Dataset Information

Effects of Neonicotinoid Pesticide Exposure on Human Health: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Numerous studies have identified detectable levels of neonicotinoids (neonics) in the environment, adverse effects of neonics in many species, including mammals, and pathways through which human exposure to neonics could occur, yet little is known about the human health effects of neonic exposure.

Objective

In this systematic review, we sought to identify human population studies on the health effects of neonics.

Methods

Studies published in English between 2005 and 2015 were searched using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. No restrictions were placed on the type of health outcome assessed. Risk of bias was assessed using guidance developed by the National Toxicology Program's Office of Health Assessment and Translation.

Results

Eight studies investigating the human health effects of exposure to neonics were identified. Four examined acute exposure: Three neonic poisoning studies reported two fatalities (n = 1,280 cases) and an occupational exposure study of 19 forestry workers reported no adverse effects. Four general population studies reported associations between chronic neonic exposure and adverse developmental or neurological outcomes, including tetralogy of Fallot (AOR 2.4, 95% CI: 1.1, 5.4), anencephaly (AOR 2.9, 95% CI: 1.0, 8.2), autism spectrum disorder [AOR 1.3, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.78, 2.2], and a symptom cluster including memory loss and finger tremor (OR 14, 95% CI: 3.5, 57). Reported odds ratios were based on exposed compared to unexposed groups.

Conclusions

The studies conducted to date were limited in number with suggestive but methodologically weak findings related to chronic exposure. Given the wide-scale use of neonics, more studies are needed to fully understand their effects on human health. Citation: Cimino AM, Boyles AL, Thayer KA, Perry MJ. 2017. Effects of neonicotinoid pesticide exposure on human health: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 125:155-162; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP515.

SUBMITTER: Cimino AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5289916 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThere is a relationship between pesticide exposure and farmworkers' health. Well-conducted evaluations can provide an insight into how to develop and implement more effective interventions to prevent farmers and farmworkers' exposure to pesticides. This review aimed to summarize the literature on the effectiveness of interventions to promote pesticide safety and reduce pesticide exposure among farmers and farmworkers.MethodsA comprehensive search on PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, Agricola, NIOSHTIC, and Agris databases was performed to identify relevant studies published from 2000 to 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies assessing the effectiveness of interventions on a variety of outcomes related to pesticide exposure were considered. The searches were restricted to articles written in English. The methodological quality of included reviews was appraised using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment tool (EPHPP).ResultsThe initial search led to 47912 records, 31 studies of which including nine RCTs and twenty-two quasi-experimental studies met the criteria. The majority of the included studies focused on the educational/ behavioral approach. The studies that applied this approach were effective in improving the participants' knowledge and attitude; however, these interventions were less effective in terms of making changes in participants' behaviors and their risk of exposure to toxic pesticides. Multifaceted interventions were moderately effective in terms of improving farmers' and farmworkers' behaviors and reduction in exposure to toxic pesticides. We did not find any studies that had evaluated the effectiveness of engineering/technological, and legislation/enforcement interventions.ConclusionsAlthough the majority of studies were based on an educational/behavioral approach and did not assess the effect of interventions on objective measures, the results of this review highlight the significant effectiveness of educational programs and some potential key elements of these interventions. These findings may inform policymakers to develop interventions to reduce pesticide exposure among farmers and farmworkers.

Project description:BackgroundPollination services provided by solitary bees, the largest group of bees worldwide, are critical to the vitality of ecosystems and agricultural systems alike. Disconcertingly, bee populations are in decline, and while no single causative factor has been identified, pesticides are believed to play a role in downward population trends. The effects of pesticides on solitary bee species have not been previously systematically cataloged and reviewed.ObjectivesThis systematic scoping review examines available evidence for effects of pesticide exposure on solitary bees to identify data gaps and priority research needs.MethodsA systematic literature search strategy was developed to identify and document reports on solitary bee pesticide exposure-effects investigations. Literature was subsequently screened for relevance using a Population, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) statement and organized into a systematic evidence map. Investigations were organized by effect category (lethal effects on immatures, lethal effects on adults, sublethal effects on immatures, and sublethal effects on adults), species, pesticide class, and publication year.ResultsA comprehensive literature search of Web of Science and ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science supplemented by targeted internet searching and reference mining yielded 176 reports and publications for title and abstract screening and 65 that met PECO criteria (22 included lethal and 43 included sublethal effects endpoints). Relevant design details (pesticide, test compound configuration, study type, species, sex, exposure duration) were extracted into literature inventory tables to reveal the extent endpoints have been investigated and areas in need of additional research.ConclusionsEvidence mapping revealed diversity in the pesticides and endpoints studied across the database. However, dilution across bee species, lack of complementary laboratory work and paucity of replicated investigations complicate efforts to interpret and apply available data to support pesticide risk assessment.

Project description:BackgroundWind turbine noise exposure and suspected health-related effects thereof have attracted substantial attention. Various symptoms such as sleep-related problems, headache, tinnitus and vertigo have been described by subjects suspected of having been exposed to wind turbine noise.ObjectiveThis review was conducted systematically with the purpose of identifying any reported associations between wind turbine noise exposure and suspected health-related effects.Data sourcesA search of the scientific literature concerning the health-related effects of wind turbine noise was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and various other Internet sources.Study eligibility criteriaAll studies investigating suspected health-related outcomes associated with wind turbine noise exposure were included.ResultsWind turbines emit noise, including low-frequency noise, which decreases incrementally with increases in distance from the wind turbines. Likewise, evidence of a dose-response relationship between wind turbine noise linked to noise annoyance, sleep disturbance and possibly even psychological distress was present in the literature. Currently, there is no further existing statistically-significant evidence indicating any association between wind turbine noise exposure and tinnitus, hearing loss, vertigo or headache.LimitationsSelection bias and information bias of differing magnitudes were found to be present in all current studies investigating wind turbine noise exposure and adverse health effects. Only articles published in English, German or Scandinavian languages were reviewed.ConclusionsExposure to wind turbines does seem to increase the risk of annoyance and self-reported sleep disturbance in a dose-response relationship. There appears, though, to be a tolerable level of around LAeq of 35 dB. Of the many other claimed health effects of wind turbine noise exposure reported in the literature, however, no conclusive evidence could be found. Future studies should focus on investigations aimed at objectively demonstrating whether or not measureable health-related outcomes can be proven to fluctuate depending on exposure to wind turbines.