Hi Peter, and thanks for the thoughtful response. As a university scientist I work with industry — the fruit and vegetable industry. They use chemical controls, and they use them safely with great care and regulation. The farmers I work with know everything they apply. They apply the least amount they need to apply, and when weather conditions dictate (work from my university has cut pesticide applications by 60–75% by integrating weather information).

You can call these “talking points of the chemical industry” or “propaganda” but it is information that I have synthesized from reading everything from labels to peer-reviewed research. I know what each chemical is, what it does, how it is applied, and what the risks are through occupational exposure and consumption.

The dirty dozen is the one obfuscating and misinforming. Residues detected here and there are much below any safety considerations. Multiple residues are due to farmers correctly rotating treatments to limit resistance.
You can talk about companies, histories, and bad actors of the past. That’s fine. But keep in mind that most of these are not manufactured by those companies, most are coming from off shore and from dozens of sources. You’d have to assume that they too are in the business of selling faulty products, which is quite a stretch.

I appreciate your points, but let’s stick to scholarly literature over personal attacks. If I said something incorrect, then help me understand. But don’t just scream Monsanto! Monsanto! Monsanto! and expect me to be interested. Thanks.

Written by

Land-grant scientist exploring ways to make better food with less input, and how to communicate science. All funding at kevinfolta.com/transparency

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store