Pesticides and Fertilizers: Balancing Safe, Healthy Food Production

Pesticides and fertilizers protect crops, keep food affordable, and support environmental health

Chemical use in agriculture is controversial, with many of us wondering how pesticides and fertilizers affect our food.

With so much information out there, it’s easy to feel like we’re compromising on safety if we buy conventionally grown foods (AKA grown with synthetic pesticides and fertilizers). But here’s what might surprise you: Pesticides and fertilizers are some of the most tightly regulated substances in North America, and they’re essential tools for producing safe, affordable, and nutritious food for everyone.

In simple terms, pesticides and fertilizers are like ‘medicine’ and ‘vitamins’ for crops, protecting plants from threats and providing nutrients that support healthy growth. Farmers depend on these tools to help maintain a steady supply of fruits, vegetables, grains, and pulses. Without them, crop losses from pests and nutrient depletion would be widespread, impacting food availability and prices.

In a kitchen setting, a person is washing vegetables, including a yellow bell pepper, tomato, and cucumber under the faucet—mindful of precision agriculture pesticides for safer produce.

A pesticide is a substance used to protect plants from threats like insects, weeds, fungi, or diseases. Here’s how different types of pesticides work:

bug
Insecticides
Target harmful insects that can damage crops.
plant
Herbicides
Control weeds that compete with crops for water, sunlight, and nutrients.
Group 51
Fungicides
Prevent or treat fungal diseases that can rot or weaken crops.
A tractor with a green-yellow tank attachment plows a dry, stubbly field under a clear blue sky, showcasing the role of pesticides and fertilizers in farming to enhance productivity.

Fertilizers, on the other hand, act like a multivitamin for the soil, adding back essential nutrients that crops pull out as they grow. Conventional farmers often use synthetic fertilizers to replace nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, ensuring soil fertility for future seasons. Organic farming doesn’t allow synthetic fertilizers, so organic farmers rely on crop rotations, compost, and natural fertilizers. These techniques can be effective, but they also mean that organic farms face higher risks of nutrient depletion, and organic yields are often lower.

Both pesticides and fertilizers used in conventional farming are regulated with strict safety standards. In the U.S. and Canada, the EPA and Health Canada evaluate each product to ensure it’s safe for humans, animals, and the environment. For example, regulators set Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs), which are safety levels that keep pesticide residues far below harmful amounts. MRLs are so conservative that you’d need to eat nearly your weight in apples every day to approach even the lowest harmful exposure level.

Farmers aim to minimize applications of both pesticides and fertilizers. Every time a farmer passes over a field with equipment, it’s costly—not just in the price of the products but also in fuel, equipment wear, and labor costs. And heavy equipment can compact the soil, which affects water absorption, soil health, and root growth. To avoid these impacts, farmers rely on precision technology to apply the right amount, only when and where it’s needed. This reduces environmental impact while ensuring crop protection.

With careful management, farmers balance the need to protect crops with their responsibility to safeguard the environment. This approach supports safe food production while keeping costs reasonable, so healthy food remains accessible to everyone.

When you buy food in North America, you can be confident it’s grown with your safety in mind. With strict regulations and responsible farming practices, pesticides and fertilizers are used in ways that protect both crops and consumers. Conventionally grown food is at least as safe and nutritious than organic food. 

A plate of grilled meat with boiled potatoes and a fresh salad of lettuce, cherry tomatoes, red onion, and dill garnish showcases the bounty made possible by precision agriculture. This method optimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers in farming for sustainable harvests.
166
PEOPLE
The average conventional farmer in the US and Canada feeds 166 people. That’s one person responsible for feeding or a small-town hockey arena every day.
A tractor spreads fertilizer across freshly tilled soil, featuring large rear wheels and a red spraying mechanism. This scene highlights the role of precision agriculture in balancing fertilizers and pesticides for optimal crop health.
Fertilizers are critical to feeding the world. Without them, we would lose half our food supply and face widespread hunger.
A vibrant outdoor market stall displays a variety of fresh vegetables, including bell peppers, cucumbers, and lettuce, thriving from the balanced use of fertilizers and pesticides in farming, with vendors and shoppers bustling in the background.
Farmers today use crop protection products only when absolutely necessary, just like you’d take Tylenol only when you have a headache.
190
COUNTRIES
190 countries worldwide participate in organic farming, but only 76 have implemented organic regulations.
30-40%
LESS FOOD
Organic farming produces 30-40% less food than conventional farming.
A stack of legal documents is placed next to a wooden gavel on a table, resembling the careful deliberation needed in addressing regulations related to pesticides and fertilizers in farming.
Today’s food safety regulations in the U.S. alone involve over 35 federal statutes, 28 House and Senate committees, and four major government agencies, all working to keep our food safe.
An open package of chewing gum with a blue wrapper lies on the table, its contents partially unveiled. This simple scene can remind one of the careful unwrapping needed in precision agriculture, ensuring every detail—like how we regulate pesticides—is meticulously handled for optimal results.
Pesticide residues are measured in parts per million (ppm) or parts per billion (ppb). 1 ppm is like 1" in 16 miles—or the length of a stick of gum compared to the distance from NYC to Newark, New Jersey.
AdobeStock_83866376 (1) (1)
The MRL for glyphosate in wheat in the US is 5 parts per million (ppm). That’s like 5 drops of dye in an Olympic-sized swimming pool.
A pile of fresh red apples with a speckled pattern, clustered closely together, showcases the beauty of produce grown with precision agriculture pesticides for optimal safety and quality.
Maximum residue limits for pesticides are so low, you’d need to eat nearly your weight in apples every day to approach even the lowest harmful exposure level.
Three white mugs filled with robust black coffee, neatly arranged in a row on a pristine white background, evoke thoughts of morning rituals and agriculture's essence—much like the delicate balance of fertilizers vs pesticides in ensuring the rich flavors within each cup.
In one study, mice were fed up to 3 espresso shots’ worth of glyphosate per day for 2 years in an effort to simulate overexposure, and there was still no evidence of cancer development.
A digital illustration of a DNA double helix structure on a dark blue background, highlighting the intricate connections akin to precision agriculture where pesticides are applied with scientific accuracy.
No pesticides authorized for use on food today are genotoxic (meaning they can harm DNA or cause mutation in cells). There are none. That is an internationally regulated standard.
A vacuum cleaner head glides over a blue carpet, unveiling a pristine path much like precision agriculture reveals the best methods for applying pesticides safely.
Would you rather pick all the crumbs out of your carpet by hand or use a vacuum? Agricultural technology is no different.

