Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study I-VEG-11 in-depth review
Pesticide residues in Egyptian market produce
Pesticide Residues in Vegetables and Fruits from Farmer Markets and Associated Dietary Risks.
Overview
El-Sheikh EA et al.. Molecules 2022 · PMID 36432173 · DOI 10.3390/molecules27228072
About 4 in 10 detected residues exceeded legal limits; some may pose risks.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Measure residues
- How was the study done?
Monitoring + risk assessment
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Not stated
- What was actually found?
Frequent exceedances
- How large was the observed effect?
40.7% of residues
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Washing and control matter in Egypt.
- What are the study's limitations?
Regional
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Partly supports
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Low
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot show health damage.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- El-Sheikh EA et al.
- Journal
- Molecules
- Year
- 2022
- Identifier
- PMID 36432173 DOI 10.3390/molecules27228072
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- full text
- Conflicts of interest and funding
Science, Technology and Innovation Funding Authority (STDF), Egyptian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (grant USC-18 ID 983); authors declare no conflict of interest.
2. Research question
Pesticide residues and dietary risk in market produce.
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Measurement / residue study – Cross-sectional market-basket residue survey (QuEChERS extraction, LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS) with deterministic worst-case dietary risk assessment
- Population
Composite vegetable and fruit samples (3 kg each from 3 sellers) from three farmers' markets
- Country
Egypt (Sharkia Governorate)
- Period
July 2020 - June 2021
- Sample size
120 composite samples: 66 vegetable samples (13 types) and 54 fruit samples (11 types); 86 residue findings in vegetables, 90 in fruits
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Convenience sampling at three farmers' markets in one governorate
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Pesticide residues (multi-residue screen; 40 pesticides detected)
- Comparator
EU maximum residue levels (European Commission database) and EU ADI/ARfD values
- Endpoints
Residue detection and concentrations; MRL exceedances; %ARfD (acute) and %ADI (chronic) for children (15 kg), teenagers (35 kg), adults (60 kg)
- Statistical methods
Descriptive; %ARfD from highest residue x 0.2 kg portion; %ADI from mean residue x 0.1 kg/day, only for residues exceeding MRLs
5. Actual results
- Results
Residues detected in 44/66 (67%) vegetable and 33/54 (61%) fruit samples; 1-15 residues per vegetable type (cucumber highest) and 1-20 per fruit type (apple highest). Insecticides 84.9% of vegetable findings. 35/86 (40.7%) vegetable and 35/90 (38.9%) fruit residue findings exceeded EU MRLs; chlorpyrifos (not approved in the EU) detected 12 times in vegetables and 9 in fruits. Exceedances of 100%: spinach lambda-cyhalothrin 138.93% ARfD and 115.82% ADI (children); zucchini fipronil 110% ADI (children); kaki dimethoate and strawberry omethoate exceeded in several groups. Authors: about 2.3% of the residues exceeding MRLs may cause acute or chronic risk at 0.1-0.2 kg/day.
- Absolute risks
not applicable; exceedances of toxicological reference values occurred only in a few worst-case commodity-pesticide combinations, mostly for children
- Authors' conclusion
More than 50% of samples contained residues and about 40% of detected residues exceeded MRLs; a small fraction may pose acute or chronic risks; continuous monitoring is needed.
6. Strengths
- Modern validated multi-residue methods with LOD/LOQ reported
- Year-round sampling covering many commodities
- Explicit acute and chronic risk calculations by age group
7. Weaknesses
- Small sample (120 composites) from one governorate; not nationally representative
- Exceedance expressed per residue finding, not per sample
- EU MRLs used (many at default LOQ for non-EU-approved substances), not Egyptian/Codex limits
- Worst-case exposure assumptions (0.1-0.2 kg/day of a single contaminated commodity; ADI used when ARfD missing)
- No effect of washing, peeling or cooking considered
- Minor internal inconsistencies between text and tables (e.g. fipronil acute vs chronic risk)
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable (exposure measurement / risk assessment)
- Type of assessment
- structured assessment based on the full text by a single reviewer (no formal double review)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
- Rationale
No standard RoB tool fits; structured single-reviewer judgement from full text, not formal.
| Domain | Judgement | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Sampling representativeness | high | Three farmers' markets in one governorate; convenience sampling; few samples per commodity. |
| Analytical validity | low | QuEChERS with LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS; LOD/LOQ reported (recoveries not shown in main text). |
| Exposure modelling | some concerns | Deterministic worst-case assumptions; no consumption data; processing factors ignored. |
| Reporting | some concerns | Percentages per residue finding may be misread as per sample; some text-table inconsistencies. |
Full-text review (25 October 2026): Added sampling period (Jul 2020-Jun 2021), sample numbers (66 vegetable, 54 fruit composites), sample-level detection rates (67%/61%), specific %ARfD/%ADI exceedances, EU-MRL basis and worst-case exposure assumptions, funding; structured validity domains (overall unchanged).
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Descriptive. The 40% figure refers to residue findings above EU MRLs, not to 40% of samples; MRL exceedance is a legal/good-agricultural-practice criterion, not a health threshold. Health-based exceedances were rare and arose under conservative assumptions.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Supports Egypt-specific concern (C-VEG-14).
11. Independent contrary findings
Dogheim 2002.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Low for EU.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Relevant Egyptian evidence of frequent residues, illegal/off-label pesticide use (e.g. chlorpyrifos) and occasional worst-case exceedances of health-based limits, mainly for children; regional and small, so it supports a targeted safety concern rather than a general harm from vegetables.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | low |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | unknown |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | unknown |
| Regional transferability | low |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
National representativeness; effect of washing/cooking; probabilistic exposure assessment with Egyptian consumption data.
15. Linked fact checks
- In Egypt, vegetables carry pesticide residues, including internationally banned pesticides, at levels that can be harmful. – Studies supporting the claim