Food production has been growing like never before, with the adoption of new technologies and the intensive use of agricultural pesticides, also known as pesticides, enabling greater productivity, generating very positive numbers for countries that invest the most in this segment, such as Brazil. However, the excessive use of agricultural pesticides has generated several problems for society. Given this context, the present work aims to analyze the scenario of deaths due to pesticide poisoning in Goiás, while the specific objectives include identifying the most affected areas, understanding patterns of use and evaluating the consequences on public health. These objectives aim to provide relevant insights for the formulation of more conscious and safe policies and practices in relation to the use of pesticides. To carry out this study, firstly, defining the type of research. From this, a bibliographic research methodology was used. At the end of the work it was found that, based on the study carried out in the State of Goiás, it was observed that due to the region having a large agricultural production, the use of pesticides is very significant, this causes not only poisoning and resulting diseases but also to a scenario of countless deaths, thus requiring more effective legislation, with the intention of seeking measures that reduce impacts on the environment as well as on humans, resulting from the large volume of pesticides used in the State of Goiás.

Keywords: deaths, intoxication, pesticides, goiás

The research addresses the impact of deaths due to poisoning by agricultural pesticides, popularly called agrochemicals, providing a comprehensive analysis of this scenario in the state of Goiás. Globally, the extensive use of agrochemicals has been a topic of discussion, raising concerns about the effects on human and environmental health. In Brazil, the issue of agrochemicals is significant, given the extensive use of these products in agriculture. In Goiás, this problem takes on particular contours, with its local implications and specific challenges.¹

Deaths from pesticide poisoning have been a growing concern worldwide, leading to debates about stricter regulations and public health impacts. In Brazil, as one of the world’s leading agricultural producers, the issue of pesticides is particularly significant. In Goiás, where agriculture is a vital economic force, the health and community impacts of these toxic substances are more pronounced, requiring detailed analysis.

Investigating this issue at a regional level is crucial to understanding the patterns, challenges, and direct impacts on local health. Proximity to agricultural areas and the specific dynamics of the region can present a unique picture of deaths from pesticide poisoning. The importance of studying this topic lies in the urgency of protecting the health of exposed populations and developing strategies to mitigate the risks associated with the use of these chemicals. Authors highlight the urgent need for detailed investigations to inform more effective public policies and promote safer agricultural practices.²

Thus, the general objective of this research is to analyze the scenario of deaths due to pesticide poisoning in Goiás, while the specific objectives include identifying the most affected areas, understanding the patterns of use and assessing the consequences on public health. These objectives aim to provide relevant insights for the formulation of more conscious and safer policies and practices regarding the use of pesticides.

Although pesticides are generally responsible for significantly reducing agricultural losses, there are intense debates regarding such chemical control. Given this context, the work is justified considering that many rural producers are exposed to possible harmful effects of pesticides, causing concern about what the consequences of this phenomenon will be in the long term.

Regarding the methodological approach in the research in question, it is worth noting that the present work aims to qualify the theme through a bibliographic survey that will be explained below.

It is not new that there are insects that cause real disasters in plantations, there are records that date that the first compounds that focused on inhibiting the actions of insects in plantations were used between 1500 and 1000 BC. These compounds have both inorganic origin, such as: arsenic, borax, copper, lead, sulfur, fluorine, mercury and zinc, as well as organic compounds formed by elements based on pyrethrin, extracted from chrysanthemum leaves, nicotine acquired from tobacco leaves and rotenone, obtained from the roots of the timbó vine.³

As history progressed, at the end of the 19th century, as well as in the first three decades of the 20th century, there was a great growth attributed to the production and commercialization of chemical products in a large part of Europe, as well as in the United States, this production aimed to eliminate several pests that affected the development and consequently the agricultural production of that period, another point to be observed for the intensification of the production of chemical products was to combat epidemics.⁴

