JPA Daily Buzz - Edisi 65 2026

page 2 According to reports from Santa Cruz County and advocacy organisations, the county has recorded childhood cancer rates above the California average. Activists and researchers have also pointed to concerns surrounding long-term exposure to agricultural chemicals used in conventional farming. One UCLA-linked public health analysis identified several pesticides correlated with higher childhood cancer risks when exposure occurred during pregnancy and early childhood. Yes, Driscoll’s is frequently mentioned in these discussions because: the company is headquartered in Watsonville, California; it controls a major share of the U.S. berry market; and many nearby farms are linked to its supply chain. But this is where nuance becomes VERY important. At this point, there is NO direct scientific evidence proving that eating Driscoll’s berries causes cancer. That distinction matters. Most of the concerns focus on: environmental exposure; pesticide drift near schools and homes; and the long-term effects on farmworkers and surrounding communities. In other words, this is more about how food is produced not proof that a box of supermarket strawberries directly causes disease. To be fair, Driscoll’s has repeatedly stated that its farming operations comply with U.S. regulatory standards and pesticide rules established by authorities such as the EPA and California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Still, the bigger issue remains uncomfortable. Modern industrial agriculture depends heavily on pesticides to meet massive global food demand. Berries? They’re actually among the crops often discussed in pesticide residue conversations because they are delicate, highly perishable, and vulnerable to pests and fungi. What struck me most about this story wasn’t fear. It was awareness because many of us including me buy food based on habit, branding, convenience, and trust. We rarely stop and ask, where did this come from? Howwas it grown? What chemicals were involved before it reached our fridge?