Germany

Detailed country profile DE EU European Union

All countries can be selected. A scientific country assessment, however, exists only where we found and checked reliable sources.

Applicable frameworks: Germany · European Union · International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

At a glance

Data availability by topic
Topic	Applicable frameworks
Pesticides and pesticide residues	Germany Data quality: high European Union Data quality: high
Veterinary medicines and antibiotics	Germany Data quality: high European Union Data quality: moderate
Hormonal growth promoters	Germany Data quality: moderate European Union Data quality: moderate
Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)	Germany Data quality: moderate European Union Data quality: moderate
Mycotoxins (mould toxins)	Germany Data quality: low European Union Data quality: moderate
Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.)	Germany Data quality: high European Union Data quality: high
Additives and processing	European Union Data quality: moderate
Animal husbandry and feed	Germany Data quality: high European Union Data quality: moderate
Controls, imports, recalls, labelling	Germany Data quality: moderate European Union Data quality: moderate
Drinking water	Germany Data quality: high European Union Data quality: low

National profile: Germany

Germany applies the EU rules on residues, contaminants, additives and hygiene and adds national monitoring and some stricter rules. In 2024 pesticide limits were exceeded in 1.0 % of German-origin samples, 1.5 % of other-EU samples and 6.7 % of third-country samples; these figures mix random and risk-oriented sampling. Veterinary antibiotics are used under the Tierarzneimittelgesetz, which obliges farms to compare their treatment frequency with national benchmarks; dispensed quantities fell from 1,706 t (2011) to 562 t (2025), but treatment frequency in broilers and turkeys rose in 2025. Residue checks on animal products found few non-compliant samples (0.14 % in the 2023 risk-based plan), and PFAS levels in eggs sampled in 2024 were below EU limits. Small-group cage housing for laying hens ended at the end of 2025, except for individual hardship approvals up to 2028; in 2025 3.1 % of eggs came from such systems.

Research scope: Germany applies EU law (see EU profile); this profile adds national implementation and national monitoring only. Sources read: BVL reports (pesticide residues 2024, pesticide sales 2024, NRKP 2023, Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024, Zoonosen-Monitoring 2024, antibiotic dispensing 2025 press release, NRKP web page), BfR opinions and press releases (NRKP 2022, PFAS 2021, PFAS in eggs 2025, antibiotic use 2025, therapy-frequency reporting 2025), the UBA/BMG drinking-water report 2020–2022 (summary of full PDF), TrinkwV 2023, TAMG §§ 54–58 and TierSchNutztV § 45 on gesetze-im-internet.de, a Destatis press release on egg production 2025, and the World Bank JMP API. Not found or not accessible: an NRKP report for 2024, a BfR assessment of NRKP 2023/2024, the BVL page with the numerical therapy-frequency Kennzahlen, a national drinking-water report for 2023 or later, AFM1-in-milk results for Germany, and the full text of the LFGB (not read).

Last checked: 25 October 2026

Pesticides and pesticide residues – Germany

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU MRLs apply (Reg. 396/2005). Plant protection products are authorised nationally by BVL under the Pflanzenschutzgesetz; producers, distributors and importers must report sales to BVL (§ 64 PflSchG).
B. What is actually used in production?: Domestic sales of pesticide active substances in 2024: 45,301 t, of which 16,662 t inert gases for stored-product protection; 28,639 t without inert gases (BVL § 64 report). 1.63 % of German-origin samples in Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024 contained substances not authorised for that crop in Germany.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: BVL national reporting 2024: 16,423 samples (5,564 random/representative monitoring; 10,859 risk-oriented). MRL exceedances (surveillance sampling): German origin 1.0 % (n 6,668), other EU/EEA 1.5 % (n 4,368), third countries 6.7 % (n 2,694; 2023: 8.5 %); objections 0.4 % / 0.4 % / 4.3 %. No quantifiable residues: German origin 57.8 %, other EU 38.3 %, third countries 40.1 %. All samples: 50.0 % no quantifiable residues, 2.2 % above MRL, 1.1 % objected. Animal products: 75.6 % no quantifiable residues; 2 samples above MRL. Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024: residues in the 575 animal-food samples 'unauffällig'.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: No German health-risk conclusion beyond EU/EFSA was extracted; BVL states for vine leaves (MRLs mostly at the LOQ) that an impairment of consumers by the exceedances found 'ist nicht zu erwarten'.
E. How robust are the data?: Origin-specific percentages refer to surveillance samples, which mix monitoring and risk-oriented sampling; 16.1 % of samples had unknown origin. German origin numbers are not a random sample of German production. Comparable across years within BVL reporting.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung Pflanzenschutzmittelrückstände Percentage based on surveillance samples only; n = all samples of German origin. Objected: 0.4 %.	1 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	6,668	mixed	domestic products	RS-DE-01
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung, other EU/EEA origin Objected: 0.4 %.	1.5 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	4,368	mixed	EU origin	RS-DE-01
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung, third-country origin Objected: 4.3 %. 2023: 8.5 %.	6.7 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	2,694	mixed	origin outside the EU	RS-DE-01
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung, all samples Read from Figure 1; objected 1.1 %.	2.2 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	16,423	mixed	all foods	RS-DE-01
Pesticides: samples with measurable residues pest_quantified_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung, German origin Computed as 100 − 57.8 % without quantifiable residues.	42.2 % of samples with quantifiable residues	2024	6,668	mixed	domestic products	RS-DE-01
Pesticides: samples with measurable residues pest_quantified_pct BVL Nationale Berichterstattung, third-country origin Computed as 100 − 40.1 %.	59.9 % of samples with quantifiable residues	2024	2,694	mixed	origin outside the EU	RS-DE-01

Notes on foods

Fruit and vegetables: Highest objection rates 2024: pitaya 36.4 %, lychees 26.7 %, okra 16.7 % (small subsets).
Eggs: Pesticide residues in eggs (Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024) had a clearly lower share of quantifiable residues than in 2017/2021.

Sources: RS-DE-01, RS-DE-02, RS-DE-09

Veterinary medicines and antibiotics – Germany

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU rules apply (Reg. 2019/6, 2019/4). National Tierarzneimittelgesetz (TAMG): keepers of listed production types report holdings and animal numbers (§ 55); since 1 January 2023 veterinarians report antibiotic use; authorities calculate a half-yearly farm 'Therapiehäufigkeit' (treatment frequency), with treatment days of 3rd/4th-generation cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones and colistin weighted by three (§ 57); farms above national 'Kennzahl 1' (median) must review causes with a veterinarian, farms above 'Kennzahl 2' (third quartile) must submit a reduction plan (§ 58). NRKP sampling follows Impl. Reg. (EU) 2022/1646 (e.g. poultry at least 1 sample per 400 t for prohibited substances; eggs 1 per 2,000 t).
B. What is actually used in production?: Antibiotics dispensed for veterinary use: 562 t in 2025, 67 % below 2011 (1,706 t); colistin 26 t; fluoroquinolones 6.3 t (+~18 %). Recorded use in livestock (TAMG data): about 494 t in 2025 (−3 %); antibiotics especially important for human medicine 29 t (2014: over 66 t). Therapy frequency 2025 fell in most categories (laying hens −55 %, dairy cows −7 %) but rose in broilers (+6 %) and fattening turkeys (+5 %). ESUAvet: Germany 75.5 mg/PCU in 2024 (2018: 88.4).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: NRKP 2023 (BVL): 44,548 samples. Risk-based control plan 0.14 % non-compliant (n 42,014; poultry 2 of about 7,320; eggs 0 of about 862; milk 6; cattle 40); randomised surveillance plan 1.2 % (n 1,333); risk-based import plan 0.31 % (n 640). Inhibitor tests on 233,822 slaughter animals: 0.09 % non-compliant. NRKP 2022 (BfR): 0.36 % of 53,267 samples non-compliant.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: BfR (NRKP 2022): health impairment 'nicht zu erwarten' for most non-compliant samples; some antibacterial residues could select less-susceptible bacteria. BfR 2026 expects rising E. coli resistance in broilers and turkeys given rising use.
E. How robust are the data?: Dispensed tonnes and mg/PCU are not species-specific; 2023 changes in German data collection affect trends. Therapy frequency can be biased downward by weekly loss reporting (BfR 064/2025: about −0.43 % per percentage point weekly loss). NRKP control and import plans are risk-based; only the surveillance plan (n 1,333) is randomised. NRKP 2024 results were not found.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Veterinary drugs: non-compliant samples vetdrug_noncompliant_pct NRKP risk-based control plan (KP) 41,244 of the samples were of German origin; rest mostly other EU.	0.14 % of samples non-compliant	2023	42,014	risk-based	domestic products	RS-DE-03
Veterinary drugs: non-compliant samples vetdrug_noncompliant_pct NRKP randomised surveillance plan (ÜP)	1.2 % of samples non-compliant	2023	1,333	random	domestic products	RS-DE-03
Veterinary drugs: non-compliant samples vetdrug_noncompliant_pct NRKP risk-based import control plan (EKP) Plus 268 import suspect samples.	0.31 % of samples non-compliant	2023	640	risk-based	imports	RS-DE-03
Antimicrobial sales, animals (tonnes) amu_tonnes BVL dispensing data (TAMG) 2011: 1,706 t.	562 tonnes antibiotics dispensed to veterinarians	2025	–	unknown	all foods	RS-DE-05
Antimicrobial sales, animals (tonnes) amu_tonnes TAMG use data evaluated by BfR Use, not sales; differs from the 562 t dispensed.	494 tonnes antibiotics used in recorded livestock categories	2025	–	unknown	all foods	RS-DE-06
Antimicrobial sales, animals (mg/PCU) amu_mg_per_pcu ESUAvet, Germany 2018: 88.4; data collection extended from 2023.	75.5 mg/PCU (sales, food-producing animals)	2024	–	unknown	all foods	RS-EU-13

Notes on foods

Poultry: Broiler and turkey therapy frequency rose in 2025; NRKP 2023 found 2 non-compliant poultry samples in the risk-based plan.
Eggs: No non-compliant egg sample in the NRKP 2023 risk-based plan; laying-hen therapy frequency fell 55 % in 2025.

Sources: RS-DE-03, RS-DE-04, RS-DE-05, RS-DE-06, RS-DE-07, RS-DE-08, RS-DE-18, RS-EU-13

Hormonal growth promoters – Germany

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU bans apply (Dir. 96/22/EC; Decision 1999/879/EC on bST). NRKP group A covers prohibited and unauthorised substances, including hormonal substances and beta-agonists.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: NRKP 2023 risk-based plan, group A (prohibited or unauthorised pharmacologically active substances): 9 of 38,459 samples non-compliant (0.02 %). NRKP 2022: 1 non-compliant of 38,585 group A samples.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed separately.
E. How robust are the data?: Group A combines several substance classes; hormone-specific results were not extracted.

