How to avoid pesticides.

"I am in a quandary," writes Nutrition Action subscriber Robert K. Hudnut of Cottage Grove, Minnesota.

"On the one hand we are told to eat a wide variety of vegetables. On the other hand we are told that many are so loaded with pesticides that they should be avoided.

"We need major help from you on this most troubling issue."

You're not alone. Mr. H. But the answer is surprisingly simple: The evidence that fruits and vegetables help protect against heart disease and cancer is far stronger than the evidence that pesticides cause cancer and other health problems.

So keep eating that produce. But buy organic when you can, especially for fruits and vegetables that are most likely to have pesticide residues. And look for (healthy) foods manufactured by companies that are trying to use fewer pesticides.

It's all spelled out inside, in our guide to avoiding pesticides.

Q: Should we be concerned about pesticide residues?

A: Yes. We know that prolonged exposure to pesticides raises the risk of some cancers, neurological problems like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, and developmental problems. It can also weaken the immune system, which leaves us more vulnerable to disease.

Those exposed through their work--farmworkers, pesticide applicators, people who work in manufacturing plants--face the greatest risk.

However, there is rarely, if ever, solid information available on the levels of pesticide exposure a person has experienced. And that makes it difficult for scientists to definitely link pesticide exposures that might have happened years ago--even prior to birth--to specific health problems.

CANCER

Q: What's the evidence that pesticides cause cancer in humans?

A: The most thoroughly researched examples are the so-called phenoxyherbicides, which raise the risk of leukemia and cancers of the lymphatic system. These cancers are more common among workers who have applied those herbicides along railroads or electrical lines, or in agricultural settings or forestry, for many years.

Evidence is not nearly so clear in the case of other cancers and other pesticides. But we know that many cancers are not caused by one thing or exposure to a single carcinogen. Sometimes it takes 20 or 30 years for a tumor to form. If pesticides impair the immune system over such a long period, they might be one reason why a person gets cancer, or whether he or she gets it at age 40 instead of age 60.

IMMUNE SYSTEM

Q: How do pesticides affect the immune system?

A: Humans are blessed with a phenomenally complex and effective immune system when it's working well. Everyone is exposed to the flu bug many times during the winter, but most of us only get one bout of the flu, and some don't even get it once.

But pesticide exposure can impair or block or disrupt both the development and the normal triggering of the immune system.

For example, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the highly toxic insecticide aldicarb was widely present in the drinking water in central Wisconsin. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin documented an impaired immune response in women living in houses with high aldicarb levels in the drinking water.

Q: Have researchers found more evidence since then?

A: Several other studies have since documented at least a short-term impact on the normal functioning of the immune system. It is enormously important that we find out how pesticides and other pollutants interfere with the treatment and prevention of hepatitis, AIDS, cancer, and a range of opportunistic infections, from pneumonia to ear infections in children.

NERVOUS SYSTEM

Q: Can pesticides cause neurological problems?

A: There's lots of evidence that pesticide exposure is a risk factor for both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. Studies have found higher rates of these diseases in farmers and other people who are exposed through their work or through an accident.

There is also suggestive evidence from lawsuits in which doctors have documented neurological symptoms in families that have gone back into homes that had recently been treated for termites or other insects.

Q: What about neurological problems in children?

A: There are some. For example, Japanese scientists recently linked a cluster of nearsightedness in schoolchildren that occurred in the 1950s and 1960s to exposure to organophosphate insecticides. And scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency's Research Triangle Park Laboratory in North Carolina have recently demonstrated that, in chickens, exposure to these pesticides changes the shape and development of the eyeball, which can lead to nearsightedness.

ENDOCRINE SYSTEM 

Q: Can pesticides cause other problems?

A: Public health experts are intensely concerned about pesticides and other pollutants called "endocrine disruptors." They mimic or interfere with hormones, which regulate how the body develops and functions.

Studies are under way to see if endocrine disruptors increase the risk of hormone-related cancers like breast and prostate and whether they cause reproductive problems like lower sperm counts. Endocrine disruptors may also impair the nervous and immune systems.

Q: Are all endocrine disruptors pesticides?

A: No. We're exposed to many others--including PCBs and dioxin--through the air, water, and the products that we purchase, like buying a car that's got that "new car smell." People can also be exposed when they bring into their homes furnishings that have been treated with fire-retardants or fabric-guards.

Still, pesticides are likely a significant source of exposure to endocrine disruptors for many, if not most, people. Nearly 40 percent of the pesticides applied in agriculture are known or suspected endocrine disruptors.

PESTICIDE EXPOSURE

Q: Which foods are most likely to contain pesticides?

