Next Article in Journal
Effects of Urban Vibrancy on an Urban Eco-Environment: Case Study on Wuhan City
Previous Article in Journal
Rehabilitation Workforce Challenges to Implement Person-Centered Care
Previous Article in Special Issue
What Impacts Perceived Stress among Canadian Farmers? A Mixed-Methods Analysis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Impact of Pesticides on Human Health in the Last Six Years in Brazil

1
Immunoregulation Unit of the Laboratory of Applied Toxinology (CeTICs/FAPESP), Butantan Institute, Vital Brazil Avenue, 1500, Butantan, São Paulo 05503-009, Brazil
2
Post-Graduation Program of Toxinology, Butantan Institute, São Paulo 05503-009, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(6), 3198; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063198
Submission received: 30 November 2021 / Revised: 26 January 2022 / Accepted: 28 January 2022 / Published: 9 March 2022

Abstract

:
Every year, Brazil intensifies its activity in agriculture and, as a result, it has become one of the biggest consumers of pesticides in the world. The high rate of these substances raises environmental and human health concerns. Therefore, we collected papers from PubMed, Scopus, Scielo, and Web of Science databases, from 2015 to 2021. After a blind selection using the software Rayyan QCRI by two authors, 51 studies were included. Researchers from the South and the Southeast Brazilian regions contributed to most publications, from areas that concentrate agricultural commodity complexes. Among the pesticides described in the studies, insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides were the most frequent. The articles reported multiple toxic effects, particularly in rural workers. The results obtained can be used to direct policies to reduce the use of pesticides, and to protect the health of the population.

1. Introduction

Brazil is a country that economically relies on industrial agriculture for the production of a diverse range of soft commodities for exportation, with 88 million hectares cultivated in the country [1]. Agricultural production accounted for just over 5% of Brazil’s $1.8 trillion gross domestic product (GDP), with a variety of products from grain and oilseed chains, meats, sugar, biofuels, and fiber, to fruits and vegetables [2,3]. The harvested area has been expanding 23.48% per decade (1930 to 2017), while productivity has increased by 8% per decade, on average. This shows that the agricultural frontiers (agricultural and livestock activities) continue to expand in the country, mainly in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes [4].
Considering the increase in agricultural productivity in Brazil and the participation in the generation of GDP, the increase in agribusiness productivity has not been accompanied by a reduction in income inequality and poverty. Instead, strong alterations in the organization and use of the territory and the way of life of social groups in the affected biomes have been described [5]. In 2018, Brazil had 13.5 million people with per capita average earnings of 1.9 dollars (US$) per day, according to the criterion adopted by the World Bank to identify extreme poverty conditions. That figure is equivalent to the populations of Bolivia, Belgium, Cuba, Greece, and Portugal. Although the percentage of people in extreme poverty conditions has been stable compared to 2017, it increased from 5.8% in 2012 to 6.5% in 2018, a seven-year record [6].
Poverty can be aggravated by the productive agribusiness model that controls its food systems and its markets [7], as opposed to the choice of the food and nutrition security model that encompasses the realization of the right of everyone to permanently access quality food in sufficient quantity [8]. Consequently, the domestic consumer market may suffer supply shortages, favoring the export of food commodities. According to the Ministry of Development, Industry, and Foreign Trade, the devaluation of the Brazilian currency has been strongly increasing the competitiveness of Brazilian commodity exports to 2020, an increase of 79% year-on-year, and 9.8% more than 2019. From May to July alone, exports counted 701,061 tons. Meanwhile, the weak currency hindered imports, which totaled 373,557 tons in the period, down 12% year-on-year.
On the other hand, food such as rice, beans, bananas, and tomatoes that supply urban populations come, in large part, from family production, with huge potential for polyculture, organic, and agroecological farming. However, this sustainable agriculture fails to receive governmental support as incentives and subsidies [9,10] in contrast to the public policies of the European Union (EU), which aim for 2030 to halve the use of chemical pesticides and ensure that at least 25% of agricultural lands are set aside for organic farming, compared with the current 8% [11].
In order to fulfill the demand with a minimum loss, Brazilian commodity producers employ a large number of pesticides, estimated at 549,280 tons in 2018 [12,13]. According to an investigation by Unearthed, more than 1200 pesticides and herbicides, including 193 containing chemicals banned in the EU, have been registered in Brazil between 2016 and 2019. Almost half of all approved products contain active ingredients listed on the Pesticide Action Network’s list of highly hazardous pesticides, indicating that, in addition to serious environmental harm, they are related to toxic effects on human health [3,14,15].
Based on scientific evidence, the real risks that pesticides pose to human health (occupational and consumer exposure) and the environment are fully justified [16,17]. They cause health conditions from acute reactions in the skin and respiratory system to chronic diseases including hematologic and hormonal abnormalities, infertility, miscarriages, fetal malformation, neurological diseases, and cancer. The underlying mechanisms of these effects are genotoxic, neurotoxic, and endocrine-disrupting actions [18,19,20].
The worsening of poverty and the loss of guarantee of food security are examples of the negative socio-economic impact of the massive use of pesticides in Brazil. Of equal importance are its direct effects on the environment, non-target organisms, and human health [21,22]. A substantial task must be carried out by state agencies, non-governmental organizations, and researchers from universities and institutes to create scientific documentation that guides public policies in the adoption of the highest standards of procedures, guidelines, and mitigation measures to reduce potential risks to the population [23], as well as initiatives capable of circumventing its social and environmental damage. Therefore, this work aims to understand the scenario of Brazilian research that portrays the various toxic effects of pesticides on human health carried out in the last six years.

2. Methods

2.1. Data Sources

Online searches of the published literature within the last six years, 2015 to 2021, were conducted through the databases SCIELO, SCOPUS, PUBMED, and WEB OF SCIENCE. On the 8th of March of 2021, we utilized the strategy of search in all these databases using the terms through the keywords pesticides, humans, and Brazil: ((“pesticides”(MeSH Terms) OR “pesticides”(All Fields)) OR (“pesticides”(Pharmacological Action) OR “pesticides”(MeSH Terms) OR “pesticides”(All Fields))) AND (“humans”(MeSH Terms) OR “humans”(All Fields) OR “human”(All Fields)) AND (“brazil”(MeSH Terms) OR “brazil”(All Fields)) AND (“2015/01/01”(PDAT): “3000/12/31”(PDAT)). All searches together resulted in 4141 articles that, after evaluation and selection by members of the research team, were restricted to 51. A full description of the search strategy is provided in Figure 1A.

2.2. Studies Selection

Using the online software Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org/, accessed on 27 January 2022), 381 article duplications were excluded. Two reviewers carried out a double-blind review and independently screened paper titles, index terms, and abstracts to identify relevant articles for possible inclusion. The discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. It was used as the first inclusion criteria research developed in Brazil involving pesticides and articles written in English or Portuguese. Overall, 3603 articles that did not accomplish these criteria were excluded.
Next, a second round of more solid review was performed with the included articles where each work was independently read by two different reviewers using a second set of inclusion criteria, i.e., research developed in Brazil involving pesticides, articles in English or Portuguese, and research involving direct studies in humans or human cells exposed to pesticides, including case reports. The articles that did not fit these criteria (106) were excluded. Thereby, 51 works were selected and evaluated concerning the Brazilian institutions that published studies about human exposure to pesticides, the number of articles published per year, the type of study conducted, the regions where the studies were conducted, the variety of crops that humans had contact with, the type of pesticides exposure evidenced, the effects observed in the exposed populations, the chemical group, function, and the distribution per region of the different pesticides mainly applied.

