"On one hand, we can recommend 25 percent of sunscreens on the market," she said. "On the other hand, we can recommend 25 percent of sunscreens on the market."

After five years of advocating more effective and safe sunscreens, we're excited to see some progress in the marketplace. Last year we could recommend 20 percent of sunscreens, and the year before only eight percent.

Why is that? Well let us walk you through it -

Sunscreens are not required to provide meaningful full-spectrum protection: A good sunscreen will protect you equally from both ultraviolet-A rays (linked to aging, cancer) and ultraviolet-B rays (linked to tanning, cancer). Even sunscreens that claim "broad spectrum protection" won't have to prove they are effective against both rays until December of this year. Even of those that prove worthy of the "broad spectrum protection" label aren't necessarily dependable. Our analysis found half of the products that would earn U.S. certification would not be sold in Europe, where sunscreen manufacturers abide by voluntary European Union standards.

The U.S. is in the Stone Ages of sun protection: Manufacturers can use any of 27 sunscreen chemicals in Europe but only 17 in the U.S. Seven compounds that absorb UVA radiation are approved for use in Europe, but only three in the U.S. Most of the sunscreens available in Europe are more than three times more protective than avobenzone, the most common UVA filter available in the States.

Bad ingredients are plentiful: Remember when EWG publicized government testing on a common sunscreen ingredient that was, according to federal studies, linked to expediting the growth of skin legions and tumors? Well that ingredient, retinyl palmitate, a form of vitamin A, is still found in 25 percent of sunscreens. The good news? Manufacturers are catching up with the science. Last year vitamin A was in about a third of sunscreens we researched.

Tricky marketing gimmicks: Those FDA regulations that take effect in December will ban the use of certain misleading terms including "sweatproof," "waterproof" and "sunblock." The agency is also looking into super-high SPF claims. Studies have found that users of high-SPF sunscreens have similar or even higher exposures to harmful ultraviolet rays than people relying on lower SPF products.

What to do?

Consult EWG's sunscreen guide. We highlighted top-performing products that also score low on toxicity. This year we featured a price rating, since some sunscreens are expensive and not necessarily better.

Don't forget our sun safety tips. Sunscreen is only one part of a sun-protection routine. Seek shade, wear protective clothing along with a hat and sunglasses and avoid the sun during peak hours.

Image via

From the natural resources department, Dusty spoke with a Reuters reporter about Vermont's prospects of being the first state to ban fracking. Read on for more tidbits of EWG's news coverage from this week:

Sunscreens

USA Today: Sunscreen manufacturers get more time to update labels

The delay is "incredibly frustrating," says Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst with the Environmental Working Group, a Washington, D.C., advocacy group which has pushed the FDA to pass even stricter sunscreen regulations.

Forbes: FDA Delays Implementation Of New Sunscreen Regulations Until After Summer

Concerned consumers can find plenty of recommendations in the annual EWG sunscreen report as of May 16th, including the addition of many more child- and baby-safe sunscreens to the Skin Deep database, which includes information on some 1800 sunscreen products.

Los Angeles Times: FDA delays implementing sunscreen rules

"FDA just gave consumers 1,800 more reasons to turn to our sunscreen database," said Sonya Lunder, senior analyst with the Environmental Working Group...

Mother Jones: FDA Delays Sunscreen Rules. Again.

But as Environmental Working Group pointed out, the new rules continue "to allow oxybenzone, retinyl palmitate and several other ingredients in sunscreens despite scientists' concerns about their toxicity."

E&E News: FDA delays enforcement of new sunscreen-labeling rule

"We are baffled that FDA deems it necessary to delay such weak regulations," analyst Sonya Lunder said. "The agency has caved to industry pressure every step of the way."

Dallas Morning News: Fun in the sun? Better read this first....

The problem with vitamin A is that according to researchers at the Environmental Working Group, it may actually speed the growth of skin cancer that it is intended to prevent!

Natural Resources

Reuters: Vermont poised to be first state to outlaw fracking

"The drilling industry has shrunk EPA's enforcement power down to the size of a matchbox," Horwitt said. "There's not a lot the EPA can do."

