Chemophobia

Last updated

Chemophobia (or chemphobia or chemonoia) [1] [2] is an aversion to or prejudice against chemicals or chemistry. The phenomenon has been ascribed both to a reasonable concern over the potential adverse effects of synthetic chemicals, and to an irrational fear of these substances because of misconceptions about their potential for harm, particularly the possibility of certain exposures to some synthetic chemicals elevating an individual's risk of cancer. [3] [4] Consumer products with labels such as "natural" and "chemical-free" (the latter being impossible if taken literally, since all consumer products consist of chemical substances) appeal to chemophobic sentiments by offering consumers what appears to be a safer alternative (see appeal to nature).

Contents

Definition and uses

There are differing opinions on the proper usage of the word chemophobia. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) defines chemophobia as an "irrational fear of chemicals". [5] According to the American Council on Science and Health, chemophobia is a fear of synthetic substances arising from "scare stories" and exaggerated claims about their dangers prevalent in the media. [6]

Despite containing the suffix -phobia, the majority of written work focusing on addressing chemophobia describes it as a non-clinical aversion or prejudice, and not as a phobia in the standard medical definition. Chemophobia is generally addressed by chemical education [7] [8] [9] [10] and public outreach [7] [4] [11] despite the fact that much chemophobia is economic or political in nature.

Michelle Francl has written: "We are a chemophobic culture. Chemical has become a synonym for something artificial, adulterated, hazardous, or toxic." She characterizes chemophobia as "more like color blindness than a true phobia" because chemophobics are "blind" to most of the chemicals that they encounter; every substance in the universe is a chemical. [12] Francl proposes that such misconceptions are not innocuous, as demonstrated in one case by local statutes opposing the fluoridation of public water despite documented cases of tooth loss and nutritional deficit. [13] In terms of risk perception, naturally occurring chemicals feel safer than synthetic ones to most people because of the involvement of humans. [14] Consequently, people fear man-made or "unnatural" chemicals, while accepting natural chemicals that are known to be dangerous or poisonous. [15] [16]

The Carcinogenic Potency Project, [17] which is a part of the US EPA's Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity (DSSTox) Database Network, [18] has been systemically testing the carcinogenicity of chemicals, both natural and synthetic, and building a publicly available database of the results [19] since the 1980s. Their work attempts to fill in the gaps in our scientific knowledge of the carcinogenicity of all chemicals, both natural and synthetic, as the scientists conducting the Project described in the journal, Science , in 1992:

Toxicological examination of synthetic chemicals, without similar examination of chemicals that occur naturally, has resulted in an imbalance in both the data on and the perception of chemical carcinogens. Three points that we have discussed indicate that comparisons should be made with natural as well as synthetic chemicals.

1) The vast proportion of chemicals that humans are exposed to occur naturally. Nevertheless, the public tends to view chemicals as only synthetic and to think of synthetic chemicals as toxic despite the fact that every natural chemical is also toxic at some dose. The daily average exposure of Americans to burnt material in the diet is ~2000 mg, and exposure to natural pesticides (the chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves) is ~1500 mg. In comparison, the total daily exposure to all synthetic pesticide residues combined is ~0.09 mg. Thus, we estimate that 99.99% of the pesticides humans ingest are natural. Despite this enormously greater exposure to natural chemicals, 79% (378 out of 479) of the chemicals tested for carcinogenicity in both rats and mice are synthetic (that is, do not occur naturally).

2) It has often been wrongly assumed that humans have evolved defenses against the natural chemicals in our diet but not against the synthetic chemicals. However, defenses that animals have evolved are mostly general rather than specific for particular chemicals; moreover, defenses are generally inducible and therefore protect well from low doses of both synthetic and natural chemicals.