According to Schwamborn,³

These first substances, produced from toxic metals, were classified as being part of the first generation of pesticides and due to their toxicity, both environmental and human, they are no longer used today as they have been replaced by organic compounds with less acute toxicity.³

This process of evolution was possible due to the pesticide industry having as parameters the evolution of the chemical industry, which in turn was only possible through the First World War, which impacted several segments. In the period surrounding the First World War there was a great race to create more efficient weapons, issues that encouraged scientists to carry out research with the aim of creating new weapons, to the detriment of this scenario, numerous toxic molecules were developed with the purpose of attacking enemy areas and destroying them.⁵

A few years later, it was identified that weapons created to combat enemies by attacking their supplies could also combat pests that caused great damage to agricultural crops. Thus, in the early 1930s, the first commercialization of pesticides created by organic synthesis took place. As a result of this historical fact, the second generation of pesticides was born at that time composed of organochlorine and organophosphate insecticides, as well as synthetic carbamates and pyrethroids.⁶

Later, with the end of the Second World War, it was found that the research carried out during that period created several molecules that could be used in other ways, that is, for peaceful purposes.⁷

In this context, companies in the chemical segment that were highly relevant at the time sought to create subsidiary organizations with the purpose of producing organosynthetic pesticides as a strategic formula for positioning themselves in the market.

For Schwamborn,³

The growth strategy adopted by these large corporations is directly linked to the processes of modernization of agriculture, which are based on the intensive use of chemical, biological and mechanical inputs.³

In view of this scenario, Lopes adds that there was a shift in activities in the post-Second World War period towards other sectors, mainly towards areas of agriculture, with the argument being the production of chemical products that would eliminate pests that affected plantations.⁸

According to Oliveira e Silva, at the end of the Second World War

[...] most of the arms industries sought to give other applications to their products: the elimination of agricultural and livestock pests and endemic diseases transmitted by vectors. Public Health helped to legitimize the introduction of these toxic products and to hide their harmfulness under the claim of “combating” these vectors.⁹

With the creation of these companies, the first products began to appear. In the early 1940s, the organochlorine (OC) insecticide DDT was introduced to the market. Over time, it became the most commercialized insecticide in the world. In the 1960s, production of the insecticide DDT reached its peak, but 13 years later, the United States banned the product domestically, due to research that indicated that the product caused environmental damage.¹⁰

According to Souza,¹¹

O Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane (DDT) has become one of the best-known low-cost insecticides. It began to be used in World War II to eliminate insects and combat diseases transmitted by them, such as Malaria, Typhus and Yellow Fever. It was also used by farmers to control agricultural pests.¹¹

Large-scale production of DTT began in 1945, and it was widely used in agriculture as a pesticide for about 25 to 30 years. The quantity was so large that it was estimated that each American citizen ingested, through food, an average of 0.28 mg per day in 1950.¹²

It is worth mentioning that the ban was made internally, meaning that the insecticide DDT continued to be sold, mainly in South America. Peru, for example, imported 300 tons of the pesticide. Brazil, in turn, used the product until mid-2009, when it also banned its import and use.³

The 1950s began with serious food shortages in several countries around the world. As a result, it was necessary to create means to boost agriculture. In order to increase food production, hybrid grains were created. These grains were seen as an innovation that brought great results, as they presented a better response to the use of insecticides and fertilizers. During this period, the significant increase in the use of insecticides led to greater productivity.³

For Carneiro et al, given the need for greater food production, in addition to the elimination of pests in agriculture, the use of herbicides contributed to reducing vegetation that competed for space with the crop of interest, being identified as an opportunity for new crop models as well as for the insertion of insecticides in the market.¹³

At the end of the 1980s, through technological advances in agriculture, the first studies related to the development of genetically modified foods were proposed and developed, resulting in an increase in agricultural demand.