Chemicals

Palm Beach Post: With Toxic Cleaners, Make a Clean Break

"The rest of the product can be a complete mystery to the consumer, Brown said.

Fox News: How to Breathe Easier at Home

At least 74 million Americans in 42 states drink tap water containing chromium (a metal that in some forms can cause cancer), a study from the Environmental Working Group reveals.

Huffington Post: Household Cleaners Hall of Shame List Highlights Hazardous Products

...consumer watchdog organization Environmental Working Group (EWG) has just released a veritable rogues' gallery of the most noxious, nasty household cleaners on the market, and it's certainly worth a look.

Huffington Post: Give the Best Mother's Day Gift Ever: A Real Spring Cleaning

Get rid of the most toxic cleaners from the Environmental Working Group's hall of shame.

Refinery 29: Juice Cleanses: Fad Or For Real?

In 2003,The Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York conducted a study with the Environmental Working Group on the toxins found within the fetal umbilical blood.

Cosmetics

Mother Jones: Is "Meat Glue" As Gross As It Sounds?

Environmental Working Group's "Skin Deep" cosmetics database lists it as an ingredient in six hair-care products and categorizes it as a "low hazard" substance.

Triple Pundit: It's biodegradable! Or is it?

So, if you are looking for safe cosmetics, then the EWG's Skin Deep database is the place to go

Examiner: How to choose a moisturizer

EWG, the Environmental Working Group, has created Skin Deep ®, a cosmetic database including product and ingredient safety ratings designed to educate consumers about products in the marketplace.

This flurry of activity grew out of one overarching conclusion embraced by scientists, physicians, policy makers, parents and the public interest community: Pesticides used in the cultivation of fruits and vegetables can cause serious and lasting harm to young children.

That didn't stop conventional agribusiness interests from trying hard to water down or remove provisions of the proposed law designed to protect infants and children. The industry argued that it would cut into their profits if they had to take children's health into consideration.

They lost that fight, but in the years that followed chemical agriculture has repeatedly enlisted its allies in Congress to try to dismantle the food safety law. And they're still trying.

In 1999, former Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) introduced legislation that would have amended FQPA and effectively kept the EPA from protecting children from harmful levels of toxic pesticides. It turned out that Pombo's bill was a word-for-word copy of a proposal written by the "Implementation Working Group" (IWG) - a front group formed by pesticide manufacturers and agricultural trade organizations. Pombo offered the Regulatory Fairness and Openness Act of 1999 following a meeting with California produce growers.

Fortunately, the defenders of the Food Quality Protection Act rallied to its defense. "The Pombo bill would be a major step backward," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.). "It would guarantee that the law we passed would never be implemented."

Conventional agriculture's campaign pulled out all the stops to try weaken or repeal the new pesticide law, marshaling its publications to disparage both it and the EPA.

As a Washington Post story by George Lardner Jr. and Joby Warrick noted in May 2000:

"Articles and editorials in the farming trade press predicted that continuing with the current law would produce economic disaster for growers and mean less fresh fruit and vegetables for children, who would suffer more illnesses and deaths as a result. One November (1999) article in the magazine The Packer even likened EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner to infamous mass murderer John Wayne Gacy."

Chemical agribusiness' spokesmen predicted that the safety standards implemented under FQPA would destroy American agriculture. The trade publication InsideEPA (subscription required) reported in May 1999) that:

"If the conservative default assumptions allowed under current law (FQPA) are used, some of the pesticides farmers now rely on will likely be pulled from the market, one industry source says. American farmers would be less competitive in the international market and could potentially be driven out of business, this source adds."

In the end, however, the Pombo bill failed, and more than a decade later, there is U.S.-grown food in abundance in every supermarket in the country.

In the years that followed, a number of pesticides that had been considered safe by conventional agriculture were found to be anything but, and EPA banned or restricted their use. And in virtually every instance when a pesticide came under the microscope of public health officials, chemical agribusiness went to the mattresses, fighting to try to block any action by EPA.

In 2006, for instance, EPA completed its FQPA-mandated review of the pesticide carbofuran, concluding that it harmed the nervous and reproductive systems and was too risky for consumers and workers:

"All products containing carbofuran generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment and do not meet safety standards, and therefore are ineligible for reregistration."