3) Because the toxicology of natural and synthetic chemicals is similar, one expects (and finds) a similar positivity rate for carcinogenicity among synthetic and natural chemicals. The positivity rate among chemicals tested in rats and mice is ~50%. Therefore, because humans are exposed to so many more natural than synthetic chemicals (by weight and by number), humans are exposed to an enormous background of rodent carcinogens, as defined by high-dose tests on rodents. We have shown that even though only a tiny proportion of natural pesticides in plant foods have been tested, the 29 that are rodent carcinogens among the 57 tested, occur in more than 50 common plant foods. It is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the supermarket contains natural pesticides that are rodent carcinogens. [20]

Causes and effects

According to chemistry professor Pierre Laszlo  [ fr ], chemists have experienced chemophobia from the population at large, and asserts that it is rooted both in irrational notions and in genuine concerns (such as those over chemical warfare and industrial disasters). [3] Professor Gordon Gribble has written that the start of chemophobia could arguably be attributed to Silent Spring , and that subsequent events such as the contamination of Times Beach and the Bhopal disaster only exacerbated the situation. [16]

These events have led to association between the word "chemical" and notions of things that unnatural or artificial and also dangerous, and the opposite has occurred, where goods are marketed as "chemical free" or "natural", to avoid this association, which in turn reinforces the misconception that "chemicals" are unnatural and dangerous. [16] [21] The chemical industry has moved to make chemicals used as flavoring or aromas using biotechnology instead of synthetic chemistry, as the products can be marketed as "natural". [22]

According to the industry advocacy group American Council on Science and Health, chemophobia is a growing phenomenon among the American public [23] and has reached "epidemic" proportions among the general public. [6] In a book published by the Council, Jon Entine writes that this is in part due to the propensity of people to show alarm at the reported presence of chemicals in their body, or in the environment, even when the chemicals are present in "minuscule amounts" which are in fact safe. [24] Elsewhere, Entine has argued that chemophobia is linked to a precautionary principle in agricultural policy, which could jeopardize the world's ability to feed its ever-expanding population. [25]

In the United Kingdom, Sense about Science produced a leaflet aimed at educating celebrities about science, in which it said that humans carry only small amounts of "chemical baggage" and that it is only because of advances in analytical chemistry that we can detect these traces at all. [26]

Philip Abelson argued that the practice of administering huge doses of substances to animals in laboratory experiments, when testing for carcinogenic potential, led to public chemophobia, raising unjustified fears over those substances' effect on humans. He saw an opportunity cost in the "phantom hazards" such testing conjures, as it distracted from attention on known hazards posed to human health. [27]

Michael Siegrist and Angela Bearth conducted a survey on 8 European Countries —Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom— with a sample of 5,631 participants to measure chemophobia. Results found that 30% of participants were "scared" of chemical substances. Additionally, 40% of participants believed that they "avoid chemical substances in [their] daily lives" and 39% of participants wanted to live in a world that was "chemical free". [28]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ames test</span> Biological testing method

The Ames test is a widely employed method that uses bacteria to test whether a given chemical can cause mutations in the DNA of the test organism. More formally, it is a biological assay to assess the mutagenic potential of chemical compounds. A positive test indicates that the chemical is mutagenic and therefore may act as a carcinogen, because cancer is often linked to mutation. The test serves as a quick and convenient assay to estimate the carcinogenic potential of a compound because standard carcinogen assays on mice and rats are time-consuming and expensive. However, false-positives and false-negatives are known.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mutagen</span> Physical or chemical agent that increases the rate of genetic mutation

In genetics, a mutagen is a physical or chemical agent that permanently changes genetic material, usually DNA, in an organism and thus increases the frequency of mutations above the natural background level. As many mutations can cause cancer in animals, such mutagens can therefore be carcinogens, although not all necessarily are. All mutagens have characteristic mutational signatures with some chemicals becoming mutagenic through cellular processes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pesticide</span> Substance used to destroy pests

Pesticides are substances that are used to control pests. They include herbicides, insecticides, nematicides, fungicides, and many others. The most common of these are herbicides, which account for approximately 50% of all pesticide use globally. Most pesticides are used as plant protection products, which in general protect plants from weeds, fungi, or insects. In general, a pesticide is a chemical or biological agent that deters, incapacitates, kills, or otherwise discourages pests. Target pests can include insects, plant pathogens, weeds, molluscs, birds, mammals, fish, nematodes (roundworms), and microbes that destroy property, cause nuisance, or spread disease, or are disease vectors. Along with these benefits, pesticides also have drawbacks, such as potential toxicity to humans and other species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Daminozide</span> Chemical compound

