By Lukie Pieterse | Editor, Potato News Today
A leading immunologist says the EWG’s Dirty Dozen list is “a heaping pile of disinformation,” and urges consumers not to fear conventionally grown produce like potatoes.
Potatoes—one of the world’s most widely consumed staple crops—have again been named to the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) controversial “Dirty Dozen” list for 2025, sparking renewed concern across the potato industry. According to EWG, this annual ranking highlights fruits and vegetables that carry the highest levels of pesticide residues.
However, a growing body of scientific voices, including immunologist Dr. Andrea Love, argues that the methodology behind the list is deeply flawed and potentially harmful to public health messaging.
The critique comes at a time when growers, processors, and agricultural scientists are increasingly frustrated by what they see as alarmist claims that could mislead consumers and unfairly stigmatize crops like potatoes that are vital to global nutrition and food security.
Questionable Methodology
Dr. Andrea Love, writing in her ImmunoLogic newsletter—republished by the Genetic Literacy Project—dissects the statistical framework and communication tactics employed by EWG. Her core criticism centers on the fact that EWG uses data from the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program (PDP), but applies no toxicological or risk-based context to the findings. Instead, the EWG counts how many samples show any detectable residue, regardless of how low the levels are or whether they fall well below EPA safety thresholds.
Dr. Love explains that just because a pesticide is detectable at parts-per-billion levels does not mean it poses a meaningful risk to human health. “This is like measuring a drop of water in an Olympic-sized pool and declaring the entire pool unsafe,” she writes. Moreover, she notes that EWG does not factor in actual dietary exposure or adjust for how many servings of a food one would have to consume to even approach safety limits—thus skewing perceptions.
Indeed, according to USDA PDP data, more than 99% of all produce sampled annually contains residues well within safety margins, often by a factor of 100 or more.
Impact on Consumer Behavior
One of the most troubling implications of the Dirty Dozen list, according to Dr. Love and many nutritionists, is its potential to reduce fruit and vegetable consumption, particularly among lower-income consumers. Research has shown that consumers who are told conventional produce is “dirty” may opt to skip it altogether if organic options are not affordable or available.
This is especially concerning given that most health agencies—including the CDC, WHO, and USDA—emphasize that increasing produce intake is critical for preventing chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Yet the EWG’s annual list, often amplified by headlines and influencers, may inadvertently steer people away from eating fruits and vegetables that are perfectly safe to consume.
The potato industry, in particular, worries about how this messaging could affect consumer attitudes, especially given that potatoes already face an uphill battle due to lingering misconceptions about their carbohydrate content and nutritional value.
Organic vs. Conventional Produce
Dr. Love also takes aim at what she calls a “false dichotomy” between organic and conventional farming practices. The Dirty Dozen list heavily implies that organic produce is inherently safer or cleaner—a claim that does not hold up under scrutiny.
Organic farming does use pesticides, though these are typically derived from natural sources. However, natural does not always mean benign. As Dr. Love points out, many organic pesticides are not included in USDA residue testing programs, leading to a biased perception of what constitutes a “clean” food.
More importantly, numerous peer-reviewed studies have confirmed that both organic and conventional produce contain pesticide residues far below established safety levels. The focus, she argues, should be on access to affordable produce, regardless of production method—not perpetuating fears that may widen the nutrition gap between rich and poor.
The Case of the Potato: A Misguided Target
Potatoes routinely appear on the EWG’s Dirty Dozen list, despite the fact that the actual residue levels detected are exceedingly low. Moreover, most potato products are peeled and/or cooked—steps that further reduce any potential residue exposure.
From a public health perspective, vilifying potatoes is problematic. They are rich in potassium, vitamin C, fiber (when eaten with the skin), and other essential nutrients. As a staple food crop across cultures, potatoes contribute significantly to food security and economic livelihoods, especially in developing regions.
The EWG’s ranking, critics say, ignores these benefits and focuses instead on trace residue levels that pose no meaningful risk. As Dr. Love summarizes, “The EWG list promotes fear, not informed food choices.”
Conclusion: Science-Based Messaging Needed
As consumer trust in food systems is increasingly shaped by social media, influencer culture, and politicized narratives, experts like Dr. Andrea Love are stepping up to provide evidence-based counterpoints. Her message is clear: the Dirty Dozen list may grab headlines, but it lacks the scientific rigor and context needed to guide sound dietary decisions.
“Produce safety should not be reduced to buzzwords and binary labels,” Dr. Love says. “We should empower people to eat more fruits and vegetables, not scare them away from what they can afford or access.”
For potato producers and advocates, this annual controversy presents an opportunity—not just to defend their crop, but to educate consumers about the real story behind the data.
Author: Lukie Pieterse, Potato News Today
Credits: This report is based in part on the commentary published by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD, in her ImmunoLogic newsletter, and republished by the Genetic Literacy Project on July 7, 2025. Full article available here: GLP: “EWG’s Dirty Dozen Is a Heaping Pile of Disinformation
Related: Potatoes added to ‘Dirty Dozen’ list of most pesticide-contaminated produce
Cover image: Credit Tuoc Chu from Pixabay