Attend AARP's Job Search in the Digital Age Online Workshop, Thursday at 7 p.m. ET. Register Now

Reply
Info Seeker
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎10-08-2011

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 1 of 86 (2,368 Views)
Spoiler
 

I used to feel that too many people were anti-government agencies, as clearly to have a humane society many things need to be regulated and restricted. Unfortunately now that much of the government has been taken over by such people, I see less and less that I trust it with. Much important and objective info has already been removed from EPA and other sites, so I wouldn't be surprised that the pesticide info, if still there, is reliable anymore. 

Conversationalist
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 2 of 86 (6,851 Views)

EWG's annual list is misleading from a health risk standpoint. EWG just identifies produce with many different pesticides...it doesn't tell the reader the levels or the toxicities or dietary risks from consuming these crops.  The residue levels are in the parts per billion and trillion which are levels 100 to 1000x lower than what EPA sets as safe levels for single day and lifetime consumption for infants, teenagers and adults, both sexes and all races. See USDA website for Pesticide Data Program and EPA's site EPA.gov/pesticides to learn more. EWG publishes this misleading list every year. Exposure at ultra low levels does not equal risks of concern. If you think so, don't drive or do most other activities.

Info Seeker
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎04-09-2014

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 3 of 86 (6,858 Views)

Oh, AARP, how ironic you are.  I linked to the "dirty dozen" article from the one on 5 reasons to eat frozen fruits and vegetables.  THAT aricle was accompanied by a photo of frozen strawberries, implying you were recommending we eat frozen strawberries.  Yet, there they are on the top of the dirty dozen list.  What gives?

Bronze Conversationalist
Posts: 16
Registered: ‎04-30-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 4 of 86 (7,452 Views)

Everyone should be skeptical of everything and everyone to a degree.  It's not the scientists and researcher that are of concern.  It is the beaureaucrat or the CEO or some other lower level manager that is to be scrutinized more closely.  They are the ones that are more likely to be influenced by big money.  That's their point in life, the money.  Workers tend to love their jobs and take great pride in doing the best job they can.  It's the middle men that are of concern.  They produce nothing, they do nothing, but take their cut, which is usually far too much.  They are the group that usually has less scruples, morals or ethics and should always be looked at more closely.  I personally put a lot of faith in scientists and researchers, but I also try to search out as many different points of view and as many "facts" as possible, hearing from as wide an array of people and entities as possible, so I can make a decision for myself that sits well on my mind.  To blindly believe anyone, no matter what their credentials are, is foolish.

Conversationalist
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 5 of 86 (7,481 Views)

I understand people are skeptical of government; it's unfortunate.  However, I spent my career at EPA in the Pesticide Program and have high respect for the scientists, regulators, and integrity of following the science and law in making decisions on each pesticide. The law requires EPA to regulate the sale and use of a pesticide based on consideration of its potential risks (human and environmental) and benefits. The science and scientific deicison-making process is robust and considered tops among developed nations and which fosters international trade of agricultural commodities.  All required studies (about 120) are reviewed in-depth.  Assessments are rigorous, meet contemporary scientific methods, and are shared with the public. Testing labs are audited by EPA scientists, penalties for any falsification (very rare) are extreme. EPA takes novel/complex science issues to external expert scientists in public meetings for advice.  This and all other deliberations, risk assessments, and proposed decisions on the new use or banning of a use are announced and posted for public comment; EPA considers all comments in making its final decisions.  If new credible information becomes available, EPA removes from the market or adds tighter use restrictions to ensure only pesticides that meet strict safety standards are sold and used.  Farmers and commercial pesticide applicators must be trained and licensed to apply pesticides.  USDA and FDA constantly tests produce (domestic and imported) to ensure only produce with residues at or below establised legal safety levels may enter the market.  Please peruse EPA's website (epa.gov/pesticides) where you'll find an enormous amount of information on each pesticide, past risk assessments, the law, regulations, policies, etc.

Bronze Conversationalist
Posts: 16
Registered: ‎04-30-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 6 of 86 (7,488 Views)
My exact thoughts.  I too worked for an arm of the Federal Government for 25 years.  The thing is, they're no different than big business.  Who ever is in charge always has some ulterior motive and it's rarely in our best interest, no matter how adamantly they profess otherwise.  You cannot trust anyone or anything if there is the possibility of large amounts of money being involved and pronouncing something safe or not can be the difference in millions and even billions of dollars over the years.  Most people who have a job do as they're told because they enjoy having a job.  Being blackballed for blabbing can have very adverse effects on one's bank account.  And the outside influence is basically criminal.

 

Info Seeker
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎06-19-2015

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 7 of 86 (7,521 Views)
I never trusted the EPA, and I used to work for the federal government. The EPA told Kenai City Water they couldn't use deep aquaphors for the city water supply because they were unsafe. They had to use the more shallow run-off sources. Guess what? The deep aquaphors were free of contamination while the shallow run-off was LOADED with heavy metals, causing too many health issues in my patients. Yeah, right. Great advice, bureaucrats! If you want to know what dangerous, check the MSDS sheets. Remember when parabens were considered "safe" preservatives in body care products? The MSDS says do NOT expose skin to any level of parabens. I'd sooner trust MSDS sheets than what the EPA (or OSHA) says. Remember: DDT used to be considered "safe". Remember the government educational films where they were exposing school kids to DDT?
Conversationalist
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 8 of 86 (7,530 Views)

EPA requires industry to conduct about 120 scientific studies on each pesticide proposed for use on food crops. The studies are based on contemporary scientific test methods and peer reviewed by external expert scientists, and these studies and methods are required around the world by all developed countries, regulatory authorities. EPA's pesticide scientists rigorously assess the studies' results and conduct conservative risk assessments to decide whether the pesticide can be used safely by applicators, consumers and the environment. EPA sets allowable maximum levels of residues for each pesticide on each crop. These levels must be safe for all age groups, races, genders based on a daily and lifetime consumption.  Actual residues are usually 10-1000x less than allowable levels. It's unfortunate EWG and other groups fail to be transparent and do not present a whole story to the public.

Conversationalist
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎07-15-2016

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 9 of 86 (7,559 Views)

This list is like a list of thngs or activities that have a potential hazard...it does not tell you the hazard, the quantity of a hazard or likelihood (risk) of acquiring the hazard over any length of time....sort of like a list of cars, airplanes, boats, lightning, aspirin, ...  All things are potentially hazardous.  Read EPA's website about risk assessment and dietary exposures to pesticides (EPA regulates pesticides in the US).  Most fruits and veggies have 0 to a few parts per billion of pesticides in or on them...levels 1000 - 100,000 X below levels shown to cause effects in many toxicology studies.  For example, EPA will not allow a pestcide to be sold or used if the potential cancer risk from consuming a pesticide every day for a life-time is greater than one-in-one million chance of acquiring cancer.  Buy and eat what you wish but don't be fooled by a list like EWG's.  Exposure does not equal risk...if you think it does, stop driving, you might be in an accident that causes you harm.

Info Seeker
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎06-22-2011

Re: The dirty dozen

Message 10 of 86 (7,569 Views)

Yes, I will definetly stop buying strawberries unless they are organic.  I was surprised that blueberries were not on the good list.  I recently heard they do not absorb pesticides like strawberries which were described as absorbing perticides like a sponge.  I think some of the good list items are because they have a outer layer like pineapple, avacado, mango, and papaya.  I was actually surprised cauliflower was on the good list.  GREAT!