3. Results and Discussion

The Brazilian population has been exposed to pesticides used in the production of commodities directly through dermal, oral, eye perfusion, and respiratory airways (notably rural workers), as well as indirectly through residues consumption in food and water [22,24,25,26,27]. The Brazilian Association of Collective Health [28] estimates that pesticides contaminate approximately 70% of food consumed by Brazilians, and they drink nearly 7.5 L of pesticides per year—the highest per capita consumption rate in the world.
Another important route of contamination is domestic or occupational exposure to multiple pesticides during pregnancy, which determines changes in fetal development and serious complications during childhood [29]. Mavoungou et al. [30], using data from the two French national population-based case-control studies, ESCALE (2003–2004) and ESTELLE (2010–2011), demonstrated a positive correlation between domestic and occupational exposures to pesticides during pregnancy with both childhood non-Hodgkin and Hodgkin lymphoma. Moreover, contaminated breast milk leads to pronounced immunological deficiencies in the newborn, increasing the risks of infections, mainly meningitis and inner ear infections in infants [31,32].
In 2017, the National Toxic-Pharmacological Information System (SINITOX) reported 2548 cases of pesticides contamination in Brazil [33]. Taking into account that pesticide intoxications are not considered a problem of compulsory notification in Brazil (according to Ordinance No. 777/GM, 28/04/2014) and that the Ministry of Health itself estimates that for each notified pesticide intoxication event, there are another 50 unnotified [34,35,36], human cases of pesticide intoxication is an alarming and neglected health problem in Brazil.
In this context, initiatives have been conducted by groups in some Brazilian research institutions and governmental and non-governmental organizations to minimize the problem of deficient notification. Other efforts include expanding the identification of sociodemographic conditions, the use of personal protective equipment, history of poisoning and hospitalizations for pesticides, and the existence of primary health care units for rural workers [37,38,39,40,41,42].
In this work, our purpose was to gather information about studies conducted by Brazilian research groups over the effects of pesticides on human health in the last six years. We revised case studies, and cross-sectional and experimental data (Figure 1B) of reported intoxications in humans derived mainly from occupational (77%) and environmental (21.3%) repeated exposure to pesticides (Figure 1C).
We found that among the fifty-one articles included in this systematic review, researchers from four of the five Brazilian administrative regions contributed to all publications, with 23 (46.2%) articles from institutions of the South region and 16 (30.7%) from the Southeast region, and seven and five (13.5% and 9.6%) articles generated by institutions from the Northeast and Midwest regions, respectively (Figure 2).
Although articles developed by researchers from institutions of the North region were not included, Freire, Koifman, and Koifman [43] from the National School of Public Health at Rio de Janeiro detected the presence of 24 types of organochlorine pesticides in the plasma of 978 adults exposed to different pesticides in Rio Branco, the capital of Acre (Figure 3). The results of this study highlight the positive association between high levels of pesticides (beta-HCH, p,p′-DDE-1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl) ethylene, and hexachlorobenzene) in the serum of male adults and alterations in hematological parameters such as eosinophilia, low hemoglobin content, and erythropenia, and high levels of liver metabolism enzymes such as bilirubin, glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase, and glutamic-pyruvic transaminase.
The Amazon region in the states of Acre, Amapá, Rondonia, Tocantins, and Amazonas has been suffering from deforestation due to many official policies [44,45], with large natural areas replaced by monoculture with an indiscriminate spread of pesticides. Soy cultivation is a major driver of deforestation in the Amazon basin. Seeds from the genetically modified (GM) soybean plant provide high protein animal feed for livestock, and 80% of Amazon soy is destined for animal feed; smaller percentages are used for oil or consumption [46]. The growing use of the land for monoculture and the consequent application of pesticides calls for a new direction in research purposes carried out by institutions of this region. Investigations are required to understand the impact of the growing and indiscriminate use of pesticides on the health of the Amazon population directly associated with exposure to pesticides or the use of contaminated water since the region is home to one of the largest hydrographic basins in the world.
Both surface water and groundwater pollution caused by pesticides are very serious and cause urgent issues in freshwater and coastal ecosystems worldwide [47]. Such pesticide contamination in water not only directly impacts the drinking water quality in local areas, but also causes indirect impacts by transferring across species, such as in soil and the food chain. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) [48], agriculture in the EU contributes 40–80% of total nitrogen and 20–40% of phosphorus to the pollution of surface waters. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) found several pesticides in more than 90% of water and fish samples collected from United States (US) streams [49]. Brazilian studies indicate that pesticide contamination had been reported in surface water, in levels exceeding the national standard, varying in the different seasons.
de Castro Lima et al. [50] confirmed the presence of high levels of four herbicides (2,4-D, atrazine, deethyl-atrazine, and simazine), three fungicides (carbendazim, tebuconazole, and epoxiconazole), and one insecticide (imidacloprid) in the water of Guaporé River, in the Rio Grande do Sul and its tributaries, that irrigate soybean, corn, and winter cereals crops and grassland forage production region. In addition, water samples collected in the river banks in the area of an agricultural project in Formoso do Araguaia city, Tocantins demonstrated levels of substances with potential for groundwater contamination such as clomazone (0.376 µg·L−1), fluazifop-p-butyl (<0.020 µg·L−1), flutolanil (<0.020 µg·L−1), metsulfuron-methyl (<0.020 µg·L−1), propanil (<0.006 µg·L−1), and imidacloprid (0.065 µg·L−1) [51].
These measures, added to the analysis of pesticide residues in human tissues and samples corroborate the guidelines stipulated by the OECD (Pesticide Assessment and Testing Project, 2013) [48], which recommend the application of a systematic assessment of environmental and social risks. The dosage of pesticides or their metabolites in human samples, such as hair and blood collected from workers in the South and Southeast regions of Brazil, has been evaluated. The results demonstrated the presence of arsenic (3.776 µg·L−1), nickel (2.686 µg·L−1), manganese (2.048 µg·L−1), zinc (1.442 µg·L−1), and cooper (1.939 µg·L−1) as a predictive risk factor for the development of disorders associated with chronic exposure to pesticides [52,53,54]. Moreover, monitoring systems to identify the spatial distribution of the planted area of crops, consumption of pesticides, and health problems related to chronic occupational exposition in Brazil have been carried out [55,56,57,58,59,60,61] with the purpose to integrate data on exposure to pesticides to social, economic, and environmental conditions, and to identify the bottlenecks in the control of the indiscriminate use of various pesticides. The data from these articles confirmed a positive correlation between the use of million liters of pesticides sprayed on soybean, corn, and sugarcane crops with the development of health problems in Mato Grosso, Paraná, and Rio Grande Sul, areas that concentrate agricultural commodity complexes.
As demonstrated in the review, these data corroborate the previous survey performed between 2012 and 2014 by Bombardi [62] that showed Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Goiás, and São Paulo as the significant consumers of pesticides in Brazil (44–92% more than the national average). Since then, according to the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture [3,23], records of new pesticides approved in 2019 are the highest in the historical data series. The average approval of new pesticides has been more than one per day. This is indicative that with access to new types and formulations [63,64], the number of tons of pesticides sprayed in the conventional or GM crops will be intensified, reinforcing the establishment of policies of continuous monitoring of pesticides in the environment by government agencies to maintain an updated inventory on the effects of contamination over non-target organisms and the environment.
Then, we analyzed the correlation between the toxic effects described in the articles reviewed with the most prevalent crops in Brazilian regions. Our data show a direct relationship with the agricultural production in each Brazilian region. Figure 4A shows that 14.3% of the articles reported the use of pesticides in the cultivation of tobacco, and 7.9% and 4.8% each in the cultivation of soy and grape, followed by 3.2% of articles related to the use of pesticides in banana, tomato, and peach crops. Crops such as kiwi, plum, apple, coffee, orange, flowers, persimmon, strawberry, and other vegetables corresponded to 19% of the articles. Moreover, 47.6% of the articles report the use of pesticides in various crops without specifically naming them, but it can be interpreted based on the crop profile of each region. In Figure 5, we observed an overlapping of data with the different cultures in each region in Brazil.
In 2019, the Midwest and Southeast regions of Brazil equally reached the highest value of agricultural commodity production (30%), followed by the South region with 28% and the North and Northeast regions with equal production of 6% [65]. In all major regions, the main product was soy, except for the Southeast region, which has sugar cane as the highest crop produced. Further, soybean (34.8%), sugar cane (15.2%), corn (13.2%), coffee (4.9%), and cotton (4.4%) represent, in this order, the commodities most produced by Brazilian regions. Taken together, these data show the amplitude of pesticide contamination to agribusiness workers as well as familiar agriculture in these regions since those are very pesticide-demanding practices [37,38,42,66].
Pesticides are classified according to the type of activity/target organism and to the chemical nature as insecticides (chlorinated hydrocarbons, organophosphates, carbamates–insecticides, and pyrethroids); fungicides and bactericides (dithiocarbamates, benzimidazoles, triazoles diazoles, and diazines morpholines); and herbicides (phenoxy hormone products to control growth and division like triazines, amides, carbamates-herbicides, dinitroanilines, urea derivatives, sulfonyl urea, bipyridyls, and uracil) among others [13].
Analyzing the type of pesticides, we found that most articles in this review describe toxic effects related to exposure to insecticides (31%), followed by fungicides (28%), herbicides (25%), and pesticides (generic name, 9%). Acaricides represented 3% of the articles, and 4% describe the toxic effects induced by nematicides, bactericides, cupinicides, and growth regulators together (Figure 4B). Our data corroborate the findings that show organophosphate Glyphosate-based herbicides as the world’s leading post-emergent, broad-spectrum, and non-selective herbicides for the control of annual and perennial weeds [67,68,69].
Glyphosate is the most sold active ingredient in Brazil, with 195,056 tons commercialized in 2018 [70]. It was recently reclassified by ANVISA (Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency, 2018) as class III, hazardous for the environment. In Brazil, the 65 µg·L−1 maximum limit concentration in superficial waters was determined by the National Council of Environment- Conama by resolutions #357/2005 and #20/1986. According to the Brazilian Ministry of Health Ordinance #518/2004, the maximum permissible concentration of Glyphosate in drinking water destined for human consumption is 500 µg·L−1 [71], similar to the high concentrations set by Environmental Protection Agencies in the United States [72], European Union [73], and Australia [74], where limits for drinking water are 700 µg·L−1, 0.1 µg·L−1, and 1000 µg·L−1, respectively.
This problem has been reported in Brazil [75,76]. de Castro Lima et al. [50] shows that the use of pesticides in rural catchments leads to the contamination of surrounding water resources. They described that 17 out of 18 water samples from the South region were contaminated with at least one pesticide (atrazine, simazine, propoxur, imidacloprid, carbendazim, azoxystrobin, thiamethoxam, fipronil, propiconazole, tebuconazole, and carbofuran).
