Study Reveals How Hard It Is To Avoid Pesticide Exposure (theguardian.com) 20
A study involving 641 participants across 10 European countries found pesticides in every silicone wristband worn for one week. Researchers at Radboud University tested for 193 pesticides and detected 173 substances. The average participant was exposed to 20 different pesticides through non-dietary sources. Non-organic farmers had the highest exposure at a median of 36 pesticides. Organic farmers and people living near farms recorded lower numbers.
Consumers living far from agricultural areas had a median of 17 pesticides. The wristbands captured banned substances including breakdown products of DDT, which was prohibited decades ago, and insecticides dieldrin and propoxur. Paul Scheepers, the molecular epidemiologist who co-authored the study, said people cannot avoid exposure to pesticides in their direct environment.
Consumers living far from agricultural areas had a median of 17 pesticides. The wristbands captured banned substances including breakdown products of DDT, which was prohibited decades ago, and insecticides dieldrin and propoxur. Paul Scheepers, the molecular epidemiologist who co-authored the study, said people cannot avoid exposure to pesticides in their direct environment.
Non-organic oats grown in America... (Score:3)
Organic does not mean pesticide free (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess what I'm saying is don't waste your money on organic. You literally cannot avoid pesticides. And the pesticides used on organic are still definitely not good, potentially worse and as mentioned you are going to get a higher dose because they have to use more of them because they aren't as effective.
Honestly if I could have cheap food I would be willing to accept pesticides more but lately the price of food keeps skyrocketing as ownership of farmland consolidates but I still get all those pesticides.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this! Also some niche local farmers use no pesticide at all so their products wouldn't support being shipped and processed along the way, they would surely arrive all rotten. Also, as you say, it tastes better and chances are it more nutritive too.
A good analogy is commercial mayonnaise sold in jars. Good for several months in the fridge even if opened and good only for a few days if you make your own.
Re: (Score:2)
It's still doable if you know how to cook and freeze and store but it's harder to do that than people really give it credit for. I mean yeah you can make edible food but it takes a lot of time and unless you are a good cook it's going to taste like crap when you pull it out of the freezer eventually or uncan it
Re: (Score:2)
It means there is a specific list of pesticides that are allowed. If you're eating organic you are probably paying more to get more pesticides. Which I guess strictly speaking is appropriate since if you're going to pay more you are to get more...
I guess what I'm saying is don't waste your money on organic. You literally cannot avoid pesticides.
Yes but you can opt for less pesticides.
And the pesticides used on organic are still definitely not good, potentially worse and as mentioned you are going to get a higher dose because they have to use more of them because they aren't as effective.
Source? You made that up!
FTFA:
Wesselius, whose results have motivated him to eat more organic food,
So clearly the author of the paper thinks "organic food" has less pesticides.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course "real" organic foods have less pesticides and unwanted chemical traces.
Re: (Score:2)
Also Jesus fucking Christ is this a bot or llm writing this crap? How the hell do you opt for less pesticides? Do you tell the girl at the drive-thru to hold the pesticides? Think critically and Google competently.
Re: (Score:2)
This document [europa.eu]? I'm surprised to learn that gelatine is permitted in the production of organic wine, because I would have assumed that wine was vegan, but it's hard to guess which permitted insecticides you're worried about.
Re: (Score:3)
Are sprayed with RoundUp (glyposate) to dry them out simply for farmers to use less fuel to pick them. This is just one example. Basically, organic farming has to be done away from heavily-industrial agricultural areas in a distant, isolated wilderness or it's pissing into the wind.
more bs, study after study finds people buying organic foods have lower levels of contamination, fewer health problems and better overall health. Here we see the typical denial that sure better is better but I don't so it can't be really true. Even if there's some cross contamination \, so what? It's both the total exposure and the fact that by support organic farming, we're encouraging more of it.
We'd all be better off if not for the the irresponsible, fundamentalist naysayers living in and spouting denial
taughtology (Score:2)
>>Non-organic farmers had the highest exposure at a median of 36 pesticides.
was a study really needed to understand this?
Re: taughtology (Score:2)
What is allowed is healthy. (Score:3)
National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances [ecfr.gov]
What is allowed seems sensible, judging from the detailed explanations.
Re: (Score:2)
"Organic" means there is a specific list of SUBSTANCES that are allowed. This is the list: National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances [ecfr.gov] What is allowed seems sensible, judging from the detailed explanations.
Thank goodness. For a minute I thought there might be a disturbing lack of carbon.
Re: (Score:3)
"Organic" means there is a specific list of SUBSTANCES that are allowed.
That's exactly what's wrong with USDA Organic and other similar labels. The founders of the Organic gardening movement absolutely did not mean that. Organic farming was envisioned as a cyclical system where human feces returned to fields and soil health and community health supported one another. We kind of, sort of do that with sewage sludge, but it's terrible. Even if you didn't mix in all the various stuff people pour down their drains (which is pretty much everything you can imagine, if it will go down
DDT not a problem (Score:2, Insightful)
"The wristbands captured banned substances including breakdown products of DDT, which was prohibited decades ago..."
First, DDT is only banned some countries. Second, DDT isn't cancerous. Rachel Carson in "Silent Spring" said it caused eagle eggs to be thinner and more likely to break. Turns out she lied about the eagle egg shells, but still caused DDT to be partially banned, and millions of humans died (from insect-borne diseases) because of her lie.
Re: (Score:1)
According to this, DDT or rather DDE a metabolite from DDT causes thinning of shells. https://www.epa.gov/caddis/cas... [epa.gov]
Having read the actual study (Score:2)
The silicone wristbands capture "volatile and semi-volatile compounds that are in the air and also compounds that adhere to the skin or are dermally excreted". This sounds like what's in your ambient environment, not what you are eating.
"Glyphosate and AMPA were not included because of their high polarity. They are not expected to be well absorbed in wrist bands", also interesting to know.
Farmers and neighbors of farms apparently get exposed much more than others, so city dwellers may have much less exposur