In December 2009, the agency officially revoked its earlier approval of carbofuran on U.S. food crops. .

Chemical agriculture fought that decision all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where five years later the Roberts court refused to hear the case (National Corn Growers Association et al v. EPA).

There are plenty of other example's of the industry's deny and delay tactics.

In 2010, when environmental and community groups pressed EPA to restrict chlorpyrifos (aka Lorsban or Dursban), one of Dow AgroSciences' popular products, industry ran this scare-tactic ad to try to persuade consumers that fresh produce would disappear if that chemical were no longer in produce growers' toolbox.

The battle goes on. Also in 2010, another agribusiness front group calling itself The Alliance for Food and Farming (AFF), which represents many of the same interests that fought the 1996 pesticide law, enlisted the unwitting assistance of American taxpayers when it secured a U.S. Department of Agriculture grant to attack the Environmental Working Group's Shopper's Guide to Pesticides in Produce. Members of The Alliance also lobbied the Obama administration to change how USDA releases the annual pesticide residue tests that EWG uses to produce the Shopper's Guide.

When the Alliance for Food and Farming or any representative of chemical agriculture tells consumers pesticides in food are perfectly safe and there is nothing to worry about, remember this history of what they've done, or not done, where public health is concerned.

USDA should be releasing its latest round of pesticide residue tests soon. When it does, EWG will do what we always do: Give eaters the best available list of fruits and veggies that carry the highest and lowest levels of pesticides - even if the AFF wishes we wouldn't.

Cosmetics

The Washington Post: The Potomac River, in good health and bad

To find products that are environmentally friendly, go to www.
ewg.org/skindeep.

Shine from Yahoo! Canada: 5 Scary Cosmetic Ingredients Explained

While petrolatum may contain trace impurities of a class of chemicals called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) - probable carcinogens - manufacturers can eliminate the contaminants via a chemical process, says Nneka Leiba, a senior analyst with the Environmental Working Group.

Examiner.com: How to find a healthy alternative to your favorite fine fragrance

According to a study by the Environmental Working Group, it contains 18 secret chemical ingredients not listed on the label.

Chemicals and Cleaners

Forbes: Procter & Gamble Defends Against Claims that Tide Detergents Contain Carcinogens

Similar to the group's popular Skin Deep database for personal care and cosmetic products, the new EWG Cleaners database will enable consumers to search for particular products and find out more about what's in them.

Treehugger: 5 Common Household Cleaners Hazardous to Your Health

Environmental Working Group (EWG) to the rescue.

Mother Nature Network: Group points finger at worst of the worst with Cleaners Hall of Shame list

In anticipation of the release of a comprehensive cleaning product safety database this fall, the Environmental Working Group publishes its Cleaners Hall of Shame list to spotlight all of the lowlights.

KCWY NBC 13 Wyoming: Hidden Dangers of Household Cleaners

The Environmental Working Group created a list called the "Cleaners Hall of Shame".

Consumer Reports: EPA puts Erin Brockovich chemical on drinking water watch list

If you're concerned about chromium-6 contaminating your drinking water, installing a point-of-use water filter in your home could offer protection, according to the Environmental Working Group.

The Sacramento Bee: Integrative Medicine: How to reduce exposure to toxins

For lots of great information on other ways to protect yourself and your family, look up the Environmental Working Group

Patch: Reducing the Risk Of Early Puberty

The Environmental Working Group reports that the plastic bottles used in liquid baby formula may leach excessive amounts of BPA.

Natural Resources

Bloomberg: Drillers May Frack First, Disclose Later Under Draft Plan

The Washington-based Environmental Working Group said in February that some of the chemicals already disclosed by the companies are known to cause cancer or reproductive harm.

Nicholas Kristof, a columnist for The New York Times, has written about the expanding evidence that hypospadias and other birth defects in people and wildlife that may be linked to the daily bombardment of endocrine disruptors in household goods, pesticides and other man-made products.

"Shouldn't our government be as vigilant about threats in our grocery stores as in the mountains of Afghanistan?" Kristof asks.

Yes, it should.

