Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 16(2): 126-49, 1992 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-1438994

ABSTRACT

The Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR), which is responsible for establishing maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides on food, has a vital role in protecting the public health and facilitating international trade. Codex MRLs are based on scientific evaluations by expert panels that constitute the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR). These panelists estimate an acceptable daily intake for a pesticide and expected level of residue remaining in food when the pesticide is used according to good agricultural practice. The goals of the CCPR are not being fully achieved. Governments are generally not accepting Codex MRLs; instead, technical and procedural aspects of the JMPR and CCPR process are being criticized. The CCPR is responding to valid criticisms of the process; however, governments may still lack the will to seek harmonization of pesticide limits for food in international trade. Overcoming this problem will be difficult, but not impossible. A plan of action is proposed that allows countries to selectively accept Codex MRLs, increase the number of chemicals in the JMPR/CCPR system for evaluation, and be responsive to both their consumers and their food producers without compromising national health and safety standards and competitive trade advantages.


Subject(s)
Food Contamination , International Agencies , Pesticide Residues , Food Contamination/legislation & jurisprudence , International Cooperation , Maximum Allowable Concentration , United Nations , World Health Organization
2.
Rev Environ Contam Toxicol ; 120: 83-104, 1991.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-1994461

ABSTRACT

Interest in pesticide residues in foods has increased, and the issue of residues in imported foods has been raised as a potential public health problem. Three U.S. government agencies, EPA, FDA, and USDA, are responsible for regulating pesticides. EPA sets tolerances, and FDA and USDA enforce those tolerances. As part of its regulatory activities, FDA conducts a regulatory monitoring program that samples and analyzes each year approximately 20,000 food shipments, about 60% of which are imports. Samples of imported foods are collected at ports of entry, and are chosen on the basis of several factors rather than on a completely random basis. Raw agricultural products are emphasized. Most analyses are performed using MRMs, to make best use of FDA's resources. Using five MRMs, about half of the 300 pesticides with U.S. tolerances can be determined. Results from monitoring over the past several years have shown that nearly 60% of the imported foods sampled had no pesticide residues detected. Of those samples that were violative, 5% contained residues for which there was no U.S. tolerance, and less than 1% had over-tolerance residues. Examples are given of the various pesticide/commodity combinations that have been found to be violative. FDA is often criticized for the scope of its pesticide coverage, particularly with regard to imported foods. Some critics have promoted the idea of a 'circle of poison,' which is based on the premise that pesticides banned in the U.S. are exported and used on foods in foreign countries; then the food containing these residues is imported into the U.S. and consumed. However, FDA's testing of imported foods has shown that residues of EPA-banned pesticides are not occurring from currently purposeful uses. The violation rates for imports also have not been significantly different from those for domestic foods. This indicates that foreign producers, as well as domestic growers, generally use pesticides in a manner consistent with EPA requirements. FDA continues to broaden its information-gathering capabilities. As mandated by the PMIA of 1988, FDA will attempt to obtain pesticide use information from countries that are major food exporters to the United States. An improved data management system will also be in place, and a long-range analytical method development plan instituted. Several international organizations address the issue of pesticide residues in foods. Attempts at harmonization of national tolerances for pesticide residues have not been successful, i.e., a number of individual nations have not accepted Codex MRLs.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)


Subject(s)
Food Contamination/analysis , Food Supply/standards , Pesticide Residues/analysis , Animals , Government Agencies , Humans , Legislation, Drug , United States , United States Environmental Protection Agency , United States Food and Drug Administration
3.
J Assoc Off Anal Chem ; 70(3): 591-5, 1987.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-3610977

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) carries out an extensive program to monitor foods for pesticide residues. The 2 main objectives of the program are to enforce tolerances established by the Environmental Protection Agency for pesticide residues on foods and feeds and to determine the incidence and level of pesticide residues in the food supply. Because of the wide diversity of pesticide/commodity combinations encountered, FDA uses a number of different approaches to achieve effective consumer protection. The components of the FDA Pesticides Monitoring Program and the strategy used in its development are described.


Subject(s)
Pesticides/analysis , Food Contamination/analysis , Pesticide Residues/analysis , Pesticide Residues/toxicity , Pesticides/toxicity , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...