22

Is there any evidence to suggest that commercially available fruit/vegetable washes can effectively remove pesticides from produce?

Here are some example claims:

Veggie Wash uses natural cleaners from citrus, corn and coconut to break up the wax, soil and agricultural chemicals on fruits and vegetables so that it can be easily and safely rinsed away.


Mom’s Veggiewash is a mild surfactant which has been specially formulated to dissolve and remove pesticide residues from the skin of fruits and vegetables. Studies have shown it removes at least 94% of oil-based chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticide residue from produce.

However, there appears to be evidence contrary to the claims above:

The mechanical action of rubbing the produce under tap water is likely responsible for removing pesticide residues. Mild detergents or fruit and vegetable washes do not enhance the removal of pesticide residues from produce above that of rinsing with tap water alone.

My questions are:

  1. Are washes necessary to remove pesticides vs. using water alone?

  2. Do washes remove pesticides so that any remnant level of pesticides could be considered outside of a harmful range?

  3. Are there any types of pesticides that washes are more effective at removing than others. For example, I'm not particularly concerned with neonicotinid-based pesticides, but I am more concerns with organophosphates

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
InquilineKea
  • 1,069
  • 2
  • 10
  • 15
  • 3
    You assume a questionable premise as given. I’d be *really* wary of those sites you linked. Reddit? Not a reliable resource. And even there some have remarked that most really dangerous pesticides are actually banned. The risk seems to be greatly exaggerated. And Quora, claiming that organic food is healthier? Oh, pur-lease. As if organic food didn’t have poisonous substances. In particular, organic food also uses (some) pesticides. I’d be wary of any article that insinuates the opposite in the very first sentence. This doesn’t negate the fundamental concern, but the resources are lacking. – Konrad Rudolph Aug 21 '11 at 18:48
  • 4
    The Quora article is downright dishonest. It mentions DDT, which has been banned for ages, and Ziram, of which the danger through inhalation is well established, but so is its relative safety when ingested with food. – Konrad Rudolph Aug 21 '11 at 18:52
  • Just because DDT has been banned for years doesn't mean it's not still present in the soil, or present as a residue on imported foods. – Darwy Aug 21 '11 at 19:45
  • "Reddit? Not a reliable resource" Reddit AskScience has a higher density of graduate students than any other place on the Internet, and *extensively* goes into discussions that involve the peer-reviewed literature. It's an entirely different thing from Reddit itself now. – InquilineKea Aug 21 '11 at 21:42
  • 2
    @inq so, have you made up your mind already? The purpose of this site is certainly not "I have this opinion, discuss". – Sklivvz Aug 21 '11 at 23:29
  • 1
    @InquilineKea: I suggest that you combine your last four comments, add them to your question, and then delete those [last four] comments. – Randolf Richardson Aug 22 '11 at 00:14
  • 1
    Oh okay I'll try that – InquilineKea Aug 22 '11 at 02:36
  • 1
    I can only answer anecdotally that, when in Mexico, not washing vegetables was a guarantee that we would get sick. It wasn't a scientific study, just an observation that serious consequences (not just diarrhea) would happen. It felt like a hangover for days. Also, I'd look to Ars Technica for a good concentration of grad students as well. – mmr Aug 22 '11 at 03:11
  • 2
    Articles linked to are provided purely for debating purpose (just for effect) and not for evidence to the claim in the question. I have edited to provide linked claims and removed any debate. – going Aug 22 '11 at 03:32
  • @mmr: Did you wash with tap water, or imported bottled water? I'm reminded of the expression "When in Mexico, _don't drink-ah dah watah!_" – Randolf Richardson Aug 22 '11 at 03:59
  • 1
    @Konrad not just is DDT banned but it's well known not to be harmful to humans :) – jwenting Aug 22 '11 at 06:11
  • 1
    @jwenting I disagree; there are known side effects of DDT exposure, especially in children. – Darwy Aug 22 '11 at 06:32
  • 4
    @InquilineKea Reddit, like other questionable sources that don’t count as reliable here, lack accountability. r/AskScience may have the highest density of grad students [citation needed!] but it also has one of the highest percentage of bat-sh*t crazy trolls and well-meaning but uninformed enthusiasts. – Konrad Rudolph Aug 22 '11 at 06:52
  • 1
    DDT may have some side effects in extreme concentrations, but nothing near to what the agents that are now used in its stead have (let alone the massive resurgence of malaria caused by the banning of the only agent effective at combatting it ever devised by man). – jwenting Aug 22 '11 at 11:48
  • 1
    @Randolf Richardson-- we actually washed with a fruit wash we got at a grocery store (I forget the brand). Washing with water was not very effective, either bottled or local. – mmr Aug 22 '11 at 13:29
  • 1
    @Konrad - "it also has one of the highest percentage of bat-sh*t crazy trolls" [citation needed, definition needed] :) – user5341 Aug 22 '11 at 15:41
  • 1
    @Jwenting DDT is still in use in malaria stricken countries such as India - it was *never* banned there. Unfortunately, as is the case with most pesticides, its intended target is becoming immune. Also, I'd recommend you examine the evidence behind DDT/DDE levels in women and its neurological effects on their children. – Darwy Aug 23 '11 at 12:44
  • 1
    Some spray on pesticides imbed into the skin of the fruit, which cannot be washed off. – Moab Aug 24 '11 at 02:24
  • Anyone remember singing "**DDT is good for me**" more than 20 years ago after seeing the TV commercials on the channels with cartoons? If not, maybe this picture will refresh your memory: http://www.docteurdavidelia.fr/images/goodme47.jpg (_Image of a little girl, animals, and food singing "DDT is good for me."_) – Randolf Richardson Aug 24 '11 at 06:22
  • Also related to http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1941/is-poisoning-possible-from-preservative-on-orange-zest/2451#2451 – Darwy Aug 24 '11 at 12:43