For Schwamborn.³

As a result, in 1996, genetically modified varieties of soybeans, corn and cotton tolerant to glyphosate were approved for planting in the US. Thus, in the following years, herbicide-tolerant genetically modified crops gained market share and in 2016 accounted for approximately 56% of global glyphosate use.³

However, it is clear that technology, as well as greater awareness, has brought many benefits to agriculture, with the so-called Green Revolution. However, the increase in the use of pesticides has generated several impacts, at a social level. For example, the traditional way of working in the fields has been directly impacted, especially in developing countries. While it has brought progress, it has also generated greater exposure of rural workers, significantly affecting their health.¹⁴

These impacts caused countries to discuss the use of pesticides due to the major problems generated for the environment as well as human health. These debates led to the creation of a convention in 2001 to discuss the issue, called the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (CETESB).

At this meeting, 92 countries were present, including Brazil, and the result was a commitment created by the European Community with the aim of banning and reducing the use of chemical compounds called Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).

Pesticides in Brazil

It was between the 1960s and 1970s that the use of pesticides began in Brazil, being intensified more intensively for vector control in the field of public health.

In agriculture, pesticides have evolved based on technological advances that enabled the construction of agrochemical equipment created with the aim of intensifying the production process, a period that was called the green revolution.¹⁰

According to the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), the use of pesticides was more prominent in the second half of the 20th century, with the use of these products in agriculture, which saw great progress in controlling pests and diseases that affected crops, a process that is still used today, with significant results in terms of production. However, the widespread use of these products generates enormous concern among public bodies regarding the social and environmental impact that they have on society.¹⁵

However, it is important to understand what pesticides are and why they are used. According to Bueno, pesticides are:

Synthetic chemicals used to kill insects, larvae, fungi, and ticks under the pretext of controlling diseases caused by these vectors and regulating vegetation growth, both in rural and urban environments. Pesticides are used in both agricultural and non-agricultural activities. Agricultural activities are related to the production sector, whether in land clearing and soil preparation, in the crop monitoring stage, in the storage and processing of agricultural products, in pastures and in forests. Non-agricultural use is carried out in native forests or other ecosystems, such as lakes and ponds, for example.¹²

Regarding the legislation initially adopted in the production of pesticides in Brazil, Decree No. 24,114 of 1934 was used, referring to the Secretariat of Plant Health Defense of the Ministry of Agriculture, which was created before the use of pesticides in Brazil. It is worth noting that this term pesticide, also known as agricultural defense, had not been mentioned at the time. Thus, what was adopted in Brazil was the term insecticides and fungicides.

However, for Schwamborn,

Given the incipience of decree No. 24,114/1934, it did not present any toxicological classification or inspection structure, which meant that the world's leading companies in the production of pesticides found it easy to register and license their products, as well as to set up production units in the country.³

As a result of this Decree, between 1954 and 1960, approximately 2,045 products had their registration released by the Plant Health Defense Service, and in 1975, several companies considered to be of large global size and which focused on the production of pesticides established themselves in Brazil.³

This release resulted in the expansion of the pesticide industry in Brazil, reaching prominent positions worldwide. From 1960 to 1980, it reached its peak, ranking between 3rd and 5th in terms of sales of these chemical products.⁶

At the same time, in 1975, the II National Development Plan emerged, which would facilitate the installation of pesticide industries in the national territory, through sectoral policies, which promoted numerous incentives for the use of products that offered a greater possibility for agriculture to develop more quickly, in addition to the National Agricultural Defensives Program (PNDA).¹⁶

It is worth noting that there were other factors that contributed to the increase in consumption, such as:

The industrialization of the Brazilian economy, through the import substitution strategy;

a modernization of the technical-productive base of national agriculture; public policies for agricultural financing and the productive internationalization strategies of leading companies in the agrochemicals market worldwide.³

In parallel with the growth of insecticide production in Brazil, the years 1965 to 1985 were marked as the period of modernization of Brazilian agriculture. Initially, grain production was the flagship, registering growth of over 123.8%, with production reaching 25,100,000 tons in 1965, and 20 years later in 1985 it registered 56,190,000 tons. In that period, soybeans presented very low results according to the market; however, as a result of greater investments in the sector, in 1985 it reached a production of approximately 18,300,000 tons.¹⁷

Even with the modernization of agriculture, consequently to the development of the pesticide industry in Brazil, specific laws had not yet been created to provide more security for the sector, thus, the activities were still based on Decree No. 24,114/1934 (BRAZIL, 1934).

