TOPICS

Biocides in Food - Reckless statement from SENASA

Biocides in Food - Reckless statement from SENASA

This is, at least, reckless, in both meanings of the term:

Reckless, exposing or exposing others to unnecessary risks.

• What is said, done or thought without foundation: reckless judgment.

1 - SENASA does not control all the fruits and vegetables that are sold in markets and consumed in Argentina.

2 - The Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) on which SENASA regulations and the few and exceptional controls are based, is the maximum concentration of a biocidal agrochemical residue, which is legally allowed as acceptable in a food, agricultural product or animal food.

This concentration does not evaluate the presence of different toxins in different foods, which are or can be consumed by a person throughout the day.

Nor does it evaluate the different susceptibilities due to age, other diseases, sex, pregnancy, the presence of other toxins in its environment.

3 - The MRLs are linked to the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), which is the regulated amount of a certain pesticide that a person can consume without causing toxicological damage. This ADI is a value whose method of determination is unknown in most cases, and which does not evaluate multiple possible diseases.

4 - Therefore, there is no way that SENASA can demonstrate that the consumption of low doses of multiple pesticides throughout a person's life does not trigger diseases such as cancer, reproductive problems, neurotoxic effects and endocrine disruption altering the immune system , among others. Therefore, SENASA in particular and the State in general should apply, minimally, the precautionary principle established in our current legislation.

5 - The explicit intention of SENASA to "bring tranquility to the population" by communicating that the fruits and vegetables that are marketed in Argentina do not represent a risk to the health of the consumer, they induce the population not to take precautions such as washing food or peel them, and hides that there are vegetables that contain the chemicals in their inner pulp.

The recklessness of the SENASA statement is made even more explicit with the image of the greenhouse cultivation of lettuce, since various reports show that it is one of the vegetables where the largest number of samples with pesticides were detected.

Ref / http://www.senasa.gob.ar/senasa-comunica/noticias/el-senasa-controla-la-inocuidad-de-las-frutas-y-hortalizas

We remember the reflections that we published in this regard, for Earth Day:

What is the maximum daily limit of bread?

What is the maximum daily limit of mate?

Lately, and due to the visibility that the health problem of biocide residues in food and the environment has taken on, we have received numerous inquiries. As BIOS Argentina NGO we are reading the concerns that should be addressed to the health authorities of the country or of each of the provinces. These concerns range from how to get toxic-free food, to the health effects these substances produce.

It is not easy to hear a mother wondering what it means that glyphosate has appeared in her urine, or dimethoate in her child's blood.

Knowing this issue can clearly cause people to become paralyzed when facing a problem so big that it seems to us that it is beyond our reach to modify. And that is not true.

There are several aspects that we usually highlight when they consult us:

The maximum limits allowed in each food, especially vegetables

This is a black hole. Nobody knows who has solved that "magic number" that says that I can consume 0.05 mg / k of a certain poison in my food. Per day? per hour? Per week? If I weigh 50 kilos? What if I weigh five kilos and I am a baby who eats puree? If I am an old man? What if I am a teenager in hormonal development? What if I am immunosuppressed?

In addition, that magic number does not contemplate that we eat a variety of foods daily, which carry several, many, diverse substances, for which we do not eat ONE SINGLE permissible limit of a single substance, but many substances together, in the morning, at noon, in the afternoon and at night. That cocktail, no one has ever studied it.

It is virtually impossible to answer that mother or determine what will happen to us if we eat several amounts of different substances, since vegetables do not come with a sign that indicates what toxins they have inside, and on the other hand, each one, you, me, your little son, we have different body masses, we are labile or allergic or reactive to different substances, we smoke or do not smoke, we have some disease or not, for which, these Maximum Allowed Limits fall into a terrifying abstract that installs us in front of the abyss of uncertainty.

The dubious science

Evidence explodes across the globe that mercenary scientists have been paid for downplaying the effects on health and ecosystems of hundreds of toxic substances (as happened with tobacco) and that the companies that manufacture these substances have financed campaigns elections in various countries. What confidence can you place on the evaluations that the health agencies of those countries make about the toxicity of the substances that your friends make? In addition, many other scientists, those who investigate for the sake of knowledge, are shouting the opposite of what those gentlemen who asked those who hired them years ago say, "What number do you want me to put in my publication?"

The evidences in our bodies, our families, our friends.

Throughout the world, the victims of pesticides are finally visible in the form of skyrocketing rates of diabetes, cancer, malformations, neurological problems, infertility, celiac disease. What hope can we put in the control mechanisms that we see that have not controlled anything?

And the model insists

We see that good agricultural practices are promoted as the solution to the problem. It is rude to hide that they do not take into account chronic contamination, fraudulent labeling, the evaporation of toxins after applications, the chain of polluting externalities that go from packaging to accidental accidents, the impossibility of accurate control (someone Have you ever seen an inspector analyzing what the tank of the applicator that is coming out to fumigate really has? What mixture has he made and if he agrees with something with what the papers say? Also, no health institution has ever investigated what happens in the body human with mixtures, cocktails, surfactants, adjuvants, that are applied.

The hunger in the world

We have been hearing for more than half a century that this toxic agriculture will solve world hunger. Beyond the fact that a gigantic percentage of this industrial agriculture is for fodder and oil, and not for food, hunger on the planet is spreading every day.

It is also revealed that it was the manufacturers of these substances who installed the idea that only in this way can we eat, through powerful press campaigns over the decades, co-opting or buying universities, officials and researchers. Thousands of examples of organic agriculture around the world and especially in Argentina and Europe show that they have lied to us.

Our certainty

We would be saying none of this if food production were agroecological, because we would stop having to worry about all these things, and we would produce healthy food, while keeping ecosystems functioning and our bodies healthy.

We see the picture of the situation with crystal clarity, and we wonder if the life of the environment and of all of us can continue to be at risk by a group of poison traders that holds Life in all its manifestations hostage.

National Network of Environmental Action


Video: Biocides Day IT tool training (July 2021).