372 Produce Degradation: Reaction Pathways and their Prevention
diseases; impacts on reproduction, immune, and nervous systems; and ecological
balance.
The perceived concerns may originate from unfortunate experiences with some
of the early synthetic organic pesticides [92], lack of education or relevant informa-
tion, general misconceptions (not only among the lay public [93]) or be caused by
unbalanced, exaggerated, or even unsupported news releases. Generally, the public
becomes particularly sensitive if the concerns relate to infants and small children
(the “Alar affair” in 1989 may serve as an example [94]). Recent studies show that
infants and children may be more sensitive than adults to pesticides in their diet
[89]. In many countries, these findings (supported by sociological factors) led to
stricter regulations of pesticide residues in baby foods and other products, impositions
of more stringent requirements for newly registered pesticides, and reevaluations of
already registered pesticides. For instance, the European Commission Directive
1999/50/EC requires baby foods to contain less than 0.01 mg/kg of any pesticide
residue [95]. In the U.S., the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 established
a new safety standard for pesticide residues in food with special consideration given
to assessing potential risks to infants and children by including an additional 10-fold
safety factor [96]. Based on this requirement, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is currently reassessing pesticide tolerance levels and reevaluating
pesticide registrations. As a consequence, the use of a number of pesticides has been
curtailed or banned, and others are scheduled for complete or partial (commodity-
dependent) withdrawal.
In general, regulation of pesticide levels in food and strict enforcement play an
important role in reducing consumers’ exposure as a means of compliance with
requirements for pesticide applications (generally with good agricultural practice,
GAP). The implementation of principles of integrated pest management (IPM) has
also been proved to reduce potential risks associated with pesticide use [97]. The
FAO defines IPM as “a pest management system that, in the context of the associated
environment and the population dynamics of the pest species, utilizes all suitable
techniques and methods in as compatible a manner as possible and maintains the
pest population at levels below those causing economically unacceptable damage or
loss” [98]. The USDA uses the definition “IPM is a management approach that
encourages natural control of pest populations by anticipating pest problems and
preventing pests from reaching economically damaging levels. All appropriate tech-
niques are used such as enhancing natural enemies, planting pest-resistant crops,
adapting cultural management, and using pesticides judiciously” [99]. Thus, contrary
to organic (“pesticide-free”) production, IPM does not exclude pesticide use, but
approaches pesticides more like “prescription drugs” rather than a “first aid medicine.”
In addition to chemical control using pesticides, the list of tools available for
IPM includes: (1) cultural control (cultivation, sanitation, crop rotation, destruction
of pests’ habitat, etc.); (2) biological control (biopesticides and natural enemies,
such as parasites, predators, or pathogens); (3) genetic control (e.g., pest-resistant
crops or application of sterile male technique in insect control); or (4) legal measures
(quarantines, inspections) [100]. Despite the availability of alternative methods, the
use of pesticides is and certainly will remain an important part of IPM systems,
because many of these approaches are still too expensive or not sufficiently effective