Alar and carcinogen controversy
The Alar and carcinogen controversy centers around daminozide, a plant growth regulator used to enhance the quality and appearance of apples. First adopted in the late 1960s, its safety came into question in the late 1980s, particularly regarding its alleged carcinogenic properties. Concerns were initially sparked by research from Dr. Bela Toth, which indicated tumor development in mice exposed to high doses of the chemical. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began to reassess Alar's safety amid rising public concern and pressure from environmental advocacy groups. This led to a significant backlash, with consumers rejecting apple products and farmers facing substantial financial losses.
Notable public figures joined the anti-Alar campaign, amplifying fears about its safety. However, subsequent research conducted after the initial controversy generally found no evidence of cancer risk associated with typical consumption levels of Alar-treated apples. In fact, the FDA later affirmed that eating such apples posed no health threat. Despite these findings, Alar's use on food crops has been banned in the United States, and it remains classified as a carcinogen. This complex issue highlights the challenges of balancing agricultural practices, consumer safety, and scientific research in public health discussions.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Alar and carcinogen controversy
DEFINITION: Brand name for the chemical daminozide, used as a plant growth regulator
The use of Alar to improve the quality and appearance of apples became controversial in the late 1980s, when a debate arose over the chemical’s carcinogenic properties.
Alar is a growth-regulating chemical manufactured by Uniroyal Chemical Company. In the late 1960s, apple farmers began using the product to improve the quality and appearance of their fruit. The use of Alar by apple growers to preserve crispness as the fruit was sent to market was a common practice for more than twenty years. In 1989, however, a controversy erupted regarding the potential harmful effects of the chemical, and Alar was accused of being the most potent in the food supply.
The first questions about the chemical were raised in the 1970s by Dr. Bela Toth of the University of Nebraska, whose research appeared to indicate that Alar created tumors in mice but not in rats. Reports of Toth’s discovery did not stress the fact that the rodents were fed massive amounts of the chemical, far exceeding the maximum tolerated dose used in cancer testing.
At the time, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disregarded the study. However, in 1983, under attack by environmental and media groups critical of the environmental policies of Ronald Reagan’s presidential administration, the EPA began its questioning of Alar. Steve Schatzow, a lawyer, was appointed to lead the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), and in conjunction with other organizations, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), the OPP began the fight against Alar, proclaiming it to be the most potent cancer-causing substance in the food industry.
The effect of OPP’s announcement was dramatic. Consumers poured apple juice down drains, stores pulled apple products from their shelves, and farmers suffered losses estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The anti-Alar campaign became more aggressive when such celebrities as Sixty Minutes newsman Ed Bradley, consumer activist Ralph Nader, and actor Meryl Streep—who set up a group called Mothers and Others for Pesticide Limits—expressed fears about the chemical.
Despite the anti-Alar fanfare, subsequent studies on the consumption of traces of the chemical, whether in apple juice or any other form of apples, proved to be negative. After 1990, no mainstream, peer-reviewed research demonstrated any linkage between the chemical or its breakdown product, UMDH, and cancer. For example, Dr. Jose R. P. Cabral, an investigator with the International Agency for Research on Cancer, declared that Alar is safe to use and that his group’s experiments had not found tumors in rodents that had consumed reasonable quantities of the chemical. In the wake of such findings, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a statement affirming that eating apples that have been treated with Alar poses no health threat. However, its use on food crops is not permitted in the United States and the chemical is classified as a carcinogen.
Bibliography
Blay-Palmer, Alison. Food Fears. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate, 2008.
"Daminozide." PubChem, 6 July 2024, pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Daminozide. Accessed 12 July 2024.
Das, Debasmita, Pallab Paul, Ishita Dutta, Sayarneel Mandal, Papiya Ghosh, and Sujay Ghosh. "Daminozide Induced Disruption of Cellular Anti-Oxidant System in Drosophila Melanogaster." Proceedings of the Zoological Society, vol. 76, 2023, pp. 102-108. DOI: 10.1007/s12595-023-00473-6. Accessed 12 July 2024.
Ohkawa, H., H. Miyagawa, and P. W. Lee, eds. Pesticide Chemistry: Crop Protection, Public Health, Environmental Safety. New York: Wiley-VCH, 2007.