Citation

Mattsson JL. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2007; 223(2): 125-132.

Affiliation

Dow AgroSciences LLC, Indianapolis, IN 46268, USA. jmattsson@indy.rr.com

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.taap.2006.12.024

PMID

17291556

Abstract

A perusal of research presented at the Annual Society of Toxicology Meetings, or in nearly any toxicology journal, will show that the overwhelming emphasis of toxicology research is on synthetic chemistries. Because of substantial potency and exposure to natural chemicals, the overwhelming focus on synthetic chemistries cannot lead to a realistic understanding of chemical risk to the general population. Natural chemicals, simply because of their abundance and potency, may be as likely to be a public health concern and to be involved in chemical interactions (natural:natural, natural:pharmaceutical; or natural:synthetic) as are environmental levels of synthetic chemicals. All plants have a mix of natural self-defense chemistries and mycotoxins that, when tested in a manner comparable to synthetic pesticides, cause the entire spectrum of toxic effects. As a further complication, plants also escalate much of their self-defense chemistry when attacked by insects and fungi, and damaged crops often have higher mycotoxins levels. Effective crop protection will typically reduce the plant's levels of self-defense toxicants and mycotoxins, but may add residues of synthetic pesticides or add some other risk variable. In addition, cooking may also alter the food chemistry (e.g., acrylamide). The mixtures toxicologist needs to address the real world mixture of natural and synthetic chemicals. Public policy on crop-food safety cannot be sensibly guided without these data and large voids in our understanding of risks from real-world mixtures cannot be in the public interest.

Language: en