Mostly false Overinterpreted Certainty of evidence: moderate provisional C-VEG-13

Vegetables themselves are often harmful because of heavy pesticide use; organic diets show how much exposure conventional vegetables cause.

In short: This claim is mostly false: pesticide residues on conventional vegetables are measurable and may reduce part of their benefit, but even high-residue produce was not linked to higher mortality than eating little produce, and residues in regulated markets are mostly within legal limits; the evidence supports lower-residue choices, not avoiding vegetables.
Conclusion: Pesticide exposure is real and may reduce part of the benefit of produce, but it does not make vegetables harmful overall; lower-residue choices, washing and peeling are reasonable, avoidance is not.

Original statement

«الجهاز الهضمي للحيوانات المجترة تستطيع هضم السليلوز الموجود في الخضروات بكفاءة بفضل معدتها المتعددة والبكتيريا الخاصة»، أمّا «الإنسان بمعدته الواحدة لا يهضم السليلوز جيدًا، مما يسبب الغازات والانتفاخ»، و«الخضروات في حد ذاتها غالبًا ما تكون ضارة بسبب الاستخدام الواسع للمبيدات».

not verbatim – paraphrase. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

Vegetables themselves are often harmful because of heavy pesticide use; organic diets show how much exposure conventional vegetables cause.

Origin

Source status
Archive quote (no location given)
Attribution
Elawady (archive paraphrase; source video not given)
Origin
https://eltayebat.com/rule/leafy-greens-cucurbits/
Attribution uncertainty
The archive attributes this text to Dr. Diaa in its 'د. ضياء يقول' box but gives no video reference. Transcript check (the project's research files, keyword search of 307 archive transcripts): found_close_paraphrase (general terms). Pesticides sprayed on crops are mentioned in general terms (9mC8oDN2abw) and 'all these vegetables are pesticides' in n_zTgU4jdug (existing alt source). The statement about organic diets was not checked.
Claimed mechanism

Organophosphate and other pesticide residues.

Claimed health effect

Chronic toxicity.

Population concerned

Everyone

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Diverging source versions

الخضار ده كله مبيدات مبيدات

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! لايف الجمعه (Open source)
Published
19 December 2025
Timestamp
1:18:18 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube captions or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.

انا موجود في زمن الحبوب والبذور متهرمنه المبيدات الحشريه مرشوشه على على المزروعات والماكولات لحمه الحيوانات متعاصه هرمونات ومبيدات وتطعيمات

I live in an era of hormone-treated grains and seeds, insecticides sprayed on crops and foods, and animal meat stuffed with hormones, pesticides and vaccines.

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
ارتفاع ضغط البطن والاضطراب الهرموني وظهور كل ماهو مناعي #ضياء_العوضي (Open source)
Published
10 January 2026
Timestamp
0:47:17 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; YouTube original not checked; wording may contain recognition errors. Close paraphrase in general terms (pesticides on crops).

Scientific assessment

Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.

Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.

1. What was claimed?

Pesticides make vegetables harmful.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

Conventional diets lead to measurable organophosphate exposure (Lu 2006: metabolites of malathion and chlorpyrifos fell to non-detectable during organic diet, but the organic substitution covered fruit, vegetables, juices and wheat/corn products, with wheat/barley/soy-based items by far the most consumed (229 servings), so the reduction cannot be attributed to vegetables, and no health outcome was measured; Curl 2003: median dimethyl metabolites ~6 times higher with conventional diet).

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

Detection of metabolites is not evidence of harm; Curl 2003 itself estimated that organic produce shifts exposure 'from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk', not from harm to safety. EU data show low exceedance rates and EFSA assesses risk as low. The benefits of vegetable intake are large and consistent (Aune 2017).

4. What remains unclear?

Long-term effects of low-level mixtures are an active research area. In three US cohorts the mortality benefit of fruit and vegetables was seen only for low-residue produce (Sandoval-Insausti 2022, I-RES-106), and high intake of high-residue produce was associated with lower IVF success in one cohort (Chiu 2018, I-VEG-140); these findings need replication.

