Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 95 posts

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#31

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

Nicksil wrote: post #24
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-... . USDA certified organic foods are grown and processed according to federal guidelines addressing, among many factors, soil quality, animal raising practices, pest and weed control, and use of additives. Organic producers rely on natural substances and physical, mechanical, or biologically based farming methods t…

Conventional pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers are more effective and sustainable. Conventional products require less of the substance to be applied and less frequently. If the concern is about the impact on the environment and humans, then the logical choice between the organic method and conventional is conventional.

Even if that is accurate(source?), quantity applied says nothing about the danger of the substance to humans.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#32

Post by Nicksil »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #23
Nicksil wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We know organic perma-culture is better; for our bodies, for the soil, for the water and birds and bees. It's not better. Not a thing about it makes it better than conventional agriculture. Indeed one could make the argument it is worse than conventional agriculture for the items you listed because of the less effective methods used for "organic" pesticide, herbicide, and fertilizer application.

I mean, have you read anything about Roundup? If so, how can you say that?

>I mean, have you read anything about Roundup? If so, how can you say that?

What specifically about Roundup are you referring to?

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#33

Post by Nicksil »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #27
Nicksil wrote: post #10

This article has so much misleading information. It's bonkers. >The official figures, analysed by Pesticide Action Network (PAN), found 122 different pesticides in the 12 most polluted products, which the charity calls the “dirty dozen”. Many of these are hazardous to human health; 61% are classified as highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs), a concept used by the UN to identify those substances most harmful to human hea…

> I've enclosed the term "organic" in quotes in some context because the word is absolutely meaningless when used to describe foods. All food is organic. "Organic" is this context is a marketing term and nothing more. I think you mean "natural" not organic? Everything in the universe is inherently natural. Cynicism about "organic" labels used to be grounded, but at least in the USA, use of the term is now regulated b…

>I think you mean "natural" not organic? Everything in the universe is inherently natural.

No, I meant organic.

>I used to have similar cynical beliefs about "organic" food. And i think even 10 years ago that cynicism was justified, but not anymore.

My comments aren't derived from cynicism. The information I've provided is widely available and easily consumable. I have not introduced any novel idea or position.

>I encourage you to update your knowledge and to keep an open mind.

Having an open/closed mind has no affect on whether information is correct.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#34

Post by mapcars »

mherdeg wrote: post #9

This is an area where I'm torn. Should I be buying only organic produce or should I be spending the same money and energy on eating less sugar and more of any kind of produce? There is a tradeoff... with young kids and a full-time job the time I can spend buying or preparing meals is pretty limited. I don't fully understand the magnitude of the risks of, say, eating too much vs. eating too much pesticide. I'm also ki…

What does it mean to spend money and time on eating less sugar? Spend no money and no time by not buying sugar products, that's it.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#35

Post by Nicksil »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #31
Nicksil wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conventional pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers are more effective and sustainable. Conventional products require less of the substance to be applied and less frequently. If the concern is about the impact on the environment and humans, then the logical choice between the organic method and conventional is conventional.

Even if that is accurate(source?), quantity applied says nothing about the danger of the substance to humans.

>Even if that is accurate(source?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming

>quantity applied says nothing about the danger of the substance to humans.

Quantity is the deciding factor when talking about toxicity to humans. If I've misunderstood your comment, please correct me.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#36

Post by Nicksil »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #30
Nicksil wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the (magnitude of) risk isn't certain yet, but it's unlikely zero, given our history of poorly quantifying the harmfulness of a variety of substances. a reasonable hedge is to buy organic for the dirty dozen and non-organic for other produce. eat less processed sugar regardless, whether you replace it with fruit or not. If the goal is to reduce ingestion of substances applied to crops, then what you describe is not…

It’s not about reducing substances–it is about substances that are healthy.

>It’s not about reducing substances–it is about substances that are healthy.