Notes on foods

Red meat: Group A findings are rare in the risk-based plan.

Sources: RS-DE-03, RS-DE-04

Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate) – Germany

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU maximum levels apply (Reg. 2023/915). Contaminants in food of animal origin are monitored since 2023 in a separate plan (KOPKONT) rather than in the NRKP.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024 (representative basket): dioxins/dl-PCBs in 80 egg, 16 turkey meat, 35 turkey liver and 49 beef samples 'unauffällig'; PFAS (EFSA-4) no maximum-level exceedance in any food analysed. BfR (2025) on 67 egg samples from 2024: 24 % above LOQ for the PFAS sum; mean sum (lower bound) organic 0.09, free-range 0.07, barn 0.001 ug/kg; no sample above the EU limit of 1.7 ug/kg; declining trend. NRKP 2022: one of about 180 egg samples exceeded dioxin/PCB maximum levels.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: BfR 2021 confirms EFSA's PFAS TWI (4.4 ng/kg bw per week) and finds that exposure of some groups in Germany partly exceeds it, possibly associated with lower vaccine antibody levels in long-breastfed infants and highly exposed children. BfR 2025: PFAS intake from eggs alone does not exceed the TWI; total dietary intake can, which 'gibt Anlass zur gesundheitlichen Besorgnis'.
E. How robust are the data?: Small sample sizes for PFAS in eggs (BfR rates data quality 'mittel'); most PFAS results are below LOQ; cage eggs not reported as a separate group.

Notes on foods

Eggs: PFAS in eggs: highest in organic and free-range eggs, much lower in barn eggs (2024, n 67); all below EU limits.
Poultry: Dioxins in turkey meat and liver 'unauffällig' (2024 monitoring).

Sources: RS-DE-09, RS-DE-11, RS-DE-12, RS-DE-04, RS-DE-03

Mycotoxins (mould toxins) – Germany

Data quality: low Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU maximum levels apply (Reg. 2023/915).
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024: 536 samples analysed for aflatoxins B1, B2, G1, G2, M1; maximum levels exceeded only in one paprika powder and one chamomile tea sample; ochratoxin A (907 samples) exceedances in several paprika powder and roasted coffee samples. AFM1 results for milk were not separately extracted.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed here (see EFSA in EU profile).
E. How robust are the data?: Results apply only to the foods in the 2024 basket.

Sources: RS-DE-09

Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.) – Germany

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU rules apply (Reg. 2160/2003, 2073/2005). The Zoonosen-Monitoring is a joint federal/state programme coordinated by BVL with BfR.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: EFSA/ECDC 2024 (German national control programme data): laying-hen flocks 1.5 % Salmonella spp. and 0.89 % target serovars (n 6,605); broiler flocks 1.3 % and 0.06 % (n 20,393). BVL Zoonosen-Monitoring 2024: Salmonella in broiler caecal content at slaughter 0.2 %, neck skin 4.2 %, conventional retail chicken meat 6.5 %, organic 4.6 %; turkey carcases 21.0 %. Campylobacter: broiler caecal content 40.3 %, neck skin 60.5 %, neck skin above 1,000 CfU/g 19.8 %, conventional chicken meat 41.0 %, organic 46.5 %. Human cases 2024: campylobacteriosis 46,377 (55.8 per 100,000), salmonellosis 12,316 (14.8 per 100,000).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: BVL/BfR: poultry meat should only be eaten thoroughly cooked and kitchen hygiene must prevent cross-contamination. S. Infantis dominated in chicken meat and is not regulated in the control programmes. 74.4 % of Salmonella isolates from the broiler chain were resistant to at least one substance.
E. How robust are the data?: Zoonosen-Monitoring uses planned representative sampling (planned 384 samples per retail matrix; achieved n not extracted). Flock data are national control programme data. Germany uses its own human case definition.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Salmonella: laying-hen flocks salmonella_layer_flocks_pct National Salmonella control programme (EFSA/ECDC Table 20) Target serovars 0.89 %.	1.5 % of adult laying-hen flocks positive for Salmonella spp.	2024	6,605	mixed	domestic products	RS-EU-21
Salmonella: broiler flocks salmonella_broiler_flocks_pct National Salmonella control programme (EFSA/ECDC Table 21) Target serovars 0.06 %.	1.3 % of broiler flocks positive for Salmonella spp.	2024	20,393	mixed	domestic products	RS-EU-21
Salmonella: poultry meat salmonella_poultry_meat_pct BVL Zoonosen-Monitoring 2024 Organic chicken meat 4.6 %. Planned 384 samples per matrix; achieved n not extracted.	6.5 % of conventional fresh chicken meat samples Salmonella-positive (retail)	2024	–	representative	all foods	RS-DE-10
Campylobacter: broilers campylobacter_broiler_pct BVL Zoonosen-Monitoring 2024 Presence, not counts. Neck skin above 1,000 CfU/g: 19.8 %. Organic chicken meat 46.5 %.	41 % of conventional fresh chicken meat samples Campylobacter-positive (retail)	2024	–	representative	all foods	RS-DE-10

Notes on foods

Poultry: Campylobacter is found on about 4 in 10 retail chicken meat samples; Salmonella on about 1 in 15 conventional samples (2024).
Eggs: Salmonella target serovars in 0.89 % of German laying-hen flocks (2024).

Sources: RS-EU-21, RS-DE-10, RS-DE-19

Animal husbandry and feed – Germany

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Stricter than the EU minimum for laying hens: the provision on small-group housing in the Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungsverordnung (former § 13b) is repealed; facilities approved for small-group housing before 22 April 2016 could be used only until 31 December 2025, with individual hardship approvals possible up to 31 December 2028 (§ 45(4)). Destatis describes a ban on small-group and enriched-cage housing since 2010 with existing farms allowed to continue until the end of 2025. Enriched cages remain legal at EU level (Dir. 1999/74/EC).
B. What is actually used in production?: Destatis 2025 (holdings with at least 3,000 places): 45.2 million laying hens, 13.7 billion eggs; share of eggs from barn 57.6 %, free-range 24.7 %, organic 14.6 %, small-group/enriched cages 3.1 % (2024: 4.3 %); hens in such cages fell 28.8 % to about 1.4 million.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Not applicable.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed.
E. How robust are the data?: Housing shares exclude small holdings; number of hardship approvals is unknown.

Notes on foods

Eggs: Cage eggs are a small and shrinking share of German production (3.1 % in 2025).

Sources: RS-DE-15, RS-DE-16

Controls, imports, recalls, labelling – Germany

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: EU control rules apply; Länder authorities carry out official food controls, BVL coordinates national programmes and reports to the EU, BfR assesses risks. National implementing rules include the Tier-LMÜV (inhibitor testing at slaughter).
B. What is actually used in production?: Germany is the top notifying country in the EU Alert and Cooperation Network (ACN 2025).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: See domain-specific monitoring; ACN 2025 names Germany, Bulgaria and France as top reporters for fruit and vegetable cases (pesticides, mycotoxins).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not applicable.
E. How robust are the data?: High notification numbers reflect control activity, not lower food safety.

Sources: RS-DE-18, RS-DE-03, RS-EU-31

Drinking water – Germany

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Trinkwasserverordnung 2023 transposes Directive 2020/2184: nitrate 50 mg/l; pesticides 0,00010 mg/l per substance; 'Summe PFAS-20' 0,00010 mg/l from 12 January 2026 and 'Summe PFAS-4' 0,000020 mg/l from 12 January 2028 (an additional, lower value for four PFAS that is not part of the EU directive values read).
B. What is actually used in production?: Supply in 2022: 74.1 million people (88.6 %) from 2,507 large supply areas; raw water 67.6 % groundwater.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: UBA/BMG 2020–2022: for almost all microbiological and chemical parameters more than 99 % of samples met the legal requirements; 14 of 349 pesticide substances/metabolites exceeded 0.10 ug/l in up to 1 % of the samples analysed for them; coliform bacteria not met in up to 1.2 %. JMP: 99.92 % of the population used safely managed drinking water in 2024.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: UBA: 'Aus den gemessenen Pestizid-Konzentrationen resultiert keine Gesundheitsgefahr.'
E. How robust are the data?: Report covers large supply areas only; no national report for 2023 or later found. JMP value is a modelled, globally comparable estimate.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Safely managed drinking water (WHO/UNICEF) water_safely_managed_pct WHO/UNICEF JMP via World Bank WDI Modelled estimate (99.917 %).	99.92 % of population using safely managed drinking water	2024	–	unknown	all foods	RS-DE-17

Sources: RS-DE-13, RS-DE-14, RS-DE-17

Sources – Germany (22)