Unfortunately, the establishment of high concentration limits in water for human consumption to substances with a good toxicological understanding by the environmental protection agencies in the main American countries (Brazil, United States, and Canada) does not follow the precautionary principle. On the contrary, in the EU, environmental regulation is required to fulfill the principles established in Article 174 of the EU Treaty, so it offers a high level of protection and is consistent with the precautionary principle. Pesticides in drinking water are regulated in the EU by the Drinking Water Directive (Directive 98/83/EC), with value of 2.5 µg·L−1 for Bisphenol-A, as benchmark. The parametric values laid down in this Directive are based on the scientific knowledge available and the precautionary principle, and are selected to ensure that water intended for human consumption can be consumed safely on a life-long basis, thus ensuring a high level of health protection.
Numerous in vivo studies (reviewed by Disner et al. [77]) have recursively proven that exposure to pesticides, either isolated or in combination [78], affect human health due to their actions as carcinogens [79,80,81,82,83,84], neurotoxicants [85,86,87,88], endocrine disruptors, developmental toxicants [89,90,91,92], and metabolic toxicants [93,94].
The impact on human health of environmental exposures is a challenge due the variability in time and space, which makes it difficult to delineate their potential harmful on the cellular, organ, and organism level. The articles selected here reported multiple toxic effects of pesticides, particularly inflicting rural workers, inducing from hematological abnormalities, DNA damage, and cell death to excessive salivation, skin and eye irritations, pain, altered hormone levels, infertility, miscarriages and fetal malformation, neurological symptoms, such as tremors and fatigue, hearing loss, psychiatric effects and suicides, neurodegenerative diseases, effects on muscular and cardiac systems, development of related metabolic diseases, including overweight, underweight, insulin resistance and even diabetes, and various types of cancer (Figure 6).
The studies revealed that the most evident effect was genotoxicity, altering the metabolic and oxidative pathways and provoking DNA damage and epigenetic changes. Moreover, the intricacy of pesticide’s metabolic characteristic is augmented by co-exposition to other intoxicants that increased or decreased enzymes implicated in metabolism [84,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105] However, it is noteworthy that, despite these findings, environmental exposure is not an isolated factor for these diseases. It can act as a catalyst or summative factor to pre-existing conditions such as: unhealthy diet, sedentary lifestyle, tobacco smoking, and alcohol drinking.
According to Smith et al. [106], carcinogens generally exhibit more than 1 of the 10 main characteristics, such as genotoxicity, alteration of DNA repair systems or genomic instability, operate as electrophiles directly with or after metabolic activation, cause oxidative stress and chronic inflammation, immunosuppression, control of actions mediated by the receptor, induce immortalization or modify cell growth, induce cell death, or block the supply of nutrients and cause epigenetic changes [56,80,82,83,107,108,109]. Therefore, DNA damage and epigenetic alterations caused by chronic exposure to multiple pesticides are directly related to the development of several diseases, including different types of cancer.
Pesticides may cause a transient or permanent alteration of the immune system, leading to higher risks for chronic health disorders, including hematological and immune alterations such as inflammation and cytokine modulation [98,110,111,112,113]. Recently, the intestinal microbiota has emerged as a notable factor regulating pesticides’ toxicity. Giambò et al. [114] propose that pesticides can disrupt the typical composition and functionality of the gut microbiome, leading to significant metabolic imbalances, especially in glycolipid metabolism. On the other hand, the bacterial community responds to pesticide toxicity by promoting the growth of bacterial strains most involved in the detoxification mechanisms of these chemical compounds.
A very interesting view is that the epithelial barrier integrity in the airways, gut, and esophagus, essential for homeostasis control, can be affected by multiple environmental toxic agents, such as pesticides. Akdis [115] proposes that the increase in agents that damage the epithelial barrier underlies not only the development of allergy and autoimmune conditions in barrier-damaged tissues but also a wide range of diseases in which an immune response to commensal bacteria and opportunistic pathogens occurs. The development of permeable epithelial barriers leads to microbial dysbiosis and bacterial translocation to interepithelial and subepithelial areas, and the development of tissue microinflammation. Notably, the microbial-mediated effects potentially modulate the course of the neurological disorders which display a chronic state of inflammation in the periphery as well as in the brain [116], providing an opportunity to intensify public policies in adopting the highest standards of measures to reduce the risks of pesticides for the population.
Data from hematological tests of rural workers from the Southeast and South Brazilian regions exposed to organochlorines (OCs) and dithiocarbamate pesticides show hematological alterations, such as neutrophilia [117] or leucopenia [118,119]. The impact of chronic exposure to multiple pesticides was described in the immune response, showing in the plasma of exposed farmers compared to controls increased levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines such IL-6 [105] and IL-1β and TNF-α [120], and augmented levels of C3, a key component in complement activation, amplification, and effector generation [119].
Pesticides may adversely affect hematopoietic tissue and liver functions in populations chronically exposed to high levels of these compounds [121]. Some experimental studies by Brazilian groups corroborate the evidence for pesticide hepatotoxicity, disrupting biochemical parameters, and antioxidant capacity. Soybean farmers in southern Brazil during high pesticide exposure periods presented lower butyrylcholinesterase (BChE), increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) activities, as well as high levels of urea and creatinine in the blood [122,123].
Lermen et al. [124] described the hepatotoxic effect in farmers who grow citrus in the Vale do Caí, in the Rio Grande do Sul, southern Brazil. Freire, Koifman, and Koifman [43], besides observing eosinophilia, low hemoglobin levels, and low erythrocyte count among residents in an area heavily contaminated with OCs, detected high levels of bilirubin, glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase (GOT), glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (GPT), and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT). Moreover, alterations of renal functions were evidenced in children from a tobacco-producing region [66,125].
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) comprise a group of compounds that have been examined extensively due to the potential detrimental effects on human health. Animal and in vitro studies support the conclusion that endocrine-disruptors affect the hormone-dependent pathways responsible for male and female gonadal development [126], either through direct interaction with hormone receptors or via epigenetic and cell-cycle regulatory modes of action. In humans, most studies point to an association between exposure to EDCs and male or female reproduction systems disorders, such as infertility, endometriosis, breast cancer, testicular cancer, or low quality or dysfunctional sperm [89,90,91,92].
The OCs and organophosphorus (OPs) are examples of pesticides with endocrine-disrupting properties. Moreover, the toxic effects they induce on the human reproductive system are directly related to the dose, the frequency of exposure, the route of exposure, and the genotypic characteristics of the affected populations [127]. Chronic exposure to OPs can be monitored by assessing plasma cholinesterase identified as a marker [122,124,125,128]. The occupational exposure of adults to pesticides such as parathion and methyl parathion increases the risk of morphological abnormalities in the sperm, including a decline in sperm count, a decreased percentage of viable sperms, and a reduction in the seminal volume [129,130].
The impact of pesticides on human thyroid functions, essential in the growth and development of children and adolescents, weight, memory, regulation of menstrual cycles, fertility, concentration, mood, and emotional control was recently investigated in soybean farmers in southern Brazil. Low levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and increased levels of total triiodothyronine (TT3) and free thyroxine (FT4) were detected by Bernieri et al. [122]. Furthermore, Cremonese et al. [131] described altered sperm morphology, high sperm count, and low luteinizing hormone (LH) and prolactin levels in young rural men with poorer backgrounds relative to urban subjects. Santos et al. [132] found positive associations of lifetime years of agricultural work with reduced total thyroxine (T4) and increased male testosterone; and of lifetime agricultural work and use of various pesticide classes (i.e., insecticides, herbicides, organophosphate insecticides, dithiocarbamate fungicides, and pyrethroids), mancozeb (fungicide), and paraquat.
Interestingly, prenatal exposure to OPs in humans has a greater impact on fetal growth and development in early childhood [133]. Prenatal indoor exposure to pesticides (e.g., chlorpyrifos, OPs, and vinclozolin) and herbicides (such as triazines and metolachlor) has been suggested to increase teratogenicity risk [29] due to the high susceptibility of most fetal systems during certain periods of development [134]. Robust data show a positive association between maternal pesticide exposure during the three months that preceded conception and the first three months of pregnancy, and paternal pesticide exposure during the 12 months that preceded conception and the occurrence of congenital malformations in children in Mato Grosso [135].
Agricultural workers who have concurrent exposure to pesticides are at increased risk of hearing loss in low and high frequencies [136,137,138]. Tobacco farmers from southern Brazil exposed to pesticides exhibited signs of central auditory dysfunction characterized by decrements in temporal processing and binaural integration processes/abilities [139,140]. Using meatoscopy, pure tone audiometry, logoaudiometry, high-frequency thresholds, and immittance testing, Tomiazzi et al. [141] demonstrate the direct effect of pesticides on hearing loss in 127 participants, of both sexes, aged between 18 and 39, carried out in Pontal do Paranapanema region, one of the less developed regions of the state of São Paulo.
The nervous system is particularly susceptible to many pesticides of several distinct chemical classes. Several studies show that prenatal and early childhood exposure to OPs is associated with neurodevelopmental effects [142] and neurocognitive disorders as attention deficit disorder with or without hyperactivity (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) [143]. A meta-analysis concluded that low-dose exposures to OPs were linked to reduced psychomotor speed, executive function, and visuospatial ability, as well as work and visual memory [144]. Other studies have also associated OCs, OPs, and other pesticides with dementias such as Alzheimer’s disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, but mainly with Parkinson’s disease [145,146]. Campos et al. (2015) [147] demonstrated that children and adolescents living in Cidade dos Meninos in the Brazilian State of Rio de Janeiro contaminated with OC pesticides presented cognitive deficiencies. In the same state, a major impact of pesticide exposure in the development of tremor was observed [148].
Hazardous pesticides (classes Ia, Ib, and II), such as the OP insecticides monocrotophos, phorate, and methyl parathion or the herbicide paraquat [149], have been responsible for most pesticide suicides worldwide over the last five decades. Several other countries where pesticide suicide is a significant problem have reported the effects of national pesticide regulation on suicide [150], notably Bangladesh [151], South Korea [152], Sri Lanka [153], and India [86]. Although regulatory agencies have many options for increased safeguards for any pesticide, the most effective and reliable is to ban the most dangerous pesticides and those with higher potential for harm to humans and the environment following the precautionary principle. Finally, more severe cases of mental illness, such as depression and attempted suicide, have also been reported by groups in some Brazilian research institutions [154,155,156], which leads us to advocate for the importance of strengthening the evaluation of mental illness caused by chronic exposure to pesticides, especially in rural workers living in low economic and social conditions by health authorities.

