The organization Pesticide Action Network Europe, along with 13 other entities, analyzed 59 samples of locally produced apples from 13 countries, including Spain. The results raised alarms in terms of environmental health.
The 93% of the apples studied contained at least one pesticide. Additionally, 85% contained residues of more than one compound at the same time, indicating frequent combined exposure.
According to the data released by Hogar sin tóxicos, each apple contained an average of three different pesticides. In some cases, up to seven substances were detected in a single piece of fruit.
Differences between countries and substances detected
The presence of multiple residues varies by the country analyzed. In eight states, all samples contained several pesticides simultaneously, revealing a widespread pattern.
In Spain, France, and Italy, 80% of the apples analyzed had more than one pesticide. In contrast, Denmark recorded 20% of samples with multiple residues and Belgium 50%.
The report also indicates that 71% of the apples were contaminated with pesticides classified by the European Union as highly toxic and considered “candidates for substitution.” Furthermore, 36% contained neurotoxic compounds and 64% included pesticides linked to persistent substances like PFAS.
Risks of the presence of pesticides in food
Experts warn that official evaluations often analyze each pesticide in isolation. However, in practice, consumers are exposed to combinations that can generate a cumulative or synergistic effect.
This so-called “cocktail effect” could amplify risks to the nervous system, hormonal balance, and child development. Therefore, the concern is greater in the case of babies and young children.
The report notes that if these apples were destined for processed baby foods, 93% would not comply with permitted limits. Consequently, it is recommended to prioritize local organic options, free of synthetic pesticides.
Debate on regulation and production
The document acknowledges the nutritional benefits of fruit but argues that the presence of toxic substances can limit its advantages. Therefore, it raises the need to improve legislation and production systems.
It also emphasizes that there are proven agricultural alternatives that reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous pesticides. In this sense, promoting agroecology appears as a concrete way to reduce the chemical load in food.
Finally, the report questions possible regulatory relaxations in the European Union and calls for stricter regulations. From an ecological perspective, transitioning to agricultural models less dependent on synthetic inputs is key to protecting biodiversity, public health, and soil quality.