RS-DE-01: Nationale Berichterstattung 'Pflanzenschutzmittelrückstände in Lebensmitteln' – Ergebnisse 2024 – Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit (BVL) (2026). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/nbpsm/00_Berichte/NBPSMR_2024.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-02: Absatz an Pflanzenschutzmitteln in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland – Ergebnisse der Meldungen gemäß § 64 Pflanzenschutzgesetz für das Jahr 2024 – BVL (2025). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/04_Pflanzenschutzmittel/01_meldungen_par_64/meld_par_64_2024.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-09: Berichte zur Lebensmittelsicherheit 2024 – Lebensmittel-Monitoring 2024 (gemeinsamer Bericht des Bundes und der Länder) – BVL (2025). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/01_lm_mon_dokumente/01_Monitoring_Berichte/2024_lm_monitoring_bericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-03: Berichte zur Lebensmittelsicherheit 2023 – Nationale Berichterstattung an die EU 2023 – Jahresbericht zum Nationalen Rückstandskontrollplan (NRKP) 2023 (BVL-Report 19.4) – BVL (2025). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Berichte/05_Weitere_Berichte_LM_Sicherheit/Berichte_zur_Lebensmittelsicherheit_2023.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-04: BfR Stellungnahme 031/2024: Ergebnisse des Nationalen Rückstandskontrollplans und des Einfuhrüberwachungsplans 2022 – Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung (BfR) (2024). https://bfr.bund.de/cm/343/ergebnisse-des-nationalen-rueckstandskontrollplans-und-des-einfuehrueberwachungsplans-2022.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-05: BVL Pressemitteilung 'Antibiotikaabgabe in der Tiermedizin weiter auf niedrigem Niveau' (data year 2025) – BVL (2026). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/05_tierarzneimittel/2026/PM_Antibiotika-Abgabemengen.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-06: BfR Presseinformation 24/2026 'Antibiotika in der Tierhaltung: Einsatz sinkt leicht' (use data 2025) – BfR (2026). https://www.bfr.bund.de/presseinformation/antibiotika-in-der-tierhaltung-einsatz-sinkt-leicht/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-07: Tierarzneimittelgesetz (TAMG) §§ 54, 55, 57, 58 (Antibiotika-Minimierungskonzept) – Bundesministerium (Germany) / gesetze-im-internet.de (2021). https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tamg/__57.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-08: BfR Stellungnahme 064/2025: Antibiotika-Einsatz in der Nutztierhaltung – wöchentliche statt tägliche Meldung von Tierverlusten könnte Therapiehäufigkeit geringer erscheinen lassen als sie ist – BfR (2025). https://www.bfr.bund.de/stellungnahme/antibiotika-einsatz-in-der-nutztierhaltung-woechentliche-statt-taegliche-meldung-von-tierverlusten-koennte-therapiehaeufigkeit-geringer-erscheinen-lassen-als-sie-ist/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-18: BVL web page 'Nationaler Rückstandskontrollplan (NRKP)' – BVL (2026). https://www.bvl.bund.de/DE/Arbeitsbereiche/01_Lebensmittel/01_Aufgaben/02_AmtlicheLebensmittelueberwachung/05_NRKP/lm_nrkp_node.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-13: European Sales and Use of Antimicrobials for Veterinary Medicine (ESUAvet) – Annual surveillance report for 2024 (EMA/CVMP/ESUAVET/376993/2025) – European Medicines Agency (2025). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/report/european-sales-use-antimicrobials-veterinary-medicine-annual-surveillance-report-2024_en.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-11: BfR Stellungnahme 043/2025: Weniger PFAS in Hühnereiern aus Boden- und Freilandhaltung – Eier und Eiprodukte tragen aber weiterhin zur Gesamtexposition bei – BfR (2025). https://www.bfr.bund.de/assets/01_Ver%C3%B6ffentlichungen/Stellungnahmen_deutsch/weniger-pfas-in-huehnereiern-aus-boden-und-freilandhaltung.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-12: BfR Stellungnahme 020/2021: PFAS in Lebensmitteln: BfR bestätigt kritische Exposition gegenüber Industriechemikalien – BfR (2021). https://www.bfr.bund.de/cm/343/pfas-in-lebensmitteln-bfr-bestaetigt-kritische-exposition-gegenueber-industriechemikalien.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-21: The European Union One Health 2024 Zoonoses Report – EFSA and ECDC (2025). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41377167/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-10: Berichte zur Lebensmittelsicherheit 2024 – Zoonosen-Monitoring 2024 (gemeinsamer Bericht des Bundes und der Länder) – BVL (with BfR) (2025). https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/01_Lebensmittel/04_Zoonosen_Monitoring/Zoonosen_Monitoring_Bericht_2024.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-19: German outbreak of Escherichia coli O104:H4 associated with sprouts – Buchholz U et al. (2011). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22029753/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-15: Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungsverordnung (TierSchNutztV) § 45 Übergangsregelungen (and § 13b, repealed) – Bundesministerium (Germany) / gesetze-im-internet.de (2026). https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tierschnutztv/__45.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-16: Destatis Pressemitteilung Nr. 086 vom 13. März 2026: Eierproduktion 2025 leicht gestiegen – Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis) (2026). https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2026/03/PD26_086_413.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-31: Alert and Cooperation Network – 2025 Annual Report – European Commission (DG SANTE) (2026). https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/5266bb47-4b7e-4558-9910-4c66519cbe7f_en?filename=acn_annual-report_2025.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-13: Trinkwasserverordnung (TrinkwV) vom 20. Juni 2023 (BGBl. 2023 I Nr. 159) – Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (Germany) (2023). https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/trinkwv_2023/BJNR09F0B0023.html (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-14: Bericht des BMG und des UBA über die Qualität von Wasser für den menschlichen Gebrauch (Trinkwasser) in Deutschland 2020–2022 (Umwelt & Gesundheit 03/2025) – Bundesministerium für Gesundheit / Umweltbundesamt (2025). https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/system/files/medien/11850/publikationen/dwd_bericht_2020-2022.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-DE-17: World Bank WDI API – SH.H2O.SMDW.ZS (People using safely managed drinking water services, % of population; source WHO/UNICEF JMP) – World Bank / WHO-UNICEF JMP (2026). https://api.worldbank.org/v2/country/EUU;DEU/indicator/SH.H2O.SMDW.ZS?format=json&date=2018:2025 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)

European Union

The EU sets one legal framework for all 27 member states: maximum residue levels for pesticides and veterinary drugs, maximum levels for contaminants, a positive list for additives, microbiological criteria, and rules on animal husbandry, feed and labelling. Pesticides and veterinary antibiotics are used in EU farming under these rules; growth promoters, hormonal growth promoters, beta-agonists for fattening and bST in dairy cows are banned, and routine or preventive group use of antibiotics is restricted. In 2024 most food samples complied with pesticide limits: 1.2 % of the representative EU programme samples were non-compliant, with higher rates for products from third countries than from the EU. Salmonella reduction targets for poultry flocks are met at EU level, but Campylobacter remains the most reported food-borne infection, and EFSA finds that part of the population exceeds the tolerable intakes for PFAS and dioxins. Most monitoring outside the coordinated programme is risk-based, so percentages are not prevalence estimates and are not directly comparable with other countries' surveys.

Research scope: EU food, feed, veterinary-medicine, contaminant, additive, hygiene, labelling, welfare and drinking-water legislation was read through the EU Publications Office Cellar service, because eur-lex.europa.eu blocks scripted access; in-force flags were checked. EU monitoring was taken from the EFSA 2024 pesticide report and the EFSA/ECDC One Health 2024 zoonoses report (full texts via Europe PMC), the EMA ESUAvet 2024 report (PDF), the EFSA news on 2024 veterinary-drug residues, EFSA opinions on PFAS, dioxins and aflatoxins (abstracts), and the Commission's ACN 2025 annual report. EEA: EFSA pesticide and veterinary-drug reports and the zoonoses and ESUAvet reports include Iceland and Norway. Under the EEA Agreement (Annex I) live-animal legislation does not apply to Iceland and veterinary legislation does not apply to Liechtenstein while the EC–Switzerland agricultural agreement extends to it (EEA Joint Committee Decision 44/2025); incorporation of each act into the EEA Agreement was not checked act by act. Not accessible or not done: the EFSA veterinary-drug technical report (EN-9913), EU-wide aflatoxin M1 and nitrate occurrence percentages, EU heavy-metal occurrence data, the consolidated EEA Annex I (HTTP 403), and an EU-level JMP value (none in the World Bank API).

Last checked: 25 October 2026

Pesticides and pesticide residues – European Union

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 sets EU-wide maximum residue levels (MRLs) for food and feed; where no specific MRL exists a default of 0,01 mg/kg applies (Art. 18(1)(b)). EFSA must publish an annual residue report (Art. 32). Pesticide active substances are approved at EU level; products are authorised nationally. Increased import checks for listed product/country combinations are set in Implementing Reg. (EU) 2019/1793.
B. What is actually used in production?: Pesticides are used in EU agriculture under EU approval and national authorisation. EU-wide use quantities were not researched here (see DE for German sales data).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: EFSA 2024 report (27 MS + Iceland + Norway). EU-coordinated programme (representative, 12 commodities incl. chicken eggs and bovine fat): 9,842 samples; 43.1 % without quantifiable residues; 2.4 % above MRL; 1.2 % non-compliant. By origin: EU/reporting-country products 1.8 % above MRL (n 7,467), third-country products 4.8 % (n 1,978). National programmes (EU MACP + MANCP, partly risk-based): 86,449 samples; 58.4 % without quantifiable residues; 3.3 % above MRL; 1.8 % non-compliant; EU-market origin 2.1 % above MRL (n 57,574), third-country origin 8.3 % (n 18,184); 12.4 % unknown origin. Increased import controls (risk-based, at the border): 39,433 samples, 5.5 % above MRL, 3.6 % non-compliant; these consignments did not enter the market. Animal products: 19,995 samples, 93.1 % without quantifiable residues, 0.5 % above MRL.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: EFSA's probabilistic assessment for 2022–2024: 'the estimated dietary risk was found to be low for most of the EU subpopulation groups'. Chronic: for 333 of 334 substances the probability of exceeding the ADI was below 1 in 1,000,000; pyrimethanil 0.200 %–1.242 % (median) in seven population groups. Acute: for 55 substances the probability of exceeding the ARfD ranged from 0.001 % to 0.6075 %.
E. How robust are the data?: High for the EU MACP (harmonised, representative design). National programme figures mix objective and selective sampling and over-represent suspect products. 'Above MRL' (numerical) and 'non-compliant' (after measurement uncertainty) must not be mixed. 12.4 % unknown origin limits origin comparisons.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct EU coordinated multiannual control programme (EU MACP) Non-compliant after measurement uncertainty: 1.2 %.	2.4 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	9,842	representative	all foods	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct EU MACP, products of reporting-country origin Non-compliant 0.8 %. Includes domestic and other EU/EEA origin.	1.8 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	7,467	representative	EU origin	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct EU MACP, products of third-country origin Non-compliant 2.6 %.	4.8 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	1,978	representative	origin outside the EU	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct National programmes (EU MACP + MANCP) Non-compliant 1.8 %. Partly risk-based.	3.3 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	86,449	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct National programmes, EU-market origin Non-compliant 1.0 %.	2.1 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	57,574	mixed	EU origin	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct National programmes, third-country origin Non-compliant 5.2 %.	8.3 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	18,184	mixed	origin outside the EU	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct Increased import controls under Impl. Reg. (EU) 2019/1793 Non-compliant 3.6 %; border checks on listed high-risk combinations.	5.5 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	39,433	risk-based	imports	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples above the maximum residue level pest_mrl_exceed_pct National programmes, animal products 93.1 % without quantifiable residues.	0.5 % of samples above MRL (numerical)	2024	19,995	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples with measurable residues pest_quantified_pct EU MACP Computed as 100 − 43.1 % without quantifiable residues (54.5 % within MRL + 2.4 % above).	56.9 % of samples with quantifiable residues	2024	9,842	representative	all foods	RS-EU-04
Pesticides: samples with measurable residues pest_quantified_pct National programmes (EU MACP + MANCP) Computed as 100 − 58.4 % without quantifiable residues.	41.6 % of samples with quantifiable residues	2024	86,449	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-04

Notes on foods

Eggs: Chicken eggs were in the 2024 EU MACP; MRL exceedance rate 1.4 % (2021: 0 %; 2018: 0.1 %); n for eggs not extracted.
Red meat: Bovine fat in the 2024 EU MACP: MRL exceedance rate 0.2 %.
Fruit and vegetables: In the EU MACP, sweet peppers had the largest rise in exceedance rate (4.7 % in 2024); grapefruit 3.7 %; bananas 1.6 %.
Cereals and rice: Wheat grain in the EU MACP: exceedance rate 0.5 % (2024).
Fish and seafood: 21 countries reported 1,063 fish samples; quantified residues mainly copper, chlorate and DDT; no MRLs above LOQ set for fish.