In view of this scenario, in order to ensure greater security in the process covering the agricultural sector and the use of pesticides in Brazil, Law No. 7,802 of 1989 was enacted in 1989, which was regulated by Decree No. 4,074/2002. However, the new laws created had more restrictions compared to the old ones, especially in relation to the registration of pesticides in Brazil.⁶

This was possible by involving new technologies, the registration processes became much more rigorous, with the aim of ensuring that chemical products did not affect the environment, much less human health. In this way, agricultural pesticides underwent toxicological evaluations to find out their real function and whether they could perform what was promised. Another point that was improved was in relation to their potential to cause damage to the environment, now having a classification.³

In the 1990s, the Plano Real was born, with it the country underwent stabilization, in that period the Brazilian currency was equal to the dollar, allowing numerous segments to compete with the foreign market on a more equal basis, including the agrochemical industry, which took advantage of that moment to import various assets at a much more competitive price, thereby also being able to reduce the sale value of its price nationwide.³

The same author also points out that in the early 2000s, the crops that benefited most from the consumption of pesticides were: coffee, sugar cane, citrus, corn and soybeans. However, among all of them, the one that benefited most was soybeans, accounting for about a third of pesticide consumption throughout the country.

Moraes, highlights that soybean cultivation reached such expressive numbers in relation to the use of pesticides, thus, at the end of the 2000s its production reached around 45% of all pesticide production sold in the country.¹⁸

And due to Brazil's great development in the agricultural sector in recent decades, as well as in the pesticide industry, in 2008, the country became the first in the ranking in relation to the commercialization of pesticides and consequently, moved the largest market in the world, even surpassing the United States.¹⁹

Pignati et al,²⁰ carried out a more in-depth analysis in relation to the most cultivated crops in Brazil that have a high consumption of pesticides. This study observed the following scenario;

Among 21 crops planted in Brazil in 2015, the one that occupied the largest area of ​​land was soybeans,

o corn and sugar cane, representing,

respectively, 42% (32,200,000ha), 21% (15,800,000ha) and 13% (10,100,000ha) of the entire planted area in the country [...] these three crops account for 76% of the entire planted area and are the crops that consumed the most pesticides in 2015, reaching 82% of the country's total consumption; soybeans account for 63%, corn for 13% and sugarcane for 5%.²⁰

The same authors also point out that, based on the crops observed, the Brazilian regions that concentrate the largest plantation as well as the greatest use of pesticides are: the central-west and southeast regions, in relation to the states, Mato Grosso (MT) is the state with the largest plantation, with approximately 13,900,000ha and in relation to the amount of pesticides used, approximately 207,000,000 liters (L), 15 L are used per hectare, followed by the second largest state in plantation and Paraná, with approximately 10,200,000ha using approximately 135,000,000L of pesticides, approximately 13 L for each hectare, and the third state with the largest plantation in the country is Rio Grande do Sul, with a planted sand of 8,500,000ha, using approximately 134,000,000L of pesticides, where 16 L is used for each hectare.²⁰

As can be seen in Brazil, the use of pesticides is considered very high, however, the argument used is associated with the great demand that the country has in the area of ​​agriculture, being seen as one of the largest food producers in the world, therefore, to maintain a plantation of this size, producers understand that the use of pesticides is inevitable. However, excessive use can generate numerous risks both to human health and to the environment.

While the use of pesticides has favored the intensification of food production, its effects are increasingly felt on human health and the environment. The indiscriminate use that has been occurring in recent decades, despite its beneficial effects in terms of productive gains, has brought great harm and undesirable effects to human health and the environment (EHRHARDT, 2020).