4. Conclusions

The review demonstrated that over the last six years, important Brazilian institutions have been dedicated to studying the possible effects of pesticides on human health. An important factor, since Brazil is an agricultural country, is that pesticide use increases every year. Furthermore, scientific publications on the effect of pesticides on human health play a fundamental role in guiding public policies in the adoption of the highest standards of procedures, guidelines, and mitigation measures to reduce potential risks to the population.

Author Contributions

M.L.-F. and C.L. conceptualized the review article and, together with A.L.A.M., L.B.-L., J.T.G.B., L.M.H., A.C.S.-S., J.B.-F. and M.A.P.F., have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work, such as literature search, data analysis, revision, and approval for publication. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the São Paulo Research Foundation—FAPESP (#2013/07467-1), CNPq (305414/2019-4), and in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES)—Finance Code 001. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

References

  1. Castro, N.R.; Spolador, H.F.S.; Marin, F.R. Assessing the economy–climate relationships for Brazilian agriculture. Empir. Econ. 2020, 59, 1161–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. de Souza Ramser, C.A.; Souza, A.M.; Souza, F.M.; da Veiga, C.P.; da Silva, W.V. The importance of principal components in studying mineral prices using vector autoregressive models: Evidence from the Brazilian economy. Resour. Policy 2019, 62, 9–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Brasil, Ministério da Agricultura, P. e A. de D.A. Portaria No. 43, de 21 de Fevereiro de 2020. Available online: http://www.agricultura.gov.br/assuntos/insumos-agropecuarios/insumos-agricolas/agrotoxicos/informacoes-tecnicas (accessed on 21 February 2020).
  4. Centro de Estudos Avançados em Economia Aplicada/Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz” PIB do Agronegócio Brasileiro. Available online: https://www.cepea.esalq.usp.br/br/pib-do-agronegocio-brasileiro.aspx (accessed on 27 November 2019).
  5. Eloy, L.; Aubertin, C.; Toni, F.; Lúcio, S.L.B.; Bosgiraud, M. On the margins of soy farms: Traditional populations and selective environmental policies in the Brazilian Cerrado. J. Peasant Stud. 2016, 43, 494–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Condições de Vida Desigualdade e Pobreza Condições de Vida, Desigualdade e Pobreza. Available online: https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/multidominio/condicoes-de-vida-desigualdade-e-pobreza.html (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  7. Wittman, H.; Desmarais, A.; Wiebe, N. Food Sovereignty: Reconnecting Food, Nature and Community. Environ. Soc. Res. 2010, 2, 87–105. [Google Scholar]
  8. Alimentar, N.B.C.N.; de Lei, S. Cria o Sistema Nacional de Segurança Alimentar e Nutricional-SISAN com vistas em assegurar o direito humano à alimentação adequada e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da Uniāo 2006. Available online: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2006/lei/l11346.htm (accessed on 26 September 2021).
  9. Ribeiro, H.; Jaime, P.C.; Ventura, D. Alimentação e sustentabilidade. Estud. Avançados 2017, 31, 185–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Sauer, S. Agricultura Familiar versus Agronegócio: A Dinâmica Sociopolítica do Campo Brasileiro; Embrapa Informação Tecnológica: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  11. Safety, F. Farm to Fork Strategy. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/actions-being-taken-eu/farm-fork_en (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  12. FAOSTAT International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/70293/WHO_HTM_NTD_WHOPES_2010.7_eng.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2020).
  13. FAOSTAT Definitions and Standards Used in FAOSTAT. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#definitions (accessed on 1 June 2020).
  14. Brasil Ato No. 91. 26 December 2019. Available online: http://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/ato-n-91-de-26-de-dezembro-de-2019-235559622 (accessed on 28 February 2020).
  15. ANVISA Programa de Análise de Resíduos de Agrotóxicos-Relatório 2017 e 2018. Available online: https://www.gov.br/anvisa/pt-br/centraisdeconteudo/publicacoes/agrotoxicos/programa-de-analise-de-residuos-de-agrotoxicos-relatorio-2017-e-2018.pdf/view (accessed on 10 February 2020).
  16. Hess, S.C.; Nodari, R.O.; Lopes-Ferreira, M. Agrotóxicos: Críticas à regulação que permite o envenenamento do país. Agron. Tempos Colapso Planet. Abordagens Crit. 2021, 57, 105–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Friedrich, K.; da Silveira, G.R.; Amazonas, J.C.; do Gurgel, A.M.; de Almeida, V.E.S.; Sarpa, M. Situação regulatória internacional de agrotóxicos com uso autorizado no Brasil: Potencial de danos sobre a saúde e impactos ambientais. Cad. Saude Publica 2021, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Monneret, C. What is an endocrine disruptor? Comptes Rendus Biol. 2017, 340, 403–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gundogan, K.; Donmez-Altuntas, H.; Hamurcu, Z.; Akbudak, I.H.; Sungur, M.; Bitgen, N.; Baskol, G.; Bayram, F. Evaluation of chromosomal DNA damage, cytotoxicity, cytostasis, oxidative DNA damage and their relationship with endocrine hormones in patients with acute organophosphate poisoning. Mutat. Res. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2018, 825, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jokanović, M. Neurotoxic effects of organophosphorus pesticides and possible association with neurodegenerative diseases in man: A review. Toxicology 2018, 410, 125–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Elgueta, S.; Valenzuela, M.; Fuentes, M.; Ulloa, P.; Ramos, C.; Correa, A.; Molinett, S. Analysis of multi-pesticide residues and dietary risk assessment in fresh tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum) from local supermarkets of the metropolitan region, Chile. Toxics 2021, 9, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. World Health Organization Pesticide Residues in Food. Available online: https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/pesticide-residues-in-food (accessed on 12 January 2019).
  23. World Health Organization Health Topics-Pesticides. Available online: https://www.who.int/topics/pesticides/en/ (accessed on 20 February 2020).
  24. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária Relatório do Plano Plurianual 2017–2020–Ciclo 2017/2018. Available online: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/programa-de-analise-de-registro-de-agrotoxicos-para (accessed on 10 February 2020).
  25. Ferreira, V.B.; Estrella, L.F.; Alves, M.G.R.; Gallistl, C.; Vetter, W.; Silva, T.T.C.; Malm, O.; Torres, J.P.M.; Abadio Finco, F.D.B. Residues of legacy organochlorine pesticides and DDT metabolites in highly consumed fish from the polluted Guanabara Bay, Brazil: Distribution and assessment of human health risk. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2020, 55, 30–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Da Silva, H.C.M.P.; Bedor, D.C.G.; Cunha, A.N.; dos Rodrigues, H.O.S.; Telles, D.L.; Araújo, A.C.P.; de Santana, D.P. Ethephon and fosetyl residues in fruits from São Francisco Valley, Brazil. Food Addit. Contam. Part B 2020, 13, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Pedon de Araujo Cardoso, T.; Viturino da Silva, J.W.; Kishishita, J.; Galindo Bedor, C.N.; Galindo Bedor, D.C.; Pereira de Santana, D.; Bastos Leal, L. Pesticide dermal absorption: Case study x in vitro study. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2020, 75, 103313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva Dossiê Agrotóxicos. Available online: https://abrasco.org.br/dossieagrotoxicos/ (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  29. Stillerman, K.P.; Mattison, D.R.; Giudice, L.C.; Woodruff, T.J. Environmental exposures and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A review of the science. Reprod. Sci. 2008, 15, 631–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mavoungou, S.; Rios, P.; Pacquement, H.; Nolla, M.; Rigaud, C.; Simonin, M.; Bertrand, Y.; Lambilliotte, A.; Faure, L.; Orsi, L.; et al. Maternal exposure to pesticides and risk of childhood lymphoma in France: A pooled analysis of the ESCALE and ESTELLE studies (SFCE). Cancer Epidemiol. 2020, 68, 101797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Criswell, R.; Crawford, K.A.; Bucinca, H.; Romano, M.E. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals and breastfeeding duration: A review. Curr. Opin. Endocrinol. Diabetes Obes. 2020, 27, 388–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Helou, K.; Matta, J.; Harmouche-Karaki, M.; Sayegh, N.; Younes, H.; Mahfouz, Y.; Mahfouz, M.; Karake, S.; Finan, R.; Abi-Tayeh, G.; et al. Maternal and cord serum levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) among Lebanese pregnant women and predictors of exposure. Chemosphere 2021, 266, 129211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cruz, F.O. Coleção Saúde, Ambiente e Sustentabilidade-Capítulo 2-Agrotóxicos. Available online: https://portal.fiocruz.br/sites/portal.fiocruz.br/files/documentos/02_agrotoxicos.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  34. Queiroz, P.R.; Lima, K.C.; de Oliveira, T.C.; dos Santos, M.M.; Jacob, J.F.; de Oliveira, A.M.B.M. Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação e as intoxicações humanas por agrotóxicos no Brasil. Rev. Bras. Epidemiol. 2019, 22, e190033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Menck, V.F.; Serafim, M.P.; Oliveira, J.M. Intoxicação do(a) trabalhador(a) rural por agrotóxicos: (Sub)notificação e (in)visibilidade nas políticas públicas de 2001 a 2015. Segur. Aliment. Nutr. 2019, 26, e019001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Faria, N.M.X.; Fassa, A.G.; Facchini, L.A. Intoxicação por agrotóxicos no Brasil: Os sistemas oficiais de informação e desafios para realização de estudos epidemiológicos. Ciênc. Saúde Colet. 