Sources: RS-EU-03, RS-EU-04, RS-EU-30

Veterinary medicines and antibiotics – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Regulation (EU) 2019/6 (applies since 28 January 2022): antimicrobials not to be used routinely or to compensate for poor hygiene or husbandry; not for growth promotion or yield increase; prophylaxis only in exceptional cases and, for antibiotics, only for an individual animal; metaphylaxis only with high risk of spread and no alternatives (Art. 107); antimicrobial prescriptions valid five days (Art. 105). Regulation (EU) 2019/4: medicated feed with antimicrobials 'shall not be used for prophylaxis' (Art. 17(3)). Antibiotics other than coccidiostats/histomonostats banned as feed additives since 1 January 2006 (Reg. 1831/2003). Implementing Reg. (EU) 2022/1255 reserves listed antimicrobials (e.g. carbapenems, glycopeptides, oxazolidinones) for humans. Since 3 September 2026 the growth-promotion and reserved-antimicrobial bans also apply to animals and products imported from third countries (Del. Reg. 2023/905, Impl. Reg. 2026/1189). MRLs and prohibited substances: Reg. (EU) No 37/2010. Third countries need an approved residue control plan per commodity (Impl. Reg. 2021/405).
B. What is actually used in production?: Veterinary antimicrobials are used in EU livestock. ESUAvet 2024: EU (27) sales 89.6 mg/PCU, 24.3 % below 2018 (118.3); target for 2030 59.2 mg/PCU; sales rose in 2023 and 2024 after a low in 2022. 86.0 % of sales were product forms mainly used for group treatment. AMEG category B substances (fluoroquinolones, 3rd/4th-generation cephalosporins, polymyxins, other quinolones) were 6.0 % of sales.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: EFSA (2024 data, EU + Iceland + Norway): 0.13 % (629 of 493,664) samples non-compliant for veterinary drug residues and other substances; risk-based production plan 0.16 %, randomised surveillance plan 0.22 %, risk-based third-country import plan 0.2 %.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: No EU-level quantitative health-risk conclusion on residues was read (EFSA technical report not accessible). The legal measures are motivated by antimicrobial resistance.
E. How robust are the data?: Sales in mg/PCU are a population-corrected sales indicator, not use per species; national data collection changes affect trends. Residue figures come from mainly risk-based plans; only the randomised plan approximates prevalence.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Veterinary drugs: non-compliant samples vetdrug_noncompliant_pct EU residue monitoring (Reg. 2017/625, Del. Reg. 2022/1644), EU + IS + NO Risk-based production plan 0.16 %; randomised plan 0.22 %; import plan 0.2 % (n of sub-plans not read).	0.13 % of samples non-compliant	2024	493,664	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-14
Antimicrobial sales, animals (mg/PCU) amu_mg_per_pcu ESUAvet, EU-27 aggregate EU + Iceland + Norway: 85.6 mg/PCU. 2018 reference 118.3; 2030 target 59.2.	89.6 mg/PCU (sales, food-producing animals)	2024	–	unknown	all foods	RS-EU-13

Notes on foods

Poultry: Only countries listed with an approved residue control plan for poultry may export poultry meat to the EU (Impl. Reg. 2021/405).
Eggs: Same requirement applies to eggs.
Dairy: Same requirement applies to milk.

Sources: RS-EU-05, RS-EU-06, RS-EU-07, RS-EU-08, RS-EU-09, RS-EU-10, RS-EU-11, RS-EU-12, RS-EU-13, RS-EU-14

Hormonal growth promoters – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Directive 96/22/EC: thyrostatics, stilbenes and oestradiol 17beta are prohibited (List A); beta-agonists are prohibited with narrow derogations (List B); other oestrogenic, androgenic and gestagenic substances are provisionally prohibited (Annex III). Administering them to farm or aquaculture animals is banned (Art. 3); limited therapeutic or zootechnical use only by a veterinarian on identified animals, not by implant (Arts 4–5). Imports of animals or meat treated with List A substances are banned; third countries authorising stilbenes or thyrostatics cannot be on import lists (Art. 11). Council Decision 1999/879/EC prohibits marketing and administering bovine somatotrophin (bST) to dairy cows. Individual beta-agonists such as ractopamine are not named in the text read; the ban is defined by substance group.
B. What is actually used in production?: Use for growth promotion is illegal in the EU; no data on illegal use beyond residue findings.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Residue plans test for group A (prohibited) substances; EU-level group A results were not separately extracted (see DE: 9 of 38,459 risk-based samples non-compliant in 2023).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed here.
E. How robust are the data?: Legal status is clear from primary texts; measured data only at national level here.

Notes on foods

Red meat: Hormonal growth promoters and beta-agonists for fattening are banned; imports must comply (Dir. 96/22/EC Art. 11).
Dairy: bST use in dairy cows is banned (Decision 1999/879/EC).

Sources: RS-EU-15, RS-EU-16

Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate) – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 (Reg. 1881/2006 not in force since 24 May 2023) sets maximum levels. Examples: dioxins (sum dioxins / dioxins + dl-PCBs) poultry meat 1,75 / 3,0 pg/g fat, eggs 2,5 / 5,0 pg/g fat, raw milk and dairy 2,0 / 4,0 pg/g fat, fish muscle 3,5 / 6,5 pg/g wet weight; PFAS sum of 4: eggs 1,7 ug/kg, meat of bovine/pig/poultry 1,3 ug/kg, fish muscle (general) 2,0 ug/kg; lead: raw milk 0,020 mg/kg, meat 0,10 mg/kg, fish 0,30 mg/kg; cadmium meat 0,050 mg/kg; mercury fish (most species) 0,50 mg/kg; nitrate: fresh spinach 3 500 mg/kg, lettuce 2 000–5 000 mg/kg, rucola up to 7 000 mg/kg.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable (environmental and process contaminants, not intentionally used).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: EU-level occurrence percentages for PFAS, dioxins, heavy metals and nitrate were not extracted in this work (see DE for German monitoring).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: EFSA 2020: TWI 4.4 ng/kg bw per week for the sum of PFOA, PFNA, PFHxS, PFOS; fish meat, fruit and eggs contributed most; 'parts of the European population exceed this TWI, which is of concern'. EFSA 2018: TWI 2 pg TEQ/kg bw per week for dioxins and dl-PCBs; mean and P95 intakes of adolescents, adults and elderly 2.1–10.5 and 5.3–30.4 pg TEQ/kg bw per week, 'a considerable exceedance of the TWI'.
E. How robust are the data?: EFSA opinions read as abstracts only. Exceeding a TWI describes long-term intake at population level; it does not mean that a single food is unsafe. Maximum levels are legal limits, not health thresholds.

Notes on foods

Eggs: EFSA lists eggs and egg products among the main PFAS contributors; dioxins and dl-PCBs transfer to eggs.
Fish and seafood: Fish meat is a main PFAS contributor (EFSA 2020).
Dairy: Dioxins and dl-PCBs transfer to milk (EFSA 2018).

Sources: RS-EU-17, RS-EU-18, RS-EU-19

Mycotoxins (mould toxins) – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Reg. (EU) 2023/915: aflatoxin M1 0,050 ug/kg in raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk for milk products; 0,025 ug/kg in infant, follow-on and young-child formulae; groundnuts for direct consumption B1 2,0 / sum 4,0 ug/kg; ochratoxin A dried vine fruits 8,0 ug/kg; deoxynivalenol unprocessed cereals 1 000 ug/kg. Increased import checks for aflatoxins in listed products (Impl. Reg. 2019/1793).
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable (natural toxins).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No EU-wide AFM1 exceedance percentage was extracted. ACN 2025: for mycotoxins, 77 % of notifications result from border checks; aflatoxins and ochratoxin A in figs most reported among fruit; aflatoxins in groundnuts and pistachios dominate nut notifications.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: EFSA 2020 (more than 200,000 analytical results): milk and fermented milk products are the main contributors to AFM1 exposure; margins of exposure below 10,000 for AFB1 and, in some surveys of younger age groups, for AFM1 – 'This raises a health concern.'
E. How robust are the data?: EFSA opinion read as abstract only; RASFF/ACN counts reflect border control intensity, not prevalence.

Notes on foods

Dairy: AFM1 limit 0,050 ug/kg (milk); EFSA identifies liquid milk as main AFM1 source.
Legumes and nuts: Groundnut limits and import checks; aflatoxins dominate nut notifications in ACN 2025.

Sources: RS-EU-17, RS-EU-20, RS-EU-30, RS-EU-31

Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.) – European Union

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 obliges national Salmonella control programmes in poultry with Union targets: at most 2 % of adult laying-hen flocks positive for S. Enteritidis/Typhimurium (Reg. 517/2011) and at most 1 % of broiler flocks (Reg. 200/2012). Reg. (EC) No 2073/2005: fresh poultry meat – S. Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium not detected in 25 g (n=5, c=0); process hygiene criterion for Campylobacter on broiler neck skin 1000 CFU/g (max 15 of 50 samples above).
B. What is actually used in production?: Control programmes are run by Member States; vaccination and on-farm measures were not researched.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: EFSA/ECDC 2024: laying-hen flocks 4.0 % Salmonella spp. and 1.6 % target serovars (n 38,918 flocks); broiler flocks 4.3 % and 0.29 % (n 313,902). Fresh meat from broilers 4.9 % Salmonella-positive (n 95,954 units). Campylobacter on broiler neck skins above 1000 CFU/g: 24.3 % of 15,431 official samples and 16.4 % of 67,042 operator samples. 14 MS and UK (Northern Ireland) met all poultry Salmonella targets. Human cases 2024: campylobacteriosis 168,396 (55.3 per 100,000), salmonellosis 79,703 (18.6 per 100,000).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Campylobacteriosis is the most reported zoonosis (63.7 % of cases) with a significant increasing trend 2020–2024. Salmonella in eggs and egg products was the agent/food pair of most concern; broiler meat was most often implicated in strong-evidence Campylobacter outbreaks.
E. How robust are the data?: Flock data come from national control programmes (official + operator samples) and are comparable across MS for target serovars. Meat data mix designs. Official samples show higher positive rates than operator own-checks. Human rates depend on surveillance systems.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Salmonella: laying-hen flocks salmonella_layer_flocks_pct National Salmonella control programmes (Reg. 2160/2003), EU-27 + XI Target serovars (S. Enteritidis/Typhimurium): 1.6 %.	4 % of adult laying-hen flocks positive for Salmonella spp.	2024	38,918	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-21
Salmonella: broiler flocks salmonella_broiler_flocks_pct National Salmonella control programmes, EU-27 + XI Target serovars: 0.29 %.	4.3 % of broiler flocks positive for Salmonella spp.	2024	313,902	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-21
Salmonella: poultry meat salmonella_poultry_meat_pct Member State reporting to EFSA (various sampling contexts) Not a harmonised retail survey.	4.9 % of fresh broiler meat sampling units Salmonella-positive	2024	95,954	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-21
Campylobacter: broilers campylobacter_broiler_pct Official controls, Reg. 2073/2005 PHC, 17 MS Operator own-checks: 16.4 % of 67,042. This is a count-above-limit share, not a prevalence of Campylobacter presence.	24.3 % of broiler neck-skin samples above 1000 CFU/g (process hygiene criterion)	2024	15,431	mixed	all foods	RS-EU-21

Notes on foods

Eggs: Salmonella in eggs and egg products was the agent/food pair of most concern in 2024 outbreaks.
Poultry: Broiler flocks meet the EU target for target serovars at EU level (0.29 %); Campylobacter on carcases remains frequent.

