Talk:Pesticide residue

Classmate's Comments
Good Job! You have really made the article easily understandable to the general public, which is something that is really important on a Wikipedia page. I felt like you conveyed the information well, and it was definitely well organized. That being said I have 2 main comments as well as some small things.

The first main comment is that I would love to see more detail on some of the information. For example, in the health impacts you said that there is a possibility that low exposure to pesticides causes cancer. I thought you could maybe go into what kinds of cancer are most associated with pesticide residue, and what mechanisms within the cell they use. Some articles I found that could be relevant are:

These are both about pesticide residue and breast cancer:
 * http://oem.bmj.com/content/60/5/348.abstract
 * http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2022666/

Health effect associated with pesticide residue you could discuss is the Endocrine disrupting element. Some articles which study this effect are:


 * http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076011000458
 * http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/56/23/5403.long (this talks about estrogenic effects and cancer implications!)

Finally, I actually found that the assertion of pesticide residues causing cancer is somewhat debated. These articles either disagree, or question the ability of testing the correlation between the two. In order to keep a NPOV I feel like you might want to include some of their main arguements into the page:


 * http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971115)80:10%3C2019::AID-CNCR21%3E3.0.CO;2-Z/full
 * http://potency.berkeley.edu/pdfs/handbook.pesticide.toxicology.pdf

The second main comment is that I feel like the first section on regulation in the different countries feels a little out of place. Perhaps you could put it towards the end? Also I feel like you need a bit more of an introductory paragraph before you jump right into the health effects. Maybe you could go into more detail about what pesticide residues are, how they get into the food, why they stay there, do companies wash the fruit before it gets sold, what are the major pesticides found in residues, that sort of thing. I feel like this would give the article a better lead in. But all of your writing is very clear and concise, and I feel like it is easily accessible to any reader. I just feel it would benefit from a bit better organization and some more information.

Now just some small things:
 * "They are used in many developing countries to prevent the spread of malaria…" this sentence feels a bit forced. I see that you are trying to say that pesticides are useful (and keep NPOV) but perhaps you could put some of the benefits of pesticides in the intro? I don't know. When it is in the health section it just seems a bit weird to me.


 * Don't abbreviate CNS, because not everyone will know what you are talking about. Also you might want to link CNS too.


 * You should explain the "clean 15" more when you explain the dirty dozen, because it can be a little confusing.


 * The list of for the dirty dozen and clean fifteen creates a lot of white space and looks kind of awkward. Perhaps you could just list them with commas instead of bullet point? Also they all should have links


 * Some things to link:
 * Neurotoxins
 * attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD),
 * autism
 * CNS
 * cancers
 * bioaccumulation
 * all the fruits and vegetables on the clean 15/dirty dozen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silverglass (talk • contribs) 21:26, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment #2
Hey Luhiz, Your article is off to a great start. I think the wealth of information presented provides a good overview of pesticide residues. I also think that you write simply enough for the average wikipedia user to stumble upon your site and understand it. You also do a good job of distinguishing pesticide residue from pesticides, which is already on wikipedia and is very long.

Some things to think about: One of the things that I noticed right away is that there are a lot of key words that you can link in your article. You can link the different diseases you talk about, as well as all the chemical (basically all the scientific terms that would be useful to click on and quickly read about while reading your article) Just add term linked  like you did elsewhere in your article.

Next I think you should add a little bit to the regulation section of your article. I'd like to see a little bit about what pesticides are regulated by all the countries, which are regulated by only some etc.. so that similarities and differences can be seen. I think it would be a good idea to maybe take a look at one common pesticide and include how it is regulated by each country, just to have a concrete example. This website also has some good information about regulation in the US: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/stprf.htm#registration I think it would be good to talk about Pesticide registration and how the tolerance levels are set. According to the website the questions below play a factor: •	the toxicity of the pesticide and its break-down products •	how much of the pesticide is applied and how often •	how much of the pesticide (i.e., the residue) remains in or on food by the time it is marketed and prepared

A little more on what types of pesticide residues cause cancer, and what types of cancer would be good too. Are these causal or correlative links? literature review of pesticides that cause cancer: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9498903

When you say lipophilic maybe say that this means they can be stored in human body fat for a long time..

Finally, I found a little more on the development effects in pregnant mothers. I think one of the big ones is lower IQ, I found a bunch of websites with studies about this. Here are a few links:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/21/news/la-heb-pesticide-children-20110421 Pesticides + children with low IQ

http://www.marchofdimes.com/pregnancy/stayingsafe_indepth.html See can pesticides harm an unborn baby section. Tips on how to use pesticides safely if need to.

User:anthonna (talk —Preceding undated comment added 21:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC).