Daminozide, also known as aminozide, Alar, Kylar, SADH, B-995, B-nine, and DMASA, is a plant growth regulator. It was produced in the U.S. by the Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc,, which registered daminozide for use on fruits intended for human consumption in 1963. In addition to apples and ornamental plants, they also registered it for use on cherries, peaches, pears, Concord grapes, tomato transplants, and peanut vines. Alar was first approved for use in the U.S. in 1963. It was primarily used on apples until 1989, when the manufacturer voluntarily withdrew it after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed banning it based on concerns about cancer risks to consumers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Insecticide</span> Pesticide used against insects

Insecticides are pesticides used to kill insects. They include ovicides and larvicides used against insect eggs and larvae, respectively. Insecticides are used in agriculture, medicine, industry and by consumers. Insecticides are claimed to be a major factor behind the increase in the 20th-century's agricultural productivity. Nearly all insecticides have the potential to significantly alter ecosystems; many are toxic to humans and/or animals; some become concentrated as they spread along the food chain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cypermethrin</span> Chemical compound

Cypermethrin (CP) is a synthetic pyrethroid used as an insecticide in large-scale commercial agricultural applications as well as in consumer products for domestic purposes. It behaves as a fast-acting neurotoxin in insects. It is easily degraded on soil and plants but can be effective for weeks when applied to indoor inert surfaces. It is a non-systemic and non-volatile insecticide that acts by contact and ingestion, used in agriculture and in pest control products. Exposure to sunlight, water and oxygen will accelerate its decomposition. Cypermethrin is highly toxic to fish, bees and aquatic insects, according to the National Pesticides Telecommunications Network (NPTN). It is found in many household ant and cockroach killers, including Raid, Ortho, Combat, ant chalk, and some products of Baygon in Southeast Asia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glyphosate</span> Systemic herbicide and crop desiccant

Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide and crop desiccant. It is an organophosphorus compound, specifically a phosphonate, which acts by inhibiting the plant enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSP). It is used to kill weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses that compete with crops. Its herbicidal effectiveness was discovered by Monsanto chemist John E. Franz in 1970. Monsanto brought it to market for agricultural use in 1974 under the trade name Roundup. Monsanto's last commercially relevant United States patent expired in 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Piperonyl butoxide</span> Chemical compound

Piperonyl butoxide (PBO) is a pale yellow to light brown liquid organic compound used as a synergist component of pesticide formulations. That is, despite having no pesticidal activity of its own, it enhances the potency of certain pesticides such as carbamates, pyrethrins, pyrethroids, and rotenone. It is a semisynthetic derivative of safrole.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Saccharin</span> Chemical compound

Saccharin, also called saccharine or benzosulfimide, or used in saccharin sodium or saccharin calcium forms, is a non-nutritive artificial sweetener. Saccharin is a benzoic sulfimide that is about 500 times sweeter than sucrose, but has a bitter or metallic aftertaste, especially at high concentrations. It is used to sweeten products, such as drinks, candies, baked goods, tobacco products, excipients, and for masking the bitter taste of some medicines. It appears as white crystals and is odorless.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Safrole</span> Chemical compound

Safrole is an organic compound with the formula CH2O2C6H3CH2CH=CH2. It is a colorless oily liquid, although impure samples can appear yellow. A member of the phenylpropanoid family of natural products, it is found in sassafras plants, among others. Small amounts are found in a wide variety of plants, where it functions as a natural antifeedant. Ocotea pretiosa, which grows in Brazil, and Sassafras albidum, which grows in eastern North America, are the main natural sources of safrole. It has a characteristic "sweet-shop" aroma.

Genotoxicity is the property of chemical agents that damage the genetic information within a cell causing mutations, which may lead to cancer. While genotoxicity is often confused with mutagenicity, all mutagens are genotoxic, but some genotoxic substances are not mutagenic. The alteration can have direct or indirect effects on the DNA: the induction of mutations, mistimed event activation, and direct DNA damage leading to mutations. The permanent, heritable changes can affect either somatic cells of the organism or germ cells to be passed on to future generations. Cells prevent expression of the genotoxic mutation by either DNA repair or apoptosis; however, the damage may not always be fixed leading to mutagenesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bruce Ames</span> American biochemist (born 1928)

Bruce Nathan Ames is a prominent American biochemist. He is a professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, and was a senior scientist at Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute (CHORI). Throughout his career, Dr. Ames has made significant contributions to understanding the mechanisms of mutagenesis and DNA repair. One of his most notable achievements is the invention of the Ames test, a widely used assay for easily and cheaply evaluating the mutagenicity of compounds. The test revolutionized the field of toxicology and has played a crucial role in identifying numerous environmental and industrial carcinogens.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Persistent organic pollutant</span> Organic compounds that are resistant to environmental degradation

Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are organic compounds that are resistant to degradation through chemical, biological, and photolytic processes. They are toxic chemicals that adversely affect human health and the environment around the world. Because they can be transported by wind and water, most POPs generated in one country can and do affect people and wildlife far from where they are used and released.

