Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Pesticide residue legal standards for beverages: risk regulation and public perception

Khara Deanne Grieger, Stefan Trapp

    Research output: Working paper/PreprintWorking paperResearch

    Abstract

    Exposure to pesticide residues in dietary sources is a major concern of Europeans. Meanwhile, drinking water and food safety authorities establish and implement maximum residue levels (MRLs) for pesticides in drinking water and food. This study compares MRLs between EU, US and Codex authorities for
    both drinking water and other beverages, i.e. milk, juice and wine, investigating differences between authorites as well as between beverage types. These results were confronted with public perceptions towards pesticide residues in beverages, based on a consumer survey conducted in Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Seven frequently-occurring pesticides were selected for this study. Results show that since no specific MRLs for juice and wine exist, MRLs for the raw products were used instead. Furthermore, established MRLs are significantly greater for pesticides in beverages when compared to legal standards for drinking
    water. Maximum levels in drinking water, if available, are generally low (0.0001 mg/L in the EU), while MRLs for pesticides in milk, juice and wine range from 0.05 to 60 mg/L. At the same time, questionnaire participants were equally concerned about their exposure to pesticide residues in drinking water and other
    beverage types. These findings reveal some inconsistencies in setting legal maximum concentrations for pesticide residues in different dietary sources as well as between different drinking water and food safety authorities.
    Original languageEnglish
    Number of pages50
    Publication statusSubmitted - 2007

    Keywords

    • Pesticide residues
    • Drinking water
    • Beverages
    • Regulation
    • Consumer perception

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Pesticide residue legal standards for beverages: risk regulation and public perception'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this