Reforming the process by which the Environmental Protection Agency reviews and approves chemicals for commercial use is an issue that generates passionate advocacy. All Americans are exposed to toxic chemicals every single day - even before we are born. And, as Kristof points out, some of these chemicals have the potential to severely undermine our children's health and their futures.

No wonder concerned customers have lost faith in products that aren't "green." It's virtually impossible to walk the aisles of a large retailer in search of diapers without seeing signs marketing products as "BPA-free" or "phthalate-free". The organic industry now hauls in more than $30 billion a year, largely because shoppers don't want to eat pesticides and other synthetic chemicals mixed into food and food packaging.

You don't have to spend much time online to realize that consumers are increasingly angry that cosmetics, blankets, toys, baby seats, sofas and all manner of everyday goods are impregnated with chemicals with unpronounceable names and dubious or non-existent safety records.

Most members of Congress have probably have heard of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act. But they might be as alarmed as most Americans when they find out more than 80,000 chemicals, including many endocrine disruptors, have been rushed onto the market with no assurances that they are safe for people.

No parent would knowingly choose a toy contaminated with lead. We're certain the same holds true for those parents - of both parties - who are members of Congress.

People are furious with a federal government they perceive to be too badly broken to serve the needs of average Americans. And they are furious with a chemical industry that floods the market with products that may not be safe. Thanks to the leadership of Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Congress and the Obama administration have a real chance to address one source of this anger: regulation of toxic chemicals in consumer goods. Congress and the Obama administration should make sure the EPA gives top priority to endocrine disruptors in the nation's drinking water, because when the water supply is contaminated, everyone is exposed.

No matter which party is in power, the White House and Congress should come together on this very serious and pressing public health crisis. A glass of water should be free of carcinogens and endocrine disruptors. So should toys, toothbrushes, countertop cleaners, infant formula and store receipts. That's something we can all agree on.

Image via

Much of his research has focused on how atrazine affects amphibians, especially their processes of metamorphosis and sex differentiation. Be warned - it's not pretty.

In December 2010, Professor Hayes, who teaches at the University of California, Berkeley, gave a talk with mother and filmmaker Penelope Jagessar Chaffer at the TEDWomen conference in Washington DC to discuss what babies (and adults) can learn from frogs. Jenn Savedge at Mother Nature News posted a video of their appearance on her blog post Friday (April 27).

Uncomfortable with a chemical that causes sex-changes in frogs to be allowed in our water and on our farms? Let Washington know. Legislation introduced by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) would ban the herbicide in the U.S. Rep. Ellison's bill - H.R.4318 - would specifically prohibit production, sale, use, importation or exportation of any pesticide containing atrazine.

image via

Time: Is Spring Cleaning a Health Risk?

It's time for spring cleaning, but before you pull out the spray bottles and solvents, researchers at the Environmental Working Group (EWG) say you should double-check what you're using to sanitize.

Babble: Toxic Cleaners 'Hall of Shame' List Released

The Environmental Working Group has released a list of the most toxic household cleaners, some of which claim to be "green."

Examiner.com: Environmental Working Group reveals names

Ken Cook, President of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), has released a sneak preview of their EWG Cleaners Database 2012, to be released this fall.

Good: 'Hall of Shame' Calls Out the Terrifying Chemicals in Your Household Cleaners

EWG, which produces that handy Dirty Dozen list of foods to buy organic, is compiling information about the toxic chemicals in thousands of cleaners...

EmaxHealth: Check your home cleaning supplies: Even 'green' may be toxic

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is again helping consumers weed out toxins in the home.

My Health News Daily: Research Group Releases List of Unhealthy Household Cleaning Products

Household cleaners, including some labeled with claims such as "natural," contain chemicals that are hazardous to human health, according to a new report from the Environmental Working Group.

Toxics

Natural News: Independent research identifies cancer-causing chemicals in food packaging, fabric coatings

...the consumer advocacy organization Environmental Working Group (EWG) is calling for the government to take action and stop ignoring the problem.

My San Antonio: Tips from Living Green S.A.

Use kitty litters made from wheat or recycled newspaper over clay-based litters that come from strip mines, the Environmental Working Group says.