Sources: RS-EU-21, RS-EU-22, RS-EU-23, RS-EU-24

Additives and processing – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008: only additives on the Union list may be used, under set conditions (Art. 4); inclusion requires no safety concern, technological need and no misleading of consumers (Art. 6); additives authorised before 2009 are re-evaluated by EFSA (Art. 32). Six listed azo-type colours (e.g. E 110, E 104, E 122) require the warning 'may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children' (Annex V). Titanium dioxide (E 171) was removed from the Union list by Reg. (EU) 2022/63 after EFSA concluded in 2021 that a genotoxicity concern could not be ruled out; foods made under the old rules could be placed on the market until 7 August 2022.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented here.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Not researched.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: EFSA 2021 on E 171: 'can no longer be considered safe when used as a food additive' (as quoted in Reg. 2022/63).
E. How robust are the data?: Legal texts read; the Union list itself was not read.

Sources: RS-EU-25, RS-EU-26

Animal husbandry and feed – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Directive 1999/74/EC: unenriched (battery) cages prohibited since 1 January 2012; enriched cages remain allowed EU-wide with at least 750 cm2 per hen (600 cm2 usable), nest, litter and perches. Eggs carry a producer code showing farming method and site (Del. Reg. 2023/2465). TSE Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 Art. 7: feeding animal protein to ruminants is prohibited; Annex IV extends and qualifies the ban for other species. Reg. (EU) 2021/1372 re-allowed processed animal protein (PAP) from pigs in poultry feed and PAP from poultry in pig feed, plus insect PAP, under strict separation; feeding PAP of the same species (intra-species recycling) remains prohibited (Reg. 1069/2009 Art. 11). Antibiotic growth promoters banned in feed since 2006.
B. What is actually used in production?: Housing shares across the EU were not researched (see DE).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Not applicable.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed.
E. How robust are the data?: Legal texts read; Annex IV of 999/2001 read only in part.

Notes on foods

Eggs: Cage eggs from enriched cages remain legal at EU level; national rules can be stricter (see DE).
Poultry: Poultry may be fed porcine PAP and insect PAP since 2021; not poultry PAP.

Sources: RS-EU-27, RS-EU-28, RS-EU-29, RS-EU-09

Controls, imports, recalls, labelling – European Union

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Regulation (EU) 2017/625 governs official controls by Member States and at the border; Reg. 178/2002 bans unsafe food and sets up EFSA and RASFF. Implementing Reg. 2019/1793 raises border check frequencies for listed product/country/hazard combinations, reviewed at least every six months. Labelling: Reg. 1169/2011 (food information); origin labelling for fresh, chilled and frozen pig, sheep, goat and poultry meat ('Reared in' / 'Slaughtered in', Impl. Reg. 1337/2013, since 1 April 2015); beef: born, fattened and slaughtered countries (Reg. 1760/2000); eggs: producer code (Del. Reg. 2023/2465).
B. What is actually used in production?: Controls are carried out by national authorities; frequency depends on risk.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: ACN 2025: 10,490 notifications (+11 %); Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium notified most; fruits and vegetables 18 % of notifications, 78 % of them for non-EU products; pesticide residues the most frequent issue. 39,433 import samples under 2019/1793 in 2024 (EFSA).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not applicable.
E. How robust are the data?: Notification counts reflect control intensity, notification practice and trade volume; they are not prevalence data.

Notes on foods

Poultry: Origin label 'Reared in / Slaughtered in' mandatory for fresh poultry meat.
Red meat: Beef labels state birth, fattening and slaughter countries.
Eggs: Producer code on each egg identifies farming method and production site; its meaning must be explained on or in the pack (individual code digits not re-read here).

Sources: RS-EU-01, RS-EU-02, RS-EU-30, RS-EU-31, RS-EU-32, RS-EU-33, RS-EU-34, RS-EU-27, RS-EU-37, RS-EU-36

Drinking water – European Union

Data quality: low Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: Directive (EU) 2020/2184 (recast; repealed 98/83/EC from 13 January 2023): E. coli 0/100 ml; nitrate 50 mg/l; pesticides 0,10 ug/l per substance; arsenic 10 ug/l; lead 10 ug/l, falling to 5 ug/l by 12 January 2036; bisphenol A 2,5 ug/l; 'Sum of PFAS' 0,10 ug/l and/or 'PFAS Total' 0,50 ug/l, to be met by 12 January 2026; risk-based approach.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No EU-wide compliance figure was read; no EU-level JMP value in the World Bank API (see DE).
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not assessed.
E. How robust are the data?: Directive text read via Cellar.

Sources: RS-EU-35

Sources – European Union (37)

RS-EU-03: Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed – European Parliament and Council (2005). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2005/396/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-04: The 2024 European Union report on pesticide residues in food – EFSA (2026). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42095190/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-30: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1793 on temporary increase of official controls and emergency measures for certain goods from certain third countries; consolidated 30.06.2026 – European Commission (2019). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/1793/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-05: Commission Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 on pharmacologically active substances and MRLs in foodstuffs of animal origin; consolidated 16.08.2026 – European Commission (2010). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2010/37/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-06: Regulation (EU) 2019/6 on veterinary medicinal products; consolidated 28.01.2022 – European Parliament and Council (2019). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/6/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-07: Regulation (EU) 2019/4 on the manufacture, placing on the market and use of medicated feed – European Parliament and Council (2019). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/4/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-08: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1255 designating antimicrobials or groups of antimicrobials reserved for treatment of certain infections in humans – European Commission (2022). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1255/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-09: Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition; consolidated 27.03.2021 – European Parliament and Council (2003). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2003/1831/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-10: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/905 on the prohibition of use of certain antimicrobials in animals or products exported from third countries into the Union – European Commission (2023). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/905/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-11: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1189 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/405 (antimicrobial restrictions; new Annex XVIa) – European Commission (2026). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2026/1189/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-12: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/405 – lists of third countries authorised for entry of animals and goods for human consumption; consolidated 03.09.2026 – European Commission (2021). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2021/405/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-13: European Sales and Use of Antimicrobials for Veterinary Medicine (ESUAvet) – Annual surveillance report for 2024 (EMA/CVMP/ESUAVET/376993/2025) – European Medicines Agency (2025). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/report/european-sales-use-antimicrobials-veterinary-medicine-annual-surveillance-report-2024_en.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-14: EFSA news 'Veterinary drug residues in food: what's the latest in the EU?' (2024 monitoring data; technical report doi 10.2903/sp.efsa.2026.EN-9913) – EFSA (2026). https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/news/veterinary-drug-residues-food-whats-latest-eu (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-15: Council Directive 96/22/EC prohibiting hormonal, thyrostatic substances and beta-agonists in stockfarming; consolidated 18.12.2008 – Council of the EU (1996). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1996/22/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-16: Council Decision 1999/879/EC concerning the placing on the market and administration of bovine somatotrophin (BST) – Council of the EU (1999). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/1999/879/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-17: Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food (repealing Reg. 1881/2006); consolidated 19.08.2026 – European Commission (2023). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/915/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-18: Risk to human health related to the presence of perfluoroalkyl substances in food – EFSA CONTAM Panel (2020). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32994824/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-19: Risk for animal and human health related to the presence of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in feed and food – EFSA CONTAM Panel (2018). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32625737/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-20: Risk assessment of aflatoxins in food – EFSA CONTAM Panel (2020). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32874256/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-31: Alert and Cooperation Network – 2025 Annual Report – European Commission (DG SANTE) (2026). https://food.ec.europa.eu/document/download/5266bb47-4b7e-4558-9910-4c66519cbe7f_en?filename=acn_annual-report_2025.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-21: The European Union One Health 2024 Zoonoses Report – EFSA and ECDC (2025). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41377167/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-22: Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 on the control of salmonella and other specified food-borne zoonotic agents; consolidated 21.04.2021 – European Parliament and Council (2003). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2003/2160/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-23: Commission Regulations (EU) No 517/2011 (laying hens) and No 200/2012 (broilers) – Union Salmonella reduction targets – European Commission (2011/2012). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/517/oj ; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2012/200/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-24: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs; consolidated 01.07.2026 – European Commission (2005). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2005/2073/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-25: Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on food additives – European Parliament and Council (2008). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1333/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-26: Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/63 amending Annexes II and III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 as regards titanium dioxide (E 171) – European Commission (2022). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/63/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-27: Council Directive 1999/74/EC (protection of laying hens) and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2465 (marketing standards for eggs) – Council of the EU / European Commission (1999/2023). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/74/oj ; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2465/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-28: Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain TSEs; consolidated 12.03.2025 – European Parliament and Council (2001). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2001/999/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-29: Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1372 amending Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 (feeding non-ruminant farmed animals with protein derived from animals) – European Commission (2021). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1372/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-01: Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (General Food Law); consolidated 01.01.2026 – European Parliament and Council (2002). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2002/178/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-02: Regulation (EU) 2017/625 on official controls; consolidated 05.01.2025 – European Parliament and Council (2017). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/625/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-32: Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers; consolidated 01.04.2025 – European Parliament and Council (2011). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1169/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-33: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1337/2013 – country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry – European Commission (2013). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2013/1337/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-34: Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef – European Parliament and Council (2000). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2000/1760/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-37: RASFF Window – public notification search (consolidated backend) – European Commission (RASFF) (2026). https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/rasff-window/screen/search (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-36: Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 44/2025 of 14 March 2025 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2025/1027] – EEA Joint Committee (2025). https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/eea/other-legal-documents/adopted-joint-committee-decisions/2025%20-%20English/044-2025.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-EU-35: Directive (EU) 2020/2184 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast) – European Parliament and Council (2020). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2020/2184/oj (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)

International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Codex Alimentarius, run by FAO and WHO, sets international food standards: maximum residue limits for pesticides and veterinary drugs, maximum levels for contaminants such as aflatoxins and lead, additive rules and hygiene codes. These standards are voluntary. A country is bound only by its own law, but under WTO rules Codex is the reference point in trade disputes. Codex accepts some hormonal growth promoters and ractopamine; the ractopamine limits were adopted in 2012 by a vote of 69 to 67, and many countries, including the EU and China, still ban it. WHO recommends stopping antibiotic use for growth promotion and for routine prevention in healthy animals; WOAH reports that 22% of reporting countries still allowed growth promoters in 2022. WHO estimates that unsafe food caused about 866 million illnesses and 1.5 million deaths in 2021, with the highest burden in Africa and South-East Asia. There is no international monitoring that measures residues in each country's food; such data come from national programmes.

