(Beyond Pesticides, April 20, 2026) Earth Day, this week on Wednesday, April 22, is a day of education and action. Earth Day embodies the power of people in their communities engaging to advance changes in policies and practices that meet the environmental and public health challenges of the day. This year, 2026, may be a turning point in which public outrage about the failure of the current political leadership in Congress and in the Trump administration to address the existential health, biodiversity, and climate crises is deemed politically unacceptable. Animating public concern are elected officials who call the climate crisis a hoax and dismiss the health and environmental threat associated with the weed killer glyphosate (Roundup)—as representative of the deregulation of pesticides associated with cancer and other deadly diseases. The words of the chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee of Health and the Environment, Representative Paul Rogers (D-FL), express in the importance of grassroots action that elevated Earth Day. In a piece in the EPA Journal, Rep. Rogers wrote the following: “Historians of the environmental movement are likely to peg Earth Day 1970 as a key turning point in the American public’s consciousness about environmental problems. I believe […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 17, 2026) A comparative analysis published in The Lancet Planetary Health highlights the pervasiveness of pesticide pollution in organic and non-organic farms in Latin America (Costa Rica) and Africa (Uganda). While pesticides were detected in nearly all participating farmers, there is a significant relationship between lower biomarker concentrations (often correlating with less contamination) in urine samples of organic farmers relative to non-organic farmers. The researchers also identified that older farmers held higher herbicide and insecticide concentrations. This research builds on the preponderance of scientific evidence and lived experiences of agricultural communities across the globe, including the U.S., which documents nontarget contamination of food systems through air, water, and soil. In this context, Beyond Pesticides continues to advocate for a transition to organic land management practices. Methodology and Results “We collected urine samples from 601 conventional and organic smallholder farmers in Zarcero County, Costa Rica, and Wakiso District, Uganda, on two occasions during the primary spraying season,” the authors write in introducing their methodology. The researchers tested urine samples of small-scale farmers in Costa Rica and Uganda for a mix of pesticides that include a fungicide, herbicide and insecticides—mancozeb (ETU), 2,4-D, glyphosate, pyrethroid metabolites (3-PBA, DCCA), diazinon (IMPy), […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 15, 2026) Researchers in the Czech Republic tested indoor dust across 116 homes and found that 93 percent of homes across urban and rural areas contained residue of at least one current-use pesticide (CUP). The study also found in every household residues of hexachlorobenzene (HCB) and pentachlorobenzene (PeCB), the breakdown products or byproducts of certain banned organochlorine pesticides (OCP). These compounds, as well as DDT metabolites DDE and DDD, were detected in more than half of the homes tested. Results in this study and previous research confirm that pesticides used outdoors find their way indoors, resulting in an exposure pattern that is not calculated when pesticides are registered and allowed on the market. The findings are published in Indoor Environments. These findings characterize the legacy of toxic pesticide exposure resulting from the proliferation of pesticides in the United States and around the world without a complete assessment of the chemicals’ residual activity and multigenerational adverse impacts on health. Based on the decades of peer-reviewed scientific literature on pesticide exposure and effects from across the globe, public health and environmental advocates warn that there is a continuation of this pattern of long-term effects associated with new pesticides linked […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 13, 2026) There are numerous provisions—a package of provisions—in the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee Farm Bill, voted out on March 5, that seriously undermine protections of health and the environment from pesticides, according to public health and environmental advocates. In response, Beyond Pesticides and allies are calling on U.S. Representatives and Senators to reject the Farm Bill as passed out of the House Agriculture Committee and, instead, pass a one-year extension of current law to protect health and the environment. The Committee Farm Bill contains provisions that advocates and members of Congress call “poison pills” because any one of them is so far-reaching that they make the entire measure unacceptable. The package of amendments covers critical areas of protection that have been established over decades of Congressional action. While groups have called for major reforms, Beyond Pesticides, in an action recently released,  says, “Existing pesticide law forms the foundation on which improvements should be made, not backsliding to give the chemical industry free rein.” At stake, according to the group, are core safeguards that are seen as critical to the health of