5. Which studies support it?

Lu 2006; Curl 2003 (exposure); Chiu 2018 (I-VEG-140, reproductive outcomes); Sandoval-Insausti 2022 (I-RES-106, benefit reduced with high-residue produce); Berlivet 2026 (I-VEG-142, organic substitution and postmenopausal breast cancer).

6. Which studies contradict it?

Sandoval-Insausti 2022 (high-residue produce not associated with higher mortality than eating <1 serving/day; HR 0.93, 0.81-1.07); EFSA 2023 and 2024 EU reports (I-VEG-15, I-RES-05, I-RES-06); Aune 2017.

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

EU MACP 2023: 13,246 samples, 2% above MRL, 1% non-compliant; national programmes 3.7% above MRL.

8. What is known about Egypt?

See C-VEG-14.

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

Residue concerns justify washing, varied sourcing or organic choices, not avoiding vegetables.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

Biomonitoring studies show that diet is the main organophosphate exposure route and that organic diets reduce urinary metabolites; this shows exposure, not harm. EU monitoring of 2023 found 2% of random samples above MRLs (1% non-compliant) and EFSA concluded a low risk to consumer health. Health benefits of vegetables are documented in large cohorts.

Source quality

Archive cites two small US biomonitoring studies (23 and 39 children).

Regional transferability

For EU produce, residue levels are regulated and mostly within limits; Egypt is addressed in C-VEG-14.

Individual exceptions

Organic produce reduces residue exposure for those who prefer it; washing and peeling reduce some residues.

Regional scope of the claim
depends on production conditions
Last reviewed
26 October 2026 provisional

Scientific evidence in detail

Overinterpreted – A real finding exists, but the claim draws more from it than the data allow (e.g. association taken as cause, animal data applied to humans, small effect presented as large).

Research question: Do pesticide residues make conventional vegetables harmful to health, compared with eating fewer vegetables or organic vegetables?

Research question in detail (PECO)
Population
General population, children, people trying to conceive
Intervention or exposure
Conventional vegetables with pesticide residues
Comparison
Organic/low-residue vegetables; low vegetable intake
Geographic scope
production- and regulation-dependent
Outcomes
  • pesticide biomarkers
  • mortality
  • cancer
  • reproductive outcomes

Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.

What speaks for the claim?

What speaks against the claim?

What does the overall evidence say?

Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.

Which position is better supported?

Residue exposure is real and may reduce part of the benefit of produce (Sandoval-Insausti 2022) and has been linked to lower IVF success; but high-residue produce was not associated with harm compared with eating little produce, and regulated-market residue levels are mostly within limits. Choosing lower-residue or organic produce, washing and peeling are reasonable; avoiding vegetables is not.

Why some studies weigh more

Large cohort outcome data weigh more than exposure biomarkers; overlapping Harvard cohorts (Sandoval-Insausti, Chiu, Wang) are not independent of each other.

Is a causal relationship established? Possible, not established Plausible for some outcomes; observational, exposure classified indirectly.

Remaining uncertainty

Long-term low-dose mixture effects.

Justified conclusion

Mostly false as stated ("vegetables are harmful"); a residue concern is legitimate.

Why do studies seem to disagree?

Sandoval-Insausti (benefit lost with high residues) and Chiu (reproductive harm) vs EU monitoring (low risk): outcome studies use US residue profiles and indirect exposure classification, monitoring compares with legal limits; they answer different questions.

Does this depend on the country?
General biological effects
Toxicology universal.
Eating habits
n/a
Origin of the food
Residue levels depend on country of production and enforcement.
Contaminants
Pesticide residues.
National production conditions
See C-VEG-14 for Egypt.
Legal rules
EU Regulation 396/2005 (I-RES-03).
Actual monitoring data
EU 2024: 98.8% compliance.

