10. Food Safety & Agricultural Chemicals as an Ethical Issue

1
10. Food Safety Agricultural Chemicalsas
an Ethical Issue

• Larry D. Sanders
• AGEC 4990 Spring 2002

Dept. of Ag Economics Oklahoma State
University
2
INTRODUCTION

• Purpose
• to understand ethical issues related to the use
  of agricultural chemicals in food
  production/processing
• Learning Objectives
• 1. To become aware of the impact of
  agricultural impact
• on food safety.
• 2. To review current policy related to
  agricultural
• chemical use in food production.
• 3. To understand the ethical issues related to
  the use of
• agricultural chemicals in food
  production/processing.

3
Food SafetyAre producers the problem?

• Some of the public is concerned about pesticide
  use/residue
• While HACCP hasnt yet targeted producers,
  traceback could do so
• Food Quality Protection Act imposes new
  responsibilities on chemical use
• Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point

4
Food Safety Policy Background Issues
FOOD

• Risk Acceptability--Tolerance Options
• Zero Tolerance
• De Minimus (Negligible) Risk (1/1 mil)
• No Significant Risk (1/100,000)
• Risk Benefit (Benefits gt Costs)
• Biotechnology
• Information Labelling
• Irradiation
• Traceback
• Free Market

???
5
Is Our Food Supply Safe?Are Ag Chemicals a
Health Hazard?

• PRIVATE CHOICES PUBLIC ISSUES Americans
  decide as a matter of public policy how much risk
  they are prepared to tolerate, but they do not do
  it in the same way at all times in all places
  in all contexts. . . . D. Kennedy, Former
  FDA Commissioner
• EXAMPLES
• Saccharine Caffeine Alar Apples Nuclear
  Power Tobacco Autos
• E.Coli/meat consumption Alcohol
• Cyanide/Grapes Water Sweets
• Red food dye/MMs

6
The Public Issue of Food Safety

• Determination of safe food does not
  necessarily imply zero risk but rather a personal
  societal judgment about the level of acceptable
  risk. The basic economic problem . . . is one of
  balance between acceptable risk . . . in terms of
  health consequences, cost. Sporleder Kramer,
  89
• Concerns trace back in history resurface in
  1960s (additives), in 1980s (pesticides)
• Issue has shifted from scientific debate to
  consumer, media political debate

7
Cancer Risks of Common Substances Risk of
Life-threatening Harm w/Selected Activities
(Ames, Wilson, Crouch)

• Source Risk
• PCBs 1/15 million
• DDT/DDE 1/10 million
• Tap water 1/3.3 million
• Peanut Butter(2T) 1/115,000
• Diet Cola 1/60,000
• Background radiation 1/50,000
• Raw mushroom(1/day) 1/35,000
• Home accidents 1/9,000
• Police work 1/4,500
• Auto accident 1/4,200
• Beer(12 oz/day) 1/1,200
• Wine(8 oz/day) 1/750
• cigarettes (pack/day) 1/300

8
Top Food Safety Hazards Perception Vs. Reality

• Consumer perception 1990
  pesticide residue in food
• 1997 both pesticides food-borne diseases
• SCIENTIFIC FACTS BASED ON ANALYSIS (ranked in
  order)
• 1. Food-borne diseases
• 2. Malnutrition
• 3. Environmental contaminants (lead/mercury)
• 4. Naturally occurring toxins
• 5. Pesticide residue
• 6. Deliberate food additives

9
Food Safety Scientific Studies--results

• Ames study
• 99.9 of carcinogens in diets result of natural
  toxins in plant
• By weight, natural toxins about 10,000 times more
  concentrated in plants than synthetic chemicals
• Pesticide residue-tested food
• 67 --no residue
• 96 --residue in allowable limits
• lt1 --exceeds federal tolerance

10
Food Quality Protection Act of 1996

• Amends FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
  Rodenti-cide Act) FFDCA (Federal Food, Drug
  Cosmetic Act)
• Includes uniform safety standard for residues in
  raw processed foods
• Generally prohibits states from setting standards
  that differ from federal standards
• Facilitates registration for pesticides for
  specialty, minor crops
• Improves consumer access to info
• EPA will consider pesticide residue risk to
  infants/children
• Provisions leading to lowering residue allowable
  levels

11
FQPA (continued)

• May reduce risks, especially to children
• Lack of substitutes shifts producers to narrow
  spectrum time specific chemical alternatives,
  bio-engineered options biologicals
• high management high cost
• Regional impacts vary
• shifts competitive advantage for some crops
  production practices
• Crop impacts vary
• estimated losses of 90-128 mil for Oklahoma
  crops
• Implementation under review by Congress

12
Government Intervention Decision Based on Various
Ethical Perspectives

• Procedural Theory
• Notion of consent requires either private
  independent agency or government objective agency
• Libertarian Theory
• Negative Rights justifies consumer protection to
  keep them free of bodily harm from industry
• Egalitarian Theory
• Positive Right of individual to safety

13
Government Intervention Decision Based on Various
Ethical Perspectives (continued)

• Utilitarian Theory
• Market benefits of safe food are greater than the
  costs to provide it
• Market and nonmarket benefits of safe food (
  attendant cleaner environment) are greater than
  the costs
• Intrinsic Rights
• The protection of all species (human non human
  animals plants) is of primary importance

14
Rank what you consider to be the most serious
food safety hazards (1most serious)

• ____Deliberate food additives
• ____environmental contaminants (lead/mercury)
• ____foodborne diseases
• ____malnutrition
• ____naturally occurring toxins
• ____pesticide residue