2007, 12, 25–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Buralli, R.J.; Ribeiro, H.; Iglesias, V.; Muñoz-Quezada, M.T.; Leão, R.S.; Marques, R.C.; de Almeida, M.M.C.; Guimarães, J.R.D. Occupational exposure to pesticides and health symptoms among family farmers in Brazil. Rev. Saude Publica 2020, 54, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Fernandes, C.L.F.; Volcão, L.M.; Ramires, P.F.; De Moura, R.R.; Da Silva Júnior, F.M.R. Distribution of pesticides in agricultural and urban soils of Brazil: A critical review. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 2020, 22, 256–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hess, S.C. Ensaios Sobre Poluição e Doenças no Brasil. Available online: https://repositorio.ufsc.br/bitstream/handle/123456789/187660/LIVRO.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  40. Neves, P.D.M.; Mendonça, M.R.; Bellini, M.; Pôssas, I.B. Intoxicação por agrotóxicos agrícolas no estado de Goiás, Brasil, de 2005–2015: Análise dos registros nos sistemas oficiais de informação. Ciênc. Saúde Colet. 2020, 25, 2743–2754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Silvério, A.C.P.; Martins, I.; Nogueira, D.A.; Mello, M.A.S.; de Loyola, E.A.C.; de Graciano, M.M.C. Assessment of Primary Health Care for rural workers exposed to pesticides. Rev. Saude Publica 2020, 54, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Lovison Sasso, E.; Cattaneo, R.; Rosso Storck, T.; Spanamberg Mayer, M.; Sant’Anna, V.; Clasen, B. Occupational exposure of rural workers to pesticides in a vegetable-producing region in Brazil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 25758–25769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Freire, C.; Koifman, R.J.; Koifman, S. Serum levels of organochlorine pesticides in blood donors: A biomonitoring survey in the North of Brazil, 2010–2011. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 598, 722–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Yanai, A.M.; de Graça, P.M.L.A.; Escada, M.I.S.; Ziccardi, L.G.; Fearnside, P.M. Deforestation dynamics in Brazil’s Amazonian settlements: Effects of land-tenure concentration. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 268, 110555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais Plataforma Terra Brasilis. Available online: http://terrabrasilis.dpi.inpe.br/app/map/deforestation?hl=pt-br (accessed on 24 June 2020).
  46. Nepstad, D.; McGrath, D.; Stickler, C.; Alencar, A.; Azevedo, A.; Swette, B.; Bezerra, T.; DiGiano, M.; Shimada, J.; da Motta, R.; et al. Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy supply chains. Science 2014, 344, 1118–1123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kurwadkar, S. Groundwater Pollution and Vulnerability Assessment. Water Environ. Res. 2017, 89, 1561–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Introduction to OECD Test Guidelines on Pesticide Residues Chemistry-Section 5 Part A; OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 5; OECD: Paris, France, 2013; ISBN 9789264203761.
  49. Rose, C.; Coupe, R.; Capel, P.; Webb, R. Holistic assessment of occurrence and fate of metolachlor within environmental compartments of agricultural watersheds. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 612, 708–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. de Castro Lima, J.A.M.; Labanowski, J.; Bastos, M.C.; Zanella, R.; Prestes, O.D.; de Vargas, J.P.R.; Mondamert, L.; Granado, E.; Tiecher, T.; Zafar, M.; et al. “Modern agriculture” transfers many pesticides to watercourses: A case study of a representative rural catchment of southern Brazil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 10581–10598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Guarda, P.M.; Pontes, A.M.S.; de Domiciano, R.S.; da Gualberto, L.S.; Mendes, D.B.; Guarda, E.A.; da Silva, J.E.C. Assessment of Ecological Risk and Environmental Behavior of Pesticides in Environmental Compartments of the Formoso River in Tocantins, Brazil. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2020, 79, 524–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Rocha, G.H.O.; Lini, R.S.; Barbosa, F.J.; Batista, B.L.; de Oliveira Souza, V.C.; Nerilo, S.B.; Bando, E.; Mossini, S.A.G.; Nishiyama, P. Exposure to heavy metals due to pesticide use by vineyard farmers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 2015, 88, 875–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kahl, V.F.S.; da Silva, J.; da Silva, F.R. Influence of exposure to pesticides on telomere length in tobacco farmers: A biology system approach. Mutat. Res. 2016, 791, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Carvalho, D.F.P.; Meire, R.O.; Guimarães, M.T.; Pereira, L.A.A.; Braga, A.L.F.; Bernardo, R.R.; Torres, J.P.M.; Malm, O. Determination of Environmental Exposure to DDT by Human Hair Analysis in Santos and São Vicente Estuary, São Paulo, Brazil. Orbital Electron. J. Chem. 2018, 10, 308–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Brito, J.G.; de Martins, C.B.G. Accidental intoxication of the infant-juvenile population in households: Profiles of emergency care. Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP 2015, 49, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Cezar-Vaz, M.R.; Bonow, C.A.; Piexak, D.R.; Kowalczyk, S.; Vaz, J.C.; Borges, A.M. Skin cancer in rural workers: Nursing knowledge and intervention. Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP 2015, 49, 0564–0571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rocha, T.A.L.C.G.; de Oliveira, F.N. Segurança e Saúde do Trabalho: Vulnerabilidade e percepção de riscos relacionados ao uso de agroquímicos em um pólo de fruticultura irrigada do Rio Grande do Norte. Gest. Prod. 2016, 23, 600–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Pignati, W.; Lima, F.; Lara, S.; Correa, M.; Barbosa, J.; Leão, L.; Pignatti, M. Distribuição espacial do uso de agrotóxicos no Brasil: Uma ferramenta para a Vigilância em Saúde. Ciênc. Saúde Colet. 2017, 22, 3281–3293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Leão, R.S.; Marques, R.C.; Buralli, R.J.; Silva, D.S.; Guimarães, J.R.D. Public health assessment of agrochemicals exposure: An experience with family farming in the northwest of Rio de Janeiro|Avaliação de saúde pública por exposição a agroquímicos: Uma experiência com a agricultura familiar no noroeste do Rio de Janeiro. Sustentab. Debate 2018, 9, 81–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Bortolotto, C.C.; Hirschmann, R.; Martins-Silva, T.; Facchini, L.A. Exposição a agrotóxicos: Estudo de base populacional em zona rural do sul do Brasil. Rev. Bras. Epidemiol. 2020, 23, e200027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Simas, J.M.M.; Yamauchi, L.Y.; do Alencar, M.C.B. de Risk factors associated among respiratory health and banana farming. Arch. Environ. Occup. Health 2021, 76, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Bombardi, L.M. Geografia do Uso de Agrotóxicos no Brasil e Conexões com a União Europeia. São Paulo; Faculdade de Filosofia Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo: São Paulo, Brazil, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  63. Brasil Ato no. 58, de 27 de Agosto de 2019: Altera as Classificações Toxicológicas dos Produtos Formulados Agrotóxicos. Brasília, Brazil. Available online: https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/ato-n-58-de-27-de-agosto-de-2019-213474289 (accessed on 29 November 2021).
  64. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária Nota Técnica No. 23/2018. Apresenta a Nota Técnica Preliminar Sobre as Conclusões da Reavaliação do Glifosato. Available online: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/documents/10181/5344168/1.+Nota+Técnica+Glifosato.pdf/d071af2d-5cb4-4443-b210-4bc43f2216b8 (accessed on 15 January 2020).
  65. Ministério da Indústria Comércio Exterior e Serviços Exportação Mercado de Commodities. Available online: http://www.mdic.gov.br/sistemas_web/aprendex/cooperativismo/index/conteudo/id/304 (accessed on 21 February 2020).
  66. Ramos, J.S.A.; Pedroso, T.M.A.; Godoy, F.R.; Batista, R.E.; de Almeida, F.B.; Francelin, C.; Ribeiro, F.L.; Parise, M.R.; de Melo e Silva, D. Multi-biomarker responses to pesticides in an agricultural population from Central Brazil. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 754, 141893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Pérez, G.; Vera, M.; Miranda, L. Effects of Herbicide Glyphosate and Glyphosate-Based Formulations on Aquatic Ecosystems. In Herbicides and Environment; BoD—Books on Demand: Norderstedt, Germany, 2011; pp. 343–368. ISBN 978-953-307-476-4. [Google Scholar]
  68. de Castilhos Ghisi, N.; Zuanazzi, N.R.; Fabrin, T.M.C.; Oliveira, E.C. Glyphosate and its toxicology: A scientometric review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 733, 139359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Muñoz, J.P.; Bleak, T.C.; Calaf, G.M. Glyphosate and the key characteristics of an endocrine disruptor: A review. Chemosphere 2021, 270, 128619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Relatórios de Comercialização de Agrotóxicos. Available online: http://ibama.gov.br/agrotoxicos/relatorios-de-comercializacao-de-agrotoxicos (accessed on 28 November 2019).
  71. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilânica em Saúde. Coordenação-Geral de Vigilância em Saúde Ambiental. Portaria MS n.º 518/2004/Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde, CoordenaçãoGeral de Vigilância em Saúde Ambiental–Brasília; Editora do Ministério da Saúde: Brasilia, Brazil, 2005.