A: Fruits and vegetables. Roughly half the fruits and vegetables tested have pesticide residues on or in them, and about 40 percent have multiple residues. For example, in 1994 the U.S. Department of Agriculture found an average of 3.5 residues per apple in the samples it tested. Amazingly, my colleagues at the Environmental Working Group have shown that a consumer is more likely to purchase an apple with seven or more residues than an apple with one residue or none.

Q: Do grains have fewer residues?

A: Yes. Wheat and bread and other grain products tend not to have residues. That's because milling often removes them. Plus, most grains are treated predominantly with herbicides that are sprayed before or very soon after planting, long before the harvested edible part of the plant ever forms.

But there clearly are exceptions. Rice grown in the Southeastern U.S., for example, is often treated with fungicides before it's harvested. So it sometimes contains residues.

Q: What about meat and dairy products?

A: They're only a problem in certain cases. Organ meats--the liver, for example--tend to accumulate some pesticide residues like benomyl. The function of the liver is to filter contaminants out of the blood, so it's no surprise that if an animal has been exposed to a pesticide, it will concentrate in the liver.

And some pesticides have a tendency to accumulate in fat. So fatty meats, fish, and dairy products may have higher residue levels than lean or low-fat animal products.

IMPORTED PRODUCE

Q: Is imported produce more likely to be contaminated?

A: Yes. Imported foods like grapes, strawberries, green beans, and leafy vegetables sometimes get through the system with illegal residue levels.

If you look at the results of the Food and Drug Administration's residue testing programs, it's clear that both the level of residues and the frequency of illegal residues on imported foods exceed that of domestically produced food by, on average, nearly threefold.

The occasional very high residues that the FDA finds are usually on imported fresh fruits and vegetables from Latin America and parts of Asia where farmers are contending with tropical and semi-tropical conditions that lead to tough pest management challenges.

In some circumstances these growers will inappropriately apply pesticides late in the season, trying to save their crops from pests and get them into the U.S. In most cases, these crops get through the system because the FDA is able to sample only about one percent of the lots of imported foods.

Q: So the FDA's surveillance is inadequate?

A: Everyone who has studied the issue recognizes that the FDA is catching only a tiny percentage of the lots that have illegal--and possibly unsafe--residues. With the small amount of money that's appropriated by Congress, though, I think the FDA does a pretty good job.

REDUCING RISK

Q: How can people minimize their exposure to pesticides?

A: They can eat a reasonably diverse diet. The more kinds of food you eat, the. less your exposure to any given pesticide. And that diet should include lots of fruits and vegetables that have been properly washed and peeled. If consumers carefully store and handle fresh foods, they will limit their exposure to bacteria as well as pesticide residues (see "Coming Clean").

Q: How can you urge people to eat more fruits and vegetables when pesticides may cause diseases like cancer or Alzheimer's?

A: Many non-organic fruits and vegetables don't contain detectable levels of pesticide residues. Fruits and vegetables have high levels of fiber, vitamins, minerals, and phytochemicals. There's strong evidence that they help protect against heart disease and some forms of cancer. I am a strong supporter of the National Cancer Institute's 5-a-Day program, which encourages people to eat more fruits and vegetables. And I believe that progress on the farm in adopting integrated pest management (IPM) will steadily reduce reliance on pesticides and residue levels. IPM uses pesticides only as a last resort.

Q: How else can people avoid pesticides?

A: They can buy fresh and processed organic foods, and they can support stores and growers that offer organic. People can also look for produce that's been okayed by the NutriClean program, which some supermarkets use to certify that their produce contains no detectable pesticide residues.

And shoppers can buy food that's been grown under biologically based IPM programs. While there isn't much IPM produce in supermarkets yet, more is on its way, perhaps this year.

Consumers Union is going to assess the IPM programs used by major food companies. A few are making significant progress. We're interested in tomato products, peanut butter, fruit juices, and other foods that may contain significant residues. We'll rate companies' IPM programs and tell the world what we find.

RELATED ARTICLE: In the Organic of Time

"In our testing, we find that organic foods usually contain no detectable pesticide residues," says Will Sumner of Scientific Certification Systems. The Oakland, California, company tests produce for supermarkets like Ralphs, Raley's, and Stop & Shop.

Good news. But the existing patchwork of state standards isn't necessarily a guarantee that the "organic" produce at your store is worth the premium you probably paid for it. That's about to change.

"Soon, when something is labeled `organic,' it will mean the same thing in Tennessee, California, or any other state," says Gene Kahn, Chief Operating Officer of Cascadian Farm, an organic food processor in Sedro-Woolley, Washington.