2 Answers2

17

According to this German web page, scientists from the Hochschule Albstadt-Sigmaringen have investigated this in 2006. It is reported that they compared three cleaning methods: rubbing with a microfiber cloth, using some fruit wash, and using just cold water. All three apparently had about the same efficacy, and could only remove about 2/3 of the pesticides from sweet peppers, and a mere 1/3 from grapes.

Here is a link to actual research paper: http://www.aid.de/data/pdf_eif/eif_2006_03_leitart2.pdf

Ben
  • 1,243
  • 8
  • 20
Hendrik Vogt
  • 327
  • 2
  • 6
12

Summary: No, it seems vegetable washes (a.k.a. produce washes) generally don't really help remove pesticides... but that isn't the point of them... but even at their main task of removing microbes, they may or may not be effective.

Are Pesticides the Real Problem?

We wash produce to remove a number of contaminants:

  • Dirt
  • Artificial Wax
  • Microbes including bacteria and viruses
  • Pesticide

From a health perspective, the microbes should be a far greater concern than the trace amounts of pesticide remaining. (e.g. FDA recommendations don't even mention pesticides; they recommend washing to avoid harmful bacteria.)

According to one reviewer:

While I found lots of how-to advice on the Internet about removing pesticides, I didn’t find a single wash that claims to do so.

Now, this reviewer clearly didn't find Veggie Wash and FIT Fruit and Vegetable Wash, whose manufacturers have made those claims, but I am using this just to support the idea that produce washes aren't primarily aimed at cleaning pesticides.

Further discussion of the alleged dangers/safety of pesticides (at the dosages found on produce) probably deserves its own Skeptics.SE question.

Given the problem is broader than merely pesticides, I have included some studies below that don't look at pesticides, but I think are relevant in evaluating fruit washes.

Which Specific Case?

The question of how much cleaner the produce becomes is difficult to answer because of the diverse set of situations we could measure:

  • The type of fruit wash.
  • The type of pesticide/species of microbes.
  • The type of fruit (compare washing firm-skinned tomatoes with soft-skinned peaches or high-surface-area grapes.)
  • Whether the washing is done by the consumer or the producer - I have focussed on the consumer here. For producer issues, this is a good starting point.

So, we can't give a single, simple answer.

Some Data Points

Here are some data-points from individual studies:


This experiment looked at:

  • Twelve pesticides - including DDE (a metabolite of DDT, that has been banned)
  • Several four commercial produce washes: FIT, Fruit & Vegetable Wash, Organiclean and Vegi-Clean
  • They were compared to detergent solution, to rinsing in tap water alone, and not washing.
  • Several types of produce: lettuce, strawberry and tomatoes.