Based on this scenario, Lisboa, also points out other elements that aggravate this situation, such as the fact that two thirds of the total pesticides used are made available to agricultural sectors, affecting not only food but also the workers who handle these products, due to the daily exposure they suffer.²¹

Regarding health risks related to pesticides, Lopes and Albuquerque, highlight that (2018)

Currently, Brazil still has public policies that encourage the use and trade of pesticides, maintained by the influence of the ruralist caucus in the National Congress. Examples of this are the ridiculous cost of registering products with the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) (from R$180.00 to R$1,800.00) and the exemption, in most states, from the Tax on the Commercialization of Goods and Services (ICMS).⁸

As for the direct impacts on the physical integrity of the organisms of individuals exposed to the presence of these substances, the most common case is poisoning with the development of signs on the skin, vomiting and other irritations. According to the survey by Almeida et al.,¹⁵ there are 6.3 cases of pesticide poisoning for every 100,000 Brazilian inhabitants. This rate represents a total of more than 84,000 cases in 8 years (2007 to 2015). According to the authors, it is important to consider the underreporting of these numbers because the symptoms associated with pesticide poisoning can easily be associated with several other complications that can even develop over time – such as blindness, amputations and cancer, for example.

Epidemiology and statistics of deaths from pesticide poisoning in Goiás

The incidence of deaths related to pesticide poisoning in Goiás is a topic of growing concern, reflecting not only the challenges of modern agriculture but also the impacts on public health in the region. Epidemiological studies have provided a detailed view of this panorama, revealing important nuances about the victims, the pesticides involved, and the most affected areas.²²

The table below highlights the worrying scenario experienced in Goiás: Table 1

Demographic data point to a variety of victims, from agricultural workers to residents near crop areas. Distribution by age group and sex also reveals relevant information about the populations most vulnerable to these poisonings. Identifying demographic patterns is crucial to directing more effective prevention and intervention policies.²²

Furthermore, the analysis of the circumstances of poisonings provides an overview of the most common situations in which these events occur. Whether during direct handling of pesticides, application in fields or even accidental exposure, understanding these contexts is essential to implement more targeted preventive and educational measures.²²

Table 2 below describes the circumstances of poisonings in Goiás between 2005 and 2015 according to Neves.²³

Identifying the types of pesticides most associated with these deaths is another crucial aspect of this epidemiological analysis. This information not only allows us to understand which chemical substances are most implicated, but can also influence more specific regulatory and monitoring policies regarding the use of these products.²²

According to Morais et al.²²

The most commonly used pesticides belong to the organophosphate chemical group (97%) (3). Furthermore, acute pesticide poisoning ranks second among exogenous poisonings in the country. In the period from 2006 to 2011, most cases were due to insecticides (53% - organophosphates, pyrethroids, carbamates), followed by herbicides (34%), fungicides (5%), rodenticides (5%) and tickicides (3%).²²

The most affected geographic areas in Goiás are also a fundamental piece in this epidemiological puzzle, in this sense Jatai stood out as the region where most cases of poisoning occurred. The concentration of these incidents in certain regions may be linked to specific agricultural practices, climatic conditions or even the lack of adequate regulation in these areas.

These epidemiological data not only quantify the problem of deaths from pesticide poisoning in Goiás, but also provide a solid basis for more efficient prevention strategies and policies.

Understanding the extent and details of this situation allows the implementation of more targeted measures to reduce the impact of these substances on public health in the region.²²

Impacts on health and the environment

In this sense, the extensive use of pesticides in Goiás has generated significant concerns not only about human health, but also about local ecosystems. Detailed studies on the impacts of these substances reveal a complex web of consequences, ranging from direct health effects to substantial environmental damage. The effects on human health are diverse and worrying. Reports of neurological disorders, respiratory problems, dermatological complications and even cases of cancer are associated with exposure to these pesticides. The nature of the effects ranges from acute to chronic, with rural workers, agricultural communities and even consumers suffering the adverse impacts of these substances.²⁴

