It's troubling to see Kauai Dr. Lee
Evslin use his column in the local newspaper to promote organic food
as inherently more pure than its conventional counterpart, and some
sort of silver bullet for attaining good health.
In this case, he's advancing the idea
that various chemicals known as endocrine disrupters are responsible
for everything from America's obesity epidemic and slow sperm to ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in children. And, as he
intones, “the same suspects are on the list: pesticides,
flame-retardants, plasticizers and cosmetics.”
Though Evslin admits that he's talking
about “a new scientific theory,” which means it's not yet proven,
he has no problem offering a dangerously simplistic “bottom line”
solution to what ails us: “Store your food in glass containers,
stop buying water in plastic bottles and eat organic whenever
possible.”
Evslin totally glosses over all the
non-food sources of pesticides, including treatments for home and
garden pests, pet flea and tick products and even water, which is
treated with chlorine, a restricted use pesticide.
What's more, he fails to understand
that organic food also is packaged in plastic, grown using pesticides and carries pesticide residues. But in any case, according to the US Department ofAgriculture, these residues are considered holistically and present no cause for concern:
The PDP data show, overall, that
pesticide residues on foods tested are at levels below the tolerances
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
pose no safety concern.
EPA [Environmental Protection Agency]
makes a safety evaluation for pesticides considering all possible
routes of exposure through food, water, and home environments when
setting the maximum residue (tolerance) level of pesticide that can
remain in or on foods.
EPA is required to periodically
re-evaluate pesticide registrations and tolerances to ensure that the
scientific data remain up to date.
Evslin also seems to be unaware that
pest-resistant GMO crops, which cannot be labeled organic under USDA
standards, are actually working to minimize pesticide use. One
compelling example is Bt eggplant, which has enabled farmers in Bangladesh to reduce their pesticide applications by 80
percent.
I want to believe that Evslin is
well-intentioned. Sadly, he is not well-informed. Every time a
well-fed, well-heeled Westerner starts beating the organic
drum, he is helping to close the door to GM technology that is
working to address environmental issues and help hungry people in
developing nations to achieve food security. Though Evslin no doubt
can afford the high price of organics, he seems to have forgotten
that many of his own neighbors are struggling to feed their families.
The last thing they need is some short-sighted doctor guilt tripping
them for not buying organic.
Meanwhile, a number of organic
certificates used on both domestic and imported products —
primarily from China and Africa — are fraudulent, according to the
USDA.
Evslin also likes to throw stuff out
there without any citations, so the curious and/or critical are
unable to check his apparently dubious sources. A case is point is
his claim that “Glyphosate is patented as an antibiotic and as an
herbicide and has been shown to affect our intestinal bacteria.”
GMO Answers has an interesting segment
on why Monsanto pursued that patent, while noting “to date, nobody
has demonstrated that glyphosate is an effective antimicrobial agent
for treating human or animal infections.” It's really quite
specious for Evslin to make that particular assertion.
If Evslin plans to keep inserting
himself into the conversation about food and pesticides, he really
needs to be more thorough in his research and careful with his facts.
That is, if he wants to be taken seriously, which I'm sure he does.
On a related topic, I noticed anti-GMO
acivist Jeri DiPietro, who presides over the group Hawaii SEED,
advocating in a newspaper article for “the precautionary
principle,” which The Garden Island defines as “an approach to
risk management that requires proponents of an activity to prove its
safety in the absence of a scientific consensus.”
Jeri's complete rejection of the scientific
consensus in support of GMO food safety aside, there are several
problems with the precautionary principle, as I learned with
attending the American Academy for the Advancement of Science meeting
earlier this year. As Gary
Marchant, an Arizona State University professor and expert on the
legal issues around genetic engineering, noted:
There has always been a degree of
precaution in regulations. To make the precautionary principle the
regulatory standard, it has to be quantified legally, which requires
a very detailed definition. But it's never been properly defined and
all efforts to do that have failed, even in Europe. So we have these
very vague definitions of precaution being used in absurd and
inconsistent ways.
Speaking of absurd, it's never been
more cool to make like you're a farmer or blue collar worker — just
wear the $425 jeans and forego the actual dirty work!
And finally, I'll leave you with this
video montage showing some of the
March for Science events around the world, starting with little
Kauai. Gosh, who knew supporting science could be such fun?!