farmers, consumers and the environment—judicial review of chemical manufacturers’ failure to warn about pesticide […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 9, 2026) “The routine use of common pesticides in agriculture is no longer an ethically viable option for sustainable food production,” according to a new review in Reproduction & Fertility by livestock researcher Whitney Payne, Ph.D. candidate, and Kelsey R. Pool, PhD, of the School of Agriculture and Environment at The University of Western Australia. They base their position on the endocrine-disrupting qualities of many pesticides. The authors describe endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) as “an inescapable feature of modern life” and note that the “farming systems sit at the intersection of animal health, environmental integrity, and food production.” The review stresses the risks that EDCs pose to livestock, which are seriously understudied.   EDCs are introduced to cattle, sheep, chickens, goats, and other mammals via pesticides, plastics, and hormone treatments. Since humans consume livestock, the effects of EDCs on animals are not confined to animals themselves. Animal production systems illustrate how EDCs “can enter diverse food chains and ecosystems from a single source,” the authors write, being introduced by humans for one purpose and returning to affect livestock and humans indirectly through their long-term effects and breakdown products. While regulatory systems typically consider direct and indirect exposure pathways in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 8, 2026) Researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assessed pesticide and PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) contamination in ten agricultural streams in the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys (Central Valley) in 2024, detecting 60 pesticides, synergists, and associated transformation products, including 12 fluorinated pesticides (Dithiopyr, Trifluralin, Fluridone, Oxyfluorfen, Penoxsulam, Flubendiamide, Bifenthrin, Flonicam, Indoxacarb, Cyhalothrin, Fluopyram, and Penthiopyrad) that meet the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) definition of qualifying as PFAS. It is alarming to learn that “the OECD fluorinated pesticides were generally detected more frequently and at higher concentrations” relative to the 48 other compounds.  Relatedly, research finds products containing three of the detected pesticides (Methoxyfenozide, Imidacloprid, and Piperonyl Butoxide) associated with various PFAS, and according to the authors, there are a handful of active ingredients, such as the insecticide Methoxyfenozide and the fungicide Azoxystrobin, detected in 100 percent of collected samples. Their entire findings were published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters in March 2026. This research is critical to our understanding of the pervasiveness and ubiquity of multi-chemical pollution that impacts one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country. The regions encompassing these two valleys make up just one percent of total U.S. farmland, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 6, 2026) While mosquito season is not yet here, Beyond Pesticides has launched an action to remind people and policy makers that mosquito management requires the enhancing of natural ecosystems, including bird populations, in communities and residential areas to reduce the population of these biting insects. The campaign draws on the science showing that an unbalanced ecosystem eliminates some of the most attractive and helpful allies in mosquito management—birds. Incorporating the awareness of healthy ecosystems in communities and yards into local and state policies and practices is a critical pest management tool. The action calls on Governors and Mayors to ensure ecological management of mosquitoes by eliminating the use of pesticides that threaten mosquito predators. An article, “The Ecological Impact of Pesticides on Non-Target Organisms in Agricultural Ecosystems” (2024), captures the importance of land management and habitat to protect a a balance of organisms, including bird populations. The authors, in the context of agroecosystems but generally applicable, write: “Pesticide exposure reduces ecosystem resilience, changes community dynamics, and accelerates population reductions in a variety of organisms, including predatory arthropods, bees, and butterflies. Furthermore, bird populations—which are essential to agroecosystems—face a variety of difficulties as a result of habitat degradation, food […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 2, 2026) In advance of opening U.S. Supreme Court arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell, Beyond Pesticides joined an amicus brief filed yesterday and led by Center for Food Safety (CFS), which challenges Bayer/Monsanto’s position that it should not be held liable for failing to warn consumers that the use of their pesticide products could cause cancer. The chemical company giant, along with the broader chemical and agribusiness industry, argues that they should be given immunity from litigation because their products are registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a claim that is disputed in detail in the amicus brief. Groups joining the brief include Consumer Federation of America, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP), Rural Coalition, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, Center for Biological Diversity, Beyond Pesticides, and Food & Water Watch.  