The YOUTUBE reaction to American Apples containing DHP....  Not good press for 
the U.S. Industry....

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oEh1IbOKRBo

Steve

From: con.tr...@ul.ie
To: apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:11:27 +0000
Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals









Hello Mike and all,
 
The backdrop to the Irish opinion was, I believe, that a number of EU countries 
were more reliant on DPA than some others, and that Ireland, having a small
 apple industry (but nonetheless one in which about 30% of the fruit could have 
been DPA treated), was naturally inclined to be positively disposed to its 
continued use (under considerable lobbying pressure from our own apple growers 
association, and from some
 other countries).
 
I do know that strong efforts were made by the task force to fill the supposed 
data gaps, but in the end they did not win out. So in the end, as you say the
 MRL was dropped not based on a definitive assessment of risk, but because, as 
I mentioned, there is a general policy thrust to remove nitrosamines from diet.
 
Dave is correct to point out that there are uncontrollable sources of 
nitrosamines in diet, but thank goodness they have not begun regulating how 
people cook
 their foods at home yet. It would be interesting to compare the amount of 
nitrosamine in a typical diet due to BBQ’s, compared with that which might come 
from DPA treated apples.
 
1-MCP is not a replacement for DPA, and a few years ago I had done some 
small-scale trials on using about 10% rates of DPA both without and in 
combination with
 1-MCP, and found scald control to be very good in both cases, indicating that 
recommended DPA rates were probably too high to begin with. I think such 
combinations would have been the ideal solution, had DPA not been removed from 
the market, as CO2 injury
 is a serious risk with 1-MCP use, which is why we now must use higher-tech 
storage systems. Regarding the treatments with DPA at 10% of the recommended 
rate, residues were still detectable at about 0.1 to 0.05 ppm after 6 months of 
storage (unwashed apples).
 Even if we could guarantee the lower figure, because DPA has now been 
withdrawn, any residue found in a random test would be an issue, as use of an 
unapproved chemical is illegal (even if it leaves no residue).
 
We have not got as far as Mosbah’s idea of calling pesticides plant medicines, 
though the industry does use the phrase plant protectant products, even though
 the public still call them pesticides. It will take quite some time to change 
that, but the opportunity arises each time someone asks the question.
 
Finally, regarding Jean-Marc’s observation of reduced aroma, we have been able 
to offset this in some varieties (for example Elstar & clones, Pinova and 
Wellant)
 by a delayed harvest, which is in itself facilitated by the excellent ability 
of 1-MCP to stop these particular varieties ripening further. In this case we 
end up with firmer fresher-tasting apples which also have great aroma 
characteristics. For other varieties
 (e.g. Jonagold and clones), once ripening is under way the effect of 1-MCP is 
not so marked, so later harvest is not the solution.
 
I would add that the advent of 1-MCP has changed my planting strategy from 
Jonagold type apples to Elstar type apples.
 

Con

 


From: apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
[mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net]
On Behalf Of Mike Willett

Sent: 30 April 2014 06:36

To: Apple-crop discussion list

Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals


 

As you can imagine, we have been following this issue very closely for a number 
of years.  According to the U.S. EPA's Registration Eligibility Decision for
 DPA, diphenyl nitrosamine is a trace contaminant in technical DPA.  In the 
most recent risk assessment (2012) done in the EU for DPA, by Ireland's 
Pesticide Registration & Control Division as the rapporteur member state (RMS), 
it came to this conclusion:


 



"N-nitrosodiphenylamine is found at trace levels, below the LOQ in processed 
apple samples. When you consider the toxicological profile of this nitrosamine 
and the amounts
 at which it is likely to be consumed, the RMS calculations show that there are 
no safety concerns. One must also consider that diphenylamine is not applied to 
apples destined for the processing market, it is only applied to freshly 
consumed table apples, as
 appearance of these apples is very important. 

 



Therefore, the RMS remains supportive of the approval of diphenylamine."


