지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술대회자료
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2002.10
- 수록면
- 123 - 134 (12page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Crop Protection Products(CPPs) are a useful weapon in our fight against the pests, diseases and weeds that harm or destroy our food. To be effective CPPs need to exhibit some persistence. The consequence of this is that residues of the original material or its metabolites may remain on food and thus there is a potential for the intake of such residues.
The issue of CPP residues in food is an emotional subject and is rarely debated rationally or supported by scientific facts. Media headlines like "Poison in our food" or "These days enough Pesticides(CPPs) are sprayed onto vegetables to turn you into one" are testimony to the high level of emotion that surrounds the subject of CPP residues in food. Recent surveys of consumers have indicated that more than 80 percent view CPP residues in food as a "serious hazard". This significantly exceeds concerns over drugs, hormones in meat, nitrates in food, irradiated foods, food additives, or artificial colours.
CPPs are among the most highly regulated of all man-made chemicals, their testing and regulation being equivalent to that of pharmaceuticals. Why is it that the public perception and confidence in the safety associated with residues in food is so negative? The public experience with the food issues over E. Coli, Salmonella, listeria, BSE, Dioxins and recently the food and mouth disease in the UK has not helped their belief in the safety of the food they consume. Rather this has led to the view that government scientists and the industry are "sparing" with the facts. Unsubstantiated scares in the past, such as that associated with use of Alar on apples, together with the molre recent issue of organophosphates on carrots, have also fuelled consumers concerns on the dangers of treating crops with CPPs.
The benefits of CPPs use on crops needs to be better communicated to the consumer. The public needs to be made aware that the development and subsequent proliferation of CPP use since the 1940s has ahd a affordable constant year-round supply of clean, fresh, healthy and, above all, safe food. It has been well recognised that CPPs not only play a major role in producing food quantity, but also contribute to high quality.
Manufacturers have to demonstrate a wide margin of safety to human health before approval of a CPP is granted by governments. Monitoring data from a large number of countries indicate that CPP residue levels in food are extremely low; thus providing even stronger evidence that our food is safe. Regulatory law provides for the safety of food. Residues in food are not permitted unless they are proven to be safe at the highest levels of exposure anticipated. It is interesting to note that the potential of naturally occurring CPPs in food to harm human health is higher than the risk from Regulatory approved man-made CPPs. There are rigorous testing and regulatory programmes for man-made CPPs, and only minor ad hoc programmes for natural CPPs; thus, we have dual standards.
This paper deals briefly with the benefits and alternatives to CPPs use along with methodologies used for safety assessments, which ensure that the consumer is not exposed to any risk from man made CPP residues in food.
The issue of CPP residues in food is an emotional subject and is rarely debated rationally or supported by scientific facts. Media headlines like "Poison in our food" or "These days enough Pesticides(CPPs) are sprayed onto vegetables to turn you into one" are testimony to the high level of emotion that surrounds the subject of CPP residues in food. Recent surveys of consumers have indicated that more than 80 percent view CPP residues in food as a "serious hazard". This significantly exceeds concerns over drugs, hormones in meat, nitrates in food, irradiated foods, food additives, or artificial colours.
CPPs are among the most highly regulated of all man-made chemicals, their testing and regulation being equivalent to that of pharmaceuticals. Why is it that the public perception and confidence in the safety associated with residues in food is so negative? The public experience with the food issues over E. Coli, Salmonella, listeria, BSE, Dioxins and recently the food and mouth disease in the UK has not helped their belief in the safety of the food they consume. Rather this has led to the view that government scientists and the industry are "sparing" with the facts. Unsubstantiated scares in the past, such as that associated with use of Alar on apples, together with the molre recent issue of organophosphates on carrots, have also fuelled consumers concerns on the dangers of treating crops with CPPs.
The benefits of CPPs use on crops needs to be better communicated to the consumer. The public needs to be made aware that the development and subsequent proliferation of CPP use since the 1940s has ahd a affordable constant year-round supply of clean, fresh, healthy and, above all, safe food. It has been well recognised that CPPs not only play a major role in producing food quantity, but also contribute to high quality.
Manufacturers have to demonstrate a wide margin of safety to human health before approval of a CPP is granted by governments. Monitoring data from a large number of countries indicate that CPP residue levels in food are extremely low; thus providing even stronger evidence that our food is safe. Regulatory law provides for the safety of food. Residues in food are not permitted unless they are proven to be safe at the highest levels of exposure anticipated. It is interesting to note that the potential of naturally occurring CPPs in food to harm human health is higher than the risk from Regulatory approved man-made CPPs. There are rigorous testing and regulatory programmes for man-made CPPs, and only minor ad hoc programmes for natural CPPs; thus, we have dual standards.
This paper deals briefly with the benefits and alternatives to CPPs use along with methodologies used for safety assessments, which ensure that the consumer is not exposed to any risk from man made CPP residues in food.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Prevalence of idiopathic scoliosis in girls with central precocious puberty: effect of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist
Annals of Pediatirc Endocrinology & Metabolism
2020 .01
-
Factors that predict a positive response on gonadotropin-releasing hormone stimulation test for diagnosing central precocious puberty in girls
Annals of Pediatirc Endocrinology & Metabolism
2013 .01
-
다양한 형태의 다공질 Calcium Polyphosphate의 생분해성에 관한 장기적인 연구
Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science
2003 .01
-
CPP-ACP의 소개 및 임상적 활용
대한치과의사협회지
2008 .03
-
일측성 성대마비 환자 평가에서 Cepstral Peak Prominence의 유용성
대한후두음성언어의학회지
2017 .01
-
Clipper를 이용한 환자관리 Program(CPP)
대한방사선치료학회 학술대회
1995 .01
-
Etiological trends in male central precocious puberty
Annals of Pediatirc Endocrinology & Metabolism
2018 .01
-
골이식재로서의 Calcium Polyphosphate 평가 : 동물 연구
Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science
2003 .01
-
CPP-ACP 적용이 치면열구전색제의 결합강도에 미치는 영향
대한소아치과학회지
2010 .01
-
Novel Cell Permeable Peptide Based on Multi Basic Furin-dependent Cleavage Site of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Fusion Protein
JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY AND VIROLOGY
2018 .06
-
염증성 만성골반통증후군과 비염증성 만성골반통증후군간의 만성전립선염 증상 점수표에 따른 임상 양상의 비교
Urogenital Tract Infection
2011 .01
-
Gabapentin for the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Patients with High Pain Score
Urogenital Tract Infection
2019 .01
-
일측성 성대마비 환자 평가에서 CPP의 유용성
대한음성언어의학회 학술대회
2017 .01
-
The Effect of α-Blockers Monotherapy vs. Combination Antibiotic Therapy on Symptom Alleviation in Patients with Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome
Urogenital Tract Infection
2018 .01
-
Evaluation of cephalometric characteristics and skeletal maturation of the cervical vertebrae and hand-wrist in girls with central precocious puberty
대한치과교정학회지
2020 .05
-
Proposed New Pathophysiology of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome
Urogenital Tract Infection
2015 .01
-
Use of Cell-Penetrating Peptides in Dendritic Cell-Based Vaccination
Immune Network
2016 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-539-013478689