In addition to the direct effects on human health, pesticides pose a significant threat to the environment in Goiás. Contamination of soil, water and natural resources is a constant concern. Residues from chemicals used in agriculture can persist in the environment for long periods, affecting not only local biodiversity but also the quality of water resources and the health of ecosystems. Fauna and flora are also affected by pesticides, with reports of negative impacts on biological diversity and the food chain. Exposure to these elements over time can result in substantial ecological imbalances, with the potential to cause irreparable damage to the sustainability of ecosystems in Goiás.²⁴

A comprehensive understanding of these impacts is crucial for formulating more sustainable and safe agricultural policies and practices. Reducing the risks associated with pesticide use requires not only stricter regulations, but also educational and awareness-raising initiatives to promote safer and more environmentally sustainable alternative practices in Goiás agriculture.

Analyzing the impacts of pesticides on health and the environment in Goiás is a fundamental step towards addressing this problem effectively and responsibly. The search for alternatives that minimize these adverse effects and promote healthier and more sustainable agriculture is essential for the well-being of the population and the preservation of the region's natural resources.²⁴

Due to population growth in Brazil and around the world, in recent decades it has become increasingly important to ensure that agriculture produces significant yields per cultivated area. To meet this demand in the best possible way, it is necessary to prioritize not only increasing the level of productivity in agriculture, but also making technologies viable and promoting good agricultural practices.

Regarding the pesticide industry in Brazil, there is a significant insufficiency and lack of policies on this topic. Thus, it was possible to verify that the policies resulting from the production and consumption of pesticides in Brazil highlight a set of uncoordinated practices, in the industrial, agricultural, as well as commercial and environmental spheres. Although pesticides are generally responsible for significantly reducing agricultural losses, there is intense debate regarding such promoted chemical control.

In this sense, the present work portrayed a scenario where many rural producers are exposed to the possible harmful effects of pesticides, causing concern about what the long-term consequences of this phenomenon will be the present study aimed to analyze the scenario of deaths due to pesticide poisoning in Goiás, while the specific objectives were to identify the most affected areas, understand the patterns of use and evaluate the consequences for public health. These objectives aimed to provide relevant insights for the formulation of more conscious and safe policies and practices regarding the use of pesticides.

Therefore, based on the study carried out in the State of Goiás, it was observed that because the region has a large agricultural production, the use of pesticides is quite significant, which causes not only poisoning and resulting diseases but also a scenario of countless deaths, thus requiring more effective legislation, with the aim of seeking measures that reduce the impacts on the environment as well as on human beings, resulting from the large volume of pesticides used in the State of Goiás.

None.

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

None.