 


In the study that generated the opinion above which was done to address home 
processing of apples that were originally sold for fresh consumption, no 
nitrosamines
 were found in raw apples, nor in apple juice; only in blended and chopped 
apples ("processed" apples).


 


The decision announced in March of this year indicates that the reason the MRL 
for DPA was reduced to 0.1 ppm was because of data gaps in the registration
 package that had been submitted.  The EU DPA Task Force has vigorously 
protested the allegation of data gaps but, at any rate, the reduction in the 
MRL in the EU was not based on a definitive assessment of risk.


 


While I am not an expert in this area, given the discussion regarding 1-MCP, 
while it is very effective at preventing scald, work done by Jim Mattheis at
 USDA/ARS-Wenatchee and Chris Watkins at Cornell, notes that in certain 
situations use of 1-MCP can increase certain fruit disorders, some related to 
CO2
injury.  Many packers in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, now use lower rates of DPA 
in combination with 1-MCP to maximize its benefits.


    




Mike Willett

Northwest Horticultural Council

www.nwhort.org

will...@nwhort.org

509.969.0245 mobile

 

This message is from a remote location, sometimes truly remote.









From:
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net [apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] 
on behalf of David A. Rosenberger [da...@cornell.edu]

Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 10:46 AM

To: Apple-crop discussion list

Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals


Hello, Con — 

Since grilling meat on a barbecue almost always creates some nitrosamines, I’m 
assuming that outdoor barbecues have also been banned in Europe? :)










****************************************************************

Dave Rosenberger, Professor Emeritus


Dept. of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology


Cornell’s Hudson Valley Lab, P.O. Box 727, Highland, NY 12528

       Office:  845-691-7231    Cell:     845-594-3060

         http://blogs.cornell.edu/plantpathhvl/ 


****************************************************************








 


On Apr 29, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Con.Traas <con.tr...@ul.ie> wrote:








Hello Mosbah,

The cost of smartfresh treatment here is about 10 euros (12 dollars?) per 330kg 
bin (700lbs approx.). It feels expensive, especially compared with DPA, which 
is very
 cheap. It does a lot more though.

By the way, I think the issue with DPA from a European perspective is that when 
it degrades it forms one or more nitrosamines, which are a group of chemicals 
many of
 which are carcinogenic, though some much more-so than others. So the EU is 
seeking to eliminate all sources of nitrosamines from diets, and therefore DPA 
is gone.


I do remember when DPA was "cleaned-up", but its breakdown products will be 
nitrosamines, regardless of how cleanly it is produced.


 

Con


 






From:
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net [apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] 
on behalf of Kushad, Mosbah M
 [kus...@illinois.edu]

Sent: 28 April 2014 15:53

To: Apple-crop discussion list

Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals



If you are asking about diphenylamine (DPA), then it is an antioxidants that 
blocks the oxidation of alpha farnesene into conjugated trienes in
 the peel. Conjugated trienes are what causes the apple/pear peel to turn brown 
from regular or superficial scald.  It doesn’t help soft scald or sunscald.   
In the old days they used to wrap fruits in paper soaked in mineral oil that 
absorbs the conjugated
 triene gas.  I have only scene this recently being practiced in one place.  To 
minimize superficial scald development, harvest fruits when they are 
horticulturally mature.  Ethoxyquin was removed from the market around the 80’s 
 because it was suspected to
 cause cancer. However, DPA went through a rigorous cleaning process to remove 
any impurities that cause cancer.  If you are asking about 
1-methylecyclopropene (1-MCP), also known as SmartFresh, it is an ethylene 
action inhibitor. Treated fruits produce ethylene
 but it does not work, because the sites where ethylene normally attaches 
itself, to initiate fruit ripening, are occupied by 1-MCP.  There is no 
evidence that  1-MCP causes any harm to human.    Some consider 1-MCP as the 
best thing since CA storage was introduced
 in the 30’s -40’s.   hope this helps, Mosbah Kushad, university of Illinois.  


 

Question to Con. What is the cost of using SmartFresh per bushel in your 
operation?


