It seems that recent debates regarding food have been overlooking the difference between “safety” and “reassurance”, thus creating chaos. Whether agricultural chemicals and pesticide residue are “safe or not” for human health is a matter that scientists and government administrations should evaluate and make a judgment on the basis of objective facts and/or scientific verification. On the other hand, the degree of “reassurance” is affected by the knowledge of each consumer and how they think, as well as how they view “safety”.
In many cases, consumer anxiety arises from a lack of correct information. When filling the gap between scientific “safety” and consumers’ psychological “safety” regarding pesticide residue, it is important to correctly understand both the safety and potential dangers of agricultural chemicals, not only by way of national and local governments and scientists, but also through consumer groups and general consumers, as well as the media, who deliver the information.
Scientists and government administration should fulfill their obligation to continuously conduct risk communication by revealing rather technical “validation results of agricultural chemical safety” and “schemes to confirm safety” in an easier to understand form, so that general consumers and the media can more fully comprehend them. Furthermore, we hope that the media - as an opinion leader - correctly understands agricultural chemicals and reports about them objectively, based on facts.

抄録全体を表示

Hosted by the Japanese Society of Food Chemistry, the 18th symposium of the Japanese Society of Food Chemistry, “Response to the Positive List System Regarding Pesticide Residue in Foods” was held on April 21, 2006 with approximately 270 people participating at Osaka Yakugyo Nenkin Kaikan. This symposium’s theme was revision of the positive list system for pesticide residues, an issue which greatly affects the food industry as well as government administration. Features of the symposium were lectures from leading experts in various areas related to Japanese agricultural chemistry. (1) First, Dr. Maitani, the leader of a group currently drafting pesticide residue analysis methods at the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, discussed the issue. (2) Then, Mr. Umezu, current chairman of the Pesticide Science Society of Japan and himself a developer of safe agricultural chemicals, gave a lecture. (3) Mr. Kimura, the third speaker, talking about standard brand issues that are very important to those who analyze agricultural chemicals. (4) The fourth speaker was Mr. Tsumura, for years a leading figure in pesticide residue analysis, who discussed how both domestic and imported foods are viewed at the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan. (5) The fifth speaker was a new generation leader in the field of pesticide residue analysis in imported foods, Mr. Hirahara. (6) Then Mr. Nagayama, a leader of pesticide residue analysis in all fields, including domestic, exported and imported foods, spoke. (7) The last speaker was Mr. Takeda, sometimes called Japan’s living dictionary on pesticide residue, who has spent his career in agricultural chemistry. He’s currently a member of the Food Safety Commission. Regarding the revision of the system, I would like to explain four points that I noticed. First, there’s the issue of subjected foods and detection sensibility. Conventional agricultural chemistry analysis has been mainly conducted on grains and fresh foods, including vegetables and fruits. In the future, it will include farm stock and fishery products as well as general processed foods. Therefore, it was noted that most people don’t have experience in analyzing farm stock, fishery products or processed foods. The second point is that the interim standard value will be 0.01 ppm. I would like you to understand this is a very difficult and minute amount. The third point is that designated examination organizations will become a major point, and time and cost will be required to analyze one material. This greatly changes depending on the type of food. Furthermore, different types of agricultural chemicals that are required to be measured have very different analysis times and costs. Please note this fact. The last point is the issue of imported food. If data shows a food is unsafe, it will cause a 100 million yen unit loss per specimen. These four points should tell us that we must firmly handle data, get definite results and send out reports based on those results.

抄録全体を表示

The positive maximum residue limit (MRL) system, a so-called positive list system for regulating pesticide residues in food has been active in Japan since May 2006. The system is aimed at prohibiting the distribution of foods that contain agricultural chemicals, veterinary drugs and food additives unless MRLs for them have been established under the Food Sanitation Law.
The Pesticide Science Society of Japan has been actively working to educate the public on the safety of pesticides and pesticide residues in crops and to improve the quality of pesticide residue analyses (and also residue data) conducted in many different laboratories before the positive list system was established. Many symposia on the safety of pesticides for humans and the environment have been held in numerous locations in Japan in order to educate consumers and farmers. A number of seminars on crop pesticide residues have also been staged since 2003 to educate technical experts engaged in residue analysis with actual practical procedures. From 2004 seminars started to focus not only on residue analysis, but also included lectures concerning amendments to the Food Sanitation Law and introduction of the positive list system.
The positive list system was primarily aimed to control pesticide residues in imported crops from foreign countries, because MRLs were previously established only for pesticides used in Japan. However, a default level of 0.01ppm is uniformly applied to chemicals for which MRLs have not been determined. This means that the level of 0.01ppm, significantly lower than existing MRLs, is also applicable to any register pesticides in Japan if there is unintentional exposure (through drift) of neighboring crops for which a MRL has not been established. This has caused enormous confusion and worry among farmers and organizations involved in agricultural production, since it is very difficult to completely avoid the drift of sprayed pesticides to neighboring crops in consideration of the farming system in Japan, i.e., farming many different crops in small areas.
On the other hand, extensive residue analyses conducted by the Japanese Authorities showed rates for pesticide residue detection of about 0.5% with levels exceeding the MRL in only about 0.01%, indicating a quite low level of pesticide residues in crop foods distributed in Japan. Harmonization and appropriate solutions are now required to remove the enormous confusion concerning drifting pesticide exposure of neighboring crops, taking into account the fact of only a very low frequency of actual residue problems with crops on which pesticides are directly sprayed.

