Rendered at 21:07:58 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
nozzlegear 2 hours ago [-]
The report itself[†] blames the pesticide residue on a "boomerang effect" from EU countries: EU countries export these banned pesticides to third countries, those countries use the banned pesticides on the food they grow, and then the EU countries import that food. In effect, EU companies are still profiting off of the sale and use of banned pesticides on food that Europeans will eat.
That is one reason why I, at least try to, check the label and avoid products with non-EU ingredients.
Also one of my worries with the mercusour trade deal. And any deal that involves meat imports from the US, with specific laxer regulation requirements (at least what Trump would like).
LorenPechtel 1 hours ago [-]
Object on "blame"--it is actually only saying that this scenario is possible, it is not establishing that it actually is the cause.
ars 32 minutes ago [-]
I checked the list of pesticides in the article, and almost all of them were banned because of the effect on pollinators, not because of human health.
So using these pesticides only on products for export makes utterly no sense!
kryptoncalm 1 hours ago [-]
More relevant is that 14 out of 64 samples had levels above the legally allowed limit (MRL), of which 12 pesticides that are not approved in the EU (page 12 of report). This is more severe than products 'containing' pesticides, which could as well be advancements in measurement.
Organic is just green washing, it doesn’t mean no chemicals. Plenty of organic products contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals. Organic oats have been found to contain glyphosate. Organic spices have been found to contain heavy metals.
bluebarbet 8 minutes ago [-]
Organic is a label which means something specific. Compliance with the definition is controlled by law, however imperfectly. It is not just greenwashing.
Saline9515 43 minutes ago [-]
Organic means that no non-organic pesticides have been used in production. There are still organic ones available, which are less dangerous. Especially to the farmers who are the first ones to get exposed to the poisons we spread on the fields.
luqtas 1 minutes ago [-]
care to cite any decent research proving you point?
there's an extensive body of research on synthetics having no effect on human health, from goverment funded, private and independent research... if you access your country's official institution you'll see there's plenty of synthetics allowed in organic agriculture just because they mimic perfectly "organic" substances
interesting point too, is the lack of any extensive meta-analysis/studies on organic pesticide impact on health and plus the fact organic farm is rather poor (produce less than 2% of the global food) and usually if not always lack good machinery to spread pesticides on the recommended quantities science points out (which organic agriculture also has less literature on that too)
i5heu 34 minutes ago [-]
At least in Germany we have “Bio” which is a organic label that is controlled at least somewhat.
Theodores 34 minutes ago [-]
Yes and no!
In the UK, tea means tea bags and that normally means tea bags made of a plastic/paper mix. If I remember, the bag material is made and then they heat it up to get the plastic out, revealing the holes, needed for the bag.
Of late there has been criticism of microplastics in tea bags, and the posh organic bags have fared quite badly. Fancy sachets are not necessarily it.
As for chemicals, not one farmer spends any money than what is the bare minimum, no matter what they do. They might have to put all kinds of toxic chemicals on crops but they are not going to waste money over-doing it, because they are tight with the money, at all times, under all circumstances.
So the question has to be asked, is it worth worrying about the worrying levels of chemicals in tea when there are worrying levels of microplastics that the body really cannot get rid of with some liver-fu?
But, are there more toxins? The working class British way to have tea is with milk and two sugars. The milk is designed for baby cows, not grown men, they should be 'weaned off' because there are all kinds of things in dairy that might not be toxins, but could be considered to be. For example the cholesterol and saturated fat. Next the sugar, which is fine in moderation, so long as you don't care for your teeth, and, when combined with saturated fat, can contribute to type two diabetes.
Clearly opinions vary regarding the health aspects of milk and sugar in tea, my grandmother almost made it to a century, consuming plenty. However, you can reduce the toxic load from drinking tea by getting rid of the microplastics by using plant-based teabags (even LIDL have them), not having milk and sugar in the tea and, only then, getting concerned about buying organic.
