Pesticide residues in indoor house dust: key recommendations for minimising exposure
Written by Paul ScheepersLikely sources of pesticide residues in the indoor house dust of farming households.
This article provides key messages about the presence of indoor dust in farming households, and what you can do to minimise pesticide exposure.
Indoor dust was collected and analysed for pesticide residues in 128 homes of farmers and their families across ten European countries and Argentina. Residues of 198 pesticides and their degradation products were observed. For most contaminants, average detected residue levels were between 0.5 to 20 parts per million (µg/g). Glyphosate and pyrethroid-based insecticides were the most frequently found. In some countries, these residues were found in the homes of all farmer participants. We found that the frequency and levels were lower in homes at organic farms compared to conventional farm homes. However, we have not studied how it is possible that residues are found in homes to such extent, warranting further research.
What is dust?
Dust is a mixture of fine particles from soil and clay, air pollutants, textile fibres, animal hair, and more.
How do pesticides get into our homes?
Previous studies have suggested that residents take home pesticides as dirt under their shoes. For example, a study in the Netherlands analysed doormats and detected a wide range of pesticide residues. For seven of the detected pesticides, a moderate to high correlation was found between levels observed in doormats and residues detected in indoor floor dust collected by vacuum cleaners. In farm homes, these substances were related to fungicide applications on the farm.
Some studies also suggest that pets may carry pesticides into the home – cat and dog ownership is a predictor for increased exposure to insecticides used as flea repellent such as fipronil. Products sold as veterinary drugs and biocides for pets may also become a source of indoor dust contamination.
Another study in France found that indoor house dust can become contaminated with insecticides used for the preservation of wood.
An additional source of contamination of pesticides indoors is the use of pesticides on plants and flowers for home decoration. These ornamental plants and cut flowers may have been treated with pesticides. There is currently no EU regulation to control residues in these products, unlike for most food items.
Finally, and more obviously, is that some of us apply pesticides in our homes, sometimes maybe even without being fully aware – for example, when trying to control so-called ‘pest’ insects such as mosquitoes, fleas, and wasps.
Why do we find so many pesticides in dust?
Pesticides can cling to dust particles, which may include both long-banned, persistent chemicals still lingering in the environment and newer, less persistent pesticides. In the dry, dark conditions common in homes, even pesticides considered less persistent can remain stable for long periods. Since it's nearly impossible to eliminate dust from our homes, some of it can linger for years. As a result, dust serves as a reservoir for both old and current pesticides. Banned pesticides, often highly persistent, can still be found in topsoil and water, while even less persistent pesticides approved for agricultural use may accumulate indoors. Some pesticides break down when exposed to sunlight, but inside homes, they endure much longer due to the absence of UV light.
How does indoor dust lead to uptake of pesticides?
When dust particles are very small, they may become airborne and be inhaled. This depends on the type of floor and cleaning habits. Usually, dust stays on the floor, but when inhabitants move around, including when children play and pets run around the house, dust can become airborne through resuspension. However, even when this happens only a small fraction is inhaled by us.
A more important route of entry is direct contact with dusty surfaces followed by hand-to-mouth contact. This type of indirect exposure is known to contribute to uptake of many contaminants, including pesticide residues. In a study in the Netherlands, a metabolite of carbendazim observed in urine of adults could be linked to traces of this fungicide in hand wipes. This is more likely to occur in young children, particularly crawling toddlers and until they are old enough to fully follow hand hygiene recommendations. One study found traces of pesticides in a small number of nappies (diapers). The origin of these pesticides could not be verified but indoor dust and food intake may have contributed.
Infants and young children may be more at risk of pesticide exposure through indoor house dust due to increased hand-mouth contact.
Is hand-to-mouth contact considered a risk for pesticide uptake via indoor dust?
In national and EU policy, the risk of ingestion of residues from environmental exposures is considered as contributing to pesticide intake. Often a relatively high contribution from ingestion is assumed in risk calculations, especially for children. This leads to a so called ‘conservative’ estimation of the risk. There is not much evidence for dust ingested e.g., by children in different age groups. Recently, the Dust Ingestion Children Study (DIRT) started with funding from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to study how hand-to-mouth behaviour in children translates to ingestion.
What can we do to prevent exposure to pesticides in our homes?
Key recommendations for avoiding pesticide exposure while indoors
Pesticide residues can be taken home with dirt under your shoes. This dirt may contain biological and chemical contaminants including pesticide residues. To avoid this source of contamination, it is suggested to leave shoes outside or at the door when entering your home.
When you buy products that may contain pesticides, doublecheck the label for any hazard symbols and sentences. If you see a warning which suggests calling a doctor in case of an emergency (e.g., if the product is ingested), consider whether you need to use it, particularly if you have small children at home.