Pesticide residue refers to the pesticides that may remain on or in food, after they are applied to food crops. The maximum allowable levels of these residues in foods are stipulated by regulatory bodies in many countries. Regulations such as pre-harvest intervals also prevent harvest of crop or livestock products if recently treated in order to allow residue concentrations to decrease over time to safe levels before harvest.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food contaminant</span> Harmful substance in food

A food contaminant is a harmful chemical or microorganism present in food, which can cause illness to the consumer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Toxicology testing</span> Biochemical process

Toxicology testing, also known as safety assessment, or toxicity testing, is the process of determining the degree to which a substance of interest negatively impacts the normal biological functions of an organism, given a certain exposure duration, route of exposure, and substance concentration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental toxicology</span>

Environmental toxicology is a multidisciplinary field of science concerned with the study of the harmful effects of various chemical, biological and physical agents on living organisms. Ecotoxicology is a subdiscipline of environmental toxicology concerned with studying the harmful effects of toxicants at the population and ecosystem levels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Organic food</span> Food complying with organic farming standards

Organic food, ecological food, or biological food are foods and drinks produced by methods complying with the standards of organic farming. Standards vary worldwide, but organic farming features practices that cycle resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Organizations regulating organic products may restrict the use of certain pesticides and fertilizers in the farming methods used to produce such products. Organic foods are typically not processed using irradiation, industrial solvents, or synthetic food additives.

Benzaldehyde (C6H5CHO) is an organic compound consisting of a benzene ring with a formyl substituent. It is among the simplest aromatic aldehydes and one of the most industrially useful.

Glyphosate-based herbicides are usually made of a glyphosate salt that is combined with other ingredients that are needed to stabilize the herbicide formula and allow penetration into plants. The glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup was first developed by Monsanto in the 1970s. It is used most heavily on corn, soy, and cotton crops that have been genetically modified to be resistant to the herbicide. Some products include two active ingredients, such as Enlist Duo which includes 2,4-D as well as glyphosate. As of 2010, more than 750 glyphosate products were on the market. The names of inert ingredients used in glyphosate formulations are usually not listed on the product labels.