抄録全体を表示

When analyzing pesticide residues, the management of standard agricultural chemical brands and standard liquid solutions is the most basic and important aspect in controlling analysis precision. At this symposium, I will briefly explain agricultural chemical management methods and the current condition of standard brands under the positive list system.
Currently, under the Japanese Food Sanitation Law, 250 agricultural chemicals are registered. However, when it comes to standard brands under the positive list system, 799 items, including 586 agricultural chemicals and 213 types of medicines and drugs for animals/feed additives are noted.
Therefore, due to the necessity of handling such an enormous number of analyses, real-time information is required, such as substantial appliances and assured analysis methods for standard brands.
In that regard, I will bring up the latest topics regarding standard brands, mixed solutions, metabolic products and surrogate materials. Additionally, there are plans to show information related to appliances (MS Library, supporting software, database, etc).

抄録全体を表示

The IAA Center for Food Quality, Labeling and Consumer Services receives requests to collect risk information from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, which is in charge of risk management. The center then conducts analysis and research of minute amounts of hazardous substances, such as pesticide residues contained in foods and agricultural products.
The center mainly conducts pesticide residue analysis from three viewpoints. The first is to confirm the propriety of issues like organic farm product labeling. The second is to confirm the proper use of agricultural chemicals on agricultural products in Japan. The last is to submit information to corporations and consumers regarding pesticide residue in imported vegetables. In regards to imported vegetables, analysis was conducted for 103 agricultural chemicals on approximately 650 samples, between April 2004 and March 2005. The most commonly detected were chlorpyrifos, methamidophos and cypermethrin.
The simultaneous analysis method, developed by the center, is a method that uses GC-MS and HPLC for measurement after conducting pretreatment based on refinement by salting out, acetonitrile-hexane partitioning and minicolumn (ENVI-Carb/NH2).
The center conducted the standard tests following the IUPAC protocol to determine the validity of this method. From the tested samples, we adopted only the agricultural chemicals that had additional recovery from 70 to 120% and recorded 2 or lower HORRAT in reproducibility between the inside of rooms and between rooms. As a result, out of approximately 140 agricultural chemicals, 111 were found to be valid.
Internal quality control at the center is conducted by setting target values, repeated examinations, recovery testing and confirming detection limits. Additionally, the center participates in a proficiency test called FAPAS that is conducted annually by the Central Science Laboratory.

抄録全体を表示

Japan is implementing a so-called “positive list system” to prohibit in principle the distribution of foods containing a certain level of agricultural chemicals in cases where no maximum residue limits (MRLs) have been set, starting on May 29, 2006. Pesticide-monitoring programmes for imported foods are therefore important to ensure that pesticides do not exceed the MRLs and have been assigned for introduction at Quarantine Stations in Japan. Results of monitoring of imported foods by the pesticide-monitoring programme at the Quarantine Station during April 1 to September 30, 2005 are presented here. Multiresidue screening methods with FPD-GC, GC/MS(/MS) and LC/MS/MS are being used to determine pesticides in imported foods for the positive list system. Some simplified methods and GLP system are also being introduced in this symposium. Exact and rapid analysis of low-level pesticides in imported foods with various sample matrixes is most important at Quarantine Stations for enforcement of the positive list system.