Salon: A new autism theory

Belli cites recent studies by the Environmental Working Group that discovered an average of 200 pollutants in the umbilical cord blood of infants.

ABC 15 Arizona: Could the 'Erin Brockovich' chemical be in your water?

"We're most concerned about chromium-6 and cancer," said Dr. Rebecca Sutton, a senior scientist at Environmental Working Group (EWG).

Patch: Reducing Your Children's Risk of Early Puberty

The Environmental Working Group reports that the plastic bottles used in liquid baby formula may leach excessive amounts of BPA.

Fox News: How to make ourselves, our families and our planet healthier on Earth Day

Babies are being born pre-polluted, meaning industrial chemicals have been found in umbilical cord blood - 200 on average, according to a 2009 report by the Environmental Working Group.

Cosmetics

BlissTree: What Is 'Clean Beauty,' Anyway?

In fact, the Environmental Working Group says that only about 89% of the 10,000-plus ingredients used in cosmetics have been tested for safety by the FDA

The Vancouver Sun: Defining the ingredients

... Skin Deep, a cosmetics safety data-base produced by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a United States environmental group that researches and advocates for better control of toxic chemicals and other concerns.

Examiner: Within Your Skin: 5 Toxic Ingredients Athletes Must Avoid

Women use more products and ingredients (12 products, 168 ingredients) than men (6 prods, 85 ingred.) and are more at risk to developmental toxins.

Gloucester Times: Senior Lookout: The bright and sunny sides of today's sunscreen

According to the Environmental Working Group's rating scale, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide pose less risk than oxybenzone, but oxybenzone is used in many more sunscreen products.

Huffington Post: Burt's Bees, Tom's Of Maine Owned By Fortune 500 Companies

Consumers interested in learning more about the ingredients in beauty products and how to determine whether they are safe can explore Environmental Working Group's database of cosmetics.

Natural Resources

Care2: EPA Steps in on Fracking

... according to the Environmental Working Group, fracking has been taking place in California for over 60 years in six state counties with further development and growth projected.

Last month, the New York Times published a story about my efforts when I was pregnant to rid my home of toxic chemicals. The story featured a photo of my 18-month-old daughter and recounted how I threw out a large pile of cosmetics, cleaners and other products that my research, using the Environmental Working Group's online Skin Deep Cosmetics Database, found to contain dangerous substances. While at the time I thought I was doing the right thing for my family, when I read readers' comments, I felt as if I were on Nickelodeon, in one of those scenes when an unsuspecting person has an entire bucket of green slime dumped on her head.

]]> http://www.enviroblog.org/2012/04/weve-been-slimed.html http://www.enviroblog.org/2012/04/weve-been-slimed.html Children's Health Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:12:24 -0500 News coverage of EWG topics including cosmetics and household toxins appeared across the web from sites including the Los Angeles Times, Shine by Yahoo!, and Prevention. EWG released a statement on a finding from an independent science panel finding PFOA, an ingredient that has been used to make non-stick coatings and stain-resistant materials, is linked to testicular and kidney cancers.

Cosmetics

Los Angeles Times: Beauty products made with natural ingredients

... the average person uses approximately 10 personal-care products daily with about 125 ingredients, according to the Environmental Work Group, a watchdog nonprofit that gathers data on consumer products.

Examiner: Now you really do know what's in that beauty product!

If you are curious to see what those hard to decipher ingredients in your daily makeup kit are, check out http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/.

Prevention: A Sneaky New Diabetes Trigger

You can also search the Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep Cosmetics Database to see how safe your current products are.

Globe and Mail: How green is it? How to sort out the environmental hype

Launched in 2004, the Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep Database provides you with easy-to-navigate safety ratings for a range of products and ingredients.

She Knows: Earth-Friendly Beauty

I recommend you look up every product on the Cosmetics Database first...

Fox News: The Toxic Truth about Buying Green

Look for products that list ingredients on their labels and cross check with the Environmental Working Group's Safe Cosmetic Database to learn about the safety of the ingredients.

Chemicals

Shine by Yahoo!: 5 Health Dangers in Your Home

Safer options include plastics with the recycling labels 1, 2 and 4, according to Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst at the Environmental Working Group

Boulder Weekly: Chemical Linked to Cancer Found in 99 Percent of Americans

"Widespread pollution by PFOA should be a wake-up call that our chemical regulation system is severely broken," said Olga V. Naidenko, Ph.D., a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG).

