The risk of cancer from pesticides is in some cases comparable to smoking, research shows

In modern agriculture, pesticides are essential to ensure sufficiently high crop yields and food security. However, these chemicals can have a negative effect on plant and animal life and on the people exposed to them.

Now, in a population-based, nationwide study, researchers in the US have linked the increased risk of cancer from agricultural pesticide use to smoking, a better understood risk factor for cancer. The results have been published in Boundaries in cancer control and society.

“In our study, we found that for some cancers, the effect of agricultural pesticide use is comparable in magnitude to the effect of smoking,” said the study’s senior author, Dr. Isain Zapata, associate professor at Rocky Vista University, College of Osteopathic. Medicine in Colorado.

Contextualizing cancer risk

“We accept that someone who is not a farmer and lives in a community with heavy agricultural production is exposed to many of the pesticides used in their environment. It becomes part of their environment,” Zapata said.

The researchers found that in such an environment, the impact of pesticide use on cancer incidence was similar to that of smoking. The strongest association was among non-Hopkins lymphoma, leukemia and bladder cancer. In these types of cancers, the effects of pesticide exposure were more pronounced than the effects of smoking.

“We present a list of the main contributors to pesticides for some specific cancer types, but we strongly emphasize that it is the combination of all these substances and not just one that matters,” Zapata emphasized.

Cocktails with pesticides

Because pesticides are not used one at a time, researchers say it is unlikely that one person is to blame. While some pesticides are discussed more often than others, all of them – and especially their combination – can have an impact.

Accordingly, the researchers included 69 pesticides for which usage data is available through the United States Geological Survey. “In the real world, people are not likely to be exposed to a single pesticide, but rather to a cocktail of pesticides within their region,” Zapata said.

The researchers said their study is the first comprehensive evaluation of cancer risk from a population perspective at the national level. To date, no large-scale study has examined the big picture and placed pesticide use in the context of a cancer risk factor that is no longer questioned, in this case smoking.

“It’s difficult to explain the magnitude of a problem without presenting some context, so we included data on smoking. We were surprised to see estimates in similar ranges,” Zapata said.

Seeing the bigger picture

The researchers said that while their study increases knowledge about pesticide use in the U.S., the risk factors for cancer are complex and assessing the big picture may not reflect individual outcomes. For example, geography has a strong impact. In regions where more crops are grown, such as the Midwest, which is famous for its corn production, the links between pesticides and cancer incidence were more striking.

Getting people, including those who are not often exposed to pesticides, to think about the problems posed by pesticide use in a larger context is one of the researchers’ goals.

“Every time I go to the supermarket to buy food, I think of a farmer who made that product. These people often endanger themselves for my convenience and that plays a role in my appreciation for that product. has had an impact on how I feel when that forgotten tomato in the fridge goes bad and I have to throw it in the trash,” said Zapata.