I’m sure many of you would have heard news about the proposed increase to limits of pesticides on berry crops in Australia. In Australia, the ‘Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’ (APVMA) are the regulatory body that manages the chemicals used in agriculture and therefore our food.
The APVMA are considering increasing the ‘maximum residue limits’ for the insecticide isocycloseram allowed on berries. Now, the short story is that our regulator wants to increase the amount of isocyloseram, an insecticide that the EU has banned as a PFAS ‘forever chemical’, allowed on berries. This may be enough information for you to want to jump onto this website to look up your local member of parliament to call on them to reduce our risk of forever chemical exposure. However, you might also wonder whether this is a one-off issue that is being twisted by anti-pesticide groups. Let’s look at some recent actions of our chemical regulator to see if we should be calling for stricter chemical regulation in Australia.
Australian Food Safety Lagging Behind Global Safety Standards
Last year, pesticide levels on Australian berries hit the news with the APVMA acknowledging that children between 2 and 6 years old were at risk of exceeding ‘safe exposure limits’ if they ate berries treated with dimethoate. Their response was not to follow other countries, including the EU, in banning dimethoate, but to tell farmers that they could only harvest crops sprayed with this insecticide 14 days after spraying. According to the University of Hertfordshire database, “Dimethoate…is moderately toxic to mammals but may have serious health implications for humans as it is an acetyl cholinesterase inhibitor and may cause reproduction or development effects.”
Now let’s assume that our regulator made the right call on dimethoate. Let’s assume that our children and grandchildren, who happen to be growing up at a point in history with frightening drops in fertility and rising chemical exposure, are protected by these 14 days between spray and harvest. This assumption at very least relies on us trusting our chemical regulator to keep all food producers in check to stick to these 14-day periods. Now that scenario requires a lot of faith in our chemical regulator, so let’s get to know them a bit better…
A quick look at our regulator, the APVMA
Our agricultural chemical regulator has been the subject of controversy in recent years. In February 2023 an external review found that the APVMA was captured by chemical industry interests. This review was called for by the then Minister for Agriculture, Henry Watt. Now sadly, this review wasn’t called for because the government of the day was concerned about the health impacts of agricultural chemical exposure. Unfortunately, it took an APVMA employee urinating on other APVMA employees at a Christmas party and this incident being brought up in Senate estimates to trigger this review. This review then found our regulatory body was captured by chemical industry interests. It highlighted drawn-out safety investigations. “Of the 10 ongoing chemical reviews, eight have been in progress for over 15 years or more, with seven ongoing for nearly 20 years.” Although this review led to the Chair and CEO both handing in their resignations, recent activities of the APVMA suggest they are still prioritising chemical companies over the health of Australians.
Just last month, the APVMA released a decision to continue to allow the use of controversial herbicide paraquat. Both Parkinson’s Australia and several of Australia’s top neurologists have been calling on our regulator to join the 70 other countries that have banned paraquat. Neurologists have been sounding the alarm over the link between Parkinson’s disease and paraquat for years. Parkinson’s disease is the fastest-growing neurological disorder in the world; it is a cruel disease where people lose the ability to control their movement. Many papers have concluded that paraquat exposure increases the risk of Parkinson’s disease.
The APVMA have been ‘reviewing the safety of paraquat’ since 1997. In 1997 there were enough safety concerns to see paraquat banned in many countries including Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Kuwait. Our regulator argued that they needed to review the safety evidence in the Australian context. The APVMA continued to review paraquat’s safety for the next 29 years. During this time, even China, who are major producers of paraquat, banned its domestic use and sale. Chinese production of paraquat continues, but only to sell to countries like Australia and parts of the US, which have failed to ban this substance. While our regulator slowly considered the safety of paraquat, Thailand, Malaysia, Fiji, South Korea, Brazil, Taiwan and multiple countries from Africa and the Middle East all joined the list of countries that banned it. https://www.wisnerbaum.com/toxic-tort-law/paraquat-parkinsons-lawsuit/where-is-paraquat-banned/
Back to our berries…
When I look at our regulator’s recent history, I have very little faith in the APVMA’s ability to make the right call in their review of isocycloseram. Australia was one of the very first countries in the world to allow its use. A world-first you would hardly want to brag about. Isocycloseram is a controversial insecticide as it is a PFAS forever chemical. Conveniently, our not-so-trusty Australian regulator uses the narrower US definition of what a forever chemical is than the OECD. Given that we just saw that America and Australia seem to be lagging behind global standards in protecting citizens from chemical exposure, perhaps it’s time to start looking towards the EU for safety definitions?
