A peer-reviewed paper published in Environmental Health Perspectives, a top journal from the American Chemical Society, on 23 September 2026 is entitled “Guiding Risk Reduction for Breast Cancer-Relevant Chemicals (BC-Chems): Chemical Production Volumes, Sources, Intake Levels, Emissions, and Regulations“.
It found that risky exposures to potential carcinogens are ubiquitous. It looked for exposure to chemicals known to cause breast cancer (BC-Chems) in the food chain, drinking water, agricultural production, industrial emissions, medicines and the immediate environment of daily life. It found 500 BC-Chems in consumer products, 462 in food, 162 in drinking water, 485 in pesticide formulations, 142 in pharmaceuticals, and 106 in construction materials.The carcinogenic potential of these chemicals is not limited to breast cancer. As we have been reporting the incidence of all types of cancer is increasing dramatically across all age groups.
These numbers are staggering and beyond anything we might expect as we innocently do our shopping or turn on our tap at home. How did this happen? The paper relates how pesticide companies and other commercial entities exploit deficiencies in regulatory systems by falsely classifying hundreds of ingredients as ‘inert’, ’inactive’ or ‘residual’ which thereby escape scrutiny. For example these include surfactants or penetrating agents that help disperse active ingredients or make them more absorbable. There are also a range of hormone disrupting chemicals that are exempt from regulation. Highly toxic trace components can also escape identification or regulation if they are present in low enough concentrations, even though they are included to ensure the product is toxic to living organisms.
A study entitled “Low-level toxicity of chemicals: No acceptable levels?” reports numerous studies showing that even at very low levels of exposure certain chemicals can be highly toxic. It concludes “These results, which are contrary to the way the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulatory agencies assess the risk of chemicals, indicate that we have underestimated the impact of toxic chemicals on death and disease. If widely disseminated chemicals and pollutants do not exhibit a threshold and are proportionately more toxic at the lowest levels of exposure, we will need to achieve near-zero exposures to protect public health.”
Intensity of toxic exposure is increasing year by year as more and more toxins accumulate in the environment, food chain and human tissue. As we reported in our article “The Health Crisis: Policy changes and increased funding are not enough” posted earlier this week. The dangers to health are now also being heavily compounded through the use of genetically modified bio-active ingredients, processing aids and batch fermentation residues.
Regulatory safeguards are failing in great part because the members of pesticide boards are drawn from the pesticide industry itself. The so-called revolving door. Regulatory testing, if it is undertaken, focuses on potential effects of single chemicals. There is no requirement to investigate the synergistic effect of taking multiple chemicals together as are present in pesticides, fertilisers, household products and medicines. Given our exposure to the sheer volume and diversity of carcinogens, there is no easy way to assess the exact role that these play in the development of any individual cancer. Therefore their role is glossed over and rarely mentioned in regulatory discussions. Toxic products are still freely advertised and sold without compulsory warning or complete ingredient lists. Government policies, agricultural training courses, export regulations and the requirements that supermarkets impose on their growers encourage, reward and/or mandate the use of agrichemicals
We should be registering our concern with our local MPs, growers, supermarkets and the media. The research findings are clear. Harmful chemicals are rapidly coming to dominate our environment and our food. Little or nothing is being done to inform the public or encourage safe practices. The commercial interests of giant corporations are being put before the needs of public health. Our politicians are promising they will fix “a broken health system”, but in reality they are completely ignoring the root causes of the epidemic of ill health that is gripping the nation. Their myopic inaction and wilful ignorance of the fundamentals of health is itself making the problem worse. Mainstream media is regularly publishing sad stories of unexpected cancers among working age families, but it is failing to point the finger at the causes and the safe food practices that will help us to avoid deadly agrichemicals and biologics.
You can make individual choices that will help you to avoid the vast majority of these chemicals by buying organic. You can ask about the use of sprays on produce sold at farmer’s market stalls. Failing that, consumer organisations also publish the results of tests of pesticide concentrations by produce type which can be found on the internet. For example typically avocados, kiwi fruit, asparagus, mushrooms, sweet corn, peas, watermelon and bananas are among those found at the lower end, whereas spinach, greens, strawberries, grapes, berries, onions, citrus, potatoes, broccoli, stone fruit, cucumber, celery, wheat flour, apples and pears are among those that have the highest pesticide/chemical residues. Processed foods contain additional chemical and modified biological residues which can be avoided by cooking fresh at home. Likewise takeaway and fast foods use a range of chemicals, additives and colourings which don’t appear on any easily visible ingredient list. Limit your reliance on eating out or ordering in.
