Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-VEG-12 standard review
Egyptian residue monitoring 1997
Monitoring of pesticide residues in Egyptian fruits and vegetables during 1997.
Overview
Dogheim SM et al.. Food Addit Contam 2002 · PMID 12456272 · DOI 10.1080/02652030210157655
Most samples had no detectable residues; 1.9% exceeded limits.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Monitor residues
- How was the study done?
Monitoring
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
2,318
- What was actually found?
1.9% violations
- How large was the observed effect?
Not applicable
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Situation may differ today.
- What are the study's limitations?
Old
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Limits concern
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Low
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot describe today.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Dogheim SM et al.
- Journal
- Food Addit Contam
- Year
- 2002
- Identifier
- PMID 12456272 DOI 10.1080/02652030210157655
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
Residues in Egyptian produce 1997.
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Measurement / residue study – National residue monitoring
- Population
2,318 domestic samples from 8 markets
- Country
Egypt
- Period
1997
- Sample size
2,318
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Market samples
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
54 pesticides
- Comparator
MRLs
- Endpoints
Detection, violations
- Statistical methods
Descriptive
5. Actual results
- Results
81.5% no detectable residues; 18.5% detectable; 1.9% exceeded MRLs; leafy vegetables 4.7% contamination; fruit 2.3% vs vegetables 1.9% violation.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Contamination and violation rates lower than previous years.
6. Strengths
- National scope
7. Weaknesses
- Old (1997)
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
Dated.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Descriptive.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Limits C-VEG-14.
11. Independent contrary findings
None.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Low.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Dated.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | not applicable |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | unknown |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | mixed |
| Regional transferability | low |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
Current situation.
15. Linked fact checks
- In Egypt, vegetables carry pesticide residues, including internationally banned pesticides, at levels that can be harmful. – Studies contradicting or limiting the claim