Chemicals in our food supply - Innocent until proven guilty?

Innocent until proven guilty is a great system for the law courts. Unfortunately, the "benefit of the doubt" is also given to the chemicals found in our food supply. With the recent announcement that BPA, a chemical banned by Canada in 2008 after it was found to pose serious risks to health, is now labelled "toxic", this was proven once again. What kept BPA off the list of toxic chemicals this long? In short: lobbyists, and the benefit of the doubt. In spite of the mounting evidence that BPA may pose risk to the general public and the environment, not just to formula fed infants from baby bottles, it remained protected, to a degree. The Government of Canada finally determined the evidence in support of BPA's safety wasn't strong enough.

Although the jig is up for BPA, there are still a multitude of other chemicals commonly found in our food supply with suspected associated health risks, including food dyes: erythrosine (banned in topical products in the US 20 years ago) and amaranth (banned in the US 30+ years ago).

Is it true that all chemicals are harmful to us? No. Just as it's not true that all natural items are safe. However, many of these chemicals are introduced into our food supply, skin care lines and household items without sufficient long-term research to say they are safe (see David Suzuki's Dirty Dozen).

Many of the pesticides still used in North American have been banned in Europe. Why is this? Are our scientists and government ahead or behind the EU? Is the EU being too cautious and removing them without research to say they’re harmful? When it comes to chemicals and our health, is there is such a thing as being too cautious? Obviously, enough concerns were raised overseas for their law makers to deem it important to completely remove these chemicals. Yet, they are still being sprayed here in Canada.

Pesticides can be carcinogens and neurotoxins, and threaten the health of humans and our environment. The argument in favour of these chemicals is that 1) they serve a useful purpose, and 2) such low levels will not affect us. They are “tolerable” levels. This is true for some, but nay-sayers argue that very little research has actually been done, especially in children. We are seeing the results of this with the BPA issue... widely found in products for years before enough scientific evidence came to light to cause the government to back track. Is it unreasonable to ask for chemicals to be kept OUT of our products until there is no question as to their safety? When it comes to chemicals in beauty products and pesticides, it should be guilty until proven innocent.

Sweden was the first country in the world to impose a tax on pesticides. By doing this, the country made is easier and cheaper for people to farm and purchase organically grown foods, and reduced pesticide use by up to 50%. 

What can you do about it? 

-Avoid packaged and processed foods. The more processed a food when you buy it, the higher likelihood someone has added unwanted additives and chemicals to it. If you must have junk foods, at least make them at home yourself, where you know exactly what goes in.

-Use the Environmental Working Groups' Dirty Dozen and Clean Fifteen list to help you decide which foods to purchase organically, and when to save your money.

-Washing fruits and veggies won't do the trick. Peel skins from fruits and vegetables that are conventionally grown, whenever possible.

-For non-food products, look for products with third-party verification that they're good for the earth, such as EcoLogo. If they're good for the earth, that means less chemicals, and that's good for you too.

Share