Paraquat at 63-the story of a controversial herbicide and its regulations: It is time to put people and public health first when regulating paraquat.
Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials
Systematic review of policy and public health intervention studies (by design analogy, not clinical CEBM).
PubMed 40993561 · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-23830-w
What was done
The authors conducted a systematic review of articles and country-specific regulatory databases to evaluate the global regulatory status of the herbicide paraquat. They assessed interventions intended to mitigate public health harms, focusing on the impact of regulatory actions (including restrictions, phase-outs, and market bans) on the incidence of poisoning and mortality.
What was found
At least 74 countries do not authorise paraquat in their markets. Complete national and regional bans and phase-outs were effective at reducing paraquat poisonings and deaths. In contrast, partial restrictions on the use and application of paraquat did not reliably result in significant reductions in poisoning or suicide mortality. The abstract notes reductions in harm without an effect on agriculture, but provides no specific quantitative effect estimates or sample counts.
Why it matters
This paper consolidates global evidence showing that comprehensive market bans, rather than partial application controls, are necessary to prevent paraquat-related poisonings and suicide mortality without disrupting agriculture.
Limits
The abstract provides no numerical data, effect sizes, statistical measures, or the exact number of studies reviewed. The underlying findings rely on population-level observational and regulatory data, which carry inherent risks of ecological confounding.
Cited by
- supports Over 70 countries globally have banned or significantly restricted the agricultural use of the herbicide paraquat.