Take pesticides off Mom's worry list

Take pesticides off Mom's worry list

Support PAN's work to protect kids, families and communities from pesticide harms. Help ease this worry for moms everywhere. Donate today »

EPA, step up for bees!

EPA, step up for bees!

The European Union just voted to stop using bee-harming pesticides. Tell EPA it's time to follow the science and protect bees.
Take Action»

Debunking GE myths

Debunking GE myths

Dr. Marcia Ishii-Eiteman separates science from myth about genetically engineered crops. Read More »

What's on your food?

What's on your food?

The science is in — pesticide residues are on our food, even after washing. Which foods and how much? Our iPhone app puts these answers at your fingertips.
Download it for free»

Pesticide Action Network's picture

Right now, behind closed doors in DC, pesticide industry lobbyists are maneuvering to strip critical pesticide protections from federal law. This week it's the Clean Water Act, next week it may very well be the Endangered Species Act. And they think nobody’s watching.

Karl Tupper's picture

Apples and celery this week. Cilantro a couple back. Stories about pesticide residues on food are making the rounds again. After my umpteenth media call, a blog seemed in order.

As I told the LA Times, here's my basic response: "It’s the farmers, farmworkers and residents of rural communities who are really most at risk" from pesticides, not consumers. While these folks are exposed to pesticides from food like the rest of us, they also must contend with pesticide fumes drifting out of fields, exposure from working directly with pesticides, and pesticide-coated dust and dirt tracked into their homes from the fields. Tom Philpott, newly migrated to MotherJones, nails this topic.

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman's picture

A New York Times Environment reporter has been pumping out a series of attention-getting blogs on agriculture, climate change and the environment. So far, so good. But, while glad to see serious attention given to this intersection, I was disappointed by the author’s apparent infatuation with the promise of technological miracle cures to increase yields, evident in his near-reverential regard for the international research institutes responsible for the first Green Revolution and for the naive techno-optimism of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman's picture

Climate change, environment and agriculture are inextricably linked. Many would have us believe that protecting the environment means feeding fewer people. Can we somehow feed the world and save rare and endangered species from extinction?

A scientific review published this month by my colleague, Michael Jahi Chappell and his co-author, Liliana Lavalle, tackles just this question. Asking “Food security and biodiversity: can we have both?” Chappell and Lavalle say yes. Citing the UN-led International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), among other studies, the authors explain how agroecological farming not only can feed the world, but also can enhance biodiversity.

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman's picture

Two weeks ago I wrote about genetic trespass. This week it’s chemical trespass. Monsanto makes news again.

An international team of highly respected scientists has just released a stunning report, Roundup and Birth Defects, proving that Monsanto and industry regulators have known for decades that Monsanto’s top-selling weedkiller, Roundup, causes birth defects in laboratory animals.