Organic does not mean no nasty chemicals, it means no synthetic nasty chemicals. However, it is still a good nice-to-have, but, realistically, if you want to cut your exposure to toxins, there are these other huge areas that are under our control, but those things are going to be controversial lifestyle choices. Just not using cars 'could' reduce your toxic load far more than any organic teabag.
Jensson 2 hours ago [-]
Just buy from places where these laws are in effect instead of imports from other countries where they legally use these pesticides.
amelius 1 hours ago [-]
We're reaching the point where people need to install GC/MS systems in their homes in order to be safe from food hazards.
andrewstuart 2 hours ago [-]
I carefully check the label and try to only buy Australian made 100% food.
I never buy any food ever from China.
verall 16 minutes ago [-]
It's one of the richest food cultures in the world. If you've never tried sichuan peppercorn on mapo tofu, or pickled mustard greens on noodle dishes, I think you're in for a real treat.
These do involve foods from China though..
andrewstuart 11 minutes ago [-]
You can use safe Australian ingredients to cook the recipe.
CoastalCoder 2 hours ago [-]
Does that meaningfully restrict which foods / ingredients you can get?
andrewstuart 2 hours ago [-]
No. Australia produces vast variety of food everything you could want to eat aside from more exotic stuff.
stogot 3 hours ago [-]
Companies that poison the people like this should be sanctioned, along with their owners. Greed and profiteering
flexagoon 1 hours ago [-]
They don't "poison the people" unless the pesticides are found in a toxic dose (they are not).
Of course, the legal limits are purposefully designed to be well below the LOAEL, and those companies that were found to contain levels above them should face consequences. But to claim they "poison the people" isn't true.
Saline9515 41 minutes ago [-]
The toxic dose is a vague term. You may not die from exposure, but you can still have effects, such as infertility, cancers or endocrine disruption.
fasterik 21 minutes ago [-]
If we really want to be precise, we should talk about parts per million (PPM). Scientific research establishes a safe level of consumption in terms of PPM, below which there are no detectable health effects. Generally when you see alarmism about "pesticides found in food" they're orders of magnitude below the PPM that would have any effect on human health.
spwa4 3 hours ago [-]
Wasn't the EU fresh from a scandal that they voted all sorts of laws, sued lots of EU companies, and then allowed Chinese companies to import lots of stuff that obviously violated all those laws for 20+ years?
From safety regulations to baby toys with lead paint.
The EU will probably do nothing again.
throwaway67678 3 hours ago [-]
When it comes to safety regulations as with everything else, some countries do not succeed, others do not try
Saline9515 37 minutes ago [-]
The EU has allowed large scale imports of chinese fake honey for the last 20 years.
All of the beekeeper associations complain about it, regularly conduct lab tests with honeys from supermarkets, most of them being not honey, or mixed with fake honey.
The EU of course has done nothing : the beekeepers aren't powerful enough to distribute the right bribes to the right people. Meanwhile the consumers buy glucose syrup at 15€/kg.
But hey, we have USB-C! It evenS out, right?
2 hours ago [-]
2 hours ago [-]
WhereIsTheTruth 1 hours ago [-]
+1
The downvotes aren't surprising, people who have spent enough time on this orange site tend to lose the plot
moi2388 2 hours ago [-]
Oh you import food from third world countries and it’s terrible? Who would have guessed.
Better keep pushing the farmers in the EU away for more of these great “trade deals”
darth_avocado 1 hours ago [-]
Are these EU farmers that are being turned away growing tea and spices?
burnt-resistor 2 hours ago [-]
There are all kinds of toxic residues and contaminants in the US food supply because there's a lack of testing, lack of regulation, lack of enforcement, and a lack of the precautionary principle. Meanwhile, farmers will continue spraying RoundUp on oats just before harvest, rice grown in the US will contain arsenic from naturally-occurring contaminated soils, and almost all bread contains toxic crap banned in the rest of the world.
dirck-norman 1 hours ago [-]
There is some weird obsession on the internet about proving the U.S. is the worst at everything.