 



From:
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
[mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net]
On Behalf Of Ginda Fisher

Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 7:08 AM

To: Apple-crop discussion list; Con.Traas; 'Evan B. Milburn'; 'Apple-crop 
discussion list'

Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals



 

Can anyone summarize what this chemical is, why and how it is used, and what 
the risks might be to farmers and consumers from its use? I feel like I walked 
into the middle of a conversation.



Thanks,

-- 

Typed with Swype. Who knows what I meant to say?

On April 28, 2014 4:03:51 AM EDT, "Con.Traas" <con.tr...@ul.ie> wrote:
Hello Evan and everybody,

 

Coming from my perspective, where we are now having to cope without DPA for 
storing Bramley (culinary) apples, I must say that is it proving tricky, but we
 are managing, through use of 1-MCP combined with more complex (and expensive 
and risky) storage regimes. So I would say it is technically possible to keep 
apples without DPA or ethoxyquin, which we also can’t use, but ironically it 
mitigates against the smaller
 grower, and in favour of the larger ones (big ag?) who can afford the higher 
tech gear.

 

It is ironic that scaring people about pesticide residues on fresh foods 
(especially fruits) actually causes people to eat more processed foods (as 
though their
 ingredients do not also get pesticide treatments), as the studies linking 
better health with fruit consumption are studies conducted with conventionally 
grown fruits with their pesticide residues (if they are not residue free). In 
other words, the benefits
 of eating fruits and vegetables are there in black and white, even if those 
fruits and vegetables have residues. It is far less healthy to switch to a 
candy bar from an apple, even if that apple has some residue (so long as that 
is below permitted levels).
 However, this is not a message we can send out, so we are left grappling when 
emails like this from EWG are circulated.

 

The joke of what EWG seems to be doing is producing a dirty dozen or clean 
fifteen list is that those lists say nothing at all about the risk of a 
pesticide
 residue on the particular apple in your fruit-bowl. You could be eating a 
residue-free fruit from among the “dirty dozen”, or one covered in pesticide 
from among the “clean fifteen”.

 

Despite the differences in regulations between Europe and the US (and I favour 
in general the less permissive, more cautious European standards, despite having
 to work within their restrictions), our agriculture here is constantly 
increasing in scale, and resembles more and more what would be our stereotyped 
image of US industrial agriculture. That is because the regulations have more 
in common than what separates
 them, and farming is becoming more and more like a business, and less like a 
passion.

 

I am personally not a fan of industrial agriculture, although I employ mostly 
similar methods. However, motivation is a key factor, and for me, the motivation
 is not profit maximisation. For the industrial model is about profit before 
all else, and that is not a suitable way for the World to produce its food.

 

However, as long as Joe public takes the attitude that 7% of their disposable 
income is what they will spend on food (that is the Irish %), then agriculture
 will continue to become more industrial, as for me that is not a percentage 
that can support the production of produce and foods that consumers might feel 
more comfortable buying, and might be able to have more confidence in.

 

So, instead of sending 45 bucks to Ken Cook, I would suggest that Joe public 
either sends it to a principled (and hopefully small-scale) farmer someplace 
near
 them, or better still, buys a few fruit trees or invests in a few packets of 
seeds, and grows their own pesticide-free produce.

 


Con Traas
European (Irish) Apple Grower
T: @theapplefarmer


 



From:
apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net 
[mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net]
On Behalf Of Evan B. Milburn

Sent: 28 April 2014 02:32

To: Apple-Crop

Subject: Re: [apple-crop] apples and chemicals



 






  This was sent to me from a friend of mine by the name of George.
 It was send to him from one of his co-workers.



                                               Evan Milburn


                                       
www.milburnorchards.com  





  








Hey Evan what’s this all about?





 




 




 





 


















_______________________________________________

apple-crop mailing list

apple-crop@virtualorchard.net

http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

 










_______________________________________________
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop                           
          
_______________________________________________
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop

Reply via email to