In a study conducted by epidemiologist Freya Kamel and her team, it was found that out of the 19,000 individuals examined, those who had utilized both two categories of pesticides and seven specific pesticides had a higher likelihood of receiving a depression diagnosis. Out of the seven specific pesticides associated with depression diagnoses in Kamel's study, only aluminum phosphide, diazinon, and malathion remain registered and actively used, according to a statement from Cathy Milbourn, a spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has revoked the registrations of ethylene dibromide, 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T), dieldrin, and parathion. Currently, aluminum phosphide, diazinon, and malathion are undergoing a review process by the EPA. In particular, individuals who had used organochlorine insecticides were found to have a risk of being diagnosed with depression that was up to 90 percent higher compared to those who had not used these insecticides. The use of some organochlorine insecticide chemicals has been banned in the U.S. but not all of them. Additionally, for fumigants (pesticides that, when applied to soil, form a gas to control pests that live in the soil), the increased risk of depression was as high as 80 percent in comparison to individuals who had not been exposed to them.

​

Despite differences in the time and location of the studies, similar reports have been documented. The researchers observed comparable outcomes when they reevaluated the same cohort documented between 1993 and 1997. Among farmers with the greatest cumulative days of pesticide exposure over their lifetimes, there was a 50 percent elevated likelihood of receiving a depression diagnosis at a later time. In a separate study conducted in France, farmers who used herbicides were almost twice as likely to receive treatment for depression compared to non-users. This risk appeared to be escalated when herbicide applicators had been engaged in such activities for over 19 years, involving a study of 567 farmers. These findings may imply that chronic exposure to low pesticide levels over time might elevate the risk of depression.

​

Additionally, the potential link between pesticide poisoning (significant exposure in a short timeframe) and depression has also been studied. The farmers in Colorado, who experienced pesticide poisoning, had twice the risk of developing depression over the subsequent three years. Furthermore, within the pesticide applicators from North Carolina and Iowa, those who had been affected by pesticide poisoning were 2.5 times more likely to receive a diagnosis of depression at a later point in time.

While these studies are based on statistics and don't establish a direct link between pesticides and depression, animal experiments suggest that such a connection is plausible. According to Cheryl Beseler, an environmental health researcher at Colorado State University, pesticides have been shown in rat tests to alter brain cells, neurotransmitters, and the production of protective acids. Kamel emphasized that there's little doubt that pesticides can influence brain functions. Experiments have shown that pesticides damage rats' brain tissue and receptors, and they may also have indirect effects by promoting other health issues linked to depression. For instance, Dr. Beate Ritz, a neurologist and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, discovered that Californians exposed to pesticides are more prone to developing Parkinson's disease, a condition characterized by a dopamine deficiency that can lead to depression.

At last, modern agriculture is a complex field with various challenges. It must provide affordable, safe food, ensure farmer and consumer safety, and maximize productivity and profitability. Balancing these factors is extremely complicated due to the need to reduce herbicides and pesticides, adopt sustainable practