If you’re hesitating about consuming the berries in your fridge, a whistleblower has raised concerns about the pesticide levels on fruit shipped by a U.S. company to Canada. David Harada, a former Driscoll’s employee based in California, alleged that nearly half of the company’s exports to Canada had pesticide levels surpassing Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) standards. Driscoll’s provides raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, and blackberries primarily grown in California and Mexico, with some seasonal products sourced from other regions, including parts of Canada.
Harada claimed that the excessive chemical levels were a result of over-spraying and the removal of food safety compliance parameters for berries sent to Canada. The CFIA verified the presence of higher-than-permissible pesticide levels on Driscoll’s berries. The company stated that it has adjusted its controls to meet Canadian standards.
However, this revelation may raise concerns among Canadian consumers, particularly parents, prompting discussions about the chemicals present in the food supply. Here’s what you should know:
Are the berries in my fridge safe to eat?
Harada’s lawsuit alleged that millions of pounds of berries with chemical levels exceeding CFIA guidelines were imported between 2022 and 2024. It’s highly improbable that these berries are still in your fridge, and if they are, it’s advised not to consume them. Maria Corradini, an associate professor at the University of Guelph, explained that the chemical compounds sprayed on produce degrade over time. The critical issue is ensuring the correct amount is applied and allowing ample time to pass to prevent leftover residue during harvest.
Environmental toxicologist Daniel Green mentioned that even if you unknowingly consumed berries with elevated chemical residues, the likelihood of harm is minimal. A substantial quantity, approximately 19 kilograms, would need to be consumed within a short period to experience adverse effects. Green emphasized that the exposure to these chemicals in berries is minimal compared to daily environmental exposures.
What chemicals were found on the berries?
The identified chemicals were bifenthrin, iprodione, and captan. Iprodione is used to combat mould, mildew, and rot on various crops, while captan serves as a fungicide for field, greenhouse, and orchard crops. Bifenthrin, an insecticide, constitutes over a quarter of globally used pesticides. It targets insects’ nervous systems, causing paralysis and death.
Bifenthrin is considered relatively low in toxicity for humans, although excessive exposure may lead to adverse effects such as headaches, dizziness, or skin irritations when inhaled, and throat discomfort, nausea, and vomiting if ingested. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency classifies bifenthrin as a potential human carcinogen based on mouse tumor occurrences. Corradini highlighted that farmworkers face greater health risks from acute chemical exposure.
Can I wash these chemicals off berries?
Washing berries may not be entirely effective due to their soft texture and crevices. Soaking them in a water and baking soda mixture has shown some promise, but conclusive evidence on its effectiveness is lacking.
Are organic berries better?
Opting for organic berries is a safer choice to avoid chemical exposure, although it’s not foolproof. Corradini noted that the risk of contamination exists, particularly in facilities handling both organic and conventional production. Chemical pesticides enable mass fruit and vegetable production at affordable prices. Organic crops may be susceptible to infestations, and like non-organic produce, they can harbor pathogens and parasites causing food-borne illnesses.
Is Driscoll’s under investigation?
Driscoll’s denies knowingly shipping unsafe products. Harada’s lawsuit is ongoing, with the company refuting his claims. Additionally, Driscoll’s faces a class-action lawsuit filed by plaintiffs from several states, accusing the company of deceptive practices regarding the presence of PFAS chemicals on strawberries, known as “forever chemicals.” The scrutiny on Driscoll’s practices and chemical use continues.
