Greetings
I would be the last person to belittle the public's concern about
pesticides in food. I, too, dream of a world where we would be able
to eat food free from contaminants. However, some perspective is
needed. Not only is the amount of pesticide present in honey and wax
minute, it pales before the quantity of toxic material we ingest
every day. Furthermore, the health benefits of consumption of fresh
food far outweigh the risk of illness from pesticide residue. Too
much food and the wrong type of food, is far more worrisome than the
residues, which are strictly regulated. Please read these excerpts
and ponder their implications. Stay informed!!

* * *

>The vast proportion of chemicals to which humans are exposed are
>naturally-occurring. Yet public perceptions tend to identify
>chemicals as being only synthetic and only synthetic chemicals as
>being toxic; however, every natural chemical is also toxic at some
>dose. We estimate that the daily average American exposure to burnt
>material in the diet is about 2000 mg, and to natural pesticides
>(the chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves against
>fungi, insects, and animal predators) about 1500 mg. In comparison,
>the total daily exposure to all synthetic pesticide residues
>combined, based on the TDS, is about 0.09 mg. We estimate that
>humans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides
>and their breakdown products. We have shown that a diet free of
>naturally-occurring chemicals that are rodent carcinogens is
>impossible.
>
>It is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the
>supermarket contains natural pesticides that are rodent carcinogens.
>Even though only a tiny proportion of natural pesticides have been
>tested for carcinogenicity, 35 of 64 that have been tested are
>rodent carcinogens and occur in common plant foods and spices. Since
>99.9% of the chemicals humans ingest are natural, and the 50%
>positivity rate for natural chemicals is similar to that for
>synthetic chemicals, nearly all rodent carcinogens that humans
>ingest are likely to be natural. Therefore, when risk assessments
>are published for synthetic pesticide residues, it might help to
>educate the public and broaden perspective if they were compared to
>this enormous background of naturally-occurring chemicals in the
>diet.

from Pesticide Residues in Food, by Lois Swirsky et al
http://potency.berkeley.edu/text/pesticide.html

* * *

>The risk of cancer from exposure to agrochemical residues in food
>and water is small. The evidence
>for an increased content of anti-cancer protective factors
>(anti-oxidant vitamins and minerals) is
>neither conclusive nor persuasive. A diet of organic food would not
>reduce the risk of cancer to any
>significant extent.
>
>There is a general consensus that dietary factors are responsible
>for 30 to 60% of cancers in the
>developed countries although there is less certainty about the
>specific dietary measures which can be
>recommended and no guarantee that dietary changes will prevent all
>kinds of cancer. Evidence-based
>dietary recommendations have been made which, if followed, should
>lead to a significant reduction in
>cancer risk. The most conclusive evidence is for the protective
>effect of fruit and vegetables and for
>an increased risk of cancer from salt, pickled food, alcohol and
>aflatoxins. The evidence is less
>conclusive but good for the effect of fibre, fat, total
>calories/obesity and red meat.
>
>A healthy cancer-preventing diet consists of:
>-- at least 5 portions of fruit and vegetables per day, including
>raw, unprocessed produce,
>-- plenty of foods from plant sources, such as breads, cereals,
>grain products, rice, pasta or beans,
>several times each day,
>-- total fat intake from calories limited to 30% or less, with
>saturated fat intake limited to 10% or
>less,
>-- limited intake of total calories so as to stay within a healthy
>weight range, minimal consumption of
>red meat,
>-- minimal consumption of salt-pickled fish and vegetables,
>-- no more than the current UK consumption of salt, smoked, cured,
>and pickled food,
>-- moderate alcohol consumption, men not more than 21 units/week,
>women not more than 14
>units/week.
>
>The evidence that organic food reduces the risk of cancer is not as
>convincing as the evidence for any
>of the dietary factors mentioned above. It has to be concluded that
>in contrast to the strength of
>evidence for a healthy cancer-preventing diet, there is no
>compelling reason to recommend the
>consumption of organic food in order to reduce the risk of cancer.


from AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND CANCER RISK
An investigation into the environmental causes of cancer - whether
intensive agriculture has an
important influence on cancer aetiology in the UK and whether
organically grown food reduces the
risk of cancer or can play a significant role in the promotion of
health of those with cancer.
Researched and written by Lisa Saffron

--

Peter Borst <[log in to unmask]>