Kahn is talking about the National Organic Program, which could go into effect this year--more than seven years after Congress authorized it. The program creates a uniform definition of "organic" and sets up a nationwide system to certify producers and processors.

It should spur large investments in the booming organic food business, predicts Kahn. And that could lead to greater production and lower prices. Still, he adds, the price of organic food may never drop as low as that of conventionally grown food ... unless you look at the big picture.

"If you factor in the cost of non-organic farming that's offloaded onto the environment, the prices of organic and nonorganic aren't that different. Consumers may not pay the price at the cash register, but somewhere down the line they're going to pay for the lower water quality and other environmental problems caused in part by conventional agriculture."

RELATED ARTICLE: Making Food Safe for Kids

"A fundamental change in the way the safety of pesticides is evaluated occurred last year when Congress passed the Food Quality Protection Act," says Richard Wiles of the Environmental Working Group. "For the first time, all exposures to pesticides must be shown to be safe for infants and children."

And when there's incomplete data on how children will be exposed to a pesticide, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must add an additional tenfold safety factor. "This is such a big change that it's been very difficult for industry and the regulators to grasp," adds Wiles, who is vice president of research at the consumer group.

What's more, the EPA can no longer consider the economic impact on farmers when it's deciding to regulate a pesticide, except in narrow exceptions. "That's a big change, and it has sent shock waves through the fruit- and vegetable-growing community.

"Growers used to come in and say, `Oops, for the 17th year in a row, we need an emergency exemption to use a restricted pesticide,'" says Wiles.

"Now the EPA must ask: `Is that safe for one-year-olds?' The EPA hasn't denied many exemptions yet, but ultimately it will be rejecting more and more."

RELATED ARTICLE: Coming Clean

Can you do anything to reduce pesticide residues on your fruits and vegetables?

"You bet," says Herb Schattenberg, an analytical chemist at the Southwest Research Institute, an independent research and development firm in San Antonio, Texas.

Schattenberg and his colleagues tested 17 popular fruits and vegetables for 22 common pesticides both before and after they were cleaned by different methods.

Sixty percent of the samples started out with no detectable pesticide residues. Washing the produce with a mixture of water and a mild dishwashing detergent (they used Palmolive) and, in some cases, peeling the skins or removing the outer leaves (of lettuce and cabbage), eliminated all residues in another 21 percent of the samples.

Peeling was enough to get rid of all the residues in acorn squash, apricots, bananas, carrots, pears, and potatoes. Ditto for shucking corn on the cob.

And even when peeling and washing didn't leave the fruits and vegetables squeaky dean, it lowered the pesticide residues by at least 30 percent. In some cases, it almost eliminated them entirely. For example, while washing in detergent and rinsing left most strawberries with residues of some pesticides, it removed about 80 percent of the widely used fungicide Captan.

Source: Journal of AOAC International 79: 1447, 1996.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Best & Worst Dressed List

The bottom line is clear: You're better off eating fruits and vegetables with pesticides than not eating fruits and vegetables. But it's still useful to know which ones are more likely to contain pesticide residues. If you don't want to pay extra for organically grown strawberries and blueberries, for example, save your money: Get ordinary blueberries and organic strawberries.

"Strawberries are by far the most contaminated fruit or vegetable," says Richard Wiles, vice president of research at the Environmental Working Group (EWG). The Washington, D.C.-based consumer group has analyzed Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspection data from 1992 and 1993 to rate 42 fruits and vegetables. The EWG considered both the levels of pesticides found on them and how toxic those pesticides are.

The FDA detected a total of 30 different pesticides on different batches of strawberries, for example. Seventy percent of all strawberries contained at least one pesticide, and 36 percent contained two or more. Strawberries were also laced with the highest average levels of "endocrine disruptors," which can mimic or interfere with hormones. Other surprises:

1. Many of the best-for-you fruits and vegetables--like cauliflower, sweet potatoes, cabbage, blueberries, carrots, bananas, and broccoli--were among the least likely to be contaminated.

2. Domestic cherries were almost three times more likely to contain pesticide residues than imported cherries.

3. Imported cantaloupes (available January through May) and grapes (available January through June) were more likely to be contaminated than U.S.-grown cantaloupes and grapes.

The EWG's complete report, A Shopper's Guide to Pesticides in Produce, is available on the World Wide Web at www.ewg.org.

Charles Benbrook is a consultant to Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports magazine. He is lead author of Pest Management at the Crossroads (available from www.pmac.net). From 1984 to 1990 he was director of the Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences. He holds a doctorate in agricultural economics from the University of Wisconsin--Madison. Benbrook recently spoke with Nutrition Action's David Schardt from his office in Washington, D.C.