Believe me, the majority of “The rest of the world” does not protect its citizens from harmful food contamination.
darth_avocado 59 minutes ago [-]
You’re the worst at everything when you’re the only one measuring it. There are parts of the world where vegetables are grown next to where factories dump toxic waste. Pretty sure no one is measuring that.
llbbdd 1 hours ago [-]
I attribute a lot of it to the principle of "punching up".
rootusrootus 47 minutes ago [-]
Agreed. Nobody really talks about most other countries, while the US is pretty much top of the list of nearly every topic. So we're constantly a target.
nozzlegear 2 hours ago [-]
I agree the situation is shitty in the US, but what does that have to do with pesticides banned in the EU? It seems entirely superfluous to this to this story.
nickff 2 hours ago [-]
This article is about the EU food supply, and does not appear to attribute the contaminants to US exports. Why are you bringing American cultivation practices into this?
If anything, this OP demonstrates that the EU regulations are futile (though that may be an overstatement).
bijowo1676 2 hours ago [-]
EU generally leads the developed world in regulation, that has become a meme and a joke.
but for Food related stuff, EU standards and regulation are truly superior for consumers, relative to US and other countries
daedrdev 44 minutes ago [-]
The United States has far stricter labeling standards than the EU. That's why US products appear to have more ingredients, they are required to say what their ingredients are mad from, even on identical products.
Many things that are well known memes are completely false. Not everything in the EU is better regulated. Everyone always complains about chlorinated chicken, not realizing that <5% of US chicken is washed that way as chicken now uses vinegar washes, and those that did were at concentrations deemed safe by the FDA.
Jensson 12 minutes ago [-]
> The United States has far stricter labeling standards than the EU
Source for that? All I can find says EU have stricter labeling standards except for forum comments such as yours here.
flexagoon 1 hours ago [-]
> but for Food related stuff, EU standards and regulation are truly superior for consumers, relative to US and other countries
That is mostly a myth. EU and US take different approaches to setting food safety regulations, which means they have different lists of banned substances. The EU bans a lot of substances that have no evidence of actual adverse effects just out of an abundance of caution or sometimes even because of uninformed public perception, which is why their regulations seem more comprehensive, but the vast majority of that has no real positive effect on consumers.
In terms of actual food safety, the US is basically the same as the EU (it technically ranks even higher than most EU countries on the "Quality and Safety" criterion of the Global Food Security Index, but the top countries are all very close)
(Before anyone accuses me of something, I live in the EU and generally prefer EU in terms of lawmaking and regulations. It's just that food safety specifically is a point of comparison which is much less true than people usually think)
NopIdoN 30 minutes ago [-]
I'd love to see a policy difference where I prefer the attitude of the US
Jensson 2 hours ago [-]
> If anything, this OP demonstrates that the EU regulations are futile (though that may be an overstatement).
Nothing said that EU farmers used these pesticides, its related to imports. And even most imports they tested were in the legal limit even though they are from areas where these things are legal.
[†] https://www.foodwatch.org/fileadmin/-INT/pesticides/banned_p...
Also one of my worries with the mercusour trade deal. And any deal that involves meat imports from the US, with specific laxer regulation requirements (at least what Trump would like).
So using these pesticides only on products for export makes utterly no sense!
Problematic products are: Peppers, dried (6x), Cumin (3x), Rice grain (2x), Tea leaves and stalks (1x), Non-fermented tea leaves (1x), Mix of spices (1x).
there's an extensive body of research on synthetics having no effect on human health, from goverment funded, private and independent research... if you access your country's official institution you'll see there's plenty of synthetics allowed in organic agriculture just because they mimic perfectly "organic" substances
interesting point too, is the lack of any extensive meta-analysis/studies on organic pesticide impact on health and plus the fact organic farm is rather poor (produce less than 2% of the global food) and usually if not always lack good machinery to spread pesticides on the recommended quantities science points out (which organic agriculture also has less literature on that too)
In the UK, tea means tea bags and that normally means tea bags made of a plastic/paper mix. If I remember, the bag material is made and then they heat it up to get the plastic out, revealing the holes, needed for the bag.