Many veterinary drugs for pets are pesticides that may be toxic to humans. Once pets are treated with a flea repellent collar or oil, this may become a source of contamination of your home. Direct unprotected contact with the fur of recently treated pets may cause transfer from pet to human.
Do not cut ornamental plants and cut flowers on the unprotected kitchen bench (where you also prepare your food). Put on gloves and carefully clean the surface with a wet towel afterwards. Before preparing food, remember to wash your hands.
This article was prepared by Paul Scheepers and Hans Mol. Infographics were designed by Charlotte-Anne Chivers.
Any questions? Get in touch: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
When considering the presence of pesticides in our environment, you might think about the outside world: soil, groundwater, sediment and crops are all contaminated with pesticide residues. But pesticides are also present in the indoor environment and accumulate in house dust. Researchers from CIEMAT have analyzed 128 dust samples from farmer households and 40 samples from non-farmer households. Results were remarkable: Even samples from non-farmer households contain 57 different pesticides (median). Many of these compounds have been banned from agricultural application in Europe, but can persist in house dust for extensive periods of time.. Not a single sample was free from pesticide residues.
Almost half of the pesticides measured are recognized as highly hazardous, and their presence in indoor dust may be of risk to human health. Potential effects of exposure to these pesticides include reproductive effects and hormone disturbances, irritation of the skin, eyes and respiratory tract, and cancer. Exposure to pesticides can also impact the gut microbiome. People and pets may be exposed to low concentrations of pesticide residues via inhalation of house dust, but also through accidental ingestion. It is estimated that the ingestion of indoor dust is approximately 30 mg/day for adults and 60 mg/day for children. For some compounds, ingestion of dust might be the main route of exposure.
The scope of contamination
The farmers participating in this study were from 11 different case study sites in SPRINT, located throughout Europe and in Argentina, and the non-farmer participants were neighbours of farmers and ‘consumers’ living further away from farmland in France and Denmark. The participants were asked to collect the dust from their house during a period of a month, via vacuum cleaning. The presence of 198 pesticides was evaluated; 197 compounds were detected in the samples, demonstrating a huge variety of compounds found in house dust. The number of different pesticide residues detected in each sample ranged between 25 and 121 for farmer households and between 36 and 80 for neighbour and consumer households.
Conventional farms using plant protection products exhibited significantly higher numbers of different pesticide residues (80 residues/sample, median) compared to organic farms (65 residues/sample, median) and non-farmer households (57 residues/sample, median), and total concentration was also significantly higher on conventional farms.
Types of pesticide residues detected
17% of the tested compounds were present in more than three quarters of all of the farmer-household samples. Multiple pesticides were even detected in >99% of samples: The insecticides fipronil and imidacloprid, the fungicides fludioxonil, hexachlorobenzene, azoxystrobin, carbendazim, tebuconazole, and a synergist, piperonyl butoxide.
The presence of some of the compounds cannot be explained by recent pesticide applications in the area. Interestingly, imidacloprid and hexachlorobenzene were not approved as a plant protection product at time of this study. However, imidacloprid is often used to treat pets against fleas. In this study, 69% of the farmer participants owned pets, which might explain the high presence of imidacloprid. Hexachlorobenzene has a long field half live, and its presence in dust could reflect historical application of the compound.
Potential human health effects
Glyphosate, pyrethroids and the synergist piperonyl butoxide were found in the highest concentrations. Exposure to these compounds is a risk for human health; Glyphosate and some pyrethroids are possible carcinogens and hormone disruptors and are known to impact the gut microbiome. Piperonyl butoxide is also a known endocrine disruptor and known neurotoxicant. While concentrations of individual pesticides in house dust are relatively low, total concentrations of up to 283 μg/g where measured, which is high compared to other matrices measured in SPRINT. Not much is known about potential health effects of combined exposure to low concentrations of a large number of compounds. Imagine you can handle drinking 4 beers, or 3 glasses of wine, or 1 glass of whiskey, but what would happen if you drank all of them at the same time, every single day? SPRINT researchers are especially interested in elucidating the effects of these ‘cocktails’ on human health, as combined exposure is not taken into account when approving plant protection products for agricultural application. Clarifying these effects can assist future policies for pesticide application. The ultimate goal, of course, is to ensure food availability while protecting human health.
Sources:
Navarro I, De la Torre A, Sanz P, Baldi I, Harkes P, Huerta-Lwanga E, Nørgaard T, Glavan M, Pasković I, Pasković MP, Abrantes N…, Martínez, MA. Occurrence of pesticide residues in indoor dust of farmworker households across Europe and Argentina. Science of the Total Environment. Dec 20;905:167797 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167797
Silva V, Gai L, Harkes P, Tan G, Ritsema CJ, Alcon F, Contreras J, Abrantes N, Campos I, Baldi I, Bureau M, Christ F, Mandrioli D, Sgargi D, Pasković I, Polić Pasković M, Glavan M, Hofman J, Huerta Lwanga E, Norgaard T…, Geissen V Pesticide residues with hazard classifications relevant to non-target species including humans are omnipresent in the environment and farmer residences. Environment International. Nov 1;181:108280 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.108280
Icon credits:
Vacuum, hormone, cancer ribbon: flaticon.com
Inhale icon: Pike Picture from Noun Project
Ingest icon: Andrew Doane from Noun Project
Gut icon: Imron Sadewo from Noun Project
Integrated pest management (IPM) in practice: an overview.
Written by Honor Mackley-Ward
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an ecosystems-based approach to managing pests. It emphasises reducing the negative impacts of pest management on agro-ecosystems, through using natural pest control (such as supporting a healthy ladybird population, which helps control aphids), improving crop resilience, and minimising the use of pesticides.
IPM was developed in response to the negative impacts of synthetic pesticide use, which makes it particularly relevant for SPRINT’s work. Synthetic pesticides emerged at scale from technologies developed during the second world war, and led to radical changes in agricultural pest management. However, pesticide resistance amongst target pest species and negative environmental and human health impacts associated with pesticide use soon emerged. By the 1950s, practices which align with the modern principle of IPM were being used to combat these impacts, and the term ‘IPM’ coined in the US in 1967.
Over recent years, the term has been adopted by a broad range of agricultural stakeholders, all supporting its principles. But what is IPM, where did it come from, and what is its significance for the SPRINT project?
Pesticides and Human Health: an Overview
Written by Honor Mackley-WardSource: Canva Pro
Pesticides, including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, and also known as plant protection products, are used globally in agriculture and a number of other industries. This article explores the interactions between pesticides and human health, a subject at the core of SPRINT’s ongoing work.
In the past year, we have gathered hundreds of samples across the SPRINT case study sites (Click here for more information). Many of these samples will be used in microbiome analyses, including: soil samples, gut samples from fish, fecal samples from humans and livestock, and nasal swabs from humans. We will analyse the composition of microbes in these samples. All of these samples contain millions of bacteria, fungi and other micro-organisms, which in combination, are called the microbiome.
Agricultural pesticide use in Argentina: The extent, the risks, and the challenges
Written by Charlotte ChiversArgentina is the only non-European case study site included in SPRINT. We included Argentina in our project because it is the main exporter of soy for animal feed in Europe. In addition, this allows us to compare our findings in Europe against those in South America, where pesticides are often applied more frequently and in greater volumes. Argentina, our chosen case study, is the third biggest pesticide user in the world, with only China and the US using more. In addition, several of the pesticides used in Argentina are no longer approved for use across the EU, so this case study will provide insights into the risks of imported chemicals. This article provides an overview of farming in Argentina before examining the extent of pesticide reliance and the potential risks of current usage.
The UK governments’ decision to allow the emergency use of a neonicotinoid: unravelling the complexities
Written by Charlotte ChiversOn Friday 8th January, the UK government decided to allow the use of a neonicotinoid-based pesticide, thiamethoxam in emergencies. They had previously pledged to maintain a ban on this chemical in line with the EU’s stance towards neonicotinoids.
The UK is not the only country to make this decision, with 11 others also permitting the use of this pesticide in emergencies. These countries include Belgium, Denmark and Spain. These are not the first European countries to lift the ban of thiamethoxam on sugar beet fields; France has already lifted their ban on neonicotinoids.
The news headlines and Twitter uproar resulting from this decision suggests that the public are unhappy with this decision.
When medicine feeds the problem: Are pesticides feeding crop pests?
Written by Charlotte ChiversSPRINT recently attended a fascinating talk at the Oxford Real Farming Conference. Researchers from the University of Edinburgh shared their findings surrounding why pesticides may, paradoxically, benefit crop pests. The research was born from the work by a French agronomist, Francis Chaboussou.
Plant protection products: The what, the why and the how
Charlotte ChiversWhat are ‘plant protection products’?
The term ‘plant protection product’ refers to ‘pesticides’. These chemicals are used by farmers, gardeners and foresters to protect crops and increase their yields. Pesticides contain active ingredients such as toxic chemicals, plant extracts, pheromones, micro-organisms or viruses for controlling unwanted ‘pests’. These ‘pests’ can include insects (insecticides), fungi (fungicides) or plants (herbicides).
Due to the risks associated with PPPs, European regulations[1] place limits on how they are used. These regulations are based on the risks to human and environmental health associated with the active ingredients of PPPs.