Feds consider upping allowable pesticide residue limits on our food
Feds consider upping allowable pesticide residue limits on our food
There is growing concern about the harmful impact of pesticides on human health, agriculture and biodiversity, prompting calls from researchers to reduce their prevalence.
You know what I hate about this? In the past, you could very easily vote with your wallet by spending it on organic food, instead of this poison laden crap.
But these days, food is so expensive that very few have that option, so we pay a premium to these companies who really don't give a damn about us, the planet, or biodiversity.
39You know what I hate about this? Somewhere someone is getting paid to allow the ag industry to slide on requirements, with the end result of people being poisoned. And we have zero say or representation.
28The only say we have anymore is to do something about it.
Then they call those people eco-terrorists.
9
Also there are plenty of organic pesticides fwiw
11Yes, if they are even used. Many organic farms don't use anything and/or use considerably less toxic versions to control pests.
When i was able to afford organic produce on a regular basis , i was getting them from a place that sourced from local farms, and none used pesticides at the time. Sure, you find the occasional bug in your lettuce here and there, but nothing that a good wash couldn't fix. 😂
5
It seems like you can still vote with your wallet. It just takes harder voting.
1...instead of this poison laden crap.
The dose makes the poison. They're taking a science-based process to update the maximum residue limit.
...don’t give a damn about us, the planet, or biodiversity.
Significantly more land would have to be allocated to agriculture to produce the same amount of food without pesticides. That's not good for the planet or biodiversity.
-1Stop saying “science-based process,” Greg.
“Safe Food Matters president Mary Lou McDonald agreed. Accessing the health and safety data the PMRA uses to determine MRLs is challenging due to stringent limits on what data can be seen — and shared — by the public to protect pesticide companies' intellectual property. She noted issues with the accuracy and relevance of the data used by the government in its assessment process.
Moreover, she noted the PMRA and pesticide manufacturers have a close working relationship — an issue also flagged by Lanphear.“
2
I understand to a degree allowing an increase in pesticide use (though that'll seriously impact the water quality due to runoff), the only thing that the industry needs to do to reduce pesticide residue is to just spray the produce with water.
It's just a way to cheapen out the process at the expense of people's health. And I don't just mean the end shoppers', but also all the industry workers along the way. While I imagine the amount isn't a lot, but an increase in pesticide residue that makes it all the way through the supply chain increases how much the workers are exposed to as they handle the produce.
22That's a very good point. Wasn't there a study somewhere that found out that there were levels beyond what's accepted in mothers' breast milk of the pesticide called Roundup? And the reason was that the water supply was completely contaminated?
4I seem to recall something like that.
Frankly speaking, I don't think there's any actively used pesticide that is particularly fine to ingest on a regular basis, even at extremely low levels. That stuff circulates throughout your entire body, and is particularly harmful to both fetuses and breastfeeding infants. And I imagine that pregnant/breastfeeding women are the group that is most conscious about eating healthily, which means tons of fresh fruits and vegetables.
7
the only thing that the industry needs to do to reduce pesticide residue is to just spray the produce with water.
Water is often the enemy you are applying the pesticide to combat; a practice known as desiccation. Granted, it seems everyone's favourite desiccant is no longer on the table for modification here.
2Permanently Deleted
1
Why settle for being slightly better than America when you could be just as bad?
21I don't want more pesticides in my food. But more importantly we wanna keep the bees and other insects alive. If they disappear, we disappear. Simple as that
17The guy in the photo can't even be bothered to wear his respirator correctly.
11Why? We already have 60% less insects in part BECAUSE of this?
10Why the fuck would this be a good idea
8Wait until we switch to a blue government. Regulators and inspectors are the first jobs shed for "small government" so it doesn't matter what the numbers are then because we won't be testing.
16I guess guerilla farming it is then !
4
Whoever got paid
2
I think many here are forgetting we get a lot of our produce and fruit from Brazil, China, etc.
That's who this rule relaxation is aimed at.
6Ask Osoyoos about their high cancer rate from pestices being used on all the fruit and berry farms there.
5They're using a science-based process to update the maximum residue limit. That's a good thing
2Yeah, I don't care about that argument. They'll say they used science to determine if a company can increase their profits to the detriment of our health and tell us it's good for us.
14“Safe Food Matters president Mary Lou McDonald agreed. Accessing the health and safety data the PMRA uses to determine MRLs is challenging due to stringent limits on what data can be seen — and shared — by the public to protect pesticide companies' intellectual property. She noted issues with the accuracy and relevance of the data used by the government in its assessment process.
Moreover, she noted the PMRA and pesticide manufacturers have a close working relationship — an issue also flagged by Lanphear.”
2