818. PMID 16030344. 
  10. ^ "Pesticide Info: 1,1-Dimethyl hydrazine". Pesticideinfo.org. Retrieved 30 November 2009. 
  11. ^ Rosen, Joseph D (Fall 1990). "Much Ado About Alar". Issues in Science and Technology: 85–90. 
  12. ^ "Alar and Apples". SourceWatch. July 26, 2010. 
  13. ^ Sadowitz, March; Graham, John. "A Survey of Residual Cancer Risks Permitted by Health, Safety and Environmental Policy". Retrieved Aug 24, 2012. 

External links[edit]