Of late there has been criticism of microplastics in tea bags, and the posh organic bags have fared quite badly. Fancy sachets are not necessarily it.
As for chemicals, not one farmer spends any money than what is the bare minimum, no matter what they do. They might have to put all kinds of toxic chemicals on crops but they are not going to waste money over-doing it, because they are tight with the money, at all times, under all circumstances.
So the question has to be asked, is it worth worrying about the worrying levels of chemicals in tea when there are worrying levels of microplastics that the body really cannot get rid of with some liver-fu?
But, are there more toxins? The working class British way to have tea is with milk and two sugars. The milk is designed for baby cows, not grown men, they should be 'weaned off' because there are all kinds of things in dairy that might not be toxins, but could be considered to be. For example the cholesterol and saturated fat. Next the sugar, which is fine in moderation, so long as you don't care for your teeth, and, when combined with saturated fat, can contribute to type two diabetes.
Clearly opinions vary regarding the health aspects of milk and sugar in tea, my grandmother almost made it to a century, consuming plenty. However, you can reduce the toxic load from drinking tea by getting rid of the microplastics by using plant-based teabags (even LIDL have them), not having milk and sugar in the tea and, only then, getting concerned about buying organic.
Organic does not mean no nasty chemicals, it means no synthetic nasty chemicals. However, it is still a good nice-to-have, but, realistically, if you want to cut your exposure to toxins, there are these other huge areas that are under our control, but those things are going to be controversial lifestyle choices. Just not using cars 'could' reduce your toxic load far more than any organic teabag.
I never buy any food ever from China.
These do involve foods from China though..
Of course, the legal limits are purposefully designed to be well below the LOAEL, and those companies that were found to contain levels above them should face consequences. But to claim they "poison the people" isn't true.
From safety regulations to baby toys with lead paint.
The EU will probably do nothing again.
All of the beekeeper associations complain about it, regularly conduct lab tests with honeys from supermarkets, most of them being not honey, or mixed with fake honey.
The EU of course has done nothing : the beekeepers aren't powerful enough to distribute the right bribes to the right people. Meanwhile the consumers buy glucose syrup at 15€/kg.
But hey, we have USB-C! It evenS out, right?
The downvotes aren't surprising, people who have spent enough time on this orange site tend to lose the plot
Better keep pushing the farmers in the EU away for more of these great “trade deals”
Believe me, the majority of “The rest of the world” does not protect its citizens from harmful food contamination.
If anything, this OP demonstrates that the EU regulations are futile (though that may be an overstatement).
but for Food related stuff, EU standards and regulation are truly superior for consumers, relative to US and other countries
Many things that are well known memes are completely false. Not everything in the EU is better regulated. Everyone always complains about chlorinated chicken, not realizing that <5% of US chicken is washed that way as chicken now uses vinegar washes, and those that did were at concentrations deemed safe by the FDA.
Source for that? All I can find says EU have stricter labeling standards except for forum comments such as yours here.
That is mostly a myth. EU and US take different approaches to setting food safety regulations, which means they have different lists of banned substances. The EU bans a lot of substances that have no evidence of actual adverse effects just out of an abundance of caution or sometimes even because of uninformed public perception, which is why their regulations seem more comprehensive, but the vast majority of that has no real positive effect on consumers.
https://blog.ansi.org/ansi/differences-between-eu-and-us-foo...
In terms of actual food safety, the US is basically the same as the EU (it technically ranks even higher than most EU countries on the "Quality and Safety" criterion of the Global Food Security Index, but the top countries are all very close)
https://insights.economistenterprise.com/sustainability/proj...
(Before anyone accuses me of something, I live in the EU and generally prefer EU in terms of lawmaking and regulations. It's just that food safety specifically is a point of comparison which is much less true than people usually think)
Nothing said that EU farmers used these pesticides, its related to imports. And even most imports they tested were in the legal limit even though they are from areas where these things are legal.