How much is safe?
Another cause for concern in our natural health community is that the APVMA hasn’t publicly released the data they will use to assess safety, but has indicated that they will use average usage data. Now I know from looking at Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) data that the average Australian’s fruit consumption does not even remotely reflect the average Natural Health Society member fruit consumption. The ABS say the average Australian’s intake of ‘fruit products and dishes’ is just 100 grams per day. (A small apple weighs 100-130 grams).
The APVMA said they changed the rules around dimethoate spraying in response to Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) data that showed that Australians’ berry consumption had increased. I know that our community eats significantly more than the Australian average, so I went looking for the data behind the amount of berries they are assuming we eat. None of the official APVMA releases I could find included how many berries they think we eat, FSANZ website links that I thought were going to give me the answer instead directed me to ‘page not found’ pages and the FSANZ datasets I could find only referred to total fruit consumption (which we know is abysmal) but nothing specific to berries.
This article, written last year when the APVMA decision was announced, reports that the data used for berry consumption had doubled to become 1.3 kg per person per year (excluding strawberries). They reference the FSANZ website for this number, but today this link goes back to the ‘page not found’ page I referred to earlier. I truly hope that this isn’t the number that the APVMA are using to make safety decisions. 1.3Kg is the equivalent of 1 bag of frozen berries and just under 3 punnets of fresh berries. So, tell me natural health community, does that reflect your berry consumption for AN ENTIRE YEAR?! If your household is anything like mine, we are well outside the margin of error here!
How did it come to this?
Up until recently, the APVMA received around 95% of it’s funding from the very same chemical industries it was charged with regulating. This may have something to do with why Australians seem to be being exposed to greater chemical risks that our OECD counterparts. Although the most recent budget allocated more government funds to our regulator, their recent behaviour indicates there is still undue industry influence. Please join us in calling on our government to do a better job of protecting us.
We know you’re busy, so if you would like, please feel free to cut and paste the below text into a letter or email and send it to your local member of parliament. If you’ve got time, perhaps you’d like to tally up what your annual berry consumption is and let them know just how far off the pace some of their information is.
Dear
The APVMA’s recent review of the maximum residue limits for the insecticide isocycloseram allowed on berries is just the latest example of how our regulator is failing to be appropriately cautious when it comes to our children’s health.
I know your government understands that there are huge problems with this regulator, as anyone paying a little attention can realise this. I appreciate the increased funding your government provided in the last budget as a way to improve our previously 95% industry-funded regulator. However, the APVMA’s recent decision on paraquat tells me our regulator still cares more about protecting industry than protecting people.
Most Australian’s would assume that our chemical regulator does a better job of protecting our citizens than countries like China, Ghana or Syria, but the APVMA’s recent decision would prove them wrong. Please use your influence to provide pressure to the APVMA to do a better job of protecting Australian’s. Our children deserve more than to be the world’s test subjects for chemicals that will likely have life-long and irreversible health impacts.
Some Good News
Our annual seminar is coming up! On 7 November, join us for a day of learning and community. We’ll have health talks by Dr Greg Fitzgerald (Allied Health) and Ally Blythe (Naturopath), and share a nourishing vegan wholefood lunch. Whether you’ve been to our seminars many times or have never joined us, we would absolutely love to see you there. Spending time with health-focused people is a great way to be inspired to make a health change or stay inspired to remain on course. We’re healthier and happier together. Tickets are available via this link, or the button below NHSA Seminar 2026 | Natural Health Society
Would you like to join our natural health community? Memberships start from just $36 per year.
Thank you! We would like to extend a huge thank you to everyone who responded to our call for help at the end of last financial year. Although we didn’t quite reach our goal of being cost neutral last financial year, we got very close thanks to your amazing support. Remember, funds from our memberships, product sales, event registrations and donations are put straight back into promoting better health naturally.
Yours in health,
Rebecca and the NHSA team