FOOD RESIDUES IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
The last EU
monitoring report on pesticide residue in food published in
2005 with 2003 data, shows a frequency of samples with residues
above the Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) of 5.5% and a frequency
of samples with residues at or below the MRLs of 38%. Thus, the
frequency of samples with detected residues amounts to 44% of the
total number of samples in 2003. These values haven't changed since
2002, but since 1999 they have increased from 36% to 44% of all
samples in EU.
The highest level of exceedances in the EU co-ordinated monitoring
was found in peppers (6%), grapes (5%), cucumber (3%) and aubergines
(3%). Among the most common substances found exceeding the MRLs
(methomyl, methiocarb, metalaxil, methamidophos, benomyl-group,
acefate, dimethoate, endosulfan, bromopropylane, chorpyrifos, captan+folpec,
imazalil and maneb-group), there are 7 acute toxic, 7 cholinesterase
inhibitors, 6 potential groundwater contaminants, 5 suspected endocrine
disruptors, 6 carcinogens or possible carcinogens and 4 developmental
or reproductive toxins, according to classifications by various
governmental and international agencies.
Because most residue limits are set on the basis of adult bodyweight,
children can consume a disproportionate level of pesticide residues.
At the residue levels found across Europe, a toddler would consume
147% of the conventional acceptable daily intake of chlorpyriphos
in table grapes, 164% of methamidophos in sweet peppers, over two
times the level of endosulfan and over five times the level of triazophos
in sweet peppers and a staggering ten times over of the acceptable
level of methomyl (1.035%) in table grapes. All these pesticides
are known hazardous substances. The evaluation of acute risk was
carried out in the EU monitoring report for pesticide with acute
toxicity and were acute Reference Doses (aRfD) have been set. These
data are based on a consumption model for the UK, if a toddler living
in other European regions consume a higher amount of fruits and
vegetables these results highly underestimate their risks. If, instead,
the German consumption model is used, the residue of 0,68mg/kg methamidophos
in sweet pepper results in a percentage aRfD of 4.283% which is,
thus 42 times too high. The Commission report gives a 164% aRfD
for the same residue.
The number of samples containing multiple residues also increased
greatly since 1999 and is now 20,5% of all samples. The health risks
of combined (additive) effects are (mostly) ignored within the official
risk assessment up to now.
These results show a complete failure of the EU in controlling
the level of pesticides in our food.
MRL HARMONIZATION PROGRAMME
Since 1993, the EU has been implementing a programme to establish
harmonized maximum residue levels (MRLs) which restrict levels of
pesticide residues in foodstuffs sold in Europe. MRLs for foodstuffs
are established both nationally and internationally with the key
objectives of:
1. controlling the correct use of pesticides in terms of the registered
use;
2. permitting the free circulation of food commodities that have
been treated with approved pesticides and comply with the established
MRLs;
3. minimizing the exposure of consumers to harmful or unnecessary
intake of pesticide residues.
MRL levels are established by balancing four different types of
data: (1) levels of residues resulting from pesticides applied following
a defined schedule, ‘good agricultural practice’ (GAP),
which takes into account operator safety and environmental impact
as well as efficacy; (2) the persistence of residues of the particular
pesticide in the given crop; (3) the toxicity of the chemical; and
(4) how much of the final product is typically eaten by the consumer.
The stated aims of the EU harmonisation programme are to iron out
current inconsistencies in national MRLs in the different member
states, by establishing common and obligatory MRLs for all active
ingredients approved for use within the EU, based on systematic
and scientific procedures. The relevant EU directives establish
obligatory MRLs for specific crop/active ingredient combinations
where sufficient data is available, and also specifies what data
is required to establish an MRL where data are not currently available.