I agree that such substances should not post a risk to human health, but there is no argument that organic crop products are any better for humans than conventional products.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#37

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

Nicksil wrote: post #33
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've enclosed the term "organic" in quotes in some context because the word is absolutely meaningless when used to describe foods. All food is organic. "Organic" is this context is a marketing term and nothing more. I think you mean "natural" not organic? Everything in the universe is inherently natural. Cynicism about "organic" labels used to be grounded, but at least in the USA, use of the term is now regulated b…

>I think you mean "natural" not organic? Everything in the universe is inherently natural. No, I meant organic. >I used to have similar cynical beliefs about "organic" food. And i think even 10 years ago that cynicism was justified, but not anymore. My comments aren't derived from cynicism. The information I've provided is widely available and easily consumable. I have not introduced any novel idea or position. >I en…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_pesticides

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#38

Post by bawolff »

jniedrauer wrote: post #8

> Although the levels of individual pesticides are within legal limits, activists fear the combination of multiple chemicals could be particularly damaging to people’s health. This is the important part. Activists' fear should not dictate health policy. That should be done by scientists. This organization, Pesticide Action Network, is opposed to GMOs and other modern farming techniques that kicked off the green revol…

> This is the important part. Activists' fear should not dictate health policy. That should be done by scientists.

I think anyone should be able to raise an objection - and then we should look at the science to decide how valid it is.

The activists seem to be worried that while individually the chemicals are fine, maybe they aren't in combination. I have no idea if that's true or not, but it doesn't sound impossible, and there have certainly been other cases in other contexts where a combination is toxic but the individual parts aren't. If that's been studied great, if not we should definitely study it to find out.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#39

Post by AdamHominem »

jniedrauer wrote: post #8

> Although the levels of individual pesticides are within legal limits, activists fear the combination of multiple chemicals could be particularly damaging to people’s health. This is the important part. Activists' fear should not dictate health policy. That should be done by scientists. This organization, Pesticide Action Network, is opposed to GMOs and other modern farming techniques that kicked off the green revol…

You're implying that because they're within legal limits everything is A-OK (how are the limits set? Exhibit A: US drinking water pollutant limits, which were raised by Bush, not based on science)

...then launching into an ad hominem attack (either the pesticide amounts are safe or not, and it has nothing to do with who is asking "is this safe or not?")

...and jumping on the word "fear" (I say "I fear the gun you've pointed at me is loaded and the safety off, would you stop pointing it at me until you check it?" You: "Oh ho look who says they're about to get shot based on NOTHING BUT FEAR". No, I'm asking you to CHECK the gun, and in the meantime stop pointing at me, because the nonzero chance of me suffering harm)

...followed by a lot of personal opinion about modern farming techniques

...including a bunch of hand-waiving about how an incredibly complex problem will be magic-bulleted (or even helped) by rolling back the incredibly loose environmental rules farmers are required to follow.

The reason we have 'trouble' feeding 7 billion humans is because of trade policies and protectionism. For example, corn in Mexico is artificially high in price because the US turns a fuckton of its corn into ethanol (which is an energy-negative process) and high fructose corn syrup (which is only cost-effective because the price of sugar imports is kept artificially high by government regulation, to protect US sugar producers.) It's also because we do things like dump food in countries with hunger, thus collapsing prices for local farmers (who then can't survive and stop farming), instead of helping those countries produce or buy more food.

Also, please provide evidence that EU farmers (using lower pesticide amounts) have lower yields than US farmers. Don't forget to account for the cost of the pesticides vs reduced yield.

Re: Traces of 122 different pesticides in 12 most polluted fruit and veg products

#40

Post by bawolff »

mherdeg wrote: post #9

This is an area where I'm torn. Should I be buying only organic produce or should I be spending the same money and energy on eating less sugar and more of any kind of produce? There is a tradeoff... with young kids and a full-time job the time I can spend buying or preparing meals is pretty limited. I don't fully understand the magnitude of the risks of, say, eating too much vs. eating too much pesticide. I'm also ki…

42% of people are obesse in usa. That seems like very obviously the more immediate risk by many orders of magnitude. The risk of pesticides (that are within legal limits) is a bit more nebulous, but seems almost certainly nowhere near as pervasive as obesity. If you have a known risk that's significant, probably best to focus there.

However is this really the trade off? For the most part you can't really buy pesticide free food that's unhealthy.

Post reply on HN