A regional difference is supported by robust data.

Statistical re-check
  • HR derivation from reported percentages; CI symmetry – Low-residue HR ~0.64 (0.59-0.68); high-residue 0.93 (0.81-1.07) -> no harm signal. recalculated
  • Convert % reductions into ratios – 0.82 (0.70-0.95) pregnancy; 0.74 (0.63-0.87) live birth. recalculated
  • CI touching 1 – Overall cancer 0.98 (0.95-1.00): borderline. recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
Main outcome
Mortality with high-residue vs low/no vegetable intake
Starting level
low (observational studies)
Reasons for downgrading
  • indirectness (residue classification)
  • imprecision
Result
low

Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.

Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
  • EFSA: The 2024 EU report on pesticide residues in food (I-RES-06) (2026) · Original publication
    Existing register entry: 98.8% of coordinated samples compliant; low risk to consumer health overall.
Search strategy

Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).

DatabaseDateSearchLooking forHitsIncluded
PubMed26 October 2026("pesticide residue*") AND ("fruits and vegetables" OR "fruit and vegetable") AND (mortality OR pregnancy OR "semen quality" OR cancer) AND (cohort OR prospective)supporting evidence16
PubMed26 October 2026("organic food" OR "organic diet") AND (cancer OR mortality OR health) AND (cohort OR prospective OR "systematic review"[pt])both directions145
Europe PMC26 October 2026("pesticide residue*" OR organophosphate*) AND ("fruit and vegetable" OR vegetables) AND (health OR mortality OR cancer OR fertility) AND (cohort OR "meta-analysis")supporting evidence934
Europe PMC26 October 2026("organic food" OR organic) AND (conventional) AND (cancer OR mortality) AND ("Million Women" OR cohort)contradicting evidence14654

Open questions

Replication of the reproductive findings; Egyptian-specific outcome data (none found).

How deeply was this checked?

9 linked studies: 3 checked in full text (2 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 6 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.

Last scientific review: 26 October 2026

History of the verdict
  1. 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly false (moderate)
  2. 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly false (moderate)
    New outcome studies give a fairer picture: there is a legitimate residue concern (Chiu 2018; Sandoval-Insausti 2022), which should be acknowledged, but no evidence that vegetables become net harmful. Verdict and certainty unchanged; review texts updated.
    New sources: I-RES-106 I-VEG-140 I-VEG-141 I-VEG-142

In plain language

Children eating conventional food have measurable traces of some pesticides in their urine, and these traces drop when they switch to organic food. This shows exposure, not illness. In the EU in 2023, only about 2% of randomly tested food samples were above legal limits, and the European food safety authority judged the risk to consumers as low. The proven health benefits of vegetables outweigh this residue concern.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (3)

  • Organic food and children's pesticide levels

    Lu C et al.. Environ Health Perspect 2006 · PMID 16451864 · DOI 10.1289/ehp.8418
    Othercited by the Tayebat archivefull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Pesticide traces in children's urine dropped to undetectable when they ate organic food.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Measure exposure change

    How was the study done?

    Diet crossover

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    23 children

    What was actually found?

    Metabolites undetectable on organic

    How large was the observed effect?

    Not applicable

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Organic reduces exposure.

    What are the study's limitations?

    No health outcomes

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Exposure only

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show conventional vegetables cause disease.

    Scientific details →

  • Organic vs conventional diet in preschoolers

    Curl CL et al.. Environ Health Perspect 2003 · PMID 12611667 · DOI 10.1289/ehp.5754
    Cross-sectional studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract checked

    Children on conventional diets had about six times more pesticide metabolites in urine.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Compare exposure

    How was the study done?

    Cross-sectional

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    39 children (18 organic, 21 conventional diets)

    What was actually found?

    Higher metabolites with conventional

    How large was the observed effect?