抄録全体を表示

On May 29, 2006, Article 11.3 of the Food Sanitation Law was brought into effect, which resulted in the introduction of the positive list system. Other than certain substances not included in subject matters, all agricultural chemicals, veterinary drugs and feed additives (hereafter “agricultural chemicals, etc.”) that remain in foods are now controlled. A uniformity standard of 0.01 ppm has been set, with 65 indicated substances that are not subject to control. Both food and additive standards have been revised, but current residual standards are basically the same. However, 15 agricultural chemicals, etc. that had no detectable standards and interim standards for 743 new agricultural chemicals, etc. are now set.
It is very difficult, both in regards to labor and cost, to examine all agricultural chemicals, etc. that the standards are set up to cope with via the positive list system. Additionally, it’s not possible to strictly prove food safety only through examination results. Effective and meaningful examinations are required. The attitude towards which agricultural chemical objects were selected to measure pesticide residue in foods is to obtain the following information and make selections taking into consideration their effectiveness and meaning: (1) agricultural chemicals used for subject food, (2) agricultural chemicals used in the subjected area, (3) agricultural chemicals that are frequently detected in subjected foods, (4) agricultural chemicals that are frequently overused in subjected food, (5) agricultural chemicals that are frequently detected in various foods, (6) agricultural chemicals that frequently infringe on various foods, (7) agricultural chemicals with high residue rates, (8) agricultural chemicals with relatively high toxicity (small ADI value and LD₅₀ value), and (9) agricultural chemicals that can be analyzed together.
Tokyo’s pesticide residue monitoring plan, which is subject to commercially available agricultural products, is designed to be conducted on the same scale in fiscal year 2006 as it was last fiscal year, while testing terms are reviewed. Regarding the review, due to the difficulty of obtaining above information (1) and (2), it is useful when based on the concept of numbers (3) to (6) above.
When testing commercially available foods, it is necessary to acquire proper samples that represent subjected food lots and the sampling region as defined in the notification. So far, examination methods, including mass examinations and individual examinations, are used for notification. Tests for agricultural chemicals that contain non-detectable standards must follow the notified examination method. Regarding others, acknowledged examination methods, revised methods or newly developed methods are used, but when using an examination method other than the acknowledged ones, it must show similar or better performance and specificity in trueness, accuracy and determination limit.

抄録全体を表示

Growing along with international trade has been an anxiety that various regulations in each country may become trade barriers. This has led to the internationalization of various standards and regulations, with the World Trade Organization becoming the arbitrator of disputes related to these issues.
The recent BSE incidents in the United Kingdom created strong public awareness about "food safety" all over the globe. Realizing that Japan depends on a lot of imported foods, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare revised its Food Sanitation Law to increase "food safety" and converted it to a positive list system, which strongly controls chemical substances remaining in foods (pesticide residues, animal medicinal drugs, animal feed additives, etc.) At the same time, the ministry decided that when sanitary supervision at a production area has been judged problematic, the transfer and sales of products from that area can be prohibited (prima facie target: 5% infringement rate). This system does not promote the existence of the quantities of above mentioned chemical substances that may affect human health (interim standard value: 0.01 mg/kg). Regarding the use of agricultural pesticides, which is the main theme of this symposium, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries revised the Agricultural Chemicals Regulation Law to reinforce the punitive regulations concerning the use of non-registered agricultural pesticides and the use of any agricultural pesticides on farm products that are not supposed to have them applied. These regulations also emphasize traceability information of farm products.
In advanced nations, there are regular and technological workshops regarding pesticide residues to equalize and improve analytic technologies. In Japan, food sanitation is basically subject to the use of samples that have unclear histories of agricultural pesticide usage. Therefore, multi-component testing methods have been applied to some agricultural pesticides for efficient monitoring. However, due to the amended regulation, the number of subjected agricultural pesticides has greatly increased, making the introduction of a screening test method unavoidable so monitoring can be more efficient. Taking into consideration the number of subjected agricultural pesticides, I think using an exclusive test method is unavoidable, especially when taking into account the importance of agricultural pesticides. At this time, I'll introduce the problems concerning the introduction of a screening test method (determination limits, precision, treatment of metabolic products and international consistency) and introduce reference data on the market regarding agricultural pesticide directions - which give important clues - and note the applicable farm products in order to narrow down the test method selection and subjected agricultural pesticides. At the same time, I'll indicate an approach to the QuEChRS method, which has been reported on in recent year. Furthermore, efficiently monitoring pesticide residue requires the disclosure of production information and the sharing of results at consuming areas. However, this is a complicated issue because both sides' interests conflict. Currently, since products are distributed all over Japan, it is imperative to build a nationwide monitoring system, disclose test results and develop a shared organization.

抄録全体を表示

Depression represents a major public disease affecting nearly 2-5% of the population in recent years. Many types of antidepressant drugs are used to treat depression. Most of them, however, are not without side effects. Therefore, the search for new antidepressant-like foods or herbs without any side effects is deemed important. Here we introduce forced swimming test (FST), which is a rodent model widely used for the screening of antidepressant drugs. The FST demonstrated that extracts from Ginkgo biloba leaves used as a traditional Chinese herbal medicine for thousands years possess antidepressant-like effect. A perspective for prevention of depression is discussed with the strategy of foods and food factors.

抄録全体を表示