Scientists urge common sense
The second swiss-food-talk was attended by three internationally recognised experts from the fields of toxicology, water protection and food safety. They discussed the handling of limit values and the partly wrong interpretation in the public discourse. The scientists pleaded for more objectivity.
Monday, August 31, 2020
Content in German
«We have to distinguish between health-related limits and politically set limits. This is always mixed up», says Rex FitzGerald, Regulatory Toxicologist at the Swiss Centre for Applied Human Toxicology (SCAHT) in Basel. Health-related limits define the dose that has no harmful effect despite lifelong and daily consumption. There are also legal limits that have nothing to do with health risk.
The value of 0.1 micrograms per litre set for drinking water is not based on a risk assessment, but expresses the political will to have no residues for precautionary reasons. This value is not suitable for assessing the health risk. «If we speak of toxic water because it exceeds 0.1 micrograms per litre, this is fundamentally wrong», says the toxicologist, who carries out risk assessments on behalf of the authorities. He is perplexed as to why this is nevertheless repeatedly reported in the media.
On the right track
Dr Manfred Röttele, project manager of the European water protection initiative TOPPS, explained just how low the limit value for pesticides in water is: «To dilute one gram of an active ingredient to the existing limit value of 0.1 micrograms per litre, you need a stream one metre wide, 30 centimetres deep and 33 kilometres long.» It goes without saying that undesirable inputs into groundwater should be avoided wherever possible. Good agricultural practice is essential. TOPPS supports users and offers the relevant expertise. In this way, pesticide inputs into the groundwater can be significantly reduced. «The direction is right. The contamination of groundwater by pesticides is decreasing», says Röttele.
Discrepancy between perception and danger
Jo Riehle, food chemist and pesticide expert from Hamburg, dares to explain why the public often senses danger at the slightest residue. In his opinion, the heated debate has to do with the so-called uncertainty avoidance index. This is very high in Germany – but probably also in Switzerland. The fear of the unknown leads to the establishment of rigid rules, regulations and laws.
«One driver of the discussion, however, is the vastly improved analytics. Today, we can find anything if we look for it», says Riehle. «The fact that fewer different active substances were found in the past also has to do with resistance management. There are fewer ‹one-fits-all› products today. Today's pesticides have a much more specific effect.» From an ecological point of view, this makes sense. At the same time, however, a greater number of different substances are found. This in turn would be perceived as «dangerous» by the public, says Riehle. There is also the fear of «multiple residues». «However, the mere detectability of different substances does not mean a higher health risk», says the pesticide expert.
The topic is complex. The speakers would like to see a more objective debate and call for common sense. This is precisely the aim of swiss-food.ch.
Related articles
Without biocides, animal welfare and food safety suffer
At the Swiss-Food Talk, three experts underlined the importance of biocides for agriculture and food processing. The conclusion of the talk: without biocides, food safety and animal welfare could not be guaranteed.
Content in German
New breeding methods – here to stay
The Swiss Parliament has decided to update the genetic engineering moratorium that has been in place since 2005. The step was overdue. On the occasion of a webinar organized by swiss-food.ch, experts from science and agriculture spoke about the benefits of new biotechnological breeding methods. It became clear: the risks are low, the opportunities are great.
You can't do without healthy, high-quality food from Switzerland
At the Swiss-Food Talk, three recognised experts gave answers to current questions in connection with a healthy, sustainable diet. And made an appeal to common sense.
Content in German
Challenges and opportunities of sustainable agriculture
Tomorrow's agriculture must produce more efficiently. And at the same time protect the climate and biodiversity. At the Swiss-Food Talk, three renowned, independent experts spoke about the challenges and opportunities of tomorrow's sustainable agriculture.
Content in German
Chasing Misinformation Feels Like Herding Cats
Science fiction has a way of masquerading as science fact — until someone like me comes with a bucket of cold, hard evidence. But let’s be real: debunking nonsense takes exponentially more effort than producing it. Jonathan Swift knew it in 1710, and here I am, centuries later, still speaking my truth before the next viral misinformation dumpster fire.
Climate protection must not jeopardise food security
Agriculture is increasingly under pressure to become climate-neutral. But how can this be achieved without jeopardising food security? In the agricultural policy podcast, Hannah von Ballmoos-Hofer, head of the energy division at the Swiss Farmers' Union, emphasises that climate protection is important, but must not come at the expense of food security.
Tradition and innovation go hand in hand when it comes to food
The study ‘Decoding Food Culture’ by the Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute shows how deeply food culture shapes our lives. That is why it is a balancing act between tradition and innovation to bring about changes in nutrition.
The underestimated danger of plant toxins
Plants produce a variety of chemical substances to protect themselves against predators and diseases, for example. These substances can have a toxic effect in high doses. A recent study by Agroscope highlights the danger of natural substances in Swiss waters.