Posted by Larry Hoover on May 29, 2006, at 10:08:22
In reply to Re: TCA's are genotoxic ? Addendum » Larry Hoover, posted by ed_uk on May 28, 2006, at 14:29:43
> >The more you know, the more realize how little you know.
>
> Words of wisdom Larry.
>
> EdThanks, my friend.
I'm going to take another shot at contextualization of risk. What you think a risk is, compared to the reality.
Does anybody remember the Alar in apple juice controversy, from maybe fifteen years ago? Alar was the brand name for an agricultural chemical. It was sprayed on apple trees early in the season, but later on, it was discovered in commercial juice made from those apples. An agricultural chemical in apple juice, which we feed to babies!
Sounds pretty straight forward, right? Better get that apple juice off the shelves! Wrong. Totally wrong.
Sure, if you go and read the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for Alar, the official risk management document for that chemical, you would find some seriously scary stuff. When rats and mice were fed this stuff, there was a significant toxic effect. Not only that, but there was genetic, carcinogenic, and reproductive disruption.
No one had any doubt that Alar was not a good food to eat.
However, in order to consume sufficient Alar to cross what was believed to be the minimum toxic threshold, by drinking Alar "contaminated" apple juice, a human being would have to drink 118,000 litres of apple juice a day. I think I actually calculated that, way back then, just to see. I think I'm remembering the details correctly.
That's about a quarter of the volume of an Olympic sized swimming pool, more or less. Every day.
And that's how much a person would have to drink to hit the *minimum* possible dose to cause problems. Most people wouldn't be affected at that minimum dose. The most sensitive people would be, but not most people.
The apple juice was withdrawn from the market. The world was saved by a vigilant press.
Meanwhile, tons of mercury/silver amalgam tooth fillings continued to leach heavy metals into the mouths of Americans. There's less than 20% silver in a "silver" filling. About 50% is mercury. I note that the dentists don't call them mercury fillings, even though the largest percentage is mercury. And that heavy metal is in the mothers' milk.
And life goes on.
Now, there is a ***lot*** more to the Alar story than I mentioned here, and there is more propaganda being thrown around on this subject than any similar subject in human history. I gave you one propaganda version, above, and I know there are substantial counter-arguments. I'm trying to address perception of risk, and compare it to what the scientists are really saying when they talk about risk ratios. For a more balanced view of the Alar story, go to:
http://www.ewg.org/reports/alar/alar.htmlAlar was, in fact, withdrawn for good reason. It helped all the apples ripen at one time, so that the farmer could pick the trees once, rather than gradually, as Mother Nature ripened the fruit the normal way. There is no valid justification for continuing to use a carcinogen for such a picayune reason. Period.
What scares me is all the chemicals that we use all the time, that have *never* been tested. Like food additives on the GRAS list. That means Generally Recognized As Safe. What it really means is, "Stuff We Used Before They Started Testing Stuff". The absence of evidence of any risks associated with e.g. GRAS food additives is not evidence for the absence of ill effects. It just means nobody ever looked.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:647031
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060525/msgs/650052.html