The Full List: 53 Fruits and Veggies

EWG analyzed pesticide residue testing data from the US Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration to come up with rankings for these popular fresh produce items.
Lower numbers = more pesticides.

1

Apples

2

Celery

3

Strawberries

4

Peaches

5

Spinach

6

Nectarines - imported

7

Grapes - imported

8

Sweet bell peppers

9

Potatoes

10

Blueberries - domestic

11

Lettuce

12

Kale/collard greens

13

Cilantro

14

Cucumbers

15

Grapes - domestic

16

Cherries

17

Pears

18

Nectarines - domestic

19

Hot peppers

20

Green beans - domestic

21

Carrots

22

Plums - imported

23

Blueberries - imported

24

Raspberries

25

Green beans - imported

26

Summer squash

27

Oranges

28

Broccoli

29

Green onions

30

Bananas

31

Cantaloupe - imported

32

Honeydew melon

33

Cauliflower

34

Tomatoes

35

Papaya

36

Cranberries

37

Plums - domestic

38

Winter squash

39

Mushrooms

40

Grapefruit

41

Sweet potatoes

42

Watermelon

43

Cabbage

44

Kiwi

45

Cantaloupe - domestic

46

Eggplant

47

Mango

48

Sweet peas - frozen

49

Asparagus

50

Avocado

51

Pineapples

52

Sweet Corn

53

Onions

^ back to top

Dear Friend, Is your sunscreen actually protecting your family as advertised? Or are some of the claims just marketing hype? Of the more than 600 beach and sports sunscreens analyzed by Environmental Working Group for our 2011 Sunscreen Guide, we can only recommend one in five. The sunscreen industry continues to load store shelves with bottles listing misleading, sky-high SPF ratings that may protect against UVB rays that cause sunburn but leave skin at risk for UVA damage. And nearly one in three products in the guide are still laced with vitamin A ingredients that accelerate the growth of skin tumors and lesions according to recent government studies. Sort through the sunscreen noise -- click here for EWG's 2011 Sunscreen Guide. You'll find: Our top rated sunscreens EWG's Sun Safety Tips Our updated "Hall of Shame," which highlights what's wrong with the sunscreen industry How your sunscreen ranks when you search our database (Hint: Leading brands like Hawaiian Tropic and Banana Boat didn't make the cut.) Has EWG helped you pick a safer sunscreen? EWG's researchers rated more than 1,700 sunscreens, lip balms, and SPF moisturizers and makeup for the 2011 Sunscreen Guide because we want you to have the information you need to make smart choices. But work like this is costly and we need your help to keep it up. Donate just $5 -- less than a bottle of sunscreen -- to EWG today and we'll send you a free Quick Tips for Safer Cosmetics shopping guide to say thank you. Click here to donate. We hope our research helps your family enjoy the sun safely this summer. Sincerely, Ken Cook President, Environmental Working Group

Norwex

The Norwex Foam Soap has been designed to deeply cleanse hands. This pleasantly scented soap leaves hands soft and clean. Comes with a pump. 250 ml 60-day warranty.

Nowex Foam Soap, containing Shea Butter & Calendula, amazing moisturizing properties. Calendula is a natural antimicrobial. Maintains natural pH balance for the skin, non-allergenic. DOES NOT CONTAIN PARABENS, FORMALDEHYDE releasers, or TRICLOSAN. One drop of soap is converted into enough foam to wash your hands with each pump

3,163 ingredients hide behind the word "fragrance"

February 2, 2010

By Lisa Frack with Becky Sutton

Enviroblog readers all know that "fragrance" is a term that the cosmetics, cleaning and candle industries use on ingredient lists that discloses only that there are unnamed chemicals in the product.

Which is not so helpful for avid label-readers (like me) who want and deserve full information when choosing products. Unless you use it as a red flag of what not to buy, that is. Then - and only then - is it helpful.

It's pretty big news that, after years of intentional mystery, the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) decided to publish an alphabetical list of ingredients that its members reportedly use to make consumer products.

Why'd they do it?

Simple: consumers want more transparency (yes, you're being heard!). And while this isn't exactly the kind of transparency we had in mind, or that helps consumers make informed decisions about their health, it's a step. (And it's a decent PR move for IFRA, right?)

A long list with some bad actors
A long list of chemicals that you can't pronounce is not in itself toxic - even if it looks it. But an analysis of these 3,163 chemicals in EWG's Cosmetics Database shows that there is reason for concern.