  72. Persch, T.S.P.; da Silva, P.R.; dos Santos, S.H.D.; de Freitas, B.S.; Oliveira, G.T. Changes in intermediate metabolism and oxidative balance parameters in sexually matured three-barbeled catfishes exposed to herbicides from rice crops (Roundup®, Primoleo® and Facet®). Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2018, 58, 170–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Masood, M.I.; Naseem, M.; Warda, S.A.; Tapia-Laliena, M.Á.; Rehman, H.; Nasim, M.J.; Schäfer, K.H. Environment permissible concentrations of glyphosate in drinking water can influence the fate of neural stem cells from the subventricular zone of the postnatal mouse. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 270, 116179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Tsai, W.-T. Trends in the Use of Glyphosate Herbicide and Its Relevant Regulations in Taiwan: A Water Contaminant of Increasing Concern. Toxics 2019, 7, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Relatório Nacional de Vigilância em Saúde de Populações Expostas a Agrotóxicos. Available online: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/relatorio_nacional_vigilancia_populacoes_expostas_agrotoxicos.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  76. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Casos Notificados de Intoxicações Exógenas Relacionados ao Glifosato no Brasil, no Período de 2007 a 2016. Available online: http://portalarquivos2.saude.gov.br/images/pdf/2018/dezembro/04/BE-2018-31-Glifosato.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  77. Disner, G.R.; Falcão, M.A.P.; Andrade-Barros, A.I.; Leite dos Santos, N.V.; Soares, A.B.S.; Marcolino-Souza, M.; Gomes, K.S.; Lima, C.; Lopes-Ferreira, M. The Toxic Effects of Glyphosate, Chlorpyrifos, Abamectin, and 2,4-D on Animal Models: A Systematic Review of Brazilian Studies. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 2021, 17, 507–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Sergievich, A.A.; Khoroshikh, P.P.; Artemenko, A.F.; Zakharenko, A.M.; Chaika, V.V.; Kodintsev, V.V.; Stroeva, O.A.; Lenda, E.G.; Tsatsakis, A.; Burykina, T.I.; et al. Behavioral impacts of a mixture of six pesticides on rats. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 727, 138491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Bonner, M.R.; Freeman, L.E.B.; Hoppin, J.A.; Koutros, S.; Sandler, D.P.; Lynch, C.F.; Hines, C.J.; Thomas, K.; Blair, A.; Alavanja, M.C.R. Occupational Exposure to Pesticides and the Incidence of Lung Cancer in the Agricultural Health Study. Environ. Health Perspect. 2017, 125, 544–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Dutra, L.S.; Ferreira, A.P.; Horta, M.A.P.; Palhares, P.R. Uso de agrotóxicos e mortalidade por câncer em regiões de monoculturas. Saúde Debate 2020, 44, 1018–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Calaf, G.; Ponce-Cusi, R.; Aguayo, F.; Muñoz, J.; Bleak, T. Endocrine disruptors from the environment affecting breast cancer (Review). Oncol. Lett. 2020, 20, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Guida, Y.; de Carvalho, G.O.; Capella, R.; Pozo, K.; Lino, A.S.; Azeredo, A.; Carvalho, D.F.P.; Braga, A.L.F.; Torres, J.P.M.; Meire, R.O. Atmospheric Occurrence of Organochlorine Pesticides and Inhalation Cancer Risk in Urban Areas at Southeast Brazil. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 271, 116359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Rede Nacional de Atenção Integral à Saúde do Trabalhador Agência da OMS Divulga Publicação Sobre a Relação Entre Organofosforados e Câncer. (Grupo 2A). Available online: https://renastonline.ensp.fiocruz.br/noticias/agencia-oms-divulga-publicacao-sobre-relacao-entre-organofosforados-cancer#:~:text=Recentemente%2CaIARCdivulgouo,parahumanos (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  84. Costa, M.B.; Farias, I.R.; da Silva Monte, C.; Filho, L.I.P.F.; de Paula Borges, D.; de Oliveira, R.T.G.; Ribeiro-Junior, H.L.; Magalhães, S.M.M.; Pinheiro, R.F. Chromosomal abnormalities and dysregulated DNA repair gene expression in farmers exposed to pesticides. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2021, 82, 103564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Dos Santos, N.F.; Contrera, L.; Teston, E.F.; Kawakame, P.M.G.; Reis, L.E.A.; de Amarilha, K.J.O. Evidências dos efeitos neurotóxicos por exposição ao agrotóxico: Uma revisão integrativa/evidence of neurotoxic effects by exposure to pesticide. Braz. J. Dev. 2020, 6, 102160–102170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Bonvoisin, T.; Utyasheva, L.; Knipe, D.; Gunnell, D.; Eddleston, M. Suicide by pesticide poisoning in India: A review of pesticide regulations and their impact on suicide trends. BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Dardiotis, E.; Aloizou, A.-M.; Sakalakis, E.; Siokas, V.; Koureas, M.; Xiromerisiou, G.; Petinaki, E.; Wilks, M.; Tsatsakis, A.; Hadjichristodoulou, C.; et al. Organochlorine pesticide levels in Greek patients with Parkinson’s disease. Toxicol. Rep. 2020, 7, 596–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Schneider Medeiros, M.; Reddy, S.P.; Socal, M.P.; Schumacher-Schuh, A.F.; Mello Rieder, C.R. Occupational pesticide exposure and the risk of death in patients with Parkinson’s disease: An observational study in southern Brazil. Environ. Health 2020, 19, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Green, M.P.; Harvey, A.J.; Finger, B.J.; Tarulli, G.A. Endocrine disrupting chemicals: Impacts on human fertility and fecundity during the peri-conception period. Environ. Res. 2021, 194, 110694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Kahn, L.G.; Philippat, C.; Nakayama, S.F.; Slama, R.; Trasande, L. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Implications for human health. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020, 8, 703–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Kassotis, C.D.; Vandenberg, L.N.; Demeneix, B.A.; Porta, M.; Slama, R.; Trasande, L. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Economic, regulatory, and policy implications. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020, 8, 719–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Zhang, C.; Schilirò, T.; Gea, M.; Bianchi, S.; Spinello, A.; Magistrato, A.; Gilardi, G.; Di Nardo, G. Molecular Basis for Endocrine Disruption by Pesticides Targeting Aromatase and Estrogen Receptor. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Petrakis, D.; Vassilopoulou, L.; Mamoulakis, C.; Psycharakis, C.; Anifantaki, A.; Sifakis, S.; Docea, A.O.; Tsiaoussis, J.; Makrigiannakis, A.; Tsatsakis, A.M. Endocrine Disruptors Leading to Obesity and Related Diseases. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. He, B.; Ni, Y.; Jin, Y.; Fu, Z. Pesticides-induced energy metabolic disorders. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 729, 139033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. de Adad, L.M.M.; Andrade, H.H.R.; Kvitko, K.; Lehmann, M.; Cavalcante, A.A.M.C.; Dihl, R.R. Occupational exposure of workers to pesticides: Toxicogenetics and susceptibility gene polymorphisms. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2015, 38, 308–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Kahl, V.F.S.; da Silva, F.R.; Alves, J.D.S.; da Silva, G.F.; Picinini, J.; Dhillon, V.S.; Fenech, M.; Souza, M.R.; Dias, J.F.; de Souza, C.T.; et al. Role of PON1, SOD2, OGG1, XRCC1, and XRCC4 polymorphisms on modulation of DNA damage in workers occupationally exposed to pesticides. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 159, 164–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kahl, V.F.S.; Dhillon, V.S.; Simon, D.; da Silva, F.R.; Salvador, M.; Branco, C.D.S.; Cappetta, M.; Martínez-López, W.; Thiesen, F.V.; Dias, J.F.; et al. Chronic occupational exposure endured by tobacco farmers from Brazil and association with DNA damage. Mutagenesis 2018, 33, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Marcelino, A.F.; Wachtel, C.C.; Ghisi, N.D.; Marcelino, A.F.; Wachtel, C.C.; de Ghisi, N.C. Are Our Farm Workers in Danger? Genetic Damage in Farmers Exposed to Pesticides. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Oliveira, S.E.; Costa, P.M.; Nascimento, S.B.; Castro, W.V.; de Ribeiro, R.I.M.A.; Santos, H.B.; Thomé, R.G. Atrazine promotes immunomodulation by melanomacrophage centre alterations in spleen and vascular disorders in gills from Oreochromis niloticus. Aquat. Toxicol. 2018, 202, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Bernieri, T.; Rodrigues, D.R.; Randon Barbosa, I.; Perassolo, M.S.; Grolli Ardenghi, P.; da Barros Silva, L. Effect of pesticide exposure on total antioxidant capacity and biochemical parameters in Brazilian soybean farmers. Drug Chem. Toxicol. 2021, 44, 170–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Mori, N.C.; Horn, R.C.; Oliveira, C.; Leal, P.A.P.; Golle, D.P.; Koefender, J.; Bortolotto, J.; Dias, H.M. Alterações bioquímicas e toxicológicas de agricultores familiares da região do Alto Jacuí, Rio Grande do Sul. Sci. Med. 2015, 25, 20999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Wilhelm, C.M.; Calsing, A.K.; da Silva, L.B. Assessment of DNA damage in floriculturists in southern Brazil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2015, 22, 8182–8189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Alves, J.S.; DA Silva, F.R.; DA Silva, G.F.; Salvador, M.; Kvitko, K.; Rohr, P.; DOS Santos, C.E.I.; DIAS, J.F.; Henriques, J.A.P.; Silva, J. DA Investigation of potential biomarkers for the early diagnosis of cellular stability after the exposure of agricultural workers to pesticides. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2016, 88, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Cattelan, M.D.P.; Maurer, P.; Garcia, F.; Berro, L.F.; Machado, M.M.; Manfredini, V.; da Piccoli, J.C.E. Occupational exposure to pesticides in family agriculture and the oxidative, biochemical and hematological profile in this agricultural model. Life Sci. 2018, 203, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Jacobsen-Pereira, C.H.; Cardoso, C.C.; Gehlen, T.C.; Regina Dos Santos, C.; Santos-Silva, M.C. Immune response of Brazilian farmers exposed to multiple pesticides. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 202, 110912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Smith, M.T.; Guyton, K.Z.; Gibbons, C.F.; Fritz, J.M.; Portier, C.J.; Rusyn, I.; DeMarini, D.M.; Caldwell, J.C.; Kavlock, R.J.; Lambert, P.F.; et al. Key Characteristics of Carcinogens as a Basis for Organizing Data on Mechanisms of Carcinogenesis. Environ. Health Perspect. 2016, 124, 713–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Extra Classe Pesquisas Associam Câncer ao Uso Intensivo de Agrotóxicos nas Lavouras. Available online: https://www.extraclasse.org.br/saude/2018/05/pesquisas-associam-cancer-ao-uso-intensivo-de-agrotoxicos-nas-lavouras/#:~:text=Pesquisasassociamcânceraousointensivodeagrotóxicosnaslavouras,-PorTomBelmonte&text=AagricultoraFabianeLange%2C35,pe (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  108. Instituto Nacional do Câncer Agrotóxicos. Available online: https://www.inca.gov.br/exposicao-no-trabalho-e-no-ambiente/agrotóxicos (accessed on 1 June 2021).
