Viewpoint: Challenging fearmongering — Environmental Working Group’s annual ‘Dirty Dozen’ uses chemophobia to scare people about safe produce
Viewpoint: Challenging fearmongering — Environmental Working Group’s annual ‘Dirty Dozen’ uses chemophobia to scare people about safe produce


EWG claims that it is not out to scare the public, that it only strives to alert consumers as to which fruits and vegetables harbour the most pesticide residues and should therefore, if possible, be purchased in their organic versions. That may be the stated motive, but I suspect EWG is not averse to the donations reaped by the wide publicity the Dirty Dozen list generates.
Here is a headline, a la EWG, that can be devised to reflect the findings. “97 per cent of apples sampled were found to contain pesticide residues with some being contaminated by as many as 12 different pesticides.” That sounds pretty scary, especially when one considers that pesticides are designed to cause harm to living things. But let’s keep in mind that the presence of a residue does not equate to the presence of risk. The question that needs to be asked is how many of the residues detected were in excess of the Environmental Protection Agency’s carefully established maximum tolerance level? These tolerance levels are not random guesses, they are based on determining the maximum dose that causes no observed adverse effects (NOAEL) in animals, and then building in a hundred-fold safety margin for humans.
So, how many of the 531 samples had a residue of any pesticide that exceeded the EPA’s tolerance level? None! Zero!
This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

![]() | Videos | More... |

Video: Nuclear energy will destroy us? Global warming is an existential threat? Chemicals are massacring bees? Donate to the Green Industrial Complex!
![]() | Bees & Pollinators | More... |

GLP podcast: Science journalism is a mess. Here’s how to fix it

Mosquito massacre: Can we safely tackle malaria with a CRISPR gene drive?

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’
![]() | Infographics | More... |

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer
![]() | GMO FAQs | More... |

Why is there controversy over GMO foods but not GMO drugs?

How are GMOs labeled around the world?

How does genetic engineering differ from conventional breeding?
![]() | GLP Profiles | More... |

Alex Jones: Right-wing conspiracy theorist stokes fear of GMOs, pesticides to sell ‘health supplements’








Viewpoint — Fact checking MAHA mythmakers: How wellness influencers and RFK, Jr. undermine American science and health
Viewpoint: Video — Big Solar is gobbling up productive agricultural land and hurting farmers yet providing little energy or sustainabilty gains
Fighting deforestation with CO2: Biotechnology breakthrough creates sustainable palm oil alternative for cosmetics
Trust issues: What happens when therapists use ChatGPT?
California, Washington, Oregon forge immunization alliance to safeguard vaccine access against federal undermining
30-year-old tomato line shows genetic resistance to devastating virus
The free-range chicken dilemma: Better for birds, but with substantial costs
‘You have to treat the brain first’: Rethinking chronic pain with Sanjay Gupta