    ~6-fold median

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Organic reduces exposure.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small; no outcomes

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Exposure only

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show harm.

    Scientific details →

  • High-residue produce linked to lower IVF success

    Chiu YH et al.. JAMA Intern Med 2018 · PMID 29084307 · DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5038
    Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    Women eating the most high-residue fruit and vegetables had 26% lower chance of live birth after fertility treatment.

    High-residue FV linked to lower ART success.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Relate residue intake to ART outcomes.

    How was the study done?

    Cohort.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    325 women.

    What was actually found?

    High-residue FV linked to fewer births.

    How large was the observed effect?

    -26% live birth.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Choosing lower-residue produce may be sensible for people trying to conceive.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small, selected.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Partial support.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show vegetables in general are harmful.

    Scientific details →

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (3)

  • EU pesticide residue monitoring 2023

    EFSA. Official document 2025
    Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study

    Only about 2% of random EU samples exceeded legal limits; EFSA judged consumer risk low.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Summarise monitoring

    How was the study done?

    Official monitoring

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    13,246 random samples

    What was actually found?

    2% above MRL

    How large was the observed effect?

    1% non-compliant

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    EU produce largely compliant.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Summary page only

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts claim for EU

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Not about Egypt's domestic market.

    Scientific details →

  • Fruit, vegetables and death rates

    Aune D et al.. Int J Epidemiol 2017 · PMID 28338764 · DOI 10.1093/ije/dyw319
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Each extra 200 g of fruit and vegetables a day was linked to 10% lower death risk; green leafy vegetables and salads were also protective.

    Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    F&V and outcomes

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    95 studies

    What was actually found?

    Lower CVD, cancer, mortality

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR 0.90 per 200 g

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Eat plenty of vegetables.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Observational

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts avoidance

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot prove causation.

    Scientific details →

  • EU pesticide residues 2024

    EFSA. EFSA J (summary on EU Agri-food Transition Pathways platform, 14 Aug 2026) 2026 · DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10054
    Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    98.8% of tested common foods complied with EU limits.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Monitor residues.

    How was the study done?

    EU programmes.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    ~136,000 samples.

    What was actually found?

    High compliance.

    How large was the observed effect?

    1.8-3.6% non-compliance.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Low risk.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Secondary summary.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Detection yes; harm no.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High.

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (3)

  • Fruit and vegetables with fewer pesticide residues were linked to lower mortality

    Sandoval-Insausti H et al.. Environ Int 2022 · PMID 34894487 · DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2021.107024
    Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    Low-residue produce was linked to 36% lower mortality; high-residue produce showed no benefit but also no harm.

    Benefit only for low-residue FV; high-residue FV neutral, not harmful.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Is intake of high- vs low-pesticide-residue fruits and vegetables associated with mortality?

    How was the study done?

    Three prospective cohorts (NHS, NHSII, HPFS)

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    160,880 participants; 27,026 deaths

    What was actually found?

    >=4 servings/day of low-residue FV: 36% lower mortality (95% CI 32%-41%) vs <1 serving/day; high-residue FV: HR 0.93 (0.81-1.07). Similar pattern for CVD, cancer and respiratory deaths.

    How large was the observed effect?

    >=4 servings/day of low-residue FV: 36% lower mortality (95% CI 32%-41%) vs <1 serving/day; high-residue FV: HR 0.93 (0.81-1.07). Similar pattern for CVD, cancer and respiratory deaths.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    A hint that residues might reduce the benefit of produce; eating fruit and vegetables was not harmful.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Exposure assigned at food level, not measured in individuals; Residual confounding; Not a direct comparison of residue levels

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Weak indirect support; does not show residues cause chronic disease.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    US residue levels; EU levels differ.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot separate residues from other differences between foods.

    Scientific details →

  • Organic food lowers pesticide exposure; health effects unclear

    Jiang B et al.. Nutr Rev 2024 · PMID 37930102 · DOI 10.1093/nutrit/nuad124
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    A review of 50 studies found that organic food lowers pesticide markers, but evidence on specific diseases was insufficient.