Click to access the 17 additional amicus briefs filed in support of the respondents: Stand for Health Freedom; The American Association for Justice and Public Justice; Children’s Health Defense; 36 State Legislators; The Local Government Legal Center, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, and International Municipal Lawyers Association; Former EPA Officials and Environmental Protection Network; Philip Landrigan, MD, MSc, Lianne Sheppard, PhD, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 31, 2026) A statement decrying chemical company secrecy was released today by over 200 grassroots, health, farm, farmworker, environmental, and consumer groups, socially responsible corporations, over 340 citizens from 46 states, and international partners. The statement, released before the U.S. Supreme Court tomorrow reaches the final deadline for submission of amicus briefs in a case in which Bayer/Monsanto argues, with support of the Trump administration, that it should not be required to disclose on its product labels the potential hazards of its pesticide products. Oral arguments in the case will be heard on April 27, with a decision anticipated in June. Decades of law have upheld the legal argument that chemical companies are liable for their failure to warn users of their pesticides about the harm that they could cause. Bayer/Monsanto is attempting to reverse years of case law and billions of dollars in jury verdicts and future cases in which the company has been held liable for causing cancer but not warning product users. See statement, Stop Chemical Company Secrecy of Pesticide Product Hazards. Chemical Industry State Campaign The chemical industry last year launched a multi-pronged campaign to establish immunity from litigation by those who have […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 30, 2026) Through today, organizations, institutions, and corporations can sign on to a public statement calling for chemical companies to continue to be held liable for harming but not warning people who use their pesticide products. The statement, joined by grassroots, health, farm, farmworker, environmental and consumer groups, and socially responsible corporations, will be released tomorrow—just as U.S. Supreme Court begins on April 1 considering Monsanto/Bayer’s claim that the company is not responsible for failing to warn those whose cancer was found by a jury trial to be caused by its weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM). Groups can sign on to the statement by 5:00pm (Eastern) by clicking here. In the case before the U.S. Supreme Court case, Monsanto v. Durnell, Monsanto/Bayer is seeking to overturn over $10 billion in jury verdicts and settlements and stop future litigation on their failure to warn about the potential cancer effects of glyphosate/RoundupTM. If Monsanto/Bayer wins, chemical companies will be able to legally withhold information on their pesticide product hazards not required to be disclosed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Bayer/Monsanto wants to overturn decades of legal precedent, including a previous Supreme Court decision, which establishes EPA-required, minimum pesticide product label language, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 26, 2026) A review of pesticide exposure from a family member working in agriculture (“take-home” residues) finds that pesticide levels in the home are elevated between 2.6- and 3.7-times. This and other nonoccupational exposure data from homes are drawn from the Agricultural Health Study (AHS), a National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) prospective study of cancer and other health outcomes in a cohort of licensed pesticide applicators and their spouses from Iowa and North Carolina. Between 1993 and 1997, with follow-up between 1999 and 2021, AHS tracks occupational and nonoccupational exposure and subsequent health effects from pesticide exposure. The current study, published in Environmental Advances, reexamines a quantitative analysis on nontarget, “active-ingredient-specific” exposure to pesticides from multiple pathways—applying new criteria to AHS spousal exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos and the herbicide atrazine. The three pesticide exposure pathways include take-home, agricultural drift, and residential use. Building on a 2019 study, researchers consider data from additional studies published between 2019 and 2024, “providing support that all three pathways contribute to pesticide exposure.” More importantly, the updated estimates of nontarget exposure to chlorpyrifos and atrazine are overall strengthened by the incorporation of new data, highlighting the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 24, 2026) Published in Environmental Pollution, study results in the floriculture region of Ecuador find detections of neonicotinoid insecticides (NNI) and the herbicide atrazine in drinking and irrigation water. The biomonitoring data reported in an earlier journal article in the same region found a total of 23 compounds used as herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, their associated metabolites (breakdown products), which include organophosphates, pyrethroids, and neonicotinoids. (See Daily