Malathion

About this database

By law, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must ensure pesticide use complies with health and environmental standards. It is currently conducting new registration reviews for some two-dozen organophosphates that must be done by October 2022. As the deadline looms, Earthjustice reviewed and extracted data from 17 organophosphate human health risk assessments, as well as agricultural pesticide usage data from the United States Geological Survey. The 17 organophosphate pesticides are acephate, bensulide, chlorethoxyfos, chlorpyrifos, chlorpyrifos-methyl, coumaphos, diazinon, dichlorvos, dicrotophos, dimethoate, ethoprophos, malathion, naled, phorate, phosmet, terbufos, and tribufos. The goal was to document the location and amount of organophosphate pesticide usage in the United States, in addition to the dangerous health effects associated with exposure. These 17 organophosphates were selected due to their known harmful health effects and/or widespread use. Download the data

On EPest-Low and EPest-High Estimates

The United States Geological Survey calculated pesticide use estimates by applying pesticide-by-crop use rates to the harvested acreage for each crop in each Crop Reporting District (“CRD”).

USGS EPest-low and EPest-high estimates indicate a range of crop-specific pesticide use based on surveyed data obtained by each state, except for the state of California.

• EPest-low estimates rely on models that assume zero use for any crop where pesticide use data was not reported within a CRD, and thus more accurately reflect state-based pesticide use restrictions.
• On the other hand, EPest-high estimates rely on pesticide use data from crops in neighboring or regional CRDs to estimate unreported crop-specific pesticide use data. Thus, EPest-high estimates are more likely to reflect restricted pesticide uses.

The state tabular data in this database and the maps on main database page display EPest-low estimates. The detailed database maps display views of both EPest-low and EPest-high estimates.

Note that all pesticide use estimates indicated in the database maps reflect only agricultural crop usage in 2017 (the most recent year available from USGS at publication time of this database) and do not reflect universal usage.

Also note that the concentrations indicated in the detailed database maps reflect the USGS estimates allocated to total harvested acreage for all crops reported in the county and total harvested acreage for all crops reported in the state. For this reason, unless all harvested crops reported in the county or reported in the state were applied with organophosphate pesticides, the concentrations found on the maps will be dilute in comparison to the true concentration.

Methods for how the concentrations were calculated are described with the detailed database maps.

Pesticide use data pertaining to non-contiguous states and U.S. territories, including Hawaiʻi, Alaska, and Puerto Rico, were not made available by the USGS and were thus not reflected in this database. Geographic usage data was available only for 14 of the 17 organophosphate pesticides in this database; data was not available for chlorpyrifos-methyl, coumaphos, and dichlorvos.

On High Residue Foods

High residue foods are food products that contain high levels of pesticide residues. In this database, high residue foods were identified from food product samples tested by the USDA Pesticide Data Program (“PDP”) in 2018 and 2019. Food products were considered high residue if PDP-measured pesticide levels presumptively violated U.S. pesticide tolerance levels, or the maximum amount of pesticide residue allowed on food and determined to be safe by the EPA. This category will remain blank if no high residue foods were specifically identified from the USDA's PDP database.

Note: the PDP tests a relatively small sample of food products and does not test for all organophosphate pesticides. Thus, no detection does not necessarily mean that there are no residues of concern for a particular organophosphate pesticide. Moreover, current U.S. pesticide tolerance levels are not protective against neurodevelopmental harm in children, so detections at or below tolerance levels do not indicate no harm.

On Farmworkers

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers farmworkers, also referred to as “occupational field workers” or “post-application workers,” as individuals who perform post-application activities in previously treated fields but do not directly apply pesticides themselves. EPA typically evaluates exposures to farmworkers from dermal absorption of pesticide residues and/or inhalation of volatilized pesticides or resuspended dusts/particulates that occur in fields where pesticides were used.

On Pesticide Handlers

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers pesticide handlers, also referred to as “occupational handlers,” as individuals who are involved in the pesticide application process. Pesticide handlers can experience varying exposures to pesticides due to the distinct job functions or tasks related to pesticide application, which include mixing pesticide formulations, loading pesticide application apparatuses, and applying liquid or granular pesticides to fields. EPA typically evaluates exposures to pesticide handlers from dermal absorption of pesticide residues and/or inhalation of volatilized pesticides generated during the application process.

On Residential Bystander Exposures

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assessed risks to residential bystanders, or people who live near areas where pesticides are applied. In the organophosphate pesticide risk assessments summarized in this database, EPA evaluated exposure to residential bystanders either from inhalation of volatilized pesticides in post-application or ambient air, or from ingestion or dermal absorption of pesticide residues resulting from spray drift. EPA defines spray drift as “the movement of pesticide dust or droplets through the air at the time of application or soon after, to any site other than the area intended.”

In the organophosphate pesticide risk assessments summarized in this database, EPA assumed that direct inhalation of pesticides from spray drift would not occur by residential bystanders due to existing product label language that is intended to prevent direct exposures. As such, EPA did not consider inhalation of pesticides from spray drift as an exposure route of concern for residential bystanders.

Data Sources

Regulatory history: EPA Risk Evaluations available on Regulations.gov. State usage: USGS. Crops usage: USGS. Percentage of crops treated: EPA Risk Evaluations available on Regulations.gov. Human health effects: EPA Risk Evaluations available on Regulations.gov. High risk exposure routes: EPA Risk Evaluations available on Regulations.gov. Registered uses: EPA Risk Evaluations available on Regulations.gov. Barplot usage charts: USGS. U.S. Tolerances and Commodities: Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR Part 180).

Icon Credits

From the Noun Project. Created by Léa Lortal (cells); priyanka (hypothalamus); popcornarts (brain); Sergey Demushkin (fetus); Alice Design (fork & spoon); Luis Prado (farmworker); yulianingsih, ID (pesticide handler); Matt Brooks (bystander); Musmellow (residential); Teewara soontorn (spray drift); Yu luck (pest control); Evan MacDonald (cilantro); Julia Soderberg (basil); Kick (strawberry); susanna pozzi (spinach); Brand Mania (snap peas); Izwar Muis (raisins, mustard greens); Vectors Market (mango); Michał Czekała (bell pepper); Sou (agricultural crops).

About Earthjustice

Since our founding in 1971, Earthjustice has been at the forefront of safeguarding the fundamentals of human health — the air we breathe, the food we eat and the water we drink. With more than 170 attorneys, Earthjustice's litigation holds polluters and the government accountable for following our nation's bedrock environmental laws, which exist to ensure widespread protections from pollution and toxic chemicals and to promote thriving communities. Alongside our clients and partners, Earthjustice's attorneys have fought — and succeeded — in banning some of the most dangerous chemicals from our food, homes, and workplaces. Learn more

Media Inquiries: Erin Fitzgerald, efitzgerald@earthjustice.org