[AdamHominem]

You're implying that because they're within legal limits everything is A-OK (how are the limits set? Exhibit A: US drinking water pollutant limits, which were raised by Bush, not based on science)

...then launching into an ad hominem attack (either the pesticide amounts are safe or not, and it has nothing to do with who is asking "is this safe or not?")

...and jumping on the word "fear" (I say "I fear the gun you've pointed at me is loaded and the safety off, would you stop pointing it at me until you check it?" You: "Oh ho look who says they're about to get shot based on NOTHING BUT FEAR". No, I'm asking you to CHECK the gun, and in the meantime stop pointing at me, because the nonzero chance of me suffering harm)

...followed by a lot of personal opinion about modern farming techniques

...including a bunch of hand-waiving about how an incredibly complex problem will be magic-bulleted (or even helped) by rolling back the incredibly loose environmental rules farmers are required to follow.

The reason we have 'trouble' feeding 7 billion humans is because of trade policies and protectionism. For example, corn in Mexico is artificially high in price because the US turns a fuckton of its corn into ethanol (which is an energy-negative process) and high fructose corn syrup (which is only cost-effective because the price of sugar imports is kept artificially high by government regulation, to protect US sugar producers.) It's also because we do things like dump food in countries with hunger, thus collapsing prices for local farmers (who then can't survive and stop farming), instead of helping those countries produce or buy more food.

Also, please provide evidence that EU farmers (using lower pesticide amounts) have lower yields than US farmers. Don't forget to account for the cost of the pesticides vs reduced yield.

[formerly_proven]

> You're implying that because they're within legal limits everything is A-OK (how are the limits set? Exhibit A: US drinking water pollutant limits, which were raised by Bush, not based on science)

The obverse is also true: "XY detected in ZY" on its own is not very meaningful, because many compounds can be detected in staggeringly low concentrations.

[varelse]

We found out the hard way that you can have manganese sediment in your drinking water to the point that the water comes out brown and full of sand and it doesn't violate EPA regulations just their recommendations as it clogs all your plumbing fixtures and sets you up for a huge repair bill. And the water company is absolutely not responsible in any way.

[guru4consulting]

Long ago, I had worked at EPA OPP division, the office of pesticide protection. In general, the regulations are not enough. I won't be able to share all the details, but I can say that these kinds of regulations sometime help the pesticide companies because they can legally do the illegal/unethical things.

[TedDoesntTalk]

Another example: EPA allows up to 15 µg/L of lead in drinking water. But lower levels are known to be dangerous:

“Researchers now know, blood lead levels in children as low as five micrograms per deciliter — the Centers for Disease Control's "level of concern" — can lead to IQ deficits and increases in behavior problems like ADHD and conduct disorder.

In adults, low-level exposure of 10 micrograms per deciliter can cause high blood pressure and kidney problems.”

And the CDC has said that no level of lead in blood is safe.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/08/13/489825051...

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/lead/final/monographhealt...