References

  1. ↑ Ropeik, D. (2015). "On the roots of, and solutions to, the persistent battle between "chemonoia" and rationalist denialism of the subjective nature of human cognition". Human & Experimental Toxicology. 34 (12): 1272–1278. doi: 10.1177/0960327115603592 . PMID   26614815.
  2. ↑ "Chemonoia: the fear blinding our minds to real dangers". BBC News . 25 February 2016.
  3. 1 2 Laszlo, Pierre (2006). "On the Self-Image of Chemists, 1950-2000". International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry. 12 (1): 99.
  4. 1 2 Shim, Soon-Mi; Seo, Sun Hee; Lee, Youngja; Moon, Gui-Im; Kim, Min-Shik; Park, Ju-Hee (July 2011). "Consumers' knowledge and safety perceptions of food additives: Evaluation on the effectiveness of transmitting information on preservatives". Food Control. 22 (7): 1054–1060. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.01.001.
  5. ↑ "IUPAC glossary of terms used in toxicology (2nd edition)" (PDF). International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry . Retrieved October 20, 2016.
  6. 1 2 Entine, Jon (18 January 2011). Scared to Death: How Chemophobia Threatens Public Health. American Council on Science and Health.
  7. 1 2 Hartings, MR; Fahy, D (23 August 2011). "Communicating chemistry for public engagement". Nature Chemistry. 3 (9): 674–677. Bibcode:2011NatCh...3..674H. doi:10.1038/nchem.1094. PMID   21860452.
  8. ↑ Smith, Robert B.; Karousos, Nikolaos G.; Cowham, Emma; Davis, James; Billington, Susan (March 2008). "Covert Approaches to Countering Adult Chemophobia". Journal of Chemical Education. 85 (3): 379. Bibcode:2008JChEd..85..379B. doi:10.1021/ed085p379.
  9. ↑ Smith, David K. (14 October 2014). "iTube, YouTube, WeTube: Social Media Videos in Chemistry Education and Outreach". Journal of Chemical Education. 91 (10): 1594–1599. Bibcode:2014JChEd..91.1594S. doi:10.1021/ed400715s.
  10. ↑ Morais, Carla (13 January 2015). "Storytelling with Chemistry and Related Hands-On Activities: Informal Learning Experiences To Prevent "Chemophobia" and Promote Young Children's Scientific Literacy". Journal of Chemical Education. 92 (1): 58–65. Bibcode:2015JChEd..92...58M. doi:10.1021/ed5002416.
  11. ↑ Fielding, Kelly S.; Roiko, Anne H. (September 2014). "Providing information promotes greater public support for potable recycled water". Water Research. 61: 86–96. Bibcode:2014WatRe..61...86F. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.05.002. PMID   24893113.
  12. ↑ Michelle M., Francl (7 February 2013). "Curing chemophobia: Don't buy the alternative medicine in 'The Boy With a Thorn in His Joints'". Slate . Retrieved 27 March 2013.
  13. ↑ Francl, Michelle (2013). How to Counteract Chemophobia (Thesis). Nature Chemistry.
  14. ↑ Saleh, Rita; Bearth, Angela; Siegrist, Michael (2019). ""Chemophobia" Today: Consumers' Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals". Risk Analysis. 39 (12): 2668–2682. doi:10.1111/risa.13375. ISSN   0272-4332. PMID   31290192. S2CID   195871582.
  15. ↑ Ropeik, David (2010). How risky is it, really?: Why our fears don't always match the facts. New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 92–96. ISBN   978-0071629690.
  16. 1 2 3 Gribble, Gordon (2013). "Food Chemistry and Chermophobia". Food Chemistry. 5 (2): 177–187. doi:10.1007/s12571-013-0251-2. S2CID   255607086 . Retrieved 27 March 2015.
  17. ↑ Carcinogenic Potency Project
  18. ↑ National Center for Computational Toxicology (NCCT) DSSTox Official Website
  19. ↑ "Publicly available Toxnet database from US NLM". Archived from the original on 2013-02-18. Retrieved 2016-10-20.
  20. ↑ Gold L.S.; et al. (1992). "Rodent carcinogens: Setting priorities" (PDF). Science. 258 (5080): 261–265. Bibcode:1992Sci...258..261S. doi:10.1126/science.1411524. PMID   1411524.
  21. ↑ Balzani, Vincenzo; Venturi, Margherita (2014). Chemistry: Reading and Writing the Book of Nature. Royal Society of Chemistry. p. 214. ISBN   9781782620020.
  22. ↑ Dioniosio, AP (2012). "Chapter 11: Natural Flavorings from Biotechnology for Food and Beverages". In Baines, David; Seal, Richard (eds.). Natural food additives, ingredients and flavourings. Oxford: Woodhead Publishing. p. 232. ISBN   9780857095725.
  23. ↑ "Consumer Education Group Hosts Call to Discuss Evidence of Growing Chemophobia Among American Public" (Press release). 17 January 2011. Retrieved 12 October 2020.
  24. ↑ Entine (January 2011), p. 38.
  25. ↑ Jon Entine (16 April 2011). Crop Chemophobia: Will Precaution Kill the Green Revolution?. Government Institutes. p. 72. ISBN   978-0-8447-4363-9 . Retrieved 21 August 2013.
  26. ↑ "Science for Celebrities" (PDF). Sense about Science. Archived from the original (PDF) on August 29, 2007.
  27. ↑ Abelson, P. (1990). "Testing for carcinogens with rodents". Science. 249 (4975): 1357. Bibcode:1990Sci...249.1357A. doi: 10.1126/science.2402628 . PMID   2402628.
  28. ↑ "Chemophobia: Nearly 40% of Europeans Want a Chemical-Free World". American Council on Science and Health. 2019-12-18. Retrieved 2023-02-26.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.