COMMISSION PROPOSAL (2003)
The Commission proposal was for a simplification and harmonisation
of the arrangements for protecting public health against toxic effects
of pesticide residues. The current position is that member states
have responsible for setting temporary (provisional) Maximum Residue
Levels (MRLs) for new chemicals. Member states have then to notify
their conclusions to Brussels and other member states, which may
then respond - for example, by adopting them themselves. The member
states also play an important role in the production of the monographs
necessary to substantiate their action. Under the Commissions proposal,
these tasks would be taken over by the EFSA. Risk assessment, under
the proposal, will become a responsibility of EFSA, which will use
its network and institutes in member states to provide an opinion
on the safety of the MRL for a particular pesticide.
The proposed method to establish MRLs is in accordance with the
approach already used in most member states. The MRL is first fixed
at the lowest residue level measured in the various crops under
conditions of Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). However, as is noted
in the Commission’s proposal, GAP with authorised use of pesticides
varies between member states (e.g. due to climate) and may give
rise to different residue levels. The EC proposal is to use the
highest levels (‘critical’ GAP) to set MRLs, unless
this level is not considered safe for the consumers. This proposal
means that member states using GAP developed to minimize the use
of pesticides will then use the higher MRLs applied in countries
using less environmentally desirable methods. Then EFSA will combine
these data with available toxicity data to determine the safety
of each MRL. This evaluation could be complicated, since a high
MRL for a food item (such as chilli) consumed only in small amounts
may be less problematic than a lower MRL for an item (such as carrots)
sometimes consumed in substantial amounts.
PAN Europe welcomed the EU Commission's initiative to harmonise
maximum residue limits (MRLs) and a limit of 0.01 mg/kg being set
for pesticides which are non-authorized or not allowed in the European
Union. The proposal, however, contained significant deficiencies
and ought to be revised and improved accordingly. Our main comments
were:
1. Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) should be defined as ICM (Integrated
Crop Management) as a minimum standard to prevent environmentally
less desirable methods of farming;
2. Temporary MRLs could be harmful to consumers and are not necessary;
3. Consumers should be protected against additive and synergistic
effects of combined residues in total food and exposure from other
environmental sources.
4. Transparency and participation in evaluation and decision-making
processes in MRL-setting should be secured.
In addition, PAN Europe believed that another objective must be
to protect environment and human health – especially vulnerable
groups such as foetuses, infants and children – according
to the precautionary principle. MRL-setting at the lowest level
possible can contribute to the protection of consumers and the environment
at the same time. You can read the full PAN Europe position here.
CURRENT SITUATION REGARDING MRL LEGISLATION
The Commission proposal for a new pesticides residue directive
aiming to harmonise MRLs across the EU was discussed in March and
April 2004 by European Parliament members. PAN Europe network members
were very critical of the Commission proposal and submitted suggested
amendments to ensure better consumer protection. Debate over proposals
in the new European Pesticide Residue Directive came to an end at
the 2nd reading in the European Parliament in November 2004. Successful
consensus talks were held between European Parliament and Council,
and the consensus amendments were passed in the plenary voting on
15 December 2004.
PAN Europe positions were instrumental in getting stricter amendments
into this directive, including:
- getting "known" cumulative and synergistic effects considered;
- taking children and the unborn as the most sensitive group to
protect;
- taking all sources of exposure into account;
- making a review of all "available" recent scientific
literature mandatory;
- evaluating immunotoxicity, endocrine disruption and developmental
toxicity;
- setting standards at the lowest (strictest) level;
- making naming and shaming of companies exceeding standards optional
for Member States
The EU is now developing a list of products of plant and animal
origin for which EU-wide MRLs should be set in next 18 months. It
will compile all current national MRLs and select the most appropriate
ones for use at EU level.
LINKS
- EC
Regulation No 396/2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in
or on food and feed and plant or animal origin
- DG Health and Consumer Protection web page: complete list of
MRL legislation http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/plant/protection/pesticides/legislation_en.htm
- DG Health and Consumer Protection web page: annual EU-wide pesticide
residue monitoring reports http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fvo/specialreports/pesticides_index_en.htm
- PAN Germany pesticide residues in Europe project: http://www.pesticide-residues.org/
- Greenpeace Germany residues projects and actions (in German)
http://www.greenpeace.de
- Global 2000 pesticide reduction in supermarkets in Austria (in
German) http://www.global2000.at
|