source : the age
Multiple fruit and vegetables for sale at Australian supermarkets have been found to contain prohibited levels of pesticide residues, including a punnet of strawberries with fungicide at nearly 10 times the legal limit.
Pesticides Action Australia, a charity that advocates for reducing pesticide use, commissioned the independent laboratory testing of 78 fruits and vegetables purchased from supermarket chains across five Australian cities in June.
Four samples, including a punnet of strawberries, grapes, and two capsicums, contained concentrations of pesticides violating maximum residue limits set by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA).
The charity said they found a further eight residues of pesticides that did not appear to be registered or permitted for use on that particular food crop.
Washing removes some residues, but not those absorbed into the plant’s tissue as it grows.
Authorities have stressed the detections pose no public health risk, as the APVMA limits are not designed to address food safety but to target growers’ misuse of pesticides.
However, the findings have raised troubling questions about the extent of illegal spraying on farms and the adequacy of the nation’s patchwork of government surveillance programs.
Critics argue the programs are failing to weed out produce that violates standards because they are either opaque, voluntary, only sample a small handful of produce types, or allow long intervals between testing.
One grower alleged unscrupulous operators routinely spray excessive amounts of pesticides or ignore label directions because the odds of being caught are low.
Pesticide Action Australia’s project lead, Eleanor Davis, said supermarkets clearly had a “pesticide problem”.
She said the report demonstrated there was inadequate produce testing and support for farmers to reduce pesticide use.
“The result is the overuse and misuse of hazardous pesticides, many of which end up on our plates,” Davis said.
Woolworths, Coles, and Aldi said food safety was their highest priority, stating all suppliers must comply with Australian regulations, including maximum residue limits.
Woolworths and Aldi noted they had risk-based surveillance programs. Woolworths also highlighted their supply chains were independently audited under a scheme that mandates residue testing, while Aldi said its suppliers conduct regular pesticide residue testing.
Deakin University chemistry professor Damien Callahan agreed that residues could breach the APVMA limits while remaining safe to eat.
However, he said the detections were important and warranted scrutiny, especially because there were still gaps in scientific understanding of the long-term effects of low-level exposure to mixtures of pesticide residues.
Mark Green, an associate professor in reproductive biology at the University of Melbourne, said it was worrying that the regulatory system did not account for the cumulative cocktail of different pesticide residues consumers were exposed to.
“There is an urgent need for these types of assessments,” Green said.
Both backed calls for more comprehensive surveillance.
Chief executive of CropLife Australia Matthew Cossey emphasised that APVMA limits were tools for good agriculture practice, and not safety thresholds.
“Safety is governed separately by health-based limits that are set with large safety margins, often hundreds of times below the level at which any effect on human health would be expected,” he said.
The fine print
Samples of 13 types of fruit and vegetables were purchased from Woolworths, Coles and Aldi and taken to a NATA-accredited laboratory for analysis.
Pesticide Action Australia said its work was funded by public donations and philanthropic grants, and it did not accept funding that could compromise its independence.
The group said a total of 201 residues spanning 54 types of pesticides were detected.
More than half of samples carried a pesticide not approved for use in the European Union, and 44 per cent carried a pesticide classified as a type of PFAS (or so-called “forever chemical”) by the OECD.
Fipronil was detected on a capsicum from a Perth supermarket, even though no fipronil residue is legally allowed on that crop.
Callahan noted the fipronil finding was significant because the concentration suggested direct application by the grower.
“It is considered moderately toxic to humans. Its use has been prohibited in many countries for crop protection due to its impact in the aquatic environment and insects,” Callahan said.
The fipronil detection was the only one breaching maximum residue limits set under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code as well as APVMA.
APVMA limits reflect the highest amount of residue expected to be present when the pesticide has been used according to approved conditions.
The Food Standards Code controls how much residue is legally allowed on food, and is often set higher to accommodate imports.
The chemical bupirimate was discovered on Sydney strawberries at 9.5 times the APVMA’s limit.
