Johannesburg, South Africa – Independent laboratory testing commissioned by the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) has found that pesticide residues are widespread in commonly consumed foods sold in South African supermarkets, including staple foods, fresh fruit and vegetables, and several products intended for infants and young children.
The findings are set out in a new briefing based on independent, South African National Accreditation System (SANAS)-accredited laboratory analysis of 43 everyday food products purchased between November 2025 and January 2026. The briefing presents verifiable residue data and examines how those findings compare with South African, Codex Alimentarius, European Union (EU), and default regulatory benchmarks.
The briefing, laboratory summary tables, and laboratory test certificates are publicly available here:
- Briefing paper: What’s really in our food?
- Laboratory-certified test results
- Summary table of results of food tested
Importantly, the briefing does not allege unlawful conduct by food producers or retailers, nor does it seek to quantify individual health risks. It provides an evidence base to inform public discussion and regulatory review of pesticide residues in food.
Key findings
- 86% of products tested contained at least one detectable pesticide residue on the applied analytical panels.
- Multiple residues were common, with 37 different pesticide active ingredients detected across the sample set. One widely consumed tomato sauce contained 14 different residues.
- 13 highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs)—substances internationally recognised for their intrinsic toxicity—were detected in 26 individual instances, including staple foods and foods consumed by children.
- 13 product–pesticide combinations exceeded at least one applicable regulatory maximum residue limit (MRL) or benchmarks, including South African MRLs, EU limits, Codex standards, or the default precautionary level of 0.01 mg/kg.
Cumulative and aggregate exposure—the “cocktail” problem
The briefing exposes a fundamental flaw in how pesticide residues are regulated: pesticides are assessed one‑by‑one and crop‑by‑crop, as if people eat single foods in isolation. In reality, people are exposed to mixtures of pesticides every day through the foods that make up their normal diets. Current standards do not meaningfully assess aggregate exposure (the same pesticide appearing across multiple foods in a single day) or cumulative exposure (different pesticides affecting the same organs or biological systems, such as the nervous system).
The test results show that this “cocktail effect” is not an abstract risk but a lived reality. Staple foods like maize meal and wheat flour, fresh produce such as tomatoes and berries, and foods marketed for infants and young children were all found to contain multiple pesticide residues. These residues overlap across a typical day’s meals, compounding exposure with each bite.
Children are especially at risk. Since they eat more food relative to their body weight and are in critical stages of development, children bear a disproportionate burden of combined pesticide exposure. Yet South Africa’s regulatory system still does not require routine assessment of aggregate or cumulative dietary exposure—even for foods that children consume daily. This gap leaves families unprotected and shifts the health burden onto those least able to absorb it.
Staple foods also show concerning residues
Testing revealed that maize meal and wheat products—the backbone of the South African diet—are already contaminated with multiple pesticide residues. These include the organophosphates Malathion and Dichlorvos, the herbicide glyphosate, and the synergist Piperonyl butoxide, a chemical known to enhance the toxicity of other pesticides. Several of these substances are classified as HHPs or are no longer approved for use on food crops in the EU. Since staple foods are eaten every day and in large quantities, they act as a constant baseline of exposure.
What may appear as “low” residues on paper can therefore translate into meaningful and persistent pesticide intake over time, long before any fruits or vegetables are added to the diet. The briefing highlights the stark implications for children. From maize and wheat products alone, a child may already reach nearly 23% of the acceptable daily intake for Malathion and 14% for Dichlorvos—before consuming any other foods. This underscores how regulatory limits, set on a pesticide-by-pesticide basis, fail to reflect real-world diets and real-world risk, particularly for children who rely heavily on staple foods.
Infant and toddler foods are not free from pesticide exposure
Of the nine infant and toddler food products tested, seven contained detectable pesticide residues, including substances that are internationally recognised as HHPs. This raises serious concerns about the everyday chemical exposures that babies and young children face from foods explicitly marketed as safe, nutritious, and suitable for early development.
The risks are well‑documented. An expert report prepared for the South African government has linked prenatal exposure to such pesticides with cognitive deficits in children, including impacts on learning, memory, and neurodevelopment. Yet these same chemicals continue to find their way into foods consumed during the most critical stages of growth.
This evidence underscores a profound regulatory failure: children are being exposed to hazardous pesticides at a time when their brains and bodies are least able to withstand harm, and parents are given no meaningful protection or warning through the current food safety system.
“Our aim was to generate independent, publicly available data on what pesticide residues are actually present in foods people eat every day,” said Zakiyya Ismail, Pesticide Coordinator at the African Centre for Biodiversity and lead author of the briefing. “It is disheartening to find pesticide residues are common across staples, fresh produce, and children’s foods, and that our current regulatory standards do not routinely assess how people are exposed through real-world diets.”
Why compliance does not equal protection
The briefing explains that MRLs are not health-based safety thresholds but regulatory tools primarily designed for compliance and trade monitoring. Compliance with an MRL does not necessarily mean that exposure is without concern—particularly where multiple residues occur together in a single product or where the same pesticide appears across several foods consumed in a day. In some cases, such as Malathion, the South African MRL is up to 160 times higher than the Codex standard, highlighting how existing residue limits prioritise regulatory compliance over meaningful consumer protection.
“What the data highlights is a gap between how exposure happens in reality and how residues are regulated,” Ismail says. “Current systems largely assess pesticides one at a time and one crop at a time. They do not routinely account for aggregate or cumulative exposure—especially for children, who eat more food relative to their body weight.”
Transparency and regulatory gaps
The briefing situates the test results within broader structural issues in pesticide governance, including:
- Absence of mandatory routine testing and public disclosure of food residue data,
- Lack of a publicly accessible, state-managed pesticide register,
- Limited public access to toxicological assessments used in pesticide approvals, and
- Outdated legislation and fragmented institutional responsibility across departments.
These issues raise questions of regulatory adequacy, transparency, and public accountability, rather than allegations of unlawful conduct.
Evidence-based recommendations
Based on the findings, the ACB calls for measured, evidence-based regulatory reforms, including:
- Stronger child-protective residue standards for foods intended for infants and young children;
- Prioritised review and progressive phase-out of HHPs where safer alternatives exist;
- Alignment of South African residue standards with more protective international benchmarks, where justified by evidence;
- Incorporation of aggregate and cumulative risk assessment into routine regulatory practice; and
- Improved transparency through public access to residue-monitoring data and pesticide registration information.
“This briefing is not about causing alarm. It is about advocating for and ensuring that regulatory systems keep pace with scientific understanding and reflect the realities of daily dietary exposure—particularly for children, whose protection should be a public health priority,” Ismail comments.
In the public interest
The ACB emphasises that the findings are presented in the public interest to inform evidence-based policy discussion, regulatory review, and strengthened consumer protection, consistent with South Africa’s Constitutional commitments to protect health, children’s best interests, and environmental well-being.
We call on the Department of Health and Parliament to act urgently on these findings and prioritise protecting children and the public from avoidable pesticide exposure in everyday foods.
This round of laboratory testing builds on previous testing of South African staple foods for glyphosate. The ACB has urgently requested the Minister of Agriculture to deregister and ban the herbicide following explosive results showing glyphosate contamination in maize meal, wheat flour, bread, and baby cereal. Read more here.
ACB also published a South African compendium on pesticides, collating extensive scientific evidence demonstrating the harms caused by chemicals used in agricultural systems and other settings across South Africa. Read more here.
Media contact
Links
