ACOEM POSITION STATEMENT: PESTICIDES AND CHILDREN

Safety considerations in the selection and application of pesticides are a worldwide concern. A recent report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) examined the scientific and policy issues of pesticide residues in foods consumed by infants and children. This report stressed the importance of additional research to examine the extent, patterns and toxicities of naturally occurring substances, microorganisms or the public health benefits of pesticide use, because this was not the charge of the committee. The report also did not consider nondietary sources.

As a class of chemicals, pesticides consist of a diverse range of substances with their own distinct characteristics of toxicity, bioavailability and persistence in the environment. They may contribute to improved public health, and may cause adverse health outcomes such as nervous system damage, cancer, reproductive dysfunction and other possible effects, depending on how, when and where they are used. However, each pesticide may have its own unique effects and levels of safety. Thus, they should be considered individually rather than as a class in making specific policy decisions regarding their appropriate applications.

Although there are theoretical reasons to be concerned about increased sensitivity in children, the circumstances under which children may be a greater, similar or lower risk of toxicity than adults have not yet been established. An expansion of efforts in toxicologic research regarding the childhood toxicity of pesticides should be supported to develop a better understanding of the longterm risks. Nonetheless, despite the possible differences in toxicity, the NAS report found that differences in exposure due to dietary patterns may result in a greater difference in health risk. In addition to considerations of differential toxicologic vulnerability, risk assessments must recognize dietary factors affecting the consumption of residues on food, current practices in pesticide application and exposure through other routes (e.g., domestic use of pesticides).

Like many other artificial and natural chemicals present in our environment, there are certain known and there may be additional unknown toxicities associated with the use of pesticides. Although the NAS Committee was not charged with an holistic examination of the pesticide issue, the risks associated with the use of any chemical must be balanced with the benefits of its use, and the risks of alternatives to its use. In some cases, a reduction in the use of pesticides without appropriate alternatives may result in hazardous residues of natural toxins, such as aflatoxin, a known potent carcinogen in humans. It would be unwise under such circumstances to replace a speculative risk with a known hazard. Those who apply the findings of the NAS Committee must consider the report in the context of the broader picture.

Substitution of safer, yet effective alternatives to the more toxic pesticides is prudent practice and should be considered whenever appropriate. Such alternatives may include safer pesticides, integrated pest management techniques, or other technologies which do not require pesticides. However, the unique characteristics of toxicity, bioavailability and environmental persistence should be carefully considered for each specific pesticide, along with the risks and cost of alternatives to pesticide use. Regulatory tolerances should reflect the most current data regarding health effects and food consumption patterns, with appropriate margins of safety to protect infants, children and adults. Whenever pesticides are used, they must be properly applied, with appropriate timing with respect to harvest. Misapplication of pesticides must be scrupulously avoided.

For the consumer, proper selection and application of pesticides and products with pesticide residues, substitution of safer alternatives, and the removal of residues from produce by careful washing prior to consumption will help to reduce exposure.