A recently conducted study carried out for IFOAM has apparently found that synthetic pesticides are “more dangerous” than natural pesticides.

According to IFOAM (formally know as the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements), the European pesticide industry has issued warnings against natural pesticides, due to what the industry describes as “ecological trade-offs implied by an increase of organic agriculture”, such as an “increased overall volume of pesticide use in Europe”.

IFOAM recently sought to carry out what it called a “fact check” of these industry claims, through a scientific examination of both synthetic and natural products.

This study looked at 256 active substances from pesticides only permitted in conventional farming in Europe, and 134 substances allowed in organic farming. They were examined in terms of their hazard potential and risk, as well as the frequency of their use.

The results of this study were published in the scientific journal Toxics, which publishes research on toxic chemical and materials.

Of the 256 mostly synthetic pesticide active substances allowed only in conventional agriculture, 55% carried health or environmental hazard warnings. For the 134 natural active substances also allowed in organic farming, only 3% had health warnings.

Warnings related to harm to unborn children, carcinogenicity, or acute lethal effects were found in 16% of pesticides used in conventional agriculture, and in none of the products used in organic farming.

It was also found that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued health-based guidance values for acceptable occupational or dietary intake for 93% of conventional pesticide products but only 7% of natural active substances.

Reacting to these findings, Jan Plagge, president of IFOAM Organics Europe, said: “It is now clear that synthetic active substances allowed in conventional farming are way more hazardous and problematic than natural active substances approved in organic farming.”

IFOAM concerned over greenwashing

In other recent IFOAM news, the organisation warned against greenwashing through the misuse of food labels and claims relating to “regenerative agriculture”.

IFOAM welcomed the adoption of some regenerative practices in conventional farming, but said: “While the reasoning and farming method behind a claim like ‘regenerative’ can be with the best intentions, it is just as much used for greenwashing purposes.

IFOAM is concerned that the use of this term is taking forms that are undermining the meaning of regenerative agriculture, including organic farming.