Pesticides in food in Cyprus. 34 samples were found to have violated limits.

Pesticides in food in Cyprus were detected at concentrations exceeding EU limits in 61 of the 466 plant product samples tested in 2025. This represents 13.1% of the samples analyzed. After taking into account measurement uncertainty, 34 cases, or 7.3%, were considered violations, according to a report by the General State Laboratory.

In some samples, the consumer exposure assessment also indicated that the acute reference dose, used to assess short-term health risk, was exceeded. However, the mere detection of pesticide residues does not automatically indicate a violation of the law or harm to health. The laboratory director emphasized this difference in her explanations presented on October 16.

Pesticides in food in Cyprus – what does the research show?

The report covers inspections conducted in 2025. Food of plant and animal origin, both domestic and imported, was analyzed.

In the case of plant products, two results must be distinguished. The first includes samples for which the measured value was above the maximum permissible residue level, known as the MRL. The second takes into account the measurement uncertainty, i.e., the range of uncertainty associated with the laboratory result.

You should not add 13.1% and 7.3%. Both values describe the same studies, evaluated at different stages.

The inspection results should not be presented as a percentage of all food sold on the island. They describe the samples tested. Laboratory Director Revekka Kokkinofta indicated that the inspections focus on products more susceptible to pesticide residues and imported food, among other things.

Exceeding the limit and health risks

The MRL and the ARfD serve different purposes. The former serves to assess a product's compliance with regulations. The latter is used to estimate the risk resulting from short-term consumption of a given substance.

According to the report, seven samples had estimated exposures exceeding the ARfD for both adults and children. This included cypermethrin in grapes and spinach.

In three further cases the exceedance concerned the assessment for children and in one case the exceedance concerned the assessment for adults, due to residues in vine leaves in the brine.

These are risk assessment results, not information about confirmed poisoning of specific individuals. Exceeding the ARfD means that, given the assumptions made, adverse health effects cannot be ruled out.

Residues also in organic products

The most frequently detected substances included acetamiprid, cypermethrin, and tebuconazole. However, the frequency of detection alone does not indicate how many samples exceeded acceptable levels.

Remains were also found in 18 out of 85 organic product samples, including oats, barley, dried mint, peaches and kiwi.

This result requires separate interpretation. Detection of a substance is not sufficient in itself to determine its origin, whether a limit has been exceeded, or whether the manufacturer knowingly used a prohibited substance.

Domestic and imported food was examined

Just over half of the plant samples came from Cyprus. The remainder included products from other EU countries, non-EU countries, and a small group of unknown origin.

It is not possible to attribute all violations to Cypriot farms based on this information. Comparisons of the safety of domestic and imported products require non-compliance results broken down by origin.

The study also included 83 samples of food of animal origin. Residues were detected in 12 of them, or approximately 14.5%. This does not mean that 14.5% of the samples exceeded the limits — the laboratory director pointed out this difference.

Determining the origin of the product remains a problem

Former MP for the ecological movement Charalambos Theopemptou, in an interview with the Cyprus Mail, pointed out the difficulties in linking a product available in a store to a specific farm.

In his opinion, inspection at the point of sale is particularly important because a later visit to the field may not allow the replication of the previous use of plant protection products.

The report lists incorrect dosages, excessively frequent treatments, use of preparations on crops for which they were not approved, and use of substances not approved in the EU as possible causes of violations. Therefore, further action requires both product analysis and tracing its path from manufacturer to sale.