Research scope: International reference framework: Codex Alimentarius (standards, MRL databases, CAC 2012 report), WHO (antimicrobial guidelines and MIA List, GEMS/Food, Drinking-water Guidelines, foodborne disease burden estimates 2015 and 2026), FAO (JECFA/JMPR, INFOSAN), WOAH ANIMUSE 9th report, WHO/UNICEF JMP and IARC classifications, all read from primary documents in October 2026. These are voluntary references, not laws of any country; they are shown when a country has no researched profile. Not covered or not verifiable: WOAH animal-welfare housing chapters, a 10th ANIMUSE report (not found), the post-2012 Codex status of bovine somatotropin from a primary report, and Codex positions on PFAS (no ML exists).

Last checked: 25 October 2026

Pesticides and pesticide residues – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex sets maximum residue limits (CXLs) for pesticide/commodity combinations. Scientific basis: the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR, since 1963) evaluates toxicology (acceptable daily intake, acute reference dose) and residue data; the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues proposes the limits; the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) adopts them. The Codex database lists MRLs and extraneous MRLs adopted up to CAC 49 (July 2026). Up to 2024, CAC had adopted 6,453 MRLs and 63 EMRLs. A Codex MRL applies at the point of entry into a country or into trade channels. Codex does not approve or ban pesticide active substances; registration and bans are national decisions.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented at the international level. Codex and JMPR do not collect data on actual pesticide use.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No international monitoring programme reports MRL exceedance rates. WHO GEMS/Food collects contaminant and residue data submitted voluntarily by national institutions (more than 9 million analytical results in total). These data are not representative samples and are not published as exceedance rates per country.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: JMPR derives health-based guidance values (ADI, ARfD) and dietary exposure estimates (IESTI for short-term, IEDI with GEMS/Food cluster diets for long-term intake). Exceeding an MRL is non-compliance with a legal limit; whether it is a health concern depends on estimated intake relative to the ADI/ARfD (the JMPR approach). The 2026 WHO foodborne disease burden estimates did not include pesticide residues because of insufficient data.
E. How robust are the data?: High for the legal reference values (official, current database). There are no globally comparable data on use or residue levels. Country exceedance rates depend on national MRLs, sampling design (random vs risk-based) and laboratory scope, so they cannot be compared with Codex values directly.

Notes on foods

Fruit and vegetables: Codex MRLs exist for many fruit and vegetable commodities; national MRLs can be lower or higher.
Cereals and rice: Codex MRLs apply to cereal grains as traded (raw agricultural commodity).

Sources: RS-INT-01, RS-INT-02, RS-INT-05, RS-INT-07, RS-INT-36, RS-INT-21, RS-INT-29

Veterinary medicines and antibiotics – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex MRLs and risk management recommendations (RMRs) for veterinary drug residues are listed in CXM 2-2024, based on JECFA evaluations. RMRs state that there is no safe residue level and that authorities should prevent residues by not using the substance in food-producing animals: carbadox, chloramphenicol, chlorpromazine, dimetridazole, furazolidone, gentian violet, ipronidazole, malachite green, metronidazole, nitrofural, olaquindox, ronidazole and stilbenes. Antimicrobial resistance: Codex CXC 61-2005 (amended 2021) states that responsible use does not include growth promotion with medically important antimicrobials; medically important antimicrobials should be used only for treatment, control or prevention under professional oversight. Codex CXC 54-2004 states antibiotics should not be used in feed for growth promotion without a public health safety assessment. WHO guidelines (2017) recommend an overall reduction in use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals, complete restriction for growth promotion and for prevention in healthy animals (strong recommendations, low-quality evidence), and suggest not using critically important antimicrobials for group control and not using highest-priority ones for treatment (conditional, very low-quality evidence). The WHO MIA List (2024) classes 3rd/4th-generation cephalosporins, quinolones, polymyxins (e.g. colistin) and phosphonic acid derivatives (fosfomycin) as highest priority critically important (HPCIA).
B. What is actually used in production?: WOAH ANIMUSE, 9th report (2025, data year 2022): 70,648 tonnes of antimicrobials reported for animals by 107 participants (adjusted estimate up to 74,035 t). Biomass-adjusted use 89-93 mg/kg (71% of global animal biomass covered); terrestrial food animals 95-98 mg/kg; aquatic 21 mg/kg. Trend panel of 85 participants (62% of biomass): 102 mg/kg in 2020 to 97 mg/kg in 2022 (-5%). Regional changes 2020-2022: Africa -20%, Americas -4%, Europe -23%, Asia-Pacific -2%, Middle East +43% (Middle East participants cover only 17% of the region's biomass). Tetracyclines (28.29%) and penicillins (17.75%) were the largest classes; fluoroquinolones 3.7%, polymyxins 1.8%, 3rd/4th-gen cephalosporins 0.9%. In 2022, 34 of 157 Members (22%) still reported antimicrobial growth promoter use; 112 (71%) reported it is no longer authorised. Colistin as a growth promoter was still reported by 8 participants. Regional mg/kg levels by country are not published in the report; only 38 of 111 quantitative reporters made national reports public, and 39 Members had public reports on the ANIMUSE portal by January 2025.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No international programme measures veterinary drug residues in food. Residue monitoring is national (see country profiles). Codex CXG 71-2009 gives guidance for designing national residue control programmes.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: JECFA evaluations (ADI, recommended MRLs) are the scientific basis of Codex veterinary drug MRLs. WHO (2017) systematic reviews: where antimicrobial use in animals was restricted, AMR prevalence in animal bacteria was 10-20% lower and multidrug resistance 24-32% lower; in humans (13 studies meta-analysed) AMR prevalence was 24% lower in intervention groups. The 2026 WHO foodborne disease estimates did not include antimicrobial-resistant bacteria because of insufficient data.
E. How robust are the data?: ANIMUSE data are mostly sales and import data, not farm-level use. Coverage differs by region; participants and methods change between years. mg/kg biomass values are estimates; WOAH reports ranges. Country-level data are public only for Members that choose to publish.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Antimicrobial sales, animals (mg/kg biomass) amu_mg_per_kg_biomass WOAH ANIMUSE 9th report - trend panel Global, 85 participants reporting 2020-2022 consistently, 62% of global animal biomass; mostly sales/import data. 2020 value: 102 mg/kg. n = number of participating countries/territories, not samples.	97 mg antimicrobial per kg estimated animal biomass	2022	85	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-24
Antimicrobial sales, animals (mg/kg biomass) amu_mg_per_kg_biomass WOAH ANIMUSE 9th report - 2022 cross-section Global range 89-93 mg/kg depending on coverage adjustment; 107 participants, 71% of global animal biomass; food-producing animals only. 'value' is the lower bound, 'value_upper' the upper bound.	89 mg antimicrobial per kg estimated animal biomass (range)	2022	107	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-24
Antimicrobial sales, animals (tonnes) amu_tonnes WOAH ANIMUSE 9th report Reported total; WOAH's coverage-adjusted estimate is up to 74,035 t. n = participants.	70648 tonnes of antimicrobial agents (reported)	2022	107	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-24
Countries using growth promoters (share) agp_use_members_pct WOAH ANIMUSE 9th report 34 of 157 participants; self-reported legal/practice status, not measured use.	22 % of WOAH reporting Members still using antimicrobial growth promoters	2022	157	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-24

Notes on foods

Poultry: Codex/WHO texts apply to all food animals; WHO 2017 recommends no routine preventive use in healthy flocks.
Fish and seafood: WOAH 2022: aquatic food animals 21 mg/kg; fluoroquinolones were 15.8% of aquatic use (3.9 mg/kg). Codex RMR: malachite green and gentian violet should not be used.

Sources: RS-INT-08, RS-INT-10, RS-INT-11, RS-INT-17, RS-INT-18, RS-INT-19, RS-INT-20, RS-INT-24, RS-INT-35, RS-INT-29

Hormonal growth promoters – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex (CXM 2-2024) treats several hormonal growth promoters as acceptable when used according to good practice: estradiol-17beta, progesterone and testosterone in cattle have MRL 'unnecessary' (JECFA: residues from growth-promoter use are unlikely to pose a hazard). Numeric MRLs exist for trenbolone acetate (cattle muscle 2, liver 10 ug/kg), zeranol (muscle 2, liver 10 ug/kg) and melengestrol acetate (muscle 1, liver 10, kidney 2, fat 18 ug/kg). Beta-agonists: ractopamine MRLs for cattle and pigs (muscle 10, liver 40, kidney 90, fat 10 ug/kg; ADI 0-1 ug/kg bw) were adopted at CAC 35 in July 2012 by secret ballot, 69 votes to 67 with 7 abstentions, without consensus; China, Norway and the EU recorded opposition and the EU stated its ban would remain. Zilpaterol MRLs for cattle (kidney 3.3, liver 3.5, muscle 0.5 ug/kg) were adopted at CAC 46 (2023). Stilbenes (e.g. diethylstilbestrol): Codex RMR - no safe level, should not be used. Somatotropins: porcine somatotropin ADI/MRL 'not specified' (CAC 26, 2003). Draft MRLs for bovine somatotropin (bST/rbST, dairy) were 'held at Step 8' since 1999 according to the 2012 CAC report; CXM 2-2024 contains no bST MRL. Codex MRLs do not oblige any country to permit these substances. In the WTO EC-Hormones dispute (DS26), the Appellate Body (1998) found the EC import ban inconsistent with SPS Article 5.1 (risk assessment), but the ban remained part of EU law.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented internationally. Use of hormonal implants, beta-agonists and bST is authorised in some countries and banned in others (see country profiles).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No international residue monitoring. National programmes test for hormones and beta-agonists.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: JECFA evaluations underpin the Codex values (e.g. ractopamine ADI 0-1 ug/kg bw; estradiol-17beta ADI 0-0.05 ug/kg bw). At CAC 35 (2012) the EU delegation stated that EFSA had concluded the data were insufficient to propose ractopamine MRLs and that risks to human health had not been sufficiently ruled out. This profile records the positions; it does not resolve the scientific disagreement.
E. How robust are the data?: High for the legal status of Codex texts (primary documents). The scientific assessment differs between JECFA and some national authorities; the ractopamine standard was adopted by a narrow vote, not by consensus.

Notes on foods

Red meat: Codex values exist for hormonal growth promoters and ractopamine/zilpaterol in cattle (and ractopamine in pigs).
Dairy: No Codex MRL for bovine somatotropin (rbST) as of CXM 2-2024.
Poultry: Codex lists no hormonal growth promoter MRLs for poultry.

Sources: RS-INT-08, RS-INT-09, RS-INT-05, RS-INT-06, RS-INT-35

Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate) – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995, last amended 2025) lists maximum levels for international trade. Examples (mg/kg): lead - milk 0.02, meat of cattle/pigs/sheep 0.1, poultry meat 0.1, fish 0.3, cereal grains 0.2, leafy vegetables 0.3, fruiting vegetables 0.05, infant formula 0.01; inorganic arsenic - husked rice 0.35, polished rice 0.2; methylmercury - tuna 1.2, shark 1.6, marlin 1.7, alfonsino 1.5, orange roughy 0.8, pink cusk-eel 1.0. CXS 193 contains no maximum levels for dioxins, PCBs or PFAS; Codex has a code of practice to reduce dioxins and PCBs in food and feed (CXC 62-2006) and to reduce lead (CXC 56-2004) and arsenic in rice (CXC 77-2017).
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable (contaminants are not intentionally used).
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: WHO GEMS/Food holds more than 9 million analytical results submitted by national institutions (records by region, e.g. WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region 15,064 in total, none added in the past year as of the access date). The data can be browsed online but are not representative surveys and are not summarised as national compliance rates.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: JECFA withdrew its tolerable weekly intakes for lead and inorganic arsenic in 2010 because they were no longer considered health-protective (lead: IQ and blood-pressure effects; inorganic arsenic: lung cancer BMDL). WHO 2026 foodborne disease estimates (data year 2021): chemical hazards accounted for 73% of foodborne deaths, mostly inorganic arsenic (42%) and lead (31%); inorganic arsenic and lead were among the leading causes of foodborne DALYs. PFAS were not included for lack of data. IARC classifies TCDD dioxin and PCB-126 in Group 1 (Volume 100F).
E. How robust are the data?: Codex MLs: high (primary text). Burden estimates: model-based with wide uncertainty intervals. GEMS/Food data: heterogeneous, non-representative.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Share of chemical causes in foodborne deaths fbd_chemical_deaths_share_pct WHO foodborne disease burden estimates, 2026 edition Global model-based estimate (not a sampling result); 9 chemical hazards included; inorganic arsenic 42% and lead 31% of chemical-related deaths.	73 % of foodborne deaths due to chemical hazards	2021	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-29

Notes on foods

Fish and seafood: Codex methylmercury MLs apply to specific large predatory species; lead ML for fish 0.3 mg/kg.
Cereals and rice: Codex inorganic arsenic ML: polished rice 0.2 mg/kg, husked rice 0.35 mg/kg.
Dairy: Codex lead ML for milk 0.02 mg/kg.

Sources: RS-INT-12, RS-INT-41, RS-INT-21, RS-INT-22, RS-INT-29, RS-INT-31, RS-INT-33

Mycotoxins (mould toxins) – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. CXS 193-1995: aflatoxin M1 in milk 0.5 ug/kg. Total aflatoxins (ug/kg): almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, Brazil nuts 10 (ready-to-eat) / 15 (for further processing); peanuts for further processing 15; dried figs 10; chili pepper and nutmeg 20; maize grain for further processing 15; maize flour/meal 10; husked rice 20; polished rice 5; sorghum for further processing 10; cereal-based foods for infants and young children 5. MLs also exist for deoxynivalenol, fumonisins, ochratoxin A and patulin. Codex codes of practice cover aflatoxin B1 in feed for dairy animals (CXC 45-1997), peanuts (CXC 55-2004), tree nuts (CXC 59-2005), cereals (CXC 51-2003), dried figs and spices.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: GEMS/Food holds about 1.09 million total-aflatoxin records and about 0.19 million aflatoxin B1 records (all regions, voluntarily submitted). No representative global prevalence figure exists.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: IARC classifies aflatoxins as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1; Monographs Volume 100F). JECFA (2001), cited in CXS 193: the additional liver-cancer risk predicted with aflatoxin M1 limits of 0.05 or 0.5 ug/kg is very small; hepatitis B carriers might benefit from lower aflatoxin intake. The 2026 WHO burden estimates excluded growth impairment from aflatoxin exposure.
E. How robust are the data?: Codex MLs: high. Occurrence data: not representative; strong regional and climatic variation.

Notes on foods

Dairy: Codex aflatoxin M1 ML 0.5 ug/kg in milk; national limits can be lower (see country profiles).
Legumes and nuts: Codex total aflatoxin MLs 10-15 ug/kg for tree nuts and peanuts depending on processing.
Cereals and rice: Codex total aflatoxin MLs for maize (15 / 10 ug/kg) and rice (20 husked / 5 polished).

Sources: RS-INT-12, RS-INT-41, RS-INT-21, RS-INT-33, RS-INT-29

Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.) – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex General Principles of Food Hygiene (CXC 1-1969, revised 2020 and 2022) set out good hygiene practice and HACCP. Specific codes and guidelines: Campylobacter and Salmonella in chicken meat (CXG 78-2011, farm-to-consumption approach without numeric targets), eggs and egg products (CXC 15-1976, rev. 2007: Salmonella Enteritidis monitoring and vaccination may reduce risk where SE is associated with poultry or eggs), meat hygiene (CXC 58-2005), milk and milk products (CXC 57-2004), fresh fruits and vegetables (CXC 53-2003), Listeria monocytogenes (CXG 61-2007), STEC in beef, leafy vegetables, raw milk and sprouts (CXG 99-2023). JEMRA provides microbiological risk assessments.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented internationally; control programmes are national.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No international prevalence monitoring of pathogens in food. WHO burden estimates (2026 edition, data year 2021, 42 hazards): 866 million illnesses (95% UI 680-1090 million), 1.52 million deaths (0.783-2.51 million), 57.1 million DALYs (39.4-81.1 million). Biological hazards caused about 860 million illnesses. Non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica, inorganic arsenic and lead caused the most DALYs. Children under 5 (9% of the population) had nearly one third of cases. The first WHO estimates (2015, data year 2010, 31 hazards) gave 33 million DALYs; WHO states the 2026 edition supersedes all earlier estimates. National estimates for every WHO Member State are available in the WHO Global Health Observatory.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Foodborne disease burden is highest in the African and South-East Asia regions (nearly three quarters of illnesses, 60% of deaths). WHO states many cases could be prevented by improved water, sanitation and hygiene, pasteurisation and access to health care.
E. How robust are the data?: Burden estimates are model-based (systematic reviews, meta-regression, expert elicitation for foodborne attribution) with wide uncertainty. They are not measured case counts and should not be ranked against national surveillance numbers. Many hazards (e.g. AMR bacteria) are not included.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Foodborne illnesses (million) fbd_illnesses_million WHO foodborne disease burden estimates, 2026 edition (FERG) Global model-based estimate, 42 hazards; 95% UI 680-1090 million.	866 million foodborne illnesses per year	2021	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-31
Foodborne deaths (million) fbd_deaths_million WHO foodborne disease burden estimates, 2026 edition (FERG) Global model-based estimate, 42 hazards; 95% UI 0.783-2.51 million.	1.52 million foodborne deaths per year	2021	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-31
Foodborne disease burden (DALYs, million) fbd_dalys_million WHO foodborne disease burden estimates, 2026 edition (FERG) Global model-based estimate, 42 hazards; 95% UI 39.4-81.1 million.	57.1 million DALYs	2021	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-31
Foodborne disease burden (DALYs, million) fbd_dalys_million WHO FERG first estimates (2015) 31 hazards; superseded by the 2026 edition and not directly comparable (different hazard set and methods).	33 million DALYs	2010	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-27

Notes on foods

Poultry: Codex CXG 78-2011 targets Campylobacter and Salmonella in chicken meat; no numeric international targets.
Eggs: Codex CXC 15-1976 (rev. 2007) addresses Salmonella Enteritidis control incl. vaccination.
Fruit and vegetables: Codex CXC 53-2003 and CXG 99-2023 (STEC in leafy vegetables and sprouts).

Sources: RS-INT-41, RS-INT-14, RS-INT-15, RS-INT-16, RS-INT-04, RS-INT-27, RS-INT-28, RS-INT-29, RS-INT-30, RS-INT-31

Additives and processing – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA, CXS 192-1995, revised up to 2026): only listed additives are recognised as suitable under the standard; an additive is considered only if JECFA has assigned an ADI (or found it safe on other criteria) and Codex has given it an INS number. Use levels are set per food category. Countries keep their own positive lists, which can be narrower or wider.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not documented internationally.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: No international monitoring of additive use levels; JECFA estimates intake when evaluating additives.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Aspartame (INS 951): IARC (2023) classified it as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B, limited evidence); JECFA (2023) kept the ADI of 0-40 mg/kg bw. IARC classifications describe strength of evidence for hazard, not the size of risk. Processed meat (a processing category, not an additive): IARC Group 1 (colorectal cancer; about 18% higher risk per 50 g eaten daily). Red meat: IARC Group 2A. These are listed here as international reference classifications; claim-level evidence is handled in the project's study files.
E. How robust are the data?: High for the legal reference (primary text). IARC and JECFA answer different questions (hazard vs risk at given intake).

Notes on foods

Red meat: IARC: processed meat Group 1, red meat Group 2A (2015, Monographs Vol. 114).

Sources: RS-INT-13, RS-INT-39, RS-INT-34, RS-INT-32, RS-INT-35

Animal husbandry and feed – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: low Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CXC 54-2004, amended 2024): antibiotics should not be used in feed for growth promotion without a public health safety assessment; animal products that could carry the BSE agent should not be fed to ruminants; undesirable substances (e.g. mycotoxins, contaminants) in feed should be identified and minimised; feed traceability and records. CXS 193 includes feed MLs only where transfer to food of animal origin is relevant. Aflatoxin B1 in feed for dairy animals is covered by CXC 45-1997. WOAH standards: the Terrestrial Code chapter 6.10 on responsible and prudent use of antimicrobials (cited in the ANIMUSE report). WOAH animal-welfare chapters on housing (e.g. cages) were not verified in this research.
B. What is actually used in production?: WOAH ANIMUSE (2022 data): 22% of reporting Members still allowed or used antimicrobial growth promoters; most reported were bacitracin, tylosin and avilamycin.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: Not documented internationally.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: See vet_drugs (antimicrobial resistance) and mycotoxins (aflatoxin M1 transfer from feed to milk).
E. How robust are the data?: Codex text: high. No international data on housing systems or feed compliance.

Notes on foods

Dairy: Aflatoxin B1 in dairy feed transfers to milk as aflatoxin M1 (CXC 45-1997; CXS 193).

Sources: RS-INT-17, RS-INT-12, RS-INT-24

Controls, imports, recalls, labelling – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: moderate Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. Codex texts are voluntary references. They become binding only when a country adopts them into national law. Under the WTO SPS Agreement, measures based on Codex are presumed consistent; stricter national rules are allowed if they are scientifically justified. National law decides what is allowed in a given country. Codex texts on food import and export inspection and certification (e.g. CXG 20-1995, CXG 26-1997, equivalence CXG 53-2003, traceability CXG 60-2006) guide national control systems. There is no international food inspection authority: official controls, recalls and border checks are national. INFOSAN (FAO/WHO) is a voluntary network of national food safety authorities from almost all FAO and WHO members; it shares information on incidents involving internationally traded food. WTO SPS Agreement: Codex standards are the benchmark for food-safety measures in trade disputes.
B. What is actually used in production?: Not applicable.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: INFOSAN does not publish per-country alert statistics comparable to RASFF. Not documented.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: Not applicable.
E. How robust are the data?: Codex and WTO texts: high. Implementation varies by country.

Sources: RS-INT-05, RS-INT-03, RS-INT-41, RS-INT-38, RS-INT-37

Drinking water – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO)

Data quality: high Last checked: 25 October 2026

A. What is legally allowed or banned?: International reference only. WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (4th edition incorporating the 1st and 2nd addenda, 2022) are a scientific starting point for national standards; WHO does not promote a single international standard. Selected guideline values: E. coli or thermotolerant coliforms not detectable in any 100 ml sample; arsenic 0.01 mg/l (provisional); lead 0.01 mg/l (provisional); cadmium 0.003 mg/l; nitrate 50 mg/l (as NO3-); nitrite 3 mg/l (as NO2-). WHO recommends water safety plans and independent surveillance. Codex CXC 48-2001 covers hygiene of bottled/packaged drinking water.
B. What is actually used in production?: WHO/UNICEF JMP defines 'safely managed' drinking water as water from an improved source that is accessible on premises, available when needed and free from faecal and priority chemical contamination. Global 2024: 73.7% of the population used safely managed drinking water (WHO GHO); JMP states 1 in 4 people (2.1 billion) still lack it, including 106 million drinking untreated surface water. Urban 83.5%, rural 60.5%.
C. Which residues or levels were measured?: JMP estimates combine household surveys, censuses and administrative or regulatory data; water quality testing is included in some household surveys (e.g. MICS). Country-level data are published at washdata.org/data and in the WHO Global Health Observatory.
D. Which health risks are demonstrated?: WHO (2026) states that many foodborne illnesses and deaths could be prevented with measures including improved water, sanitation and hygiene. GDWQ guideline values are health-based (e.g. nitrate 50 mg/l based on short-term effects).
E. How robust are the data?: JMP is the globally comparable reference (one definition for all countries). Estimates are modelled; the water-quality component is missing or estimated for many countries.

Indicators
Indicator	Value	Year	Samples	Sampling design	Scope	Source
Safely managed drinking water (WHO/UNICEF) water_safely_managed_pct WHO/UNICEF JMP (via WHO GHO, indicator WSH_WATER_SAFELY_MANAGED) Global modelled estimate (GHO value 73.735). World Bank WDI world aggregate: 73.67%. JMP text: '1 in 4 ... still lack access'.	73.7 % of population using safely managed drinking water	2024	–	mixed	all foods	RS-INT-26

Sources: RS-INT-23, RS-INT-41, RS-INT-25, RS-INT-26, RS-INT-40, RS-INT-29

Sources – International reference framework (Codex, WHO, FAO) (41)

RS-INT-01: About Codex (Codex Alimentarius website) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission Secretariat (2026). https://codex.fao.org/about-codex/about-us (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-02: About Codex texts – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission Secretariat (2026). https://codex.fao.org/codex-texts/about-codex-texts (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-05: Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) – World Trade Organization (1994 (in force 1995)). https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/15sps_01_e.htm (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-07: Codex Pesticide Residues in Food and Feed Database – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2026). https://codex.fao.org/codex-texts/codex-online-databases/pesticides-residues (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-36: Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) - WHO page – World Health Organization (2026). https://www.who.int/groups/joint-fao-who-meeting-on-pesticide-residues-(jmpr) (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-21: GEMS/Food - Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment Programme (WHO web page) and GEMS/Food Contaminants database landing page – World Health Organization (2026). https://www.who.int/teams/nutrition-and-food-safety/databases/global-environment-monitoring-system-food-contamination (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-29: News release: Unsafe food causes 866 million illnesses and 1.5 million deaths annually, young children at highest risk (4 June 2026) – World Health Organization (2026). https://www.who.int/news/item/04-06-2026-unsafe-food-causes-866-million-illnesses-and-1.5-million-deaths-annually--young-children-at-highest-risk (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-08: CXM 2-2024 Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) and Risk Management Recommendations (RMRs) for Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2024). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/MRL2e.pdf?lang=en&id=41 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-10: CXC 61-2005 Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance (amended 2021) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2005, amended 2021). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXC_061e.pdf?lang=en&id=302 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-11: CXG 94-2021 Guidelines on integrated monitoring and surveillance of foodborne antimicrobial resistance; CXG 77-2011 Guidelines for Risk Analysis of Foodborne AMR (rev. 2021) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2021). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXG_94e.pdf?lang=en&id=8037 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-17: CXC 54-2004 Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (amended 2008, 2024) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2004, amended 2024). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXC_054e.pdf?lang=en&id=414 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-18: CXG 71-2009 Guidelines for the Design and Implementation of National Regulatory Food Safety Assurance Programmes Associated with the Use of Veterinary Drugs in Food Producing Animals (rev. 2012, 2014) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2009, rev. 2014). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXG_071e_2014.pdf?lang=en&id=7006 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-19: WHO guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals – World Health Organization (2017). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550130 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-20: WHO List of Medically Important Antimicrobials: a risk management tool for mitigating antimicrobial resistance due to non-human use (WHO MIA List, 7th revision) – World Health Organization (2024). https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/gcp/who-mia-list-2024-lv.pdf?sfvrsn=3320dd3d_2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-24: Annual Report on Antimicrobial Agents Intended for Use in Animals, 9th report (ANIMUSE) – World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) (2025). https://www.woah.org/app/uploads/2025/05/en-woah-amu-report-2025-final.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-35: Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) - WHO page – World Health Organization (2026). https://www.who.int/groups/joint-fao-who-expert-committee-on-food-additives-(jecfa) (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-09: REP12/CAC Report of the 35th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, Rome, 2-7 July 2012 – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2012). https://www.fao.org/input/download/report/772/REP12_CACe.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-06: DS26: European Communities - Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) - case summary – World Trade Organization (1996-2014). https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds26_e.htm (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-12: CXS 193-1995 General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (last amended 2025) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (1995, amended 2025). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXS_193e.pdf?lang=en&id=18 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-41: Codex 'Find a Codex text' list (LoadFilter endpoint behind codex.fao.org/codex-texts/find-a-codex-text) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2026). https://codex.fao.org/codex-texts/find-a-codex-text (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-22: GEMS/Food overview fact sheet 'Monitoring exposure to food chemicals' – World Health Organization (2017). https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/food-safety/gems-food/gems-overview-2017.pdf?sfvrsn=d33fae48_2 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-31: WHO estimates of the global, regional, and national burden of 42 foodborne infectious and chemical hazards, 2000-21: an updated data synthesis – Lake RJ, Devleesschauwer B, Majowicz S, et al. (2026). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langlo.2026.103994 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-33: IARC Monographs Volume 100F: Chemical Agents and Related Occupations (A Review of Human Carcinogens) - publication page – International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (2012). https://publications.iarc.who.int/123 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-14: CXC 1-1969 General Principles of Food Hygiene (revised 2020, 2022) – FAO and WHO / Codex Alimentarius Commission (1969, rev. 2022 (publ. 2023)). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXC_001e.pdf?lang=en&id=23 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-15: CXG 78-2011 Guidelines for the Control of Campylobacter and Salmonella in Chicken Meat – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2011). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXG_078e.pdf?lang=en&id=449 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-16: CXC 15-1976 Code of Hygienic Practice for Eggs and Egg Products (rev. 2007) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (1976, rev. 2007). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXC_015e.pdf?lang=en&id=355 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-04: Codex and science (FAO/WHO scientific advice bodies) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission Secretariat (2026). https://codex.fao.org/about-codex/about-us/science (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-27: World Health Organization Global Estimates and Regional Comparisons of the Burden of Foodborne Disease in 2010 – Havelaar AH, Kirk MD, Torgerson PR, et al. (WHO FERG) (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001923 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-28: WHO estimates of the global burden of foodborne diseases: Foodborne Disease Burden Epidemiology Reference Group 2007-2015 – World Health Organization (2015). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565165 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-30: WHO estimates of the global burden of foodborne diseases 2000-2021 (2026 edition) - programme page – World Health Organization (2026). https://www.who.int/teams/nutrition-and-food-safety/monitoring-nutritional-status-and-food-safety-and-events/foodborne-disease-estimates/2026-edition (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-13: CXS 192-1995 General Standard for Food Additives (GSFA), revised up to 2026, and GSFA online database – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (1995, rev. 2026). https://codex.fao.org/restapi/searchstandard/CXS_192e.pdf?lang=en&id=353 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-39: Codex online databases (Veterinary Drug Residues in Foods; GSFA) – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission (2026). https://codex.fao.org/codex-texts/codex-online-databases (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-34: News release: Aspartame hazard and risk assessment results released (14 July 2023) – World Health Organization / IARC / JECFA (2023). https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-32: IARC Press Release No. 240: IARC Monographs evaluate consumption of red meat and processed meat (Monographs Vol. 114) – International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (2015). https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr240_E.pdf (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-03: Codex and trade – FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission Secretariat (2026). https://codex.fao.org/about-codex/about-us/trade (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-38: International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) - FAO page – FAO and WHO (2026). https://www.fao.org/food-safety/emergencies/infosan/en (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-37: FAO Food safety and quality - programme page – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2026). https://www.fao.org/food-safety/en/ (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-23: Guidelines for drinking-water quality: fourth edition incorporating the first and second addenda – World Health Organization (2022). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240045064 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-25: JMP: Drinking water service ladder and 'Progress on household drinking water, sanitation and hygiene 2000-2024: special focus on inequalities' – WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) (2025). https://washdata.org/reports/jmp-2025-wash-households (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-26: WHO Global Health Observatory OData API - indicator WSH_WATER_SAFELY_MANAGED (global, total) – World Health Organization (data from WHO/UNICEF JMP) (2026). https://ghoapi.azureedge.net/api/WSH_WATER_SAFELY_MANAGED?$filter=SpatialDimType%20eq%20'GLOBAL' (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)
RS-INT-40: World Bank WDI API - SH.H2O.SMDW.ZS, World aggregate – World Bank (source: WHO/UNICEF JMP) (2026). https://api.worldbank.org/v2/country/WLD/indicator/SH.H2O.SMDW.ZS?format=json&date=2015:2024 (checked, accessed 2026-10-25)

← Go to the country overview