BAC writes
In which case we probably don't regard the food source as toxic at all. Or
not - in which case the toxins remain toxic to humans, and we presumably
have learned to avoid ingestion, or to process the food so as to reduce the
toxicity to levels we consider acceptable. Similar to how we might deal with
foods we know to have been treated with 'artificial' toxins, really.

So far as I am aware allowed pesticide levels in treated produce are not
related to subsequent treatment by the purchaser (which may, or may not,
reduce levels further).

Allowed levels are set by no adverse effect levels found in animal
studies after multi-generational trials, divided by 10 or 100. Note that
the amount of produce that exceeds the ADI when tested is minute, and
the 'traces' found and usually quoted are more a symptom of the
hypersensitivity of modern testing than anything else, usually way below
the ADI.

Further the ADI is in essence set by the maximum amount of that produce
a consumer could theoretically eat. There are stories about excessive
proposed intakes such as the one where the proposed possible carrot
intake was close to 100% of diet (they might be carrot loving
veggies...), and was well over the toxic intake for the carrots
themselves. In this situation you wouldn't be harmed by the pesticide,
but would be killed by the carrots.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.