Consumers have the right to warnings on the products they bring into their homes, including the right to know whether a pesticide is linked to cancer and other health harms.
Pesticide residue can lurk on a range of everyday products we wouldn’t immediately think of. Consumers deserve to know whether the pesticides they bring into their homes – ranging from insecticides to lawncare or petcare products – may pose the risk of long-term health harms.
Children are especially vulnerable to the chemicals that may be present in the pesticides designed to kill insects found in and around our homes. One study found an average of over 30 different pesticides in urine samples from every American child surveyed.
Although warnings often alert consumers to risks like eye or skin irritation, labels on residential-use pesticides don’t warn consumers about other risks associated with long-term exposures.
These risks include harm to the lungs, the brain, reproductive or hormone systems, breast cancer, and cancer in children. Even low levels of exposure can affect a young child’s behavioral development.
The Environmental Protection Agency reports that long-term exposure to some pesticides used in our homes can result in damage to the liver, kidneys and the hormone and nervous systems. For example, some pet care products designed to kill fleas and ticks contain a chemical that may be dangerous to consumers, especially children and pregnant people. Exposure to this chemical can increase the risk of learning disabilities.
The National Poison Control Centers report more than 28,000 household pesticide exposures to children under the age of 5 and over 35,000 adults each year. In 2024, pesticides were pregnant people’s third most common exposure to poison.
Consumers have the right to know if someone nearby is spraying a pesticide that can make them sick.
Consumers deserve to know whether someone living or working near their home has applied pesticides that can make people sick. In most states, consumers have no way of knowing whether a toxic pesticide has been sprayed nearby. Farmers and other commercial and government applicators are not required to notify their neighbors about potential risks.
Pesticides can travel from their intended target. Some pesticides can drift in the wind after they are applied. Others can volatilize and travel as an invisible vapor.
For example, federal experts using a screening model recently estimated that paraquat, a highly toxic pesticide that’s been linked to Parkinson’s disease, could reach levels of concern in air up to or beyond 2.7 miles from where it’s applied.
And though the people who spread the chemicals may be required to wear special protective gear, communities nearby remain unprotected.
Consumers have the right to know that what they feed their children is subject to the toughest pesticide safety standards.
Consumers deserve to know that the pesticides found on foods most commonly consumed by children – fruit like strawberries and blueberries and vegetables like broccoli and carrots – are subject to the strictest food safety standards.
Federal law requires by default that the EPA apply an additional safety factor when it sets limits on pesticide residues on fruits and vegetables. But it rarely does.
While pesticide residues detected on fruits and vegetables meet federal standards, they are not set low enough to ensure they are safe, especially for kids.
An EWG peer-reviewed study found the EPA fails to adequately consider children when setting limits for 90% of the most common pesticides.
Consumers have the right to expect their kids are protected from toxic pesticides at school and in local parks.
Consumers deserve to know children are safe when they are at school. They have the right to expect the pesticides sprayed in school, on school grounds and near schools are not toxic. Children face higher risk from pesticides because their developing bodies and nervous system are more vulnerable to chemical toxicity.
Despite mounting scientific evidence of these potential harms, school pesticide safety standards vary from state to state.
Some allow pesticide application within proximity to schools. EWG found 3,901 public elementary and middle schools located within just 200 feet of a crop field where pesticides could be sprayed.
Nearly 25,000 other schools are situated within a quarter-mile of a pesticide-treated crop field.
Consumers have the right to expect America’s pesticide regulators will act quickly to review toxic pesticides when other nations ban the chemicals.
When a pesticide is banned by another country, U.S. consumers have the right to expect the EPA will quickly evaluate whether we should ban it too.
But dozens of pesticides, including those linked to serious health harms, such as cancer and Parkinson’s disease, have been banned by other nations – yet are still allowed for use in the U.S. And many will not be reviewed by the EPA for safety for years to come.
Consumers have the right to know where and when pesticides have been used and misused and when they’re detected in food and water.
Consumers have the right to know more about the impact and details of pesticide use, including especially:
- Where and how much is manufactured
- Where and how much is applied
- Which pesticides can be detected in food and water
- When spills may pose a risk to our health
Some of that information is publicly available. But it is often hard to find, and when it is, may be out of date.
And in most states, this kind of data about the location and quantities of manufacturing and application isn’t available at all.
Consumers deserve to know more about pesticides so they can protect their families.
Consumers have the right to seek justice when pesticides have caused harm.
The Supreme Court this year blocked many pesticide lawsuits, leaving consumers who have been harmed by a pesticide with fewer ways to hold pesticide corporations accountable. When pesticides have made us sick – and consumers can show their health was harmed because of their exposure to pesticides – they should have access to justice through the courts.
