We went looking for the evidence. Here's what we found.
Every guide is based on the best available Australian data, supplemented by international research where Australian data doesn't exist. All sources listed. All caveats stated. Designed for families, not scientists.
The 12 Australian produce items with the highest evidence of pesticide contamination. Ranked by strength of Australian-specific evidence.
Ten commonly eaten items that don't belong on the Dirty Dozen — but carry specific concerns worth knowing. Citrus, potatoes, ginger, garlic and more.
22 produce items with the lowest evidence of pesticide risk in the Australian context. When conventional is generally a reasonable choice.
Grains, bread, oats, nuts, tea, coffee, dried fruit. What the Australian Total Diet Study actually found — and what it didn't look for.
Where microplastics are entering our food, what Australian research exists, and what the gaps tell us. The next frontier — and nobody is watching it properly yet.
On the data: Australia's pesticide residue testing program is fragmented, infrequent, and not publicly compiled in one consumer-facing resource. Where Australian data does not exist, we use international findings and biological inference. Absence of Australian data does not mean absence of risk. It often means absence of independent investigation.
Australia has no consumer-facing produce pesticide program. No equivalent to the US Environmental Working Group's (EWG) Shopper's Guide. No coordinated annual testing across all states and retail channels. The data exists — fragmented across FSANZ, APVMA, state programs, FOI requests, and academic studies — but it has never been compiled in one accessible place.
Lighten Your Load does that. Not to frighten — to inform. Everything here is sourced, caveated, and updated. No advertising. Not funded by industry. We tell you what we don't know as clearly as what we do.
See the methodology →When Australia hasn't tested something, we say so — and explain why the gap itself is significant.
The guides are free. No paywall. No email gate. Printable PDFs are available for a small contribution to fund continued research.
We are not funded by organic food companies, supermarkets, or any food industry body. Our only funding is direct reader support.
Guides are reviewed when new Australian data is published, when major international studies are released, or when regulatory decisions change the picture.
Every ranking is based on the best available evidence, with a clear statement of confidence. We don't pretend the data is better than it is.
FSANZ Total Diet Studies, APVMA MRL register, National Residue Survey, FOI-obtained government data, Friends of the Earth AU, CHOICE, and state-based monitoring programs.
When Australian data doesn't exist, we use EWG (US), EFSA (EU), Canadian CFIA, and peer-reviewed research — and clearly label every such instance.
Where no residue data exists, we consider skin type, pest pressure, systemic vs. contact pesticide use, and post-harvest treatment practices.
Every item is rated by evidence strength. ★★★★ strong AU data. ★★★ reasonable. ★★ international proxy. ★ inference only. We never hide uncertainty.
Following standard testing practice, produce is washed or peeled before residue testing — so rankings reflect what reaches you when eating normally. Skins and peels may carry higher residues than the flesh. For example, banana skins carry post-harvest fungicide residues not reflected in the flesh ranking.
The guides are free and will stay that way. Reader support funds ongoing research, data updates, FOI requests, and new guides — so every Australian family can make more informed choices.
A simple thank you that helps keep the lights on and the research moving.
All four guides as beautifully formatted, print-optimised PDFs — including the wallet reference card.
Fund ongoing research — new guides, FOI requests, data verification, and access to expert sources.