Prominent among the many reasons that people chose to eat organic produce is the question of pesticide exposure. Organic produce is not exposed to synthetic pesticides, herbicides or fertilizer, however large variations of pesticide exposure and residues are seen even in non-organic produce.
Synthetic pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer have long been a “hot” topic in the environmental movement. Since before the start of the ironically named Green Revolution in the 1960’s, environmentalists have been fighting against the use of synthetic products in agriculture. The massive increases in worldwide crop yields heralded by the Green Revolution greatly reduced world hunger problems, but were in large part the result of unrestrained chemical and industrial inputs. As James E. McWilliams in “Just Food” proposes that “Because the means – industrial irrigation; synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides; and agressive forms of mechanization – accounted for much of the Green Revolution’s bumper yields, environmentalists have rightfully raised objections to them.” In many cases environmentalists fears about the safety of these pesticides has been shown to be valid, with such products as dioxin, agent-orange and DDT showing not only strong carcinogenic effects, but remarkable environmental persistance – staying intact and active for many decades.
Proponents of organic agriculture often cite the less intensive use of chemicals in organic production as a warrant of its safety and while it’s true that organic methods generally use less chemicals that industrial agriculture – that fact does not by itself guarantee that these “natural” chemical inputs are safer. Often our obsession to avoid synthetic chemicals overlooks the fact that most of the toxic chemicals to which we are exposed are completely natural. There are practically no differences in health outcomes between exposure to natural or synthetic toxins. According to an article in the prestigious journal Science researchers have shown that, according to toxicity studies in rodents, a glass of wine, a glass of orange juice and a cup of coffee have a higher “potency index” than synthetic pesticides lindane and captan. Hervé This, physical chemist at the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique in Paris and well known teacher and author on the subject of Molecular Gastronomy believes that many people do not behave rationally when it comes to diet. While people get up in arms about pesticides and rare contamination of food by toxins, Hervé This notes that no one makes a fuss about consuming considerable quantities of grilled meats which contain proven carcinogenic molecules such as benzopyrenes which are deposited by the smoke. He also observes that though consumers and chefs alike are concerned about toxins in food they nonchalantly add such elements as tarragon, bay leaf and nutmeg to recipes, unaware that these contain extremely toxic molecules (the toxins in one nutmeg berry ground to a powder can kill an adult). Hervé This cites the Renaissance physician, botanist, alchemist and astrologer Paracelsus on this matter when he says :
“Alle Ding’ sind Gift, und nichts ohn’ Gift; allein die Dosis macht, daß ein Ding kein Gift ist.”
“All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous.”
Organic agriculture has now become BIG business, with sales in the billions of dollars in North America alone. It has built its very marketable reputation on a commonly held belief that organic farming does not use pesticides. However, as James E McWilliams makes reference to in his chapter on the Organic Panic, since pests often consume over 40 percent of crops grown in the United States, farmers – organic or not – have no choice but to rely on chemicals as a matter of course to control these pests. Even if the substances used are labelled as “botanical extracts” or “biorationals” – this does not make these toxins less dangerous. Even if many of these “natural” products have been used for decades and in some cases hundred of years in traditional, small scale agriculture; the scaling up of commercialized organic agriculture could quickly bring about serious health and environmental problems similar to those seen with synthetic crop aids if these natural toxins are used irresponsibly or on too large a scale. For a balanced and detailed examination of the issues facing organic and convential food production, read McWilliams’ excellent book Just Food.
What strategies can we use to maximise the benefits of our diet while reducing the risks? A few simple tactics are available to us. Firstly, by increasing the variety of food species that we include in our diets we can accomplish two things – we can reduce the pressure applied commercial agriculture to increase monoculture, an agricultural method that often leads to increased reliance on chemical inputs; we can also reduce the doses of any single toxic chemical in our diet, whether from the fertilizers pesticides, fungicide or herbicides or from the toxins in the foods themselves. Secondly we can push our food producers to take a more pro-active and responsible approach to food production by becoming more active participants in the food cycle; by buying more food in-season from small local producers who accept to account for their chemical use; by buying more organic produce from responsible small-scale producers who respect the philosophy of responsible agriculture; and by shortening the chain of food production between the primary producer and the plate. For those who cannot afford to switch to 100% organic and responsible food production – you can switch where it makes the most difference for your family and the environment, by avoiding crops that are the most heavily chemical-laden and contaminated. Use references like the Environmental Working Group’s Shoppers’ Guide to Pesticides to find out which non-organic crops are OK. Vote for a healthier environement and safer food with your debit card and your fork.