Health Goes Strong: Earth Day Tip: Nix Flame Retardants

But here are a few things you can do to reduce your exposure (tips courtesy of the Environmental Working Group)...

Natural News: The superfood power of wild caught salmon

Research produced by the Environmental Working Group in 2003 showed that farmed salmon were contaminated with high levels of polychlorinated biphenyl's (PCB's).

From our toxics side, we commented on two new reports - one highlighting troublesome chemicals in nail polishes in California, and the other examining a link between phthalate exposure and diabetes.

Natural Resources

AlterNet: Unregulated Fracking for Decades? Why California May Be a Disaster Waiting to Happen

The situation became less clear after a recent investigative report from DC-based nonprofit Environmental Working Group explained that California has experienced 60 unregulated years of widespread fracking...

Also in: Salon

The Atlantic: Middle America Is Experiencing a Massive Increase in 3.0+ Earthquakes

The Environmental Working Group notes that more than 400,000 wells were drilled between 2001 and 2010, a 65% increase over the previous ten-year period.

Care2: Fracking in California?

...The Environmental Working Group came out with a damning report bringing together years of research to conclude that serious fracking has taken place in at least six California counties...

Chemicals

WebMD: Phthalates May Double Diabetes Risk

"There are chemicals in our environment including phthalates that may be able to interact with the body that changes the way we metabolize and regulate fat," says Johanna Congleton, PhD. She is a senior scientist for Environmental Working Group in Washington, D.C.

HealthDay: Common Plastics Chemical Might Boost Diabetes Risk

According to the Environmental Working Group, a group trying to rid hazardous chemicals from consumer products, there is no practical way to choose phthalate-free products.

Also in: U.S. News World Report

Chatelaine: How to reduce PFCs in your home

The Environmental Working Group suggests starting in the kitchen.

Cosmetics

Good Morning America: Safer Mani-Pedis: Steps You Can Take

If you're concerned about ingredients in your favorite brands of nail polish, Malkan suggested going to the Skin Deep online safety database, created by the Environmental Working Group,

KQED: The Ugly Side of Beauty: Toxic Chemicals in Nail Polish

WebMD: Is Your Nail Polish Toxic?

"The bottom-line finding is we can't trust the labels on some of these nail salon products that are claiming to be free of these toxic chemicals," says Rebecca Sutton, PhD, senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group.

Prevention: Your Risky Manicure

Honeybee Gardens and Aquarella are two water-based brands that have earned low-hazard ratings from the Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep Cosmetics Database.

New online videos from a chemical agribusiness front group show conventional growers straining to convince consumers that it's just fine to eat bug killers and weed killers.

The Alliance for Food and Farming, or AFF, which has lobbied the U.S. Department of Agriculture to tone down its annual pesticide residue tests on fruits and vegetables, has rolled out short videos in which California farmers answer questions usually reserved for scientists and health experts.

Among AFF's unsupported claims:

Is organic farming better for the environment than conventional farming?

AFF says: No. Rod Braga, a vegetable farmer from Soledad, Calif., says conventional agriculture is actually "very much easier on the environment."

Truth: The environmental benefits of organic agriculture far outweigh any offered up by conventional operations. Conventional farmers apply more than one billion pounds of highly toxic manmade pesticides and fungicides each year. These chemicals pollute not only the food supply but also air, drinking water and ultimately people's bodies. They have been found in the umbilical cord blood of newborns. Chemical fertilizer runoff from Midwest crop operations has introduced so much nitrate into the Mississippi River that the Gulf of Mexico has a Dead Zone the size of New Jersey literally chocking off aquatic life. Mega-farms throughout the country have also played a significant role in greenhouse gas emissions.

Are pesticides used in organic farming different from those used in conventional farming?

AFF: Not really. Grape and blueberry farmer Jon Marthedal of Fresno, Calif., contends that pesticides used on conventional agriculture are "really just synthetic versions of the organic compounds we use in our organic operations."

