'Alongside medicines, plant protection products are by far the most thoroughly studied substances,' the episode notes – and yet public debate often remains at the surface. Too often, headlines centre on threshold exceedances and blame, while the complex interplay between politics, research and agricultural practice receives little attention.

Aicher explains not only how residues are absorbed through food, the skin or breathing, but also how the body processes these chemicals and which biological degradation mechanisms are relevant.

The podcast encourages a more fact-based discussion: the goal is not to create fear but to explain how threshold values are set, what purpose they serve, what uncertainties exist and how risks can be assessed realistically. Consumers typically take in only small amounts; risk depends on a substance’s toxicity, the quantity absorbed and the frequency of exposure.

Aicher also explains how the hazard of chemicals is determined: the basis consists of controlled toxicological studies – often animal tests – whose results feed into legally defined safety factors. He also highlights why alternatives to animal testing are becoming increasingly important, both ethically and scientifically.

The episode also addresses how the risk from residues can be reduced: through good agricultural practice, correct application and effective controls. Only when these relationships are clearly communicated can trust and constructive dialogue emerge – essential foundations for mutual understanding and practical solutions in chemical regulation and plant protection. Another focus of the episode is PFAS: Aicher explains why PFAS should be reduced or replaced.

The episode also shows that public debates are often emotional, even when the scientific assessment is sound. Aicher illustrates why we sometimes misjudge hazards – and stresses: 'We tend to assess risks as lower when we perceive a personal benefit.' He points out that alcohol is undeniably a poison – particularly when consumed in high doses. One thing is clear: those who understand the mechanisms behind threshold values and risk assessment can judge risks more precisely and contribute to a fact-based public discussion.