In fact, 1 in 20 earned a "high" hazard score (7-10 of 10), and a full 1 in 6 rated at least a "moderate" hazard score (3-10 of 10). 25 of them scored a 10, the highest score:

25 chemicals scored a "10" in Skin Deep
Aniline
BHA
Cyclohexanone
Dibutyl phthalate
Diethylhexyl phthalate
Hydroquinone
MIBK
Nano titanium dioxide
Nano zinc oxide (20-60nm)
Octoxynol-6
Octoxynol-7
Octoxynol-11
Octoxynol-12
Octoxynol-13
Octoxynol-16
Octoxynol-20
Octoxynol-25
Octoxynol-30
Octoxynol-33
Octoxynol-40
Octoxynol-70
PEG-3 Sorbitan oleate
PEG-6 Sorbitan oleate
Resorcinol
Styrene

Some chemicals on the list are very troubling
Of the 3,163 chemicals listed, several stand out as particularly toxic: phthalates, octoxynols and nonoxynols. Phthalates are potent hormone disruptors linked to reproductive system birth defects in baby boys. Octoxynols and nonoxynols break down into persistent hormone disruptors, as well.

What kind of products contain these chemicals?
All kinds. To name several: facial cleanser, after shave, astringents, hair color, cleaning products, and acne treatment.

The best way to reduce your exposure to fragrance chemicals
While this new information adds to our knowledge about fragrance chemicals, it doesn't change our longstanding advice for choosing safer cosmetics: read the label, skip the fragrance, and look up your products in EWG's Cosmetics Database.

Here's some information about the testing done on Norwex cloths.

Norwex Cloth Testing

2007 Norwex Antibacterial Microfiber is a microfiber that contains an environmentally friendly antibacterial agent that has passed both FDA and EPA approval. Because the new microfiber and silver agent are both environmentally friendly, one can still clean without chemicals by simply using water and the new antibacterial microfiber. Silver ions play an important role for the bactericidal action of this microfiber. The reasons the new Microfiber cloths are cleaner and safe to handle are: 1. The germs picked up by the microfiber cloths are eliminated within the cloth thus preventing germ transfer to hands and other surfaces. 2. The silver agent itself cannot be transferred from the cloth to the hands or other surfaces. Test Certificates completed by Japan Spinners Inspecting Foundation are also available. Two separate studies were completed, one in May 2003 and one in September 2003. The study tested for the presence of Staphylococcus Aureus and Escheria coli; or simply, the eradication of Staph and E-coli microorganisms. Both studies concluded that both organisms were eliminated by a percentage of 99.9% or more. The three ACT microfiber cloth and mop studies are also available. The studies stated that the microfiber with only water removed 99.94% of all microorganisms. Only conventional cloths in conjunction with a full concentrate disinfectant, which remained wet on the surface for 30 seconds, performed better. The cloths were tested for their ability to remove Staph, E-coli microorganisms and dust as well as for cloth saturation, cross contamination, and the best way to clean the dirty/contaminated microfiber cloths. The tests proved that cross contamination was not an issue – the debris was held inside the fiber of the cloth and was not transferred to another surface. The effectiveness of the cloth’s ability to clean was not reduced even after 10 surfaces were cleaned in succession. In other words, 10 surfaces were cleaned without cleaning the microfiber between each surface. The testing proved that on both smooth and textured surfaces the microfiber was 99.95% and 99.97% effective at removing germs with just water. This outperforms a bleach/water solution, which is recognized as a standard for cleanliness. The smooth surface cleaned with bleach had 20 times more contamination than the surface cleaned with microfiber and water. The textured surface and bleach had 46 times more contamination than the surface cleaned with the microfiber and water. Washing the dirty microfiber cloths in a standard washing machine on the hottest cycle was as effective in removing bacteria from the cloth as was boiling. One study was specific in testing the importance of a disinfectant compound for cleaning efficiency. The results - “It is obvious that the reduction of the number of bacteria is the same in all ‘moist’ methods of cleaning. Thus, the use of a disinfectant doesn’t seem to produce greater bacteria reduction than the ‘moist’ cleaning with water only.” The cleaning method without a disinfectant is preferred because disinfection includes the risk for the development of resistance in bacteria that is a serious issue especially in health care. No disinfectant means no exposure to the person using it to clean and no residues for later exposure. Finally the test concluded that microfiber “with only water, or in certain circumstances with water and detergent, can in many instances be an alternative to disinfection.” The STORE bought microfiber does not have testing proving its effectiveness. Our microfiber comes with a guarantee for performance for 2 full years because of our hospital and independent testing. By: Sheri Gauthier, Norwex Technical Advisor