151

Feds consider upping allowable pesticide residue limits on our food (www.nationalobserver.com)

submitted 2 years ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/canada@lemmy.ca

93 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 39 points 2 years ago

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.

[-] RedEyeFlightControl@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

You 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.

[-] SlikPikker@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago

The only say we have anymore is to do something about it.

Then they call those people eco-terrorists.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

Well in the land of the fee, you might have about 50 000 say in total to be divided up to what you need (a bunch of that going straight to your landlord or mortgage company anyway), while big agriculture firms have 10 000 000s of say dedicated to the policy initiatives they want.

[-] RedEyeFlightControl@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

That's a really long way to call me poor 😂

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Dingus_Khan@hexbear.net 11 points 2 years ago

Also there are plenty of organic pesticides fwiw

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago

Yes, 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. 😂

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

Local farmers, sure. But from what I know, industrial farmers all use pesticides unless if it's grown indoors. And a lot of the organic pesticides are more dangerous than artificial ones. Especially since the farmers need to use more.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

I don't believe they are more dangerous, unless the research found otherwise in the last 10 years.

But i cant speak to the industrial side of things, since i was buying local.

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (15 replies)

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 years ago

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.

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

That'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?

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago

I 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.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

We don't know the full impacts of the majority of our industrialized food system. Emulsifiers, perservatives, flavouring agents and pesticides all are relatively new and their effects, impacts, build ups, and mixtures in the human body are not fully studied or understood yet.

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

The issue is a lack of money studying them, as the only group with the money to do all the studies needed are the ones producing the pesticides, and they have a dedicated interest in only doing enough studies to prove that there are no immediate issues with their products.

It's a conflict of interest unless if there's more government funding into examining these sorts of things, as there are no other major forces that don't have a invested interest in making sure that the studies make the products look good.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Even then, human lifespans can reach 100 years, some of this stuff simply hasnt existed in our food supply to truly know what a lifetime of consumption can cause. Many of these additives and pesticides are tested to be safe per individual food and the total ingestion control is left to the consuner, who may be uninformed on their consumption rate, especially considering the increasing background presence of these substances in our water and soil.

load more comments (5 replies)

[-] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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.

[-] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

They might just mean wash the final product before shipping it out to the grocery stores.

[-] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I see you've never worked with flour before. Once it meets water there is no turning back.

Granted, if you catch it earlier, wheat berries aren't that hard to run through the dryer, assuming you accept the environmental and financial cost. Get into beans, though... Good luck.

If you just mean something like Apples, which don't need to be dry, who doesn't already wash it before consumption already?

[-] Dearche@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago

Well of course the moment you've processed the crop it's too late to wash them. I was mostly just talking about fruits and vegetables.

But for grains and legumes, washing them before hulling them shouldn't be a problem. Of course there's the issue of added costs, but spraying additional pesticides is also a cost.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Restaurants. Just on the basis of how many people eat at those this is important.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Nagarjuna@hexbear.net 21 points 2 years ago

Why settle for being slightly better than America when you could be just as bad?

[-] Defectus@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

I 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

[-] ProfessorPeregrine@reddthat.com 11 points 2 years ago

The guy in the photo can't even be bothered to wear his respirator correctly.

[-] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Why? We already have 60% less insects in part BECAUSE of this?

[-] O_i@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Why the fuck would this be a good idea

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 years ago

Wait 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.

[-] O_i@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I guess guerilla farming it is then !

[-] WookieMunster@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

Whoever got paid

[-] girlfreddy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

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.

[-] BCsven@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago

Ask Osoyoos about their high cancer rate from pestices being used on all the fruit and berry farms there.

[-] Greg@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

They're using a science-based process to update the maximum residue limit. That's a good thing

[-] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 years ago

Yeah, 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.

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

“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.”

load more comments (26 replies)

load more comments