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

61–70 of 95 posts

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

#61

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #49
Nicksil wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Let’s just take one example: Sodium Bicarbonate, commonly known as Baking Soda works well as an efficient and cost effective fungicide and insecticide. It is actually registered with the EPA for use against certain plant fungi, powdery mildew. As a foliar spray used in the garden, it works wonders against fungus and bugs. There’s approximately no amount of sodium bicarbonate a person could reasonably ingest, in this…

Might apply to vinegar, too, another insecticide, although I don’t know if consuming huge quantities of vinegar is bad for you. I’m guessing not as bad as the same quantity of Round-up or a variety of other synthetics.

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

#62

Post by ekianjo »

argvargc wrote: post #56
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…

And when activists are scientists? Or what about when activists just pay attention to, read and understand science? That, in general, seems to be something rather common - emergent science is often what motivates activists, especially regarding safety. Actually, much science itself could be considered an ongoing process of a kind of "activism". As a sibling suggested, if something plausible and potentially harmful ha…

Nope dont mix Science and activism. Activism already has a set goal in mind. Science is about the method to reach the truth.

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

#63

Post by tharkun__ »

ricardobeat wrote: post #55
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? Well, if I were you, I would do both, and I would stop working a full-time job so that I could focus on raising my kids. I would also stop trusting the FDA or any other large org, because they have shown themselves to be untrustworthy and cor…

Stoping to work a full time job and buying only organic produce are kinda mutually exclusive.

Buying organic: yes. Eating organic: no.

At least in the US and Canada this should work. Of course not everyone can do it and it's not for everyone.

You gotta live in the right place and know the right stuff. You want some acreage. That's where you'll grow your organic veggie garden. This doesn't need too much of the acreage but you also want woodlands that you can get your fire wood from sustainably. You also want to be close enough to somewhere you can legally hunt and know how to hunt. Then you home school the kids. Et voila!

If you want an example of someone that is at least close enough to this (AFAIK they live 50% of the year w/ their parents in Florida and 50% is what I described above) look into the guy that won season 8 of Alone.

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

#64

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

varelse wrote: post #60
AdamHominem wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

We found out the hard way that you can have manganese sediment in your drinking water to the point that the water comes out brown and full of sand and it doesn't violate EPA regulations just their recommendations as it clogs all your plumbing fixtures and sets you up for a huge repair bill. And the water company is absolutely not responsible in any way.

Another example: EPA allows up to 15 µg/L of lead in drinking water. But lower levels are known to be dangerous:

“Researchers now know, blood lead levels in children as low as five micrograms per deciliter — the Centers for Disease Control's "level of concern" — can lead to IQ deficits and increases in behavior problems like ADHD and conduct disorder.

In adults, low-level exposure of 10 micrograms per deciliter can cause high blood pressure and kidney problems.”

And the CDC has said that no level of lead in blood is safe.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/08/13/489825051...

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/lead/final/monographhealt...

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

#65

Post by formerly_proven »

AdamHominem wrote: post #39
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…

> 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)

The obverse is also true: "XY detected in ZY" on its own is not very meaningful, because many compounds can be detected in staggeringly low concentrations.

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

#66

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

JamisonM wrote: post #53
JamisonM wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the first time I have heard this endogenous pesticide argument and I gotta say, it seems extraordinary! Is there some solid evidence for this?

(Also the argument that applied pesticides are on the surface of plants/produce only is incorrect as a blanket statement. There are many systemic insecticides on the market and they are usually preferable due to duration of protection.)

Indeed the article speaks to this:

“ In terms of washing, it should remove some residues on the skin of a product (which will often be fungicides used to prevent rotting during storage and transportation). However, many modern [synthetic] pesticides are what are called ‘systemic’ which means that they are absorbed into the plant and distributed throughout its tissues, reaching any fruits or flowers. As a result, pesticide residues are often contained within the body of the produce itself and therefore washing the surface won’t remove them.”

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

#67

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

clairity wrote: post #28
mherdeg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the fact that it took us years to identify issues with like, BPA or trans fats -- and the constant churn on stuff like glyphosate where it feels like regulators continue to be slower than data -- have me worried. Maybe we should be buying more organic ... It's not any extra time and not overall a huge amount of extra money in the grocery budget.

yah, washing produce thoroughly also helps reduce (but doesn't eliminate) the extra chemicals. these couple precautions don't add too much mental/physical burden, imo.

From the article:

“In terms of washing, it should remove some residues on the skin of a product (which will often be fungicides used to prevent rotting during storage and transportation). However, many modern pesticides are what are called ‘systemic’ which means that they are absorbed into the plant and distributed throughout its tissues, reaching any fruits or flowers. As a result, pesticide residues are often contained within the body of the produce itself and therefore washing the surface won’t remove them.”

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

#68

Post by mandmandam »

Nicksil wrote: post #32
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's funny how often you show up in these threads Nicksil. Doing exactly this.

For a software engineer you really seem to love defending pesticides, toxins, and mono-culture.

Did an organic banana hurt you in some way?

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

#70

Post by nitrogen »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #64
varelse wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We found out the hard way that you can have manganese sediment in your drinking water to the point that the water comes out brown and full of sand and it doesn't violate EPA regulations just their recommendations as it clogs all your plumbing fixtures and sets you up for a huge repair bill. And the water company is absolutely not responsible in any way.

Another example: EPA allows up to 15 µg/L of lead in drinking water. But lower levels are known to be dangerous: “Researchers now know, blood lead levels in children as low as five micrograms per deciliter — the Centers for Disease Control's "level of concern" — can lead to IQ deficits and increases in behavior problems like ADHD and conduct disorder. In adults, low-level exposure of 10 micrograms per deciliter can c…

You're comparing micrograms per liter in water to micrograms per deciliter in blood. Those are very different things.
Post reply on HN