News here.) Researchers from the University of Iowa, University of California, San Diego State University, and Universidad de San Francisco in Quito, Ecuador, determined that 1 in 5 households (20.5%) have detectable levels of one or more neonicotinoids in drinking water samples surrounding floricultural agricultural operations. This builds on previous research underscoring the nontarget pesticidal effects in communities near agricultural operations where the chemicals drift through the air and move into soil and water. Methodology and Results The authors report that, “This study focused on household tap water in proximity to floricultural plantations and in the ESPINA [Secondary Exposures to Pesticides among Children and Adolescents] participants’ homes with a range of NNI and total pesticides in urinary metabolite samples of the children.” They continue: “Participant households in the water study were […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 23, 2026) After President Trump invoked the Defense Production Act of 1950 and issued an Executive Order (EO), Promoting the National Defense by Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Elemental Phosphorus and Glyphosate-Based Herbicides, U.S. Representatives Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME) stood up to say “no.” They introduced the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act (HR 7601) to undo the February 18 Executive Order, which is now being supported by a campaign to urge Congressional Representatives to cosponsor the bill.  With the EO’s declaration that contains no supporting documentation or findings, the U.S. government is granting Bayer/Monsanto immunity from lawsuits for adverse health effects or damage associated with the production, transportation, use, and disposal of the weed killer glyphosate. The executive order proclaims: “There is no direct one-for-one chemical alternative to glyphosate-based herbicides. Lack of access to glyphosate-based herbicides would critically jeopardize agricultural productivity, adding pressure to the domestic food system, and may result in a transition of cropland to other uses due to low productivity.  Given the profit margins growers currently face, any major restrictions in access to glyphosate-based herbicides would result in economic losses for growers and make it untenable for them to meet growing food and feed demands.” […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 20, 2026) Biopesticides represent a kind of Utopian destination in the landscape of agricultural sustainability. If only they could ensure planetary harmony. A review of botanical biopesticides in the March 11 issue of Toxics raises important questions that require scrutiny and review under the pesticide registration process and when used in organic systems under the Organic Foods Production Act. The term biopesticide can be misleading, and any replacements for synthetic pesticides cannot be taken only on faith. As Beyond Pesticides has noted previously, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) definition of biopesticides—“derived from such natural materials as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals”—is broad, vague, and used differently by different interests. EPA regulates biopesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) in three categories: Substances that interfere with mating, such as insect sex pheromones, as well as various scented plant extracts that attract insect pests to traps; Microbial pesticides consisting of a microorganism (e.g., a bacterium, fungus, virus, or protozoan) as the active ingredient; and Plant-Incorporated-Protectants (PIPs), pesticidal substances that plants are genetically engineered to produce. The review by Sandra Petrovic, PhD, and Andreja Leskovac, PhD, of the University of Belgrade, highlights the need not to […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 18, 2026) Researchers in Germany and Brazil investigated the biodiversity of agricultural landscapes in organic and non-organic areas in “bee hotels,” finding that there is a positive correlation between organically managed fields and numerous indicators of improved pollinator health, including an “increase in bee abundance, species richness, and diversity.” This study, published in Global Ecology and Conservation, builds on the breadth of existing research in recent years that underscores the adverse public health and biodiversity effects associated with a food system that is drenched in synthetic chemicals, as well as additional evidence of the ecological and economic benefits of organic agriculture. Methodology and Results Research for this study “was conducted at 17 sites in the southern part of Germany, Baden-Württemberg, including eight conventional and nine organic farming systems.” Researchers for this study are based at the Institute of Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics at Ulm University in Germany and the Laboratory for Bee Studies at the Federal University of Maranhão in São Luís, Maranhão in Brazil. The authors signed a “declaration of competing interest,” stipulating that “that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 16, 2026) On the brink of the first genetically engineered (GE) wheat to be introduced into the U.S. market, after the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved it in August, 2024, groups are calling on Congress to instruct USDA