Truth: The U.S. has never banned or restricted the use of any organic pest control chemical because of potential risks to human health or the environment. Not one. However, dozens of conventional pesticides have been banned or their uses severely restricted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for several reasons, including health and environmental risks.

Is organic produce healthier than conventionally grown produce?

AFF: Nope. Marthedal dismisses the question as, "Do I want to drive a Chevy, or do I want to drive a Ford?"

Truth: A study published in September 2010 by scientists at Washington State University found that organically grown strawberries from California not only tasted better but also provided more nutrients than those grown with synthetic pesticides.

Jane Black wrote in The Washington Post:

A new study of 13 pairs of conventional and organic California strawberry farms over two seven-month growing seasons in 2004 and 2005 revealed that organic farms produced more flavorful and nutritious berries while leaving the soil more healthful and genetically diverse. In a surprising twist, the organic strawberries also had a longer shelf life than the other varieties.

Should I be worried about pesticide residues on my fruits and vegetables?

AFF: No. In tackling this question, farmer Marthedal said he and his family have farmed the same land for 100 years while spraying pesticides on their crops.

Truth: Dietary exposures to pesticides, particularly for children and babies in the womb, may cause adverse health effects including neurologic impairments and low birth weight. Last year, three separate studies arrived at similar conclusions: Prenatal pesticide exposure is linked to diminished IQ.

Other health problems that have been linked to low-dose exposure to pesticides include disruption of the hormonal system, lower levels of testosterone and other hormones, leukemia, lymphoma and Parkinson's disease.

In announcing these new videos defending pesticides on produce, AFF executive director Marilyn Dolan said, "Who better to talk with consumers about how fruits and vegetables are grown than the farmers of these products themselves?"

When I want an expert opinion on whether or not I should drink or smoke, I don't ask the owner of the local liquor store if the cigarettes and bourbon he's peddling are safe for my health.

The answers given by these farmers are riddled with half-truths, misleading statements and outright falsehoods.

Just last month Arysta LifeScience, the maker of a toxic pesticide used primarily by California and Florida strawberry growers, decided to pull one of its signature products, methyl iodide, from the market. The company acted under pressure calls for a ban from the public, leading scientific and public health experts and farmworkers. Members of the AFF fought a ban every step of the way.

The same crew took a similar stance when the predecessor to methyl iodide, methyl bromide, was being phased out for depleting the ozone layer. Representatives of the strawberry and tomato growers - the two crops that used the highly toxic pesticide - gained exemptions from the 1992 international agreement, commonly called the Montreal Protocol, which set in motion a worldwide effort to phase out all ozone depleting chemicals by 2000. Agribusiness vigorously opposed the methyl bromide ban. The United States is the only industrial country still using the fumigant, with 1.7 million pounds applied in California during the latest reporting year available, 2010, courtesy of the state's Department of Pesticide Regulation.

When chemical-dependent agriculture takes a page from the "All is well!" scene from Animal House and tries to persuade you that pesticides in our food and environment are perfectly fine, just remember who is delivering that message.

As you've likely noticed, Facebook recently released its Timeline feature for fan and brand pages. It's a great new way to tell stories and share and highlight memorable posts. Everyone is getting creative with the new format, so we set to work figuring out EWG's approach as well.

As we thought it through, we recognized that EWG is all about people - it's all about you, actually. We believe that you have a right to know what's in your food, air, water and consumer products, and you have the right to vital information that helps you make sound decisions for your your family's health. You have the right to be heard - and to be seen.

Ditto our Facebook community: It's your participation, your enthusiasm, your commentary that makes our community one of the most engaged and vibrant non-profit fan pages. We recognize that, and we want to build on it.

The first order of business is the oversized banner image that welcomes you to our Facebook page and sets the tone. We want that space to represent our community; we want it to reflect those we serve - that is, you and yours.

So we're asking you for help! Look around your home, your workplace, your child's school, your supermarket or farmers' market, and show us what EWG means to you. Give a thought to how our work affects you personally. Then grab your cell phone or camera, shoot an image that's emblematic of this and send it our way. We'll use the ones that best reflect EWG and our supporters to build a mosaic image for the page.

Send your image to ewgtimeline@ewg.org.