27.12.2024
The study makes the poison
Dear readers,
Humans have feared being poisoned since time immemorial. That is why many royal courts had food tasters. With power come enemies. Food tasters had to sample meals intended for dignitaries, and sometimes they paid with their lives. Poisoning is also a common motif in fairy tales. In the Brothers Grimm «Snow White» was supposed to be put out of action by a poisoned apple. Death by poisoning has also been used as a form of execution. Socrates was sentenced to drink the notorious hemlock cup made from the highly poisonous flowering plant.
Poisons also lurk in farmlands: Mycotoxins can be harmful to humans and animals. They pose a real and present threat, as evidenced by the title of the 2024 issue of the Swiss magazine for farmers Schweizer Bauer, referring to the year’s wheat harvest: «Low Yield, High Levels of Mycotoxin.» It was the worst wheat harvest in 35 years. The wet conditions during the flowering period led to harmful fungal wheat disease (swiss-food.ch reported), specifically an infestation of Fusarium.
Fusarium is a genus of mold fungi that is widespread throughout the world. It causes blight, leads to crop loss, and contaminates crops with mycotoxins, even small amounts of which endanger the health of living organisms. These dangerous mycotoxins are carcinogenic and pose a threat to food safety.
Crop protection products may help to contain mycotoxins, but without adequate crop protection, consumption poses a risk. And this is the dilemma. Not all poisons are alike. Crop protection products can indeed have a toxic effect, as they are intended to combat harmful organisms. But they can also eliminate life-threatening toxins. Thorough evaluation and proper use are crucial. Research serves to minimize the negative impacts. It is high time for authorization procedures that encourage innovations in crop protection for farmers instead of hindering them – not least of all for the benefit of human health.
For over 1000 years, the highly active substances contained in the fungal plant pathogen ergot caused horrifying mass poisonings in Europe. A new nonfiction book gives compelling insight into the history and medicinal significance of the dreaded ergot. It ranges from the early medical writings of Mesopotamia, Greece, and China, to the industrial and academic laboratories of pharmaceutical research in the 20st century. Consuming grain contaminated with ergot can cause ergotism, a disease manifested by severe circulatory problems and seizures. A narrowing of the blood vessels can cause tissue death in the extremities. Ergotism (or St. Anthony’s Fire) was a widespread disease in Europe during the Middle Ages. The book explains how the Order of St. Anthony was founded exclusively to care for people suffering from ergotism. It would be some time before physicians identified the link between the ergot fungus and the poisoning caused by foods containing rye.
The book tells the fascinating history of how research into the pharmaceutical chemistry of natural substances led to the development of drugs from pure ergot compounds, which would be of great importance in the modernization of medicine. This part of the story demonstrates the significant progress made in human health out of the darkness of the Middle Ages. Another highlight of the book is the discussion of how this research led to LSD, which was so pivotal in explaining the chemical basis of the psyche and marked the beginning of psychopharmacology.
The world’s most potent poison is botulinum toxin. That’s right: We’re talking about Botox. Even an amount as small as just one nanogram per kilogram of body weight is lethal to humans. Injected under the skin, however, it has been used a million times over to smooth wrinkles. It’s yet another example that «the dose makes the poison.» The dose used medically/cosmetically is about 100 to 1,000 times smaller.
What this shows is that natural substances can be very poisonous. The most potent toxins are found in nature, but humans have learned to use many of them for beneficial purposes. What is more, they have learned to synthesize natural substances and design molecules for specific uses. That’s something we can be proud of. Chemistry has saved innumerable lives, and yet we still manage to fall into the «nature is healthy» trap. The myth of «good nature» versus «bad chemistry» still persists.
Many of the comforts of our daily lives today exist because we learned to take inspiration from nature and estimate risk. Without this behavior – observation, curiosity about new things, experimentation, adaptation, and continuous improvement – humanity would still be living in a cave, without fire, because fire is risky. Risks need to be estimated, prevented, or mitigated: We call this risk management. Simply forbidding something, or not even considering it in the first place, is akin to stagnation. In the wild, a lion, walking 30 feet away from me, poses a major threat, but in a zoo, I can go right up to its cage without being in danger. It’s the effective exposure that makes the difference. Risk is determined by the level of exposure to danger.
