b'respectively. But by the 2000s the aver- vented. Additionally, avoiding the needfungicides, the risk posed by this myco-age use rates of newly introduced prod- for ploughing lowers COemissions.toxin can be reduced. Another example: 2ucts were reduced to 100, 40, and 75 g/haPesticides enable regenerative farm- the heavy metal copper can be applied respectively, which is about 95 per centing practices that protect the environ- in organic farming practices. But as the lower on average. ment, such as no-till farming in whichcopper builds up in the soil, it becomes fields are not ploughed, and residuesharmful to soil creatures like earth-MYTH: THERE ARE A LOT OFfrom the previous seasons crops, such asworms. PESTICIDES ON OUR FOOD wheat stalks, are left in the field as mulchIn addition, biological crop protec-FACT:There are NOT a lot of pesticidesfor the next season. The benefits of no-tilltion products, also called biopesticides, on our food. Maximum Residue Limitsfarming include reduced soil erosion,represent a broad category of plant pro-(MRLs) are a trading standard and awater conservation, improved soil healthtection products that are derived from measure of the highest level of a pesticideand reduced fuel use. Dont forget that theliving organisms. Growers use biologicals residue that is legally tolerated in or onbehaviour and risk of pesticides to/in theto complement chemical products in an food or feed when pesticides are appliedenvironment is assessed and mitigated asintegrated pest management (IPM) pro-correctly. MRLs are set well below safetypart of the pesticide registration process. gram, or as stand-alone method, for pro-margins to ascertain foods produced withtecting plants from disease, insect pests pesticides are suitable for consumption.MYTH: INSECT DEATHS ARE THEand competition from weeds.MRLs ensure that consumers can trustRESULT OF PESTICIDE USEthe safety and quality of the foods theyFACT:The decrease in insect populationsMYTH: PESTICIDES ARE MAKING buy. Pesticide residues, if they occur, aremust be studied from various angles andOUR FOOD POISONOUSso low that people would have to con- can be linked to a wide range of causes.FACT:Pesticide residues are strictly sume amounts humanly impossible to beMainly climate change, but also lack ofregulated through so-called Maximum affected, according to the most recentliving space (due to a lack of open spaceResidue Limits (MRLs) and closely mon-annual report from EFSA on pesticideand/or hedges, for example), all types ofitored (see above). The MRL is defined residues in food. soil sealing (due to construction projectsas the maximum amount of a pesticide For the subset of 12,077 samplesand roads), the introduction of substancesresidue in or on food that is expected and analysed as part of the EU-coordinatedinto the environment (for cleaning andlegally tolerated when a pesticide was control programme (EU MACP), 98.2 perplant protection), an increase in lightapplied according to the label instruc-cent were within legal limits and 94.9 persources (due to the constant illuminationtions that will not be a concern to human cent of the 88,141 total samples analysedof roads), an increase in traffic (insecthealth. MRLs are set according to the fell below the maximum allowable levels,collisions), and a lack of biotope pro- As Low as Reasonable Possible princi-with only 3.6 per cent being non-compli- tection (e.g., fewer wetlands) all impactple. Some 50 to 60 years ago, authorities ant, i.e. samples exceeding the MRL afterinsect populations. Farmers depends onmonitored MRLs to check if farmers have taking the measurement uncertainty,and protect insects and other pollinatorsused pesticides correctly. The authorities which still do not pose a safety issue duethat are essential for their crops. Manywere checking for label compliance. With to their trace amounts and huge safetyfarmers go to great lengths to providethe beginning of this millennium, global margins. habitat and forage for insects, such astrade drastically increased and with it the In the rare cases where dietaryplanting wildflowers around their fields. need for standards that ensure the traded exposure for a specific pesticide/productfood is save. Therefore, MRLs became a combination was calculated to exceedMYTH: NATURAL IS HEALTHY;trading standard ensuring that the food the health-based guidance value (usingPOISONOUS SUBSTANCES AREis save for consumption. conservative assumptions), and for thoseCHEMICALS The amount of pesticide residues pesticides for which no health-basedFACT:Organic food is not inherently morefound in food is often used and taken guidance value could be established, thesafe or nutritious. While organic pesticidesout of context by mainstream media and competent authorities took appropriatemay generally come from natural sources,social media influencers as scare tactics. and proportionate corrective measuresthey can still pose risks to humans andThese claims frequently fail to explain to address potential risks to consumers.the environment if used incorrectly. Andthat crop protection products make it This is means that dietary exposure todue to the less targeted nature of organicpossible to produce healthy food for a pesticides is unlikely to pose a risk to EUpesticides, farmers may need to use themgrowing population and in that way sig-consumer health. more frequently and in greater amountsnificantly improve public health. Strict than non-organic pesticides. regulations ensure that we can consume MYTH: PESTICIDES HARM THEThere are numerous naturally occur- foods like fresh produce without worry-ENVIRONMENT ring compounds that are highly toxic,ing about safety.FACT:Using pesticides enables farmersand there are also many syntheticallyMany diseases, deadly fungi, and to grow more food on a smaller plot ofcreated substances that are completelyharmful weeds cannot be controlled land. Higher yields per hectare meanssafe. Aflatoxins, produced by the natu- without pesticides. EU consumers have that less land is required to feed theral infection of a plant by a fungus, aremany choices in the food they eat. world, enabling the preservation of bio- some of the most carcinogenic chemicalsWhether buying organic, non-organic, diverse habitats. This is true globally asknown to man. In Africa it has been sug- local, or imported, chances are our food well as regionally or locally. In that way,gested that half the food produced hashas almost certainly been grown with the the use of forests, marshes, and wet- aflatoxin levels higher that the U.S. safetyhelp of pesticides and food in Europe is lands for agricultural purposes is pre- limit. However, by employing particularcurrently the safest it has ever been. EUROPEAN-SEED.COMIEUROPEAN SEED I 25'