Multiple samples, including a Sydney cucumber, turned up chlorpyrifos, even though it is no longer registered for use on those crops.
The APVMA banned most agricultural uses of chlorpyrifos over worker health and environmental risks following a 2024 review.
“The chlorpyrifos detection is very low; however, the EU withdrew chlorpyrifos because it couldn’t establish a safe exposure level for effects on the developing brain, which makes pregnant women and young children the main concern with its detection,” Callahan said.
Cossey pointed out that nearly all detections still complied with Australia’s food standards code, including the bupirimate found on the Sydney strawberry.
He added that CropLife Australia does not support off-label pesticide use and potential breaches should be investigated.
Cossey said European decisions to ban certain pesticides were “not grounded in sound science” and the OECD had acknowledged that classifying a compound as PFAS did not inherently indicate harm.
Pesticides are used in food production to ensure adequate supply, reduce food waste and support farm productivity.
An APVMA spokesperson said suspected MRL violations should be reported to authorities to determine their source and whether pesticides had been used correctly.
The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) regulates pesticide use in NSW.
A spokeswoman said it undertook extensive risk-based compliance and enforcement programs, conducting 74 inspections since last September.
“We take seriously any reports of suspected misuse … and continue to target compliance efforts where potential risks or non-compliance are identified,” she said.
She said the EPA had not been provided with Pesticide Action Australia’s data or testing methodology, adding: “We encourage any organisation to share its findings for assessment.”
Backyard operators
A grower, speaking anonymously for fear of industry retribution, was unsurprised at the breaches.
“There are a lot of backyarders, and they just go however they want,” he said. “It’s widespread.”
He stressed that produce remains safe when sprayed legally, but said some growers were spraying excessive amounts unlawfully in order to combat disease and pests faster.
“They want to eliminate it and don’t want to keep dealing [with it],” he said.
The grower said visits by government inspectors were infrequent and rarely thorough enough to catch rogue spraying practices.
“It’s too easy to get away with,” he said. “The people who are doing the right things are the ones who are suffering.”
Multiple government bodies share responsibility for pesticide oversight.
Federally, the Department of Agriculture runs the voluntary National Residue Survey.
Last financial year it tested two fresh produce types, apples and pears, with a 96.5 and 100 per cent compliance rate across 222 samples.
The NSW Food Authority, within the Department of Primary Industries, conducts targeted risk-based residue surveys.
In a 2023-24 survey of 100 cucumber, parsley and basil samples, 22 samples exceeded maximum residue limits, although dietary exposure assessments found no health risks.
“Where possible, the Food Authority communicated the results with the relevant vendor and undertook traceback,” said a spokeswoman for the NSW Department of Primary Industries, adding no recent breaches required prosecutions, fines or compliance notices.
A separate sampling of 100 berries last November revealed no Food Standards Code breaches.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand also monitors exposure to chemicals through its Total Diet Study.
Davis noted the last study focusing on agricultural chemicals was published in 2019 using data collected in 2013-14, making it over a decade old.
“Our food just isn’t being adequately tested,” Davis said.
However, the next round of the study being conducted will analyse more than 2000 food samples and will include pesticides.
Davis urged the government and supermarkets to test more frequently, publish results, and support growers to reduce pesticide use, noting: “Other countries already do this at scale.”
Dr Maisarah Nasution Waras is an exposure science lecturer at Universiti Sains Malaysia whose doctoral thesis examined Australia’s pesticide regulations.
She called for population-wide tracking of pesticides in human blood, alongside produce testing.
“Human biomonitoring measures what is actually absorbed, metabolised, and retained by the human body from all exposure pathways,” she said.
Industry peak body Ausveg said it could not comment directly without reviewing the testing methodology, chain of custody and lab accreditation.
“Australian vegetable growers operate in a highly regulated production environment, and consumers can have faith that Australian-grown vegetables are among the world’s safest,” a spokesman said.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