Just a quick comment, more to come! Check out this reference: http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.114-a112a Also, EHP has an education section that might have some useful information to include in this article. Hakeleh (talk) 16:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)hakeleh

Proposed Edits and Sources
Also, we need a section of definition telling what the pesticide reside is. Adress why we use it, what the benefits, risks are. About Pesticides U.S environmental protection agency. Also, we can add a section talking about how we deal with pesticide residue internationally. Food, Crop & Livestock Safety Pesticide residue Chickatack (talk) 00:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I think this article has a good start. But I believe it can be improved if we put more details on "Pesticide residue by country". Also, in health issue section, I think we can adress what kind of issue we have clearly. Such as Pesticide poisoning. Chickatack (talk) 21:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I have found some external sources to expand the article.The Pesticide residue by country section hasn't mentioned China,which has serious food safety problems.One article I found may help to this:Implementation of food safety and quality standards: A case study of vegetable processing industry in Zhejiang, China.I also found a recent op-ed relaing to the article,an interview with a Pesticide Expert and Toxicologist:Is Your Food Exposing You To This Pesticide?. by--InJuillet (talk) 01:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Great article! I agree with the above comment that you should expand upon the serious food safety problems within China and other major industries. I enjoy your breakdown of the Pesticide residue by country, but feel a bit more specifics should be added. Yogi44 (talk) 23:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)yogi44

In Class Peer Review
Your article is articulate and well written! It is certainly very easy to follow for anyone looking to learn about pesticide residue. I would suggest that you include why pesticides are used to begin with, as well as the movements against pesticide use. You could also link your article to child development where you speak about the health implications of pesticide. I would also suggest that you expand your section on minimizing exposure to pesticide residue. Since there are so many health hazards associated with pesticides, it would be useful to learn more on how to avoid them. Maybe include something on buying locally produced foods that typically don't use pesticides or growing your own food? Good work Kinloch21 (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi! The information you gathered and contributed to your article page was very impressive! There were a few minor gramatical errors which I have corrected for you. :) Something I noticed in the Health Impacts section under the Chronic Impacts heading was the sentence, "Even though the majority of the general population may not come in direct contact with large quantities of pesticides, many of the pesticide residues that are ingested tend to be lipophilic and can bioaccumulate in the body." which seems to be a quote from the actual article of the abstract you referenced. I would recommend either re-wording the statement or putting it in quotations. I feel that your article was clear and concise and was able to present valuable information about the topic in an objective manner. Terrific job! Well done!(Beaujayna (talk) 18:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC))

Environmental Disruptor Classmate Assignment Comment
I have a few suggestions in my opinion on how to improve the article.

Background – I found another article to support the differences between first-generation pesticides and second-generation pesticides. I feel that it needs to explain more of a difference between the two for the article.

http://apes08.tripod.com/insecticide/id14.html

Residues on Food – For this section I think it would be best to discuss the most common foods often contaminated by pesticides. Provided below is a link describing the 12 most common contaminated foods.

http://www.prevention.com/food/healthy-eating-tips/12-commonly-contaminated-foods

From this initial finding, I feel it would be best to continue to search for contaminated foods.

Another potential section I think would be useful should be preventable measures. There are most likely studies on how to reduce the chemical intake from pesticides either by washing the foods before eating or by buying from organic sources.

Regulations – I think the discussion of a buffer zone should be included in this article to talk about current regulations between pesticide use and school zones or hospitals to prevent air or water contamination in addition to MRL.

EDD Edit Suggestion
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/health/pid-database.pdf
 * I think a major discussion point with regards to pesticides and their subsequent residue is legislation on it, not only is their legislation currently in place regarding pesticide residues but also current debates regarding implementing further legislature on it. In order to fully cover the topic, discussion of regulation is an important element and needs to be covered more fully in this encyclopedia article. A major component of legislature and regulation is enforcement- the EPA has some good information on enforcement policies: http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/enforcement-basic-information
 * The ailments caused by pesticides (the results of bioaccumulation) are very scarcely referred to in this article. Beyond Pesticides provides important information on this topic area. For example, they have articles discussing links to Alzheimer’s disease, asthma, birth defects, cancer, diabetes, endocrine disruption, learning/development, Parkinson’s disease and sexual and reproductive dysfunction. I think that discussion on these topics would add more substance to the article.
 * Because the article focuses on residues rather than the pesticides themselves, I think the biological pathways by which these pesticides act would be a good area to focus on. The introduction relays that residues remain on/in food after being applied by there’s no mention of how/why this happens. The article by Pesticide Action Network titled Environmental effects of pesticides provides a substantial amount of information regarding this, especially the biological process of bioaccumulation in food chains and subsequent consequences on human health.
 * Link 12, “Plant Protection- Pesticide Residues” is no longer working

--Enthusiast006 (talk) 15:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't think that "beyondpesticides.org" is an appropriate reliable source for factual, medical-related information (see WP:MEDRS). We should focus on review articles published in major journals, rather than position papers published by activist orgs. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Classmate's Comments 2/2/15
Hey Luhizi, I wanna start by saying that your article was very well organized, and also very informative. Despite this being a good article, and definitely much improved based on where the entry was before you had edited it, there are some improvements that could be made.

Firstly, there are some simple grammatical errors, along with some mistakes in syntax. For example, these sentences need to be cleaned up: "Those pesticides were widely used due to its effective pest control. However, in 1946, people started to resist to the widespread use of pesticides, especially DDT since it harms non-target plants and animals. People became aware of problems with residues and its potential health risks" Pesticides are plural, yet you refer to the pluralized version as "its" which sounds unnatural and incorrect. There are other instances where singular and plural verb tense is misused.

Another issue that I see is under your "regulations" title. You begin by saying that every country adopts their own set of regulations regarding pesticide usage. Then you say that 185 countries use the "international" system of regulations, but you do not even list some key countries that follow the international regulations. Also, you go on to discuss pesticide regulation in the European Union after noting some EU country uses the international guidelines.

Your next section, health impacts, should be the highlighted section of your article, considering we are interested in the health impacts during development. Once again you have some simple errors in grammar and syntax. Your final sentence of the first paragraph about pesticides causing cancer also likely needs a citation, considering empirical evidence is split on this assertion. I also wonder if it is necessary to include the positive health impacts of pesticides, because you are really trying to talk about pesticide residue, rather than the positives of the pesticides themselves.

My biggest point of concern, which another has already pointed out, is the section on neurodevelopment that severely lacks citations, while containing some spelling errors. The issues of neurological development should be the crux of your paper, but they end up being the least proven part of the article. The fears and concerns regarding pesticide residue are often associated with hormonal development, so to elaborate on these concerns with proper citations would be much better.

Ultimately, the article is filled with elementary errors, but the information in tables as well as the specific pesticides are good parts of the article. I think part of your article should focus on the future of pesticides, and maybe some ways for people to combat the pesticide residue such as washing, shopping organically, etc. Also, you do not discuss the particular methodology in which these pesticides become intertwined with the things they contact, or how the body directly processes these dangerous compounds. Either way, Great Job!!!!

GV1330 (talk) 18:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)GV1330

Hello I was just reviewing this article as an assignment for BIOL5130 course and just wanted to suggest few ideas to improve the article. Overall, it is well organized, straight to the point. I thought few of the updates on regulation policies around the world would have been helpful since they seem outdated at this point. There is an updated wikipedia page about US regulations here -> which doesn't include too much up-to-date information as well. Here is the website that contains related information about the US regulation -> Thanks for all your work Jukaredaa (talk) 06:04, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Pesticide residue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100613142901/http://pubs.caes.uga.edu/caespubs/pubs/PDF/B1121.pdf to http://pubs.caes.uga.edu/caespubs/pubs/PDF/B1121.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150227041753/http://www.chinapesticide.gov.cn/doc10/10122912.html to http://www.chinapesticide.gov.cn/doc10/10122912.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060106072111/http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/ to http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Mount Allison University supported by Canada Education Program and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Section "Health impacts"
User:dialectric requested that the deletion of the following two sentences should be discussed:- " Pesticide exposure cannot be studied in placebo controlled trials as this would be unethical. A definitive cause effect relationship therefore cannot be established.* These sentences are supported with a citation to Sanford et al. When I deleted these two sentences yesterday I wrote as edit summary:- "It is not necessary to explain that trials with humans are not done. The reference to Sanborn et al deals with exposure to people using pesticides and not food residues, and is thus not relevant to this page." I will now try to explain in more detail.

Deletion of the first sentence is surely not controvertial. Perhaps it is not clear to everyone that doing toxicological studies of chemicals on humans is not ethical. For me it is completely clear, Surely we all see this as a form of torture.Obviously no-one is suggesting this should be done.

Therefore perhaps the problem is with the second sentence? Toxicology is studied in animal trials, cell based trials, and biochemical studies. An understanding of the "cause effect relationships" derive from such trials. There are many cases of inadvertent poisoning of farm workers. As I wrote in the first paragraph of "health issues" there are very many studies on the effects of pesticides on humans as a result of these poisonings, and an understanding of "cause effect relationships" derive from them.

Perhaps the problem is elsewhere? With the statement that literature about the poisoning of farm workers is not relevant to pesticide residues on food. Many people believe that they are being subtly and slowly poisoned by traces of pesticides in food, and there are many pressure-groups pushing this. However again as I wrote in the first paragraph the FAO of the UN, the EPA and the EFSA of the EU and the corresponding authorities of very many countries all set limits where humans are not affected by pesticide residues in food. I trust and believe them, and we all should.

On this topic I will finish researching the several large studies comparing the health of people eating organically grown food with "conventionally" grown food using pesticides,.I will then write a sentence.

Bosula (talk) 12:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Nothing so far. It there are no comments or objections by the end of January, I will re-delete the two sentences. Bosula (talk) 15:58, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * These two sentences I have just now finally re-deleted. Bosula (talk) 10:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)