"Oz" wrote in message
news
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).


Yes, but I was thinking more of people eating 'wild' foods, not produce,
e.g. Colin's one man eatathon to rid the country of J Knotweed, which might
well have taken a sizeable dose of God Knows What a few hours before he
harvested it.

snip sensible stuff, for which many thanks


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.


So what is the deadly dose of carrots, and does it alter if they are cooked?