First, they checked that water removed pesticides. They found all but three types of pesticide were "significantly reduced". (I don't know what that term means in this case.)

Then they tried comparing the washes.

The mechanical action of rubbing the produce under tap water is likely responsible for removing pesticide residues. Mild detergents or fruit and vegetable washes do not enhance the removal of pesticide residues from produce above that of rinsing with tap water alone.


This paper looked at a couple of experiments variously involving:

  • Dirt, Wax, a "cocktail" of organophosphorous and organochlorine pesticides, and contaminating it with Tryptone Soya broth and ground beef brothes.
  • An unnamed (in the abstract) produce wash, with and without a paper towel.
  • It was compared to water (with and without a paper towl), a produce brush and a chlorine solution.
  • Several types of produce: waxed apples, unwaxed apples, cucumbers and lemons.

Generally,

Water rinse and paper towel dry was found superior to all other methods tested.

For pesticides:

any treatment that included wiping with paper towels showed increased effectiveness over similar treatments or controls

For the Tryptone Soya broth, the chlorine dip was better than water rinse and paper towel. For the beef contaminant, water rinse and paper towel was better.

The efficacy shown by paper towels usage in this diverse set of experiments is based on frictional removal of offending soils.


This measured actual produce being served at a university dining hall.

  • It looked at any microflora they could culture. This one is not about pesticides.
  • It compared before washing, after washing in water and after washing in Victory produce wash.
  • It looked only at lettuce.

They find the high contaminated lettuces had less microflora on them when washed in the produce wash with water.

Our results indicate that Victory produce wash is effective in reducing indigenous flora on lettuce during food service preparation.

I note the authors had some caveats about the techniques used.


This looked at a number of different washing solutions.

  • It looked only at strawberries.
  • They strawberries were innoculated with 4 different viruses and bacteria. This one is not about pesticides.
  • It compared warm and cool water, seven various chlorine, bleach and phosphate solutions plus Fit produce wash, Healthy Harvest, liquid and automatic dishwashing liquid, saline and vinegar.

While they didn't top the lists, the produce washes outperformed water:

The consumer-oriented produce wash Fit was very effective (>99%) in reducing the numbers of bacteria but not in reducing the numbers of viruses. Another wash, Healthy Harvest, was significantly less effective than Fit in reducing bacterial pathogens but more effective for viruses.


This study was trying to check that a particular result was reproduceable by trying it at three different labs.

  • They looked only at tomatoes (but suggests the results will apply to " similar fruits and vegetables with rigid, smooth surfaces.")
  • They contaminated the tomatoes with five different types of Salmonella. (This is not about pesticides.)
  • They compared Fit produce wash, sterile water and "neutralizer broth".

Fit produce wash worked better than water or the neutralizer broth at removing Salmonella.

Treatment with PW resulted in reductions in the number of Salmonella 2 to 4 logs greater than those achieved with the sterile water or D/E neutralizer broth controls.


The Food Safety & Health department of the University of Wisconsin took one manufacturer's claims to task: FIT Fruit and Vegetable Wash: Do the Ads and Research Match?

They showed that the claims made by the company were based on experiments that did not match realistic situations, and that the cleanliness it implied might not translate to real-world benefits.

e.g. they claim that some experiments were done on glass containers rather than fruit, and that pesticides were applied immediately before harvest, which is not how fruit is normally consumed.

Fit's overall claim is to provide a convenient and more effective way to CLEAN fresh produce better than water alone. It make no claims for increased safety of quality. Fit may indeed clean produce better than water by removing wax and fingerprints. There is no available proof that Fit increases safety of produce.

Overall

There are plenty of studies of various aspects of the effectiveness of produce washes. It is clear that pesticides are not the only reason to consider them.

The results of the studies are somewhat mixed and almost contradictory, which may be due to the large number of differences between the situations. In the absence of a formal review of the literature (which I have looked for but didn't find), we might turn to organisations that evaluate such risks:

The US FDA Recommendation is to use running water.

Washing fruits and vegetables with soap or detergent or using commercial produce washes is not recommended.

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638