1. Queiroz GR, Neto FIA, Peres GM, et al. Epidemiological profile of exogenous pesticide poisoning in the municipality of Jataí, Goiás. Brazilian Journal of Health Review. 2020;3(4):8197–8211.
2. Lima TGR. Poisoning and deaths by pesticides in the State of Goiás, Brazil and legislative innovations. Ibero-American Journals of Health Law. 2018;7(1):229–249.
3. Schwamborn TM. Expansion of the agricultural frontier, use of pesticides and risks of human exposure to glyphosate in the metropolitan region of Santarém. 2019. 143 p. Master's degree (Master in Sustainable Development). University of Brasília, Brasília, 2019.
4. Carvalho MMX, Nodari ES, Nodari RO. Defensives” or “pesticides”? A history of the use and perception of pesticides in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil, 1950-2002. History, Sciences, Health- Sleeves. 2017;24(1):75–91.
5. Oliveira RFP. The development of Industrial Biotechnology in production processes in the state of Amazonas. 2023. 172 p. Thesis (Doctorate in Biotechnology) - Federal University of Amazonas, Manaus - AM, 2023.
6. Pelaez VM, Silva LR, Guimarães TA, et al. The (dis)coordination of policies for the agrochemicals industry in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Innovation. 2015;14:153–178.
7. Lima RO. Are the children of (R)evolution? Pesticides, transgenics, biofortification and socio-environmental conflicts in the face of food and environmental security. Confluences | Interdisciplinary Journal of Sociology and Law. 2020;22(1):120–141.
8. Lopes IS, Zonaro LD, Calvalcante M, et al. Pesticides: The threat of bee extinction in Brazil. JC at School Educational and Social Program: Science Feeding Brazil. 2018; p. 95–110.
9. Oliveira RP, Silva JMO. Pesticides: use, contamination and destination of packaging on family farms in the municipality of Paragominas - PA. 2017. Final course work (Degree in Agricultural Engineering) Federal Rural University of the Amazon, Paragominas - AM, 2017.
10. Barbosa LR. Use of Pesticides and its Impacts on Human Health and the Environment: a study with farmers from the Ribeirão Arara watershed in the municipality of Paranavaí, PR. 2014. 41f. Monograph (Specialization in Environmental Management in Municipalities). Federal Technological University of Paraná, Medianeira, 2014.
11. Souza G dos S, Costa LCA, Maciel AC, et al. Presence of pesticides in the atmosphere and risk to human health: a discussion for Environmental Health Surveillance. Cien Saude Colet. 2017;22(10):3269–3280.
12. Bueno N. Deputies call for an end to aerial spraying and a ban on the herbicide 2,4-D in SC. Alesc. 2018.
13. Carneiro FF, Rigotto R, Giraldo L, et al. Abrasco Dossier: a warning about the impacts of pesticides on health. EPSJV/Expressão Popular, 2015.
14. Serra LS, Mendes MRF, Soares MVA, et al. Green Revolution: reflections on the issue of pesticides. Revista Científica do Centro de Estudos em Desenvolvimento Sustentável da UNDB. 2016;1(4):2–25.
15. Almeida MD, Cavendish TA, Bueno PC, et al. The flexibilization of Brazilian pesticide legislation and the risks to human health: analysis of Bill No. 3,200/2015. Cad Saude Publica. 2017;33(7):e00181016.
16. Lignani LB, Brandão JLG. The dictatorship of pesticides: the National Agricultural Defensives Program and changes in pesticide production and consumption in Brazil, 1975-1985. Hist Cienc Saude-Manguinhos. 2022;29(2):337–359.
17. Frederico S. Globalized scientific agriculture and modern agricultural frontier in Brazil. Confins. 2013;17.
18. Moraes RF. Pesticides in Brazil: patterns of use, regulatory policy and prevention of capture regulatory. Ipea. 2019.
19. Rigotto RM, Aguiar ACP. Invisibility or invisibilization of the chronic effects of pesticides on health? Challenges to science and public policies. Human capabilities. 2016.
20. Pignati WA, Lima FANSE, Lara SS, et al. Spatial distribution of pesticide use in Brazil: a tool for Health Surveillance. Cien Saude Colet. 2017;20(10):3281–3293.
21. Lisbon ACLCL. Health risks to workers in the sugar and alcohol sector due to the use of pesticides: applicability of environmental law. 2017. p.114. Dissertation (master's degree) - Universidade Católica de Santos, Santos – SP, 2017.
22. Morais LTG de, Nascimento HA, Maya ACL, et al. Epidemiological profile of pesticide poisonings reported in the State of Goiás between 2011 and 2016. Brazilian Journal of Health Review. 2021;4(2):8520–8528.
23. Neves PDM, Mendonça MR, Bellini M, et al. Agricultural pesticide poisoning in the state of Goiás, Brazil, from 2005 to 2015: analysis of records in official information systems. Cien Saude Colet. 2020;25(7):2743–2754.
24. Tavares GG, Leal AC, Campos FI, et al. Territory of planting, harvesting and getting sick? Agricultural production, pesticides and illness in Goiás, Brazil (2000 to 2013). Sociedade & Natureza. 2022;32:362–372.