Consumption of fruits and vegetables contaminated with pesticide residues in Brazil: A systematic review with health risk assessment.

Brazil is the third largest exporter of fruits and vegetables in the world and, consequently, uses large amounts of pesticides. Food contamination with pesticide residues (PRs) is a serious concern, especially in developing countries. Several research reports revealed that some Brazilian farmers spray pesticides on fruits and vegetables in large quantities, generating PRs after harvest. Thus, ingestion of food contaminated with PRs can cause adverse health effects. Based on information obtained through a systematic review of essential information from 33 articles, we studied the assessment of potential health risks associated with fruit and vegetable consumption in children and adults from Brazilian states. This study identified 111 PRs belonging to different chemical groups, mainly organophosphates and organochlorines, in 26 fruit and vegetable samples consumed and exported by Brazil. Sixteen of these PRs were above the Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) established by local and international legislation. We did not identify severe acute and chronic dietary risks, but the highest risk values were observed in São Paulo and Santa Catarina, associated with the consumption of tomatoes and sweet peppers due to the high concentrations of organophosphates. A high long-term health risk is associated with the consumption of oranges in São Paulo and grapes in Bahia due to chlorothalonil and procymidone. We also identified that 26 PRs are considered carcinogenic by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), and the carcinogenic risk analysis revealed no severe risk in any Brazilian state investigated due to the cumulative hazard index (HI) < 1. However, the highest HI values were in São Paulo due to acephate and carbaryl in sweet pepper and in Bahia due to dichlorvos. This information can help regulatory authorities define new guidelines for pesticide residue limits in fruits and vegetables commonly consumed and exported from Brazil and monitor the quality of commercial formulations.

A Systematic Review on Metal Dynamics and Marine Toxicity Risk Assessment Using Crustaceans as Bioindicators.

Metals, many of which are potentially toxic, are present in the aquatic environment originated from both natural and anthropogenic sources. In these ecosystems, these elements are mostly deposited in the sediment, followed by water dissolution, potentially contaminating resident biota. Among several aquatic animals, crustaceans are considered excellent bioindicators, as they live in close contact with contaminated sediment. The accumulation of metal, whether they are classified as essential, when in excessive quantities or nonessential, not only cause damage to the health of these animals, but also to the man who consumes seafood. Among the main toxic elements to animal and human health are aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and silver. In this context, this systematic review aimed to investigate the dynamics of these metals in water, the main bioaccumulative tissues in crustaceans, the effects of these contaminants on animal and human health, and the regulatory limits for these metals worldwide. A total of 91 articles were selected for this review, and an additional 68 articles not found in the three assessed databases were considered essential and included, totaling 159 articles published between 2010 and 2020. Our results indicate that both chemical speciation and abiotic factors such as pH, oxygen and salinity in aquatic environments affect element bioavailability, dynamics, and toxicity. Among crustaceans, crabs are considered the main bioindicator biological system, with the hepatopancreas appearing as the main bioaccumulator organ. Studies indicate that exposure to these elements may result in nervous, respiratory, and reproductive system effects in both animals and humans. Finally, many studies indicate that the concentrations of these elements in crustaceans intended for human consumption exceed limits established by international organizations, both with regard to seafood metal contents and well as daily, weekly, or monthly intake limits set for humans, indicating consumer health risks.

Safety of Plastic Food Packaging: The Challenges about Non-Intentionally Added Substances (NIAS) Discovery, Identification and Risk Assessment.

Several food contact materials (FCMs) contain non-intentionally added substances (NIAS), and most of the substances that migrate from plastic food packaging are unknown. This review aimed to situate the main challenges involving unknown NIAS in plastic food packaging in terms of identification, migration tests, prediction, sample preparation, determination methods and risk assessment trials. Most studies have identified NIAS in plastic materials as polyurethane adhesives (PU), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyester coatings, polypropylene materials (PP), multilayers materials, plastic films, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), recycled materials, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and low-density polyethylene (LDPE). Degradation products are almost the primary source of NIAS in plastic FCMs, most from antioxidants as Irganox 1010 and Irgafos 168, following by oligomers and side reaction products. The NIAS assessment in plastics FCMs is usually made by migration tests under worst-case conditions using food simulants. For predicted NIAS, targeted analytical methods are applied using GC-MS based methods for volatile NIAS and GC-MS and LC-MS based methods for semi- and non-volatile NIAS; non-targeted methods to analyze unknown NIAS in plastic FCMs are applied using GC and LC techniques combined with QTOF mass spectrometry (HRMS). In terms of NIAS risk assessment and prioritization, the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept is the most applied tool for risk assessment. Bioassays with sensitive analytical techniques seem to be an efficient method to identify NIAS and their hazard to human exposure; the combination of genotoxicity testing with analytical chemistry could allow the Cramer class III TTC application to prioritize unknown NIAS. The scientific justification for implementing a molecular weight-based cut-off (<1000 Da) in the risk assessment of FCMs should be reevaluated. Although official guides and opinions are being issued on the subject, the whole chain's alignment is needed, and more specific legislation on the steps to follow to get along with NIAS.