2011 pesticide guide

here's the latest guide to pesticides in our produce. you can print it out and carry it in your wallet. justjoan

(i would add that conventional cilantro has been shown to have up to 31 different, unapproved pesticides on it. i'm not sure why it didn't make the 'dirty dozen'. i mention it as i because i use a lot of it)

http://static.ewg.org/reports/2011/food ... eGuide.pdf

HI,

What are the qualifications of the people who produced this list?

Regards,

cathy, the list is from the Environmental Working Group. i'm on their email list. here is the link to their website. you can judge for yourself. justjoan
http://www.ewg.org

Cathy2 wrote:What are the qualifications of the people who produced this list?

Not a lot, according to numerous sources. Here's one source, it's easy to find others:

http://activistcash.com/organization_ov ... king-group

From the link, and pertinent to the topic:

The EWG has long argued in favor of organic agriculture, claiming that pesticides are a danger to our health and a horrible threat to humanity. What they’re not telling us, of course, is that most of the pesticides we find on fresh produce are natural, and manufactured by plants themselves. In a 1995 interview with Vegetarian Times magazine, the award-winning Berkeley biologist Bruce Ames insisted that “99.99% of the pesticides we eat are naturally present in plants to ward off insects and other predators… Reducing our exposure to the 0.01% of ingested pesticides that are synthetic is not likely to reduce cancer rates.”

,

I'm not surprised.

Regards,

I agree Mark. I trust a PR website set up by Phillip Morris, Cargill, Monsanto, etc.

I'm confused. Which website was set up by Monsanto, etc?

Re. pesticides, I'm curious to hear more about the facts for this 0.01% synthetic, and the toxicity/ carcinogenic risk of natural vs. synthetic. Any further resources for this?

"ActivistCash.com, a project of the Center for Consumer Freedom, "

You can Google the CCF and find out their history.

Information on the lobbyists who run "ActivistCash.com" can be found at Sourcewatch:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... er_Freedom


Sourcewatch has its own biases but is considerably more transparent and provides documentation for its claims.

this is a very complex issue. we have thousands of years of eating natural pesticides (residing in our food) behind us. we know what we can safely eat (ie; no rhubarb leaves=toxins). we have only about 60 years of eating synthetic pesticides- so not much of a track record. also, the natural order of things(plants producing the exact pesticides needed to protect themselves) is most likely being seriously disrupted when humans interfere. so whether or how much they are hurting us is very much open for debate (google natural pesticides and read, read, read). how much they are hurting plants' ability to protect themselves from their natural predators will not be known until it possibly is too late to turn back the tide. IMO, what IS clear, is the very negative effect on our ecology by synthetic pesticides. they get in the ground water; they get in our drinking water; they affect soil fertility, etc.
i'm not remotely an expert on this stuff. but i'll quote hippocrates on this 'THE POISON IS IN THE DOSE:. those of you who are complacent about the chemicals we are adding to our environment and our body- well, you (and i) will probably not live long enough to know all the destructive effects of pesticides. justjoan

teatpuller wrote:I agree Mark. I trust a PR website set up by Phillip Morris, Cargill, Monsanto, etc.

CCF and EWG are two peas in the same pod...both are biased and require additional research to believe ANY of their claims. Groups like PCRM and PETA are in the same category.

But in this case, I put more faith the in the pesticide claims of CCF than I do of EWG. One group typically provides research (albeit biased) to support their claims, the other typically uses fearmongering as opposed to research to support their claims. I have a degree in biochemistry and an advanced degree in statistics. I can spot the biases and read through them in many/most of these research papers.

Me? Most of the time I won't pay the premium for organic produce, choosing instead to take the time to thoroughly wash my fruit and vegetables. I do avoid organic root vegetables due to the potential of E. coli infections caused by the use of manure as fertilizer.

I guess I'm one of the many baby-boomers who grew up in the '60s and '70s eating produce that was laced with fertilizers and pesticides, and I'm doing just fine, thank you.

I agree this is a complex issue, and I also work in the environmental field. I would say that "fear mongering" applies equally well to the inflammatory language used in CCF's page about EWG.

From the link provided by Siun:
The Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) (formerly called the "Guest Choice Network (GCN)") is a front group for the restaurant, alcohol, tobacco and other industries. It runs media campaigns which oppose the efforts of scientists, doctors, health advocates, animal advocates, environmentalists and groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, calling them "the Nanny Culture -- the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who 'know what's best for you.'"

It seems to me that if EWG's data is indeed that terrible, there are better voices to speak to the problem than CCF.

Hi- I heard Bruce Ames speak at one of the Midwest Farmer's markets, Abby Mandel used to put on at Ravinia, and I was not impressed with him. He gave a very negative view of organic farming, and gave people the impression that we would all starve, if farmer's did away with pesticides.

I also have problems with EWG's dirty dozen list they put out every year. They are strictly talking about California factory farms, which unfortunately supply Dominick's and Jewel with most of their produce. Factory farms use lots of pesticides, because it is difficult to raise produce with less pesticides, when you are doing it on a large scale. Some of the pesticides that are found on produce grown on factory farms, are not used by smaller farmers.

Peaches is always on their list of the dirty dozen, and yet a few years ago, the Chicago Tribune bought local peaches from Michigan at the farmer's market, and had them lab tested. The USDA lab that tested the peaches, found only two pesticides in the peaches, and neither of their concentrations came within even 10% of the tolerance allowed by the EPA.

Personally, I think that the conventionally grown fruit sold at the Chicago area farmer's market, contains a lot less pesticide than the fruit grown on factory farms in California. In Michigan it is almost impossible to grow peaches organically, partly because of problems with brown rot. It is not nearly as humid in peach growing areas of California, as it is here. Humidity causes brown rot. Hope this helps, Nancy

I agree that pesticides are a problem and that our produce might be laden with them is of concern. I too was in the environmental field and I know that there is a lot of fear mongering. I would like to see a balanced view. I don't often buy organic produce. The big issue to me is "is there something reliable that we can spray on our produce to clean and remove the pesticides?" Any advice?

FYI, I don't know whether or not this information is pertinent to the discussion, but the EWG states that it comes up with the list based on the USDA's own data on pesticide residues: http://www.ewg.org/foodnews/methodology/ What it doesn't list are the pesticides on organic produce, nor does it say anything about herbicides.

It also does not list or rate the potential toxicity of any individual chemical, so it's difficult to make an assessment on what is or is not safer to eat based on the offered information - meaning, an agricultural product treated with a single chemical that's highly toxic is probably worse for you than one treated with 10 different products that aren't. Plenty of stuff is toxic to bugs that isn't toxic to us and vice versa: for instance, in our garden, the rhubarb leaves previously mentioned are full of insect holes, and coffee has long been used as an insect repellent.

Toria, here's a study that says simple rubbing while washing with water is the most effective way to reduce pesticide residue: http://www.ct.gov/caes/cwp/view.asp?a=2815&q=376676

Yes I have seen that. Rubbing or scrubbing with a brush. Also a soak in water with some vinegar. I think I'll start doing this with apples and pears.

I'm just kidding around - I agree completely with the actual content of your post.

A discussion of this guide, by the Director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society, appeared in this morning's Montréal Gazette . Warning: it's pretty negative...

Geo

I suppose people will now attempt to discredit Mr. Schwarcz and/or his department at McGill.