to prohibit HB4 wheat and instruct EPA to prohibit the use of glufosinate herbicides on wheat. The herbicide on which the crop is dependent, glufosinate, is a highly toxic herbicide banned in the European Union because of its links to reproductive and developmental harm. The drought- and herbicide-tolerant wheat, known as HB4 GMO wheat, follows a long line of genetically engineered crops that have been allowed to be grown in the U.S., with Roundup ReadyTM (glyphosate-tolerant) soybeans being among the first crops allowed in 1996. While the introduction of this technology promised to reduce pesticide use (herbicides are included under the definition of pesticide), the exact opposite occurred, with the skyrocketing of herbicide use. (See Daily News review of a study by Charles Benbrook, PhD, “Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S.—the first sixteen years.”) The extraordinary increase in herbicide use associated with GE crops has been accompanied by an escalating increase in weed resistance […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2026) The Monsanto Company, founded in 1901 and acquired by the multinational corporation Bayer AG in 2018, submitted its opening brief to the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) last month, seeking liability immunity from lawsuits filed by product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards. The question before SCOTUS is: “Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., preempts a state-law failure-to-warn claim concerning a pesticide registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where EPA has determined that a particular warning is not required and the warning cannot be added to a product label without EPA approval.” If successful, the Court would be overturning (reversing) its 2005 decision in Bates v. Dow Agrosciences, 544 U.S. 431, which upheld EPA and state registration of pesticides as a floor of protection, without releasing manufacturers of the responsibility to warn for potential harm that is not required by EPA. Pesticide manufacturers propose the text for their product labels and EPA ensures compliance with its minimum requirements, which does not preclude them from disclosing potential adverse effects they know of or should have known. The Missouri case before the Supreme Court, Durnell v. Monsanto, on the cancer causing effects of the weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM) resulted in a jury verdict (in 2023) of $1.25 million and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements may amount to over $10 billion in liability if […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 9, 2026) Policy and toxicology are slated to collide as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers allowing the use of a PFAS pesticide by invoking an emergency waiver process in federal pesticide law. If authorized, EPA’s decision will permit the use of an unregistered pesticide under an emergency waiver provision—in this case an emergency caused by weed resistance to weed killers (herbicides) on the market. EPA is accepting public comments until March 16, 11:59pm EDT. Beyond Pesticides is urging the public to object to EPA approval by writing to EPA and Congress stating that herbicide resistance is not an emergency and PFAS chemicals must not be broadcast in the environment.  The pesticide that is being requested for use is a new not yet registered, herbicide tetflupyrolimet (TFP), which is a PFAS chemical according to the definition of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The fact that the chemical is not registered by EPA means that it has not been reviewed in accordance with all the safety assessments reviewed under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The states applying for the exemptions under Section 18 of FIFRA—Missouri and Arkansas—claim that there is an emergency requiring the use of TFP because […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2026) The Farm Bill—the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567—reported out of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday strips environmental and public health protections from pesticides, reversing over 90 years of environmental laws adopted by Congress to protect farmers, consumers, and the environment that stretch back to the first Farm Bill in 1933. The Committee rejected the Protect Our Health Amendment, sponsored by Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME), which would have ensured that the final bill maintain three core safeguards in current law: (i) Judicial review of chemical manufacturers‘ failure to warn about pesticide hazards; (ii) Democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use; and, (iii) Local site-specific action to ensure protection—the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides under numerous environmental statutes. All Republicans and one Democrat (Rep. Adam Gray, D-CA) on the Committee blocked the Pingree amendment. The Agriculture Committee bill adversely affects a wide range of social and conservation issues, including the protection of family farms, food security, environmental and public health, local and state authority, and judicial review, according to a cross-section of groups representing these interests. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2026) Does humanity want to live in a world without birds? This may seem like an extreme question, but a new study in Science concludes that, without changes in human behavior, just such a world may be on the horizon. This would be a tragedy of colossal proportions, not only for the ecosystem services birds provide, but for the meaning of human life and a healthy biosphere. The oldest human-made image of a bird is 40,000 years old. The new study, by Czech environmental scientist François Leroy, PhD, and two colleagues from The Ohio State University, measured local population abundances of 261 North American bird species between 1987 and 2021. They also measured the speeds at which the species’ populations rose or fell. The study was based on data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey, a program of the U.S. Geological Survey in coordination with the Canadian Wildlife Service. This survey involves direct observations of bird populations along roadsides during breeding season. The program was created in the mid-20th century in response to the severe mortalities associated with the use of DDT, highlighted by Rachel Carson in her seminal 1962 work, Silent Spring. In the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 5, 2026) In a deep analysis of public records, U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), a nonprofit newsroom and public health research group, discloses significant financial ties between Bayer-Monsanto, lobbying firms, and the second Trump Administration, raising concerns about basic safeguards to curb corporate influence over federal policymakers. The USRTK tracker and report, “Tracing Bayer’s ties to power in Trump’s Washington,” (see more) finds that there have been significant lobbying investments by the multinational pesticide corporation just in the past year, including:  “At least $9.19 million on federal lobbying in [2025]”;   “16 key administration officials with ties to Bayer’s lobbying or legal network. Bayer and its lobbyists have access to people in power at the White House, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency and even those in high level positions closest to Trump”;  “45 people registered to lobby for Bayer under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and at least 13 outside lobby firms – seven of which are now among the highest-paid firms in D.C”; and,  “More than 30 senior officials at lobby firms retained by Bayer have direct ties to Trump, having worked in one or both of his administrations or political campaigns.”  The report points out that the four main trade and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 2, 2026) In advance of deliberations on the Farm Bill tomorrow, March 3, in the Agriculture Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, opposition to the GOP-proposed legislation has been widely expressed by farm, environmental, consumer, and social justice organizations. The bill, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, H.R. 7567, is a dramatic departure from previous Farm Bills going back to the first one in 1933, which began a process of integrated policy to address family farmers’ sustainability, land conservation, energy, climate, and food security. Discarding the traditional bipartisan process used to draft the Farm Bill, the Republican leadership has instead proposed a measure that has garnered across-the-board disapproval, except from those representing the vested interests of chemical companies and agribusiness. In order to uphold fundamental protections from pesticides for farmers, consumers, and the environment, a campaign has emerged to urge U.S. Representatives to support Rep. Pingree’s Protect Our Health Amendment (removes Sections 10205-10207), move to strike Sections 10201-10204 and 102011, and support the No Immunity for Glyphosate Act provisions. Without a comprehensive overhaul, this campaign is urging a vote against the Farm Bill. Central to the GOP Farm Bill, released by the chair of the U.S. House Agriculture […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2026) Researchers at Prairie View A&M University in Texas published in the journal Sustainability a study of organic agricultural systems from 1960 to 2021, concluding that “the outlook for U.S. organic fruit and vegetables is encouraging, supported by expanding consumer demand, government support, and improved conditions for international trade.” While delivering upbeat findings, including health benefits, the study identifies tremendous obstacles to entry into organic farming, including the limited support for alternative pest management and pest control systems in the United States in recent modern history, compared to the assistance provided for highly subsidized, petrochemical-dependent agricultural practices. Public health and environmental advocates continue to advocate for a wholesale transition to organic pest management, including calls for U.S. Representatives and Senators to cosponsor the Opportunities in Organic Act! Study Methodology, Background, and Findings The authors of this literature review arrived at the following conclusions on research trends for human health and environmental impacts of organic systems (for further analysis, the numbers below list citations from their report): “[O]rganic food has been documented to have higher antioxidant capacity, acidity, and phosphorus as well as lower levels of cadmium, pesticides, and other chemicals (18–22). Additionally, organic practices increase the […]