Cited by 59Agricultural safety and regulationsPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyPesticide Exposure and Toxicity

The 2009 European Union Report on Pesticide Residues in Food

Open access
European Food Safety Authority·2011·EFSA Journal

Abstract

The report presents the results of the control of pesticide residues in food commodities sampled during the calendar year 2009 in the 27 EU Member States and two EFTA countries (Iceland and Norway). The report also comprises the outcome of the consumer risk assessment of pesticide residues. Finally, the report provides some recommendations aiming to improve future monitoring programmes and enforcement of the European pesticide residue legislation. In total, more than 67,000 samples of nearly 300 different types of food were analysed for pesticide residues by national competent authorities. The total number of analytical determinations reported among all the participating countries amounted to more than 14,000,000. 97.4% of the samples complied with the legal maximum residue levels (MRLs) of pesticides. EFSA concluded that the long-term exposure of consumers did not raise health concerns. The short-term exposure assessment revealed that for 77 food samples analysed the acute reference dose (ARfD) might have been exceeded if the pertinent food was consumed in high amounts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2430

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Results of the short-term risk assessment ........................................................................... 18314732, 2011, 11, Downloaded from https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2430, Wiley Online Library on [11/09/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 2009, the highest number of different pesticides in one sample was 26 (found by the Netherlands in a sample of processed grapes (raisins) from Turkey). Without knowing the details of the sample, only assumptions can be made regarding the reason for the high number of pesticides in this sample. The high number of pesticides is probably the result of mixing lots of different producers. Multiple residues were reported by all reporting countries. 3 residues: 5.9% 4 residues: 3.8% 5 residues: 2.2% 6 residues: 1.3% 7 residues: 0.8% >7 residues: 1.2% 2 residues: 10.0% 1 residue: 17.4% No measurable residues: 57.5% REFERENCES BfR (Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung), 2009. BfR-Modell zur Berechnung der Aufnahme von Pflanzenschutzmittel-Rückständen. Information Nr. 026/2009 des BfR vom 1. Juli 2009. http://www.bfr.bund.de/cd/10196.
  2. ENV/JM/MONO(2009)30 18314732, 2011, 11, Downloaded from https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2430, Wiley Online Library on [11/09/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
  3. WHO 2009. Dietary exposure assessment of chemicals in food. Report of a joint FAO/WHO Consultation of 2-6 May 2005 published by FAO/WHO 2009. Annapolis, Maryland, USA http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2008/9789241597470_eng.pdf 18314732, 2011, 11, Downloaded from https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2430, Wiley Online Library on [11/09/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Authority, E. F. S.
Corresponding author
European Food Safety Authority
Venue
EFSA Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-11
Volume
9
Issue
11
ISSN
1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4240429025
Cited by
59
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
FWCI
12.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EFSA Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Pesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity
Keywords
pesticide residues, food safety, consumer risk assessment, acute reference dose, short-term exposure, long-term exposure, food monitoring, European Union

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review