Consumers have yet another “guide” or “list” to further confuse them when shopping for fruits and vegetables.  Despite government programs consistently showing that 99.8% of foods sampled have residues well below Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) safety standards and almost 50% of those foods having no detectable residues at all, consumers continue to receive inaccurate and conflicting advice on what to eat by certain groups who strive to promote one production method over another.

The significant nutritional benefits of fruits and vegetables are also ignored in these “guides/lists.”  For example, one peer reviewed study found that 20,000 cancer cases could be prevented annually if half of Americans increased their consumption of fruits and vegetables by a single serving each day.  Or, the recent study from Tufts University which determined that “prescriptions” for healthy foods could save more than $100 billion in healthcare costs.  The healthy foods included fruits and veggies.  Nope. Somehow the decades of nutritional studies which show that a diet rich in organic and conventional fruits and vegetables lead to better health and a longer life are rarely mentioned or given only cursory attention.

Toxicological analyses also never seem to be referenced when groups put out these “lists.”  One analysis conducted by the University of California’s Personal Chemical Exposure Program underscores the safety of fruits and vegetables.  Some examples of those findings: A child could eat:

476 servings of cherries in one day without any effect from residues.

Or

1,468 servings of potatoes in one day

Or

1,665 servings of lettuce in one day

Or

1,888 peaches in one day

You get the picture.  Residues are so low, if present at all, a child can eat hundreds to thousands of servings of a fruit or veggie in a day and still not have any health effects from residues.

It should also be noted that these “lists” are in direct conflict with each other.  A shopper who tries to follow the advice of these groups would be in a constant state of confusion in the produce aisle.

Finally, the harm to consumers of this “list/guide” approach has been shown in studies.  One peer reviewed study found that messaging which inaccurately describes certain fruits and vegetables as having “higher” pesticide residues results in low income shoppers reporting that they would be unlikely to purchase any fruits and vegetables – organically or non-organically grown.  Further, 94% of dietitians/nutritionists agree that fear-based messaging negatively impacts their efforts to promote increased consumption of fruits and vegetables among their clients and consumers.

At the Alliance for Food and Farming we strongly support consumer choice.  Our message:  Buy what produce you and your family enjoys, is accessible and affordable because a diet rich in fruits and vegetables maintains healthy immune function, prevents disease and leads to a longer life. No confusing, conflicting “lists” needed.