References

Blanding, M. (2020, January 2). The strange case of Dr. Ho Man Kwok. Colgate Magazine. https://news.colgate.edu/magazine/2019/02/06/the-strange-case-of-dr-ho-man-kwok/

Boffetta, P., et al. (2021, June 15). Exposure to glyphosate and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: An updated meta-analysis. La Medicina del Lavoro. https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v112i3.11123

Cancer Research UK. (2023, July 26). Does eating processed and red meat cause cancer? Cancer Research UK. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/diet-and-cancer/does-eating-processed-and-red-meat-cause-cancer

Committee on a Framework for Assessing the Health, Environmental, and Social Effects of the Food System. (2015, June 17). A framework for assessing effects of the food system. National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK305175/

English, C. (2021, June 17). Glyphosate doesn’t cause cancer: New EU report confirms what we already knew. American Council on Science and Health. https://www.acsh.org/news/2021/06/17/glyphosate-doesnt-cause-cancer-new-eu-report-confirms-what-we-already-knew-156122

Goldhaber, S. (2022, October 11). Science finally winning the day in glyphosate cases. American Council on Science and Health. https://www.acsh.org/news/2022/10/11/science-finally-winning-day-glyphosate-cases-16602

Harvard Gazette. (2007, May 2). Too much water can be life-threatening for marathoners. The Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/05/too-much-water-can-be-life-threatening-for-marathoners/

Huang, J., et al. (2024, March). Global burden, risk factors, and trends of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A worldwide analysis. Cancer Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.7056

IARC. (2018). Red meat and processed meat. IARC Monographs. http://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Monographs-On-The-Identification-Of-Carcinogenic-Hazards-To-Humans/Red-Meat-And-Processed-Meat-2018

Institute of Medicine. (1998). Ensuring safe food: From production to consumption. National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK209121/

Key, T. J., et al. (2020, March 5). Diet, nutrition, and cancer risk: What do we know and what is the way forward? British Medical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m511

Li, Y., & Chapman, G. B. (2012). Why do people like natural? Instrumental and ideational bases for the naturalness preference. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00964.x

Market Research Future. (2024). Global homeopathy market overview. Market Research Future. https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/homeopathy-market-4970

Massick, S. (2024, February 9). Should you worry about aluminum in your antiperspirant? Ohio State University. https://health.osu.edu/health/skin-and-body/aluminum-in-antiperspirant

Mesnage, R., & Antoniou, M. (2017). Facts and fallacies in the debate on glyphosate toxicity. Frontiers in Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00316

Munroe, R. (n.d.). Radiation dose chart. XKCD. https://xkcd.com/radiation/

Nielsen, L. N., et al. (2018). Glyphosate has limited short-term effects on commensal bacterial community composition. Environmental Pollution. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.016

OECD. (2024). OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals. OECD iLibrary. https://doi.org/10.1787/20745753

Organic Trade Association. (n.d.). National list of allowed and prohibited substances. Organic Trade Association. https://ota.com/advocacy/organic-standards/national-list-allowed-and-prohibited-substances

Rosner, R., & Scott, C. (2003). Principles and practice of forensic psychiatry. CRC Press.

Simmons-Duffin, S. (2021, December 7). The NIH director on why Americans aren’t getting healthier, despite medical advances. Houston Public Media. https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/npr/2021/12/07/1061940326/the-nih-director-on-why-americans-arent-getting-healthier-despite-medical-advances

Slovic, P., et al. (1981). Facts and fears: Societal perception of risk. Advances in Consumer Research. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292458918_Facts_and_Fears_Societal_Perception_of_Risk

Sonnenburg, J. (2015, May 1). Shoot to kill: Control and controversy in the history of DDT science. Stanford Journal of Public Health. https://web.stanford.edu/group/sjph/cgi-bin/sjphsite/shoot-to-kill-control-and-controversy-in-the-history-of-ddt-science

U.S. EPA. (2024, March 12). DDT – A brief history and status. United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-brief-history-and-status

WHO. (2023, November 16). Food additives. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/food-additives

Wighton, K. (2011, March 16). From radioactive sweat to airport scanners—Top myths debunked by expert. Imperial College London. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/171326/from-radioactive-sweat-airport-scanners-myths/

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By continuing to browse on this website, you accept the use of cookies for the above purposes.