Assessment of occupational and dietary exposure to pesticide residues

Abstract

Plant protection products (PPPs) are pesticides containing at least one active substance that drives specific actions against pests (diseases). PPPs are regulated in the EU and cannot be placed on the market or used without prior authorisation. EFSA assesses the possible risks of the use of active substances to humans and environment. Member States decide whether or not to approve their use at EU level. Furthermore, Member States decide at national level on the authorisation of PPPs containing approved substances. In agriculture, exposure to PPPs and their residues during occupational tasks is estimated prior to product authorisation, using models fed with study‐specific (e.g. absorption, dissipation) and default values. Exposure of workers to pesticide residues reduces with the pesticide's dissipation time during crop‐related tasks. However, the current risk assessment gap is that no methodology is available to calculate the re‐entry interval (REI) for workers, which specifies how long they should wear personal protective clothing during their first entry into pesticide‐sprayed crops. Protective clothing (such as gloves) can reduce pesticide residue exposure to an acceptable level of worker safety. Within the European Food Risk Assessment Fellowship Programme (EU‐FORA) assignment, a methodology was developed to calculate agricultural‐use‐specific and pesticide‐specific REIs for which period workers should wear gloves. This was an assignment of the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. Another important aspect of risk assessment to ensure consumer safety is dietary risk assessment. A critical evaluation of residue studies and metabolism of the pesticide in question in crops results in a residue definition for dietary risk assessment and for enforcement and monitoring to define maximum residue limits allowed legally on or in raw agricultural commodities when applying pesticides according to good agricultural practices. This work was assigned by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport and contributes to the work of the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues.

Feed Composition Differences Resulting from Organic and Conventional Farming Practices Affect Physiological Parameters in Wistar Rats—Results from a Factorial, Two-Generation Dietary Intervention Trial

“…There is evidence from animal and human epidemiological studies that changes in phenolic/antioxidant, pesticide and cadmium intake may affect human health [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ]. Increased dietary intake of antioxidants/(poly)phenols was linked to a reduced prevalence of obesity, type-2 diabetes, and certain cancers [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ], and increased consumption of antioxidant-rich foods was linked to a reduced prevalence of pre-eclampsia [ 16 ].…”

“…It should be pointed out that government regulators set maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides in food crops that are orders of magnitude below the concentrations that result in measurable toxicity symptoms in animal studies. The consumption of foods with pesticide residue levels that are below the MRLs is therefore not considered to pose a health risk to consumers by most toxicologists and government regulators [ 19 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. However, this view has recently been challenged for many of the currently used pesticides especially those linked to endocrine and immune system disrupting and neurological effects [ 19 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ].…”

“…The consumption of foods with pesticide residue levels that are below the MRLs is therefore not considered to pose a health risk to consumers by most toxicologists and government regulators [19,[28][29][30]. However, this view has recently been challenged for many of the currently used pesticides especially those linked to endocrine and immune system disrupting and neurological effects [19,[24][25][26][30][31][32][33][34].…”