This kind of risk estimation is inherent in many areas of life. It is particularly important when it comes to substances that have an intended effect, such as crop protection products or medicines. A quote from the German pharmacologist Gustav Kuschinsky illustrates this: «If it is claimed that a substance has no side effects, then there is a strong suspicion that it likewise has no principal effect.» If a substance is to conquer cancer or eliminate a pest, it must have a toxic effect on them; otherwise, the substance is not worth the investment.
Drug development is becoming increasingly complex and costly: By the time a new crop protection product is marketed, a research organization has invested an average of USD 300 million in it. During the developmental phase, the active substance and formulation are continuously improved. Extensive toxicological tests are conducted for this purpose. The chemical behavior of the active substance in the environment is also studied in detail, including its products of decomposition.
Due in part to increasingly strict registration requirements, particularly in the area of environmental compatibility, the time it takes from initial synthesis of a new active substance to its market introduction has risen from 8.3 years (1995) to 12.3 years (2019). At the same time, the number of innovative active substances introduced to the market each year is declining. While an average of 16 new active substances came onto the market around 1995, only about five new substances per year found their way onto farmer’s fields between 2016 and 2020. Due to the long development period and the tremendous investment it requires, companies are greatly dependent on reliable and foreseeable regulatory framework conditions. The challenges of providing farmers with a sufficiently wide range of active substances for effective and eco-friendly crop protection are mounting.
Plant protection products are among the most well-tested chemical products. The registration process follows strict rules and is transparent. The Swiss Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (BLV), which is responsible for registration, explains the process on its website. The German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL) provides detailed answers to questions about the process of registering plant protection products and explains why it relies on studies conducted by plant protection companies.
The requirements are high. Studies of potential effects on people and the environment are only accepted from testing facilities that have established the international quality assurance system of Good Laboratory Practice (GLP). In addition, these facilities are required to be state-certified. The same applies to all company laboratories.
Lead investigators can be penalized under criminal law for manipulation of any kind. The type and number of studies required are specified, and the methods used and reporting requirements are defined in detail for each type of study. All steps of a study must be documented and archived. In other words, the study design is determined not by the companies, but by the regulatory authorities. What is more, studies must be replicable by third parties at any time.
This creates a sound basis for research. And according to this, plant protection products have become increasingly safer for people and the environment. Acute toxicity has decreased by 40 percent since the 1960s. When horror stories of pesticide poisoning and fatalities circulate and studies are cited, it is important to take a close look at the facts. One central question in this context is: How trustworthy are the underlying studies and data? An article in the Zürich-based «NZZ am Sonntag» newspaper and the explanations provided by the «Quarks» media program offer revealing perspectives on the quality of scientific studies and the possible misuse of data.
In recent years, the alarming news has been making the rounds that 385 million people suffer from crop protection poisoning every year. The claim comes from a study by critics of crop protection products. It has been picked up and spread by numerous media and government institutions. The problem: The number is wrong. The study doesn’t support such a conclusion, which is why the scientific publisher in question has since withdrawn the study. Nevertheless, it has influenced politics and continues to be cited frequently. In this case, the «study» makes the poison. Science serves as a basis for political decisions, which is why the credibility and reliability of studies is so important.
It is undisputed that, like all substances with an intended effect, crop protection products must be used properly. Exposure to users and so-called non-target organisms must be minimized. For this reason, regulatory authorities impose requirements that must be printed on the product labels and observed. Active substances in pesticides are used to control pests or germs, whether in crop protection products, household pest control products, or disinfectants. As such they necessarily have a biological impact, otherwise they would neither be approved by the regulatory authorities nor bought and used by consumers. This means, however, that they harbor an inherent risk, depending on the active substance they contain. When used properly and with due care, they can achieve their beneficial effect, are safe for humans and the environment, and pose a low risk. The same applies to any household chemical such as bleach or ammonia.
As we know, alcohol is also a poison, especially when consumed in large quantities – a risk inherent to the upcoming holidays. We wish you every success with your risk management, and most of all we wish you happy holidays and success in the coming year. Many thanks for your loyalty and interest.
Your swiss-food editorial team
