Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] Pesticides You Eat Shouldn't Be Measured, Says Food Industry

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Livingontheland] Pesticides You Eat Shouldn't Be Measured, Says Food Industry
  • Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 21:45:31 -0600


Pesticides You Eat Shouldn't Be Measured, Says Food Industry
The USDA's annual pesticide data are five months late this year, largely due
to food industry lobbying efforts.

http://tinyurl.com/3ddzu8p

UPDATE 5/26/11: The USDA released its Pesticide Data Program annual report
yesterday after a five-month delay. Fortunately, the agency didn't cave in to
intense lobbying efforts on behalf of pesticide companies and chemical
farmers to alter the data. The pesticide residues are being reported in the
same manner they have been since 1991. However, the Environmental Working
Group is continuing to investigate the $180,000 federal grant given to the
industry to combat efforts to educate the public about pesticide residues on
food. Read the backstory below.

RODALE NEWS, EMMAUS, PA—The produce industry wants you to eat chemical-laden
food, so much so that it's now strong-arming government agencies into
withholding information about pesticides on food. A coalition of 18 produce
and pesticide trade groups has sent a letter to U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack asking him to reform how the agency
reports pesticide residues so that information can't be used by nonprofits
who advocate for eating organic food, despite loads of evidence suggesting
that pesticides on food are linked to health problems, including attention
deficit disorder and lowered IQ.

THE DETAILS: Every year, in late January or early February, the USDA issues
the annual report of its Pesticide Data Program, a survey of pesticide
residues on food. That information is used by, among other agencies, the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration to
determine exposure levels of certain pesticides and to find out how much of
certain pesticides are being used on food. The data are also used by
nonprofits like the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and The Organic Center
to put out reports, such as EWG's Shoppers Guide to Pesticides, that help
people find out which fruits and vegetables have the highest or lowest
overall pesticide residues.

This year, however, the report is five months late, and all fingers are
pointing at the pesticide and produce industries as the reason. As part of a
lobbying effort that began last year, chemical-agriculture groups have been
pushing the USDA to change the way it reports its pesticide residues because
the data have "been subject to misinterpretation by activists, which
publicize their distorted findings through national media outlets in a way
that is misleading for consumers and can be highly detrimental to the growers
of these commodities," according to the letter sent to Vilsack. These same
groups allege that public education efforts like the EWG's Shoppers Guide
amount to "fear-mongering" and "actually make the work of improving the diets
of Americans more difficult because they scare consumers away from the
affordable fruits and vegetables that they enjoy," one industry group states
on a website designed to promote conventional produce.

"This is the first time, to our knowledge, that there's been pressure by
pesticide and produce industries on officials in the federal government to
change the way they report residue data," says EWG spokesperson Alex
Formuzis. And that likely has to do with organic food's increase in market
share of late. While all organic foods and beverages make up a tiny 3.7
percent of total U.S. food sales, organic produce makes up 11.4 percent of
total fruit and vegetables sales, according to the Organic Trade Association.
"That's compared to the conventional produce industry, which has seen sales
flatline," Formuzis says.

WHAT IT MEANS: It isn't clear exactly what the produce trade groups are
lobbying for, Formuzis says, because their meetings with USDA officials have
been behind closed doors. Earlier in May, EWG filed a Freedom of Information
Act request for any and all correspondence that the agency has had with these
lobbying groups. But Formuzis is concerned with how successful some of their
attempts have already been.

Last fall, a produce industry trade group called the Alliance for Food and
Farming pushed for, and received, a taxpayer-funded grant from the California
Department of Agriculture in the amount of $180,000. The grant was used for a
project titled "Correcting Misconceptions about Pesticide Residues." The
description about the project from the California agency read in part: "The
project seeks to correct the misconception that some fresh produce items
contain excessive amounts of pesticide residues. Claims by activist groups
about unsafe levels of pesticides have been widely reported in the media for
many years, but have largely gone uncontested. Continued media coverage of
this misleading information is damaging to producers of California specialty
crops and may also have a negative impact on public health."

"That was the final straw," says Formusiz. "The industry got a
taxpayer-funded grant to specifically push back on nonprofits who are trying
to educate public."

The USDA is expected to release its pesticide report sometime this week, and
EWG is waiting to see if it looks any different from previous years' reports.
If the agency were to discontinue or change its reports, he says that his
group's ability to put out its annual Shopper's Guide would be severely
curtailed. "These tests are not done in the field. The USDA tests these
fruits and vegetables as if they're ready to be eaten—they're picked, washed,
then tested for pesticide residues," he says. "I'm not aware of a program
that is as robust as the USDA's, and there's not another government agency
that studies pesticide residues." And if nothing else, he says, these tests
are funded by us, the taxpayers, and we have the right to access information
we've paid for.

EWG currently has an online petition that it's sending to the USDA,
questioning the $180,000 grant that was doled out to the industry and asking
the agency to reject industry efforts to block pesticide residue results. You
can sign the petition here.

And, as always, demand organic produce wherever you shop, to show your
support for pesticide-free food and to show the chemical industry that you
have no "misconceptions about pesticide residues on food."






  • [Livingontheland] Pesticides You Eat Shouldn't Be Measured, Says Food Industry, Tradingpost, 05/30/2011

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page