Some activists seem almost purposeful in their attempts to dissuade low-income consumers from eating realistic, healthy diets. The latest target of their hyperbole and angst is the popular produce brand Driscoll’s and its strawberries.
Mamavation, a so-called “wellness site” directed by mothers, recently contracted a lab to test both conventional and organic berries. After finding minuscule amounts of pesticide residue in the non-organic fruit, they deemed the result “shocking.” This despite vigorous testing by multiple government agencies showing time and again that such tiny amounts of pesticides do not cause adverse health effects.
What’s truly “shocking” is that activists are so cavalier about scaring Americans away from cheap, available fruits and vegetables, which is the genuine crisis.
Strawberries are a low-calorie, nutrient-dense fruit packed with 100% of the daily recommended amounts of vitamin C, antioxidants and potassium, considered a shortfall nutrient for its underconsumption. Only about 1 in 10 adults and children are eating the recommended amounts of fruits and vegetables.
Most of us fall short by an order of magnitude. Higher income groups manage to consume about 12% of the recommended amount while lower income groups only eat about 7%. Consumers are turning instead to packaged junk food including crackers, chips, snack bars, ice cream, sweet bakery products and candy as alternatives.
One reason lower income groups eat less produce is that research has shown that they are more susceptible to activists’ warnings. They also have higher incidences of chronic diseases associated with a poor diet, including cancer, heart disease and diabetes. One study found that “More than one-third (36%) of lower income adults in the U.S.have two or more chronic conditions — significantly more than in many other countries.”
The scaremongering over produce is harmful to people in every income class. Three out of four U.S. adults are now overweight or obese. When activists argue that the only response to pesticide residues is to switch from conventional to organic produce, they aren’t doing so based on good science.
Pesticide safety has been ensured for over 50 years. Three federal agencies oversee pesticides, including the FDA (which monitors the food supply for residues), the EPA (which sets tolerances for allowable levels) and the USDA (which also rigorously samples residues every year). Although it is not widely reported, quite possibly because it doesn’t lend itself to clickbait, the USDA routinely finds that 99% of all pesticide residues are well below safe levels.
It is also true that, by weight, 99% of the pesticide residues that we consume (whether eating conventional or organic) are not sprayed on produce. They are made by the plants themselves which, through evolution, have become resistant to pests.
The other big reason why economically disadvantaged populations are not consuming organic produce is that it costs 59% more than conventional produce on average, according to a 2026 LendingTree price analysis. How are they supposed to eat more produce at those prices, especially after being hit with a big cost-of-living increase over the last half-decade?
Organic crop yields are 19%-25% smaller than conventional yields, which is what makes the produce more expensive. It’s also why going fully organic would require approximately 40% more space, pushing food production onto forested lands and destroying countless trees’ ability to capture carbon and release it into the soil.
That would be a setback for the Green Revolution, which began after World War II thanks in large part to better pesticides. It enabled us to greatly increase the production of fruits and vegetables, which in turn fed tens of millions of people who would have otherwise died of starvation.
It’s okay to ask questions about pesticides and the safety of your food. Just remember that all fruits and vegetables are composed of chemicals. A cup of coffee contains 1,500 of them. And, yes, at high doses, some chemicals are toxic. Even drinking too much water too fast is dangerous.
On the other hand, chemicals have safe doses at low enough levels. We may prefer that some aren’t there at all, but when it’s time to choose between a piece of fruit and a bag of chips, follow the science and not the pesticide scare campaigns.
Richard Williams is a board member with Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA) and author of “Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and the Solutions.”