Welcome to Oxygenie.com - The Power of Activated Oxygen

The report below has been reprinted from the original analysis conducted by the Consumers Union of the United States, Inc., Public Service Projects Department, Technical Division.

"Which Foods Have the Highest TI Values? Seven foods consistently had high or very high TI's each time tested: Fresh peaches (both domestic and imported); frozen and fresh winter squash grown in the U.S.; domestic and imported apples, grapes, spinach and pears; and U.S.-grown green beans. Among these, U.S. peaches and frozen winter squash had TI Values about 10-fold higher than even the other "high" scores..."

This Report is very long, and has been broken down into different sections:

Quick Links

|| Summary || Introduction to the USDA Pesticide Data Program || Methodology & Toxicity Index ||
|| Results and Discussion || Recommendations || Tables: Pesticide Contamination in Fruits & Vegetables ||

DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE EATING?
AN ANALYSIS OF U.S. GOVERNMENT DATA
ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN FOODS1

Results and Discussion

Quick Links to Sections on this Page

|| Comparative Toxicity of Different Foods || Illegal Residues || Health Implications || Multiple Residues ||
|| Differences between Domestic & Imported Foods || Trends || Risk Drivers || Pesticide Use Data ||

Policy Recommendations

You can't control pesticide use by the agricultural industry... ...but you can remove the pesticides! Food and Water Ozonator

In its efforts to implement the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), the EPA needs to set priorities, and address the pesticide uses that pose the largest risks first.

The information we have assembled here can help set priorities. We suggest beginning with foods that have Toxicity Indices greater than 100, and focusing on individual pesticides found on those foods whose residues account for 10 percent or more of the overall TI's. Table 5 shows about a dozen crops, and about 20 pesticides used one or more of those crops, that meet these criteria.

We believe the EPA should, with very little further ado, determine that use of methyl parathion on foods like apples, grapes, peaches, pears and green beans cannot survive the children's health protection requirements of the FQPA. EPA must promptly address the dominant role this insecticide plays in the toxicity loading of several foods consumed in large quantities by children. Taking action on methyl parathion alone can dramatically reduce the TI's for several of the foods with the highest toxicity loadings in this analysis.

But EPA should not stop with methyl parathion. The most prominent risk drivers in Table 5 involve only about 20 chemicals in all, and for many of the chemicals, only selected uses are risk drivers. Many essential uses of even some very toxic pesticides probably can be preserved; selective bans of high-risk uses, not outright bans of chemicals, can very likely reduce overall toxicity loading to acceptably safe levels. In some cases, tighter regulation of how a pesticide is used--reducing the permissible application rates, or requiring longer intervals between application and harvest, to give residues more time to break down--can undoubtedly bring risks within acceptable limits, without requiring growers to do completely without certain valuable pest-control chemicals.

The Food and Drug Administration, EPA and USDA need to address the problems that can result from dieldrin residues in soils. Residues of this pesticide--banned a quarter-century ago--gave U.S. winter squash Toxicity Indices far greater than those of many other foods with residues of currently legal, high-risk organophosphates. It seems clear that the "action levels" in effect for such persistent environmental contaminants need re-examination; many would not pass the child-health protection test of the FQPA. Producers of crops which, like winter squash, have a propensity for taking up residues like dieldrin and heptachlor epoxide from the soil, should plant only on lands that are known to be free of these pollutants.

As far as the PDP is concerned, we believe USDA should expand its surveillance of foods children eat a lot of, to provide data that can measure progress as the FQPA is implemented. As it is now structured, the PDP rotates among different foods. While breadth of coverage is valuable, it is also essential to revisit certain foods that play a large role in overall dietary pesticide exposure often, to track trends in residue patterns. We think apples, peaches, pears, grapes, potatoes, spinach, green beans and winter squash all should probably be tested at least every other year.

Whenever pesticide-use data indicate a steep increase in applications of a risk-driving pesticide (as, for example, recent increases in aldicarb use on Western potatoes, or methyl parathion use on green beans), such trends in use data should trigger expanded testing of that crop by the PDP.

In tests Consumers Union did in 1997 for a report published in January 1998, we found that green peppers had frequent, high residues of acephate and methamidophos. We think green peppers should be tested by the PDP, too. Perhaps another six to 10 crops that each are significant in (i.e., make up more than 1 percent of) the diets of young children, have not yet been tested by the PDP, and should be among those tested soon.

We would like to see the PDP include more samples of organically- grown and "green labeled" foods in its annual test surveys. These food categories are becoming increasingly important in the U.S. marketplace, driven in part by consumer demand for foods produced with less pesticide use. In 1997, the PDP made an initial effort to include identified samples of such categories for several tested foods. We hope the program can expand its testing of these market sectors, to provide objective data on whether and how these alternatives can help reduce dietary pesticide exposure.

Our comparisons between U.S. and imported samples of various foods were sometimes stymied by the PDP's inclusion of too few samples of foods from certain importing countries. USDA should carry out an analysis of the number of samples needed to provide statistically meaningful residue data, and should ensure that the PDP tests sufficient numbers of samples from key importing countries for foods it examines each year.

REFERENCES Benbrook, Charles M., et al. (1996) Pest Management at the Crossroads. Yonkers, NY: Consumers Union of U.S., Inc, Colborn, Theo, Diane Dumanoski and John Peterson Myers (1996) Our Stolen Future. New York: Dutton.

Colborn, Theo, Frederick S. vom Saal and Ana M. Soto (1993) Developmental Effects of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals in Wildlife and Humans, Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 101:5, pp.378-384. Consumers Union (1998) Greener Greens? The Truth About Organic Food. Consumer Reports, January 1998, pp. 12-18.

Environmental Working Group (1998) Overexposed: Organophosphate Insecticides in Children's Foods. Washington, DC: EWG.

Kenney, Jeannine M., Charles M. Benbrook, and Edward Groth III (1998) Worst First: High Risk Insecticide Uses, Children's Foods, and Safer Alternatives. Washington, D.C.: Consumers Union of U.S., Inc.

National Research Council (1993) Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

USDA PDP reports and databases: http://www.ams.usda.gov/science/pdp/ For the EPA's toxicity data on pesticides, contact The Office of Pesticide Programs, OPPTS/OPP/HED, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 (Attn: Mr. Rick Whiting):

For Consumers Union's papers and analyses related to pesticide policy and the Food Quality Protection Act: http://www.ecologic-ipm.com.

For an interactive database on pesticides encountered in foods you eat or feed to your children: http://www.foodnews.org.

Goto the Next Section:: Tables: Pesticide Contamination in Fruits & Vegetables

Bibliography and References

1 This report was compiled in February, 1999, by the Consumers Union of the United States, Inc. Public Service Projects Department, Technical Division Edward Groth III, PhD, Project Director Charles M. Benbrook, PhD, Consultant Karen Lutz, MS, Consultant The analysis was supported in part by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Joyce Foundation and the W. Alton
Jones Foundation.