    Organic food lowers pesticide biomarkers; disease effects insufficient/confounded.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Review organic food and health.

    How was the study done?

    SR/MA.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    50 studies.

    What was actually found?

    Lower exposure; uncertain disease effects.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Not in abstract.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Organic reduces residues; health gains unproven.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Confounding.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Mixed.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Moderate.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot show conventional vegetables harm health.

    Scientific details →

  • Organic produce and breast cancer

    Berlivet J et al.. Am J Clin Nutr 2026 · PMID 41862000 · DOI 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2026.101284
    Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Replacing 100 g/day conventional with organic fruit and vegetables was linked to 10% lower postmenopausal breast cancer risk, not to lower overall cancer.

    Organic-for-conventional substitution linked to lower postmenopausal breast cancer only.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Assess organic vs conventional FV and cancer.

    How was the study done?

    Cohort, substitution models.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    31,179 adults.

    What was actually found?

    Possible breast-cancer benefit only.

    How large was the observed effect?

    HR 0.90 (0.85-0.96).

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Conventional produce is still beneficial; organic may add a small benefit.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Confounding.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Weak support for residue concern.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    European.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cannot prove causality.

    Scientific details →

Regional context

Germany / EU

EU MACP 2023: 13,246 samples, 2% above MRL, 1% non-compliant; national programmes 3.7% above MRL.

Egypt

See C-VEG-14.

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly false Pesticide exposure is real and may reduce part of the benefit of produce, but it does not make vegetables harmful overall; lower-residue choices, washing and peeling are reasonable, avoidance is not.

The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:

  • Pesticides and pesticide residues
  • Veterinary medicines and antibiotics
  • Hormonal growth promoters
  • Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)
  • Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.)

Eggs · Poultry · Dairy · Fish and seafood · Red meat · Fruit and vegetables

Choose a country to see the checked information for it.

Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.

Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country

References

  1. Organic diets significantly lower children's dietary exposure to organophosphorus pesticides.. Lu C et al.. Environ Health Perspect 2006 · PMID 16451864 · DOI 10.1289/ehp.8418
  2. Organophosphorus pesticide exposure of urban and suburban preschool children with organic and conventional diets.. Curl CL et al.. Environ Health Perspect 2003 · PMID 12611667 · DOI 10.1289/ehp.5754
  3. Association Between Pesticide Residue Intake From Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Women Undergoing Infertility Treatment With Assisted Reproductive Technology.. Chiu YH et al.. JAMA Intern Med 2018 · PMID 29084307 · DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5038
  4. Pesticide residues in food: what's the situation in the EU? (EFSA news on the 2023 EU report). EFSA. Official document 2025
  5. Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality-a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.. Aune D et al.. Int J Epidemiol 2017 · PMID 28338764 · DOI 10.1093/ije/dyw319
  6. The 2024 European Union report on pesticide residues in food (summary: 'EFSA's 2024 pesticide residue report finds 98.8% of tested EU foods compliant'). EFSA. EFSA J (summary on EU Agri-food Transition Pathways platform, 14 Aug 2026) 2026 · DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10054
  7. Intake of fruits and vegetables according to pesticide residue status in relation to all-cause and disease-specific mortality: Results from three prospective cohort studies.. Sandoval-Insausti H et al.. Environ Int 2022 · PMID 34894487 · DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2021.107024
  8. The effects of organic food on human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies.. Jiang B et al.. Nutr Rev 2024 · PMID 37930102 · DOI 10.1093/nutrit/nuad124
  9. Consumption of organic compared with conventional fruits and vegetables in relation to cancer risk: findings from the NutriNet-Santé cohort study.. Berlivet J et al.. Am J Clin Nutr 2026 · PMID 41862000 · DOI 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2026.101284

← Back to overview