  109. G1 MP Apura Presença de 27 Agrotóxicos que Causam Câncer e Malformação Fetal na Água que Abastece Cuiabá. Available online: https://g1.globo.com/mt/mato-grosso/noticia/2019/05/13/mp-apura-presenca-de-27-agrotoxicos-que-causam-cancer-e-malformacao-fetal-na-agua-que-abastece-cuiaba.ghtml (accessed on 3 May 2021).
  110. Mokarizadeh, A.; Faryabi, M.R.; Rezvanfar, M.A.; Abdollahi, M. A comprehensive review of pesticides and the immune dysregulation: Mechanisms, evidence and consequences. Toxicol. Mech. Methods 2015, 25, 258–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. dos Santos Mendonça, J.; Vieira, L.G.; Valdes, S.A.C.; Vilca, F.Z.; Tornisielo, V.L.; Santos, A.L.Q. Effects of the exposure to atrazine on bone development of Podocnemis expansa (Testudines, Podocnemididae). Ecotoxicology 2016, 25, 594–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Daisley, B.A.; Trinder, M.; McDowell, T.W.; Welle, H.; Dube, J.S.; Ali, S.N.; Leong, H.S.; Sumarah, M.W.; Reid, G. Neonicotinoid-induced pathogen susceptibility is mitigated by Lactobacillus plantarum immune stimulation in a Drosophila melanogaster model. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 2703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Costa, C.; Briguglio, G.; Catanoso, R.; Giambò, F.; Polito, I.; Teodoro, M.; Fenga, C. New perspectives on cytokine pathways modulation by pesticide exposure. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 2020, 19, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Giambò, F.; Teodoro, M.; Costa, C.; Fenga, C. Toxicology and Microbiota: How Do Pesticides Influence Gut Microbiota? A Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Akdis, C.A. Does the epithelial barrier hypothesis explain the increase in allergy, autoimmunity and other chronic conditions? Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2021, 21, 739–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Blacher, E.; Bashiardes, S.; Shapiro, H.; Rothschild, D.; Mor, U.; Dori-Bachash, M.; Kleimeyer, C.; Moresi, C.; Harnik, Y.; Zur, M.; et al. Potential roles of gut microbiome and metabolites in modulating ALS in mice. Nature 2019, 572, 474–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Dalbo, J.; Filgueiras, L.A.; Mendes, A.N.; Dalbo, J.; Filgueiras, L.A.; Mendes, A.N. Effects of pesticides on rural workers: Haematological parameters and symptomalogical reports. Ciênc. Saúde Colet. 2019, 24, 2569–2582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Piccoli, C.; Cremonase, C.; Koifman, R.; Koifman, S.; Freire, C. Occupational exposure to pesticides and hematological alterations: A survey of farm residents in the south of brazil | Exposição ocupacional a agrotóxicos e alterações hematológicas: Estudo transversal em moradores rurais do Sul do Brasil. Ciênc. Saude Colet. 2019, 24, 2325–2340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Cestonaro, L.V.; Garcia, S.C.; Nascimento, S.; Gauer, B.; Sauer, E.; Göethel, G.; Peruzzi, C.; Nardi, J.; Fão, N.; Piton, Y.; et al. Biochemical, hematological and immunological parameters and relationship with occupational exposure to pesticides and metals. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 29291–29302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Pizzatti, L.; Kawassaki, A.C.B.; Fadel, B.; Nogueira, F.C.S.; Evaristo, J.A.M.; Woldmar, N.; Teixeira, G.T.; Da Silva, J.C.; Scandolara, T.B.; Rech, D.; et al. Toxicoproteomics Disclose Pesticides as Downregulators of TNF-α, IL-1β and Estrogen Receptor Pathways in Breast Cancer Women Chronically Exposed. Front. Oncol. 2020, 10, 1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Tichati, L.; Trea, F.; Ouali, K. Potential Role of Selenium against Hepatotoxicity Induced by 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid in Albino Wistar Rats. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2020, 194, 228–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Bernieri, T.; Rodrigues, D.; Barbosa, I.R.; Ardenghi, P.G.; Basso da Silva, L. Occupational exposure to pesticides and thyroid function in Brazilian soybean farmers. Chemosphere 2019, 218, 425–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Bernieri, T.; Moraes, M.F.; Ardenghi, P.G.; Basso da Silva, L. Assessment of DNA damage and cholinesterase activity in soybean farmers in southern Brazil: High versus low pesticide exposure. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2020, 55, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Lermen, J.; Bernieri, T.; Rodrigues, I.S.; Suyenaga, E.S.; Ardenghi, P.G. Pesticide exposure and health conditions among orange growers in Southern Brazil. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B 2018, 53, 215–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. do Nascimento, F.P.; Kuno, R.; Lemes, V.R.R.; Kussumi, T.A.; Nakano, V.E.; Rocha, S.B.; de Oliveira, M.C.C.; de Albuquerque Kimura, I.; Gouveia, N. Organochlorine pesticides levels and associated factors in a group of blood donors in São Paulo, Brazil. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2017, 189, 380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Sifakis, S.; Androutsopoulos, V.P.; Tsatsakis, A.M.; Spandidos, D.A. Human exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals: Effects on the male and female reproductive systems. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2017, 51, 56–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Hernández, A.F.; Parrón, T.; Tsatsakis, A.M.; Requena, M.; Alarcón, R.; López-Guarnido, O. Toxic effects of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level: Their relevance to human health. Toxicology 2013, 307, 136–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. De Silva, H.J.; Samarawickrema, N.A.; Wickremasinghe, A.R. Toxicity due to organophosphorus compounds: What about chronic exposure? Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2006, 100, 803–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  129. Perry, M.J.; Venners, S.A.; Chen, X.; Liu, X.; Tang, G.; Xing, H.; Barr, D.B.; Xu, X. Organophosphorous pesticide exposures and sperm quality. Reprod. Toxicol. 2011, 31, 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Yucra, S.; Rubio, J.; Gasco, M.; Gonzales, C.; Steenland, K.; Gonzales, G.F. Semen quality and reproductive sex hormone levels in Peruvian pesticide sprayers. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 2006, 12, 355–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Cremonese, C.; Piccoli, C.; Pasqualotto, F.; Clapauch, R.; Koifman, R.J.; Koifman, S.; Freire, C. Occupational exposure to pesticides, reproductive hormone levels and sperm quality in young Brazilian men. Reprod. Toxicol. 2017, 67, 174–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Santos, R.; Piccoli, C.; Cremonese, C.; Freire, C. Thyroid and reproductive hormones in relation to pesticide use in an agricultural population in Southern Brazil. Environ. Res. 2019, 173, 221–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Peiris-John, R.J.; Wickremasinghe, R. Impact of low-level exposure to organophosphates on human reproduction and survival. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2008, 102, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Selevan, S.G.; Kimmel, C.A.; Mendola, P. Identifying critical windows of exposure for children’s health. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108, 451–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Ueker, M.E.; Silva, V.M.; Moi, G.P.; Pignati, W.A.; Mattos, I.E.; Silva, A.M.C. Parenteral exposure to pesticides and occurence of congenital malformations: Hospital-based case-control study. BMC Pediatr. 2016, 16, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  136. Sena, T.R.R.; Dourado, S.S.F.; Lima, L.V.; Antoniolli, Â.R. The hearing of rural workers exposed to noise and pesticides. Noise Health 2018, 20, 23–26. [Google Scholar]
  137. Sena, T.R.; Dourado, S.; Antoniolli, Â. Audição em altas frequências em trabalhadores rurais expostos a agrotóxicos. Ciênc. Saúde Colet. 2019, 24, 3923–3932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Mattiazzi, Â.L.; Caye, J.L.; Frank, J.G.; Endruweit Battisti, I.D. Hearing screening and cholinesterase activity among rural workers exposed to pesticides. Rev. Bras. Med. Trab. 2019, 17, 239–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  139. Cazé, A.; Lacerda, A.; Lüders, D.; Conto, J.; Marques, J.; Leroux, T. Perception of the Quality of Life of Tobacco Growers Exposed to Pesticides: Emphasis on Health, Hearing, and Working Conditions. Int. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 2019, 23, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  140. Milani, P.; Franca, D.; Balieiro, A.G.; Faez, R.; Milani, P.; Franca, D.; Balieiro, A.G.; Faez, R. Polymers and its applications in agriculture. Polim. E Tecnol. 2017, 27, 256–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Tomiazzi, J.S.; Pereira, D.R.; Judai, M.A.; Antunes, P.A.; Favareto, A.P.A. Performance of machine-learning algorithms to pattern recognition and classification of hearing impairment in Brazilian farmers exposed to pesticide and/or cigarette smoke. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2019, 26, 6481–6491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Muñoz-Quezada, M.T.; Lucero, B.A.; Barr, D.B.; Steenland, K.; Levy, K.; Ryan, P.B.; Iglesias, V.; Alvarado, S.; Concha, C.; Rojas, E.; et al. Neurodevelopmental effects in children associated with exposure to organophosphate pesticides: A systematic review. Neurotoxicology 2013, 39, 158–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  143. Roberts, J.R.; Dawley, E.H.; Reigart, J.R. Children’s low-level pesticide exposure and associations with autism and ADHD: A review. Pediatr. Res. 2019, 85, 234–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Ross, S.M.; McManus, I.C.; Harrison, V.; Mason, O. Neurobehavioral problems following low-level exposure to organophosphate pesticides: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 2013, 43, 21–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Mostafalou, S.; Abdollahi, M. Pesticides: An update of human exposure and toxicity. Arch. Toxicol. 2017, 91, 549–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Blair, A.; Ritz, B.; Wesseling, C.; Beane Freeman, L. Pesticides and human health. Occup. Environ. Med. 2015, 72, 81–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Campos, É.; Freire, C.; Novaes, C.O.; Koifman, R.; Koifman, S. Exposure to organochloride pesticides and the cognitive development of children and adolescents living in a contaminated area in brazil|Exposição a pesticidas organoclorados e desenvolvimento cognitivo em crianças e adolescentes residentes em uma area c. Rev. Bras. Saúde Matern. Infant. 2015, 15, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  148. De Azevedo, M.F.A.; Meyer, A. Tremor essencial em guardas de endemias expostos a agrotóxicos: Estudo caso-controle. Cad. Saude Publica 2017, 33, e00194915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  149. World Health Organization. The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44271 (accessed on 15 September 2021).
  150. Gunnell, D.; Knipe, D.; Chang, S.-S.; Pearson, M.; Konradsen, F.; Lee, W.J.; Eddleston, M. Prevention of suicide with regulations aimed at restricting access to highly hazardous pesticides: A systematic review of the international evidence. Lancet Glob. Health 2017, 5, e1026–e1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  151. Chowdhury, F.R.; Dewan, G.; Verma, V.R.; Knipe, D.W.; Isha, I.T.; Faiz, M.A.; Gunnell, D.J.; Eddleston, M. Bans of WHO Class I Pesticides in Bangladesh-suicide prevention without hampering agricultural output. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2018, 47, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Cha, E.S.; Chang, S.-S.; Gunnell, D.; Eddleston, M.; Khang, Y.-H.; Lee, W.J. Impact of paraquat regulation on suicide in South Korea. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2016, 45, 470–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Knipe, D.W.; Chang, S.-S.; Dawson, A.; Eddleston, M.; Konradsen, F.; Metcalfe, C.; Gunnell, D. Suicide prevention through means restriction: Impact of the 2008-2011 pesticide restrictions on suicide in Sri Lanka. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  154. da Silva, V.D.; de Mello, M.S.; Otero, U.B. Exposure to pesticides and mental disorders in a rural population of Southern Brazil. Neurotoxicology 2016, 56, 7–16. [Google Scholar]
  155. Gondim, A.P.; Nogueira, R.R.; Lima, J.G.B.; Lima, R.A.C.; Albuquerque, P.L.M.M.; do Veras, M.S.B.; Ferreira, M.A.D. Tentativas de suicídio por exposição a agentes tóxicos registradas em um Centro de Informação e Assistência Toxicológica em Fortaleza, Ceará, 2013|Suicide attempts by exposure to toxic agents registered in a Toxicological Information and Assistance Cent. Epidemiol. Serv. Saúde 2017, 26, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Conti, C.L.; Barbosa, W.M.; Simão, J.B.P.; Álvares-da-Silva, A.M. Pesticide exposure, tobacco use, poor self-perceived health and presence of chronic disease are determinants of depressive symptoms among coffee growers from Southeast Brazil. Psychiatry Res. 2018, 260, 187–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. (A) Study Flow of selected articles. (B) Type of the studies conducted about pesticides in Brazil between 2015 and March 2021 (8th of March). (C) The route of exposure to pesticides were grouped into three main categories: occupational, environmental, and accidental, as described by the authors of the articles included in this review.
Figure 1. (A) Study Flow of selected articles. (B) Type of the studies conducted about pesticides in Brazil between 2015 and March 2021 (8th of March). (C) The route of exposure to pesticides were grouped into three main categories: occupational, environmental, and accidental, as described by the authors of the articles included in this review.
Ijerph 19 03198 g001
Figure 2. Brazilian institutions that published studies about human exposure to pesticides from 2015 to March 2021, classified by regions. The 51 articles included in the systematic review were grouped according to the research institutions that carried the study.
Figure 2. Brazilian institutions that published studies about human exposure to pesticides from 2015 to March 2021, classified by regions. The 51 articles included in the systematic review were grouped according to the research institutions that carried the study.
Ijerph 19 03198 g002
Figure 3. Percentage of Brazilian geographical regions where the studies were conducted, from 2015 to March 2021. The 51 articles included in the systematic review were grouped according to the Brazilian regions where the research was conducted.
Figure 3. Percentage of Brazilian geographical regions where the studies were conducted, from 2015 to March 2021. The 51 articles included in the systematic review were grouped according to the Brazilian regions where the research was conducted.
Ijerph 19 03198 g003
Figure 4. Percentage of the different crops and function of pesticides described in the articles between 2015 and March 2021. The studies included in the systematic review were grouped according to (A) the type of crops that humans had contact with. The majority of the studies (47.6%) include different types of plantations such as vegetables and cereals, a classic sign of polyculture activity present in Brazil. (B) Function described by the authors or the pesticide package leaflet. Some of the chemicals mentioned have more than one function described; therefore, they were included in different categories.
Figure 4. Percentage of the different crops and function of pesticides described in the articles between 2015 and March 2021. The studies included in the systematic review were grouped according to (A) the type of crops that humans had contact with. The majority of the studies (47.6%) include different types of plantations such as vegetables and cereals, a classic sign of polyculture activity present in Brazil. (B) Function described by the authors or the pesticide package leaflet. Some of the chemicals mentioned have more than one function described; therefore, they were included in different categories.
Ijerph 19 03198 g004
Figure 5. Geographic distribution by percentage of the different crops described in the articles between 2015 and March 2021. The 51 studies included in the systematic review were grouped according to the type of crops and distributed according to the region’s occurrence in the percentage of total crops. The southern and southeastern regions of Brazil have a greater variety of monoculture plantations, while in other regions, polyculture stands out.
Figure 5. Geographic distribution by percentage of the different crops described in the articles between 2015 and March 2021. The 51 studies included in the systematic review were grouped according to the type of crops and distributed according to the region’s occurrence in the percentage of total crops. The southern and southeastern regions of Brazil have a greater variety of monoculture plantations, while in other regions, polyculture stands out.
Ijerph 19 03198 g005
Figure 6. The repertoire of effects observed in the studied populations exposed to pesticides. Illustration of the types of harmful effects on humans involved in the studies caused by the exposure to different types of pesticide mentioned in the articles. All the effects were cited at least once, with most of the effects being associated and mentioned in different studies.
Figure 6. The repertoire of effects observed in the studied populations exposed to pesticides. Illustration of the types of harmful effects on humans involved in the studies caused by the exposure to different types of pesticide mentioned in the articles. All the effects were cited at least once, with most of the effects being associated and mentioned in different studies.
Ijerph 19 03198 g006
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lopes-Ferreira, M.; Maleski, A.L.A.; Balan-Lima, L.; Bernardo, J.T.G.; Hipolito, L.M.; Seni-Silva, A.C.; Batista-Filho, J.; Falcao, M.A.P.; Lima, C. Impact of Pesticides on Human Health in the Last Six Years in Brazil. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3198. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063198

AMA Style

Lopes-Ferreira M, Maleski ALA, Balan-Lima L, Bernardo JTG, Hipolito LM, Seni-Silva AC, Batista-Filho J, Falcao MAP, Lima C. Impact of Pesticides on Human Health in the Last Six Years in Brazil. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(6):3198. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063198

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lopes-Ferreira, Monica, Adolfo Luis Almeida Maleski, Leticia Balan-Lima, Jefferson Thiago Gonçalves Bernardo, Lucas Marques Hipolito, Ana Carolina Seni-Silva, Joao Batista-Filho, Maria Alice Pimentel Falcao, and Carla Lima. 2022. "Impact of Pesticides on Human Health in the Last Six Years in Brazil" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 6: 3198. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063198

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop