Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-RES-104 standard review

More than half of tested Egyptian foods had pesticide traces

Comprehensive multi-residue analysis of 87 pesticides in Egyptian food commodities: Method validation and dietary risk assessment.

Overview

Ezzat A et al.. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2026 · PMID 41678938 · DOI 10.1016/j.jchromb.2026.124960

55% of 591 samples had residues; calculated risks were below the level of concern.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

How frequent are pesticide residues in selected Egyptian foods and herbs and what are the hazard quotients?

How was the study done?

Method validation plus market survey with hazard quotients

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

591 samples

What was actually found?

325 of 591 samples (54.9%) contained residues; 38 compounds, most frequent chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, profenofos; dried mint 63.1% and hibiscus 64.2%; up to eight pesticides in one sample. THQ: chlorpyrifos in rice 0.286, profenofos in dried mint 0.098; all below 1.

How large was the observed effect?

325 of 591 samples (54.9%) contained residues; 38 compounds, most frequent chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, profenofos; dried mint 63.1% and hibiscus 64.2%; up to eight pesticides in one sample. THQ: chlorpyrifos in rice 0.286, profenofos in dried mint 0.098; all below 1.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Residues are common in Egypt, including banned chlorpyrifos, but measured risks were below thresholds.

What are the study's limitations?

Sampling not described in abstract; Chlorpyrifos detected despite national ban (from 2022, per jurisdiction data)

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports detection, not harm.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Not EU data.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cumulative exposure not assessed.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Ezzat A et al.
Journal
J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci
Year
2026
Identifier
PMID 41678938 DOI 10.1016/j.jchromb.2026.124960
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

not stated in abstract

2. Research question

How frequent are pesticide residues in selected Egyptian foods and herbs and what are the hazard quotients?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Measurement / residue study – Method validation plus market survey with hazard quotients
Population

Apple, chamomile, caraway, dried mint, fennel, green beans, hibiscus, rice

Country

Egypt

Period

not stated

Sample size

591 samples

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

as described in the abstract

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Pesticide residues

Comparator

Reference doses

Endpoints

Detection rate; target hazard quotients

Statistical methods

as reported in the abstract

5. Actual results

Results

325 of 591 samples (54.9%) contained residues; 38 compounds, most frequent chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, profenofos; dried mint 63.1% and hibiscus 64.2%; up to eight pesticides in one sample. THQ: chlorpyrifos in rice 0.286, profenofos in dried mint 0.098; all below 1.

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

Values below the action threshold of unity but warrant enhanced monitoring.

6. Strengths

  • Validated GC-MS/MS method

7. Weaknesses

  • Sampling not described in abstract
  • Chlorpyrifos detected despite national ban (from 2022, per jurisdiction data)

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Survey.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Hazard quotients below 1 for all combinations reported.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Egyptian evidence of frequent detection with exposure below thresholds.

11. Independent contrary findings

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

13. Overall methodological judgement

55% of 591 samples had residues; calculated risks were below the level of concern.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsmoderate
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilitylow
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

15. Linked fact checks