ABSTRACT
There is much talk about risk but a poor understanding of it by the public. Politicians tend to be swayed by forceful lobbying as much as by scientific evidence, and as a result, environmental decisions can easily be taken on the wrong basis[1]. In the UK, for example, we have a stringent and very costly limit on nitrate in potable water, but no random breath-testing for drunk drivers, implying a set of priorities very much at variance with the mortality statistics. No-one in the UK has been killed by nitrate in the mains water supply, and there is now evidence[2] that nitrate intake is beneficial. Far too many people have been killed by drunken drivers. There is a far more stringent limit on pesticides in potable water. This is obviously prudent, but it seems to have been imposed without any consideration of the fact that practically all our pesticide intake comes from naturally-produced pesticides in plants. In fact, 99.99% of all known pesticides are produced quite naturally by plants wishing to repel insects. Cabbage, for example, contains 49 natural pesticides, and farmers would not be allowed to use some plant-produced pesticides because they can cause cancer in laboratory rats[3]. Coffee is particularly rich in rodent carcinogens, and there is certainly no point in worrying about synthetic pesticides in the water used to brew it. However, the reality is that many people worry, and even campaign, about pesticides in water, while few even think about the natural chemicals in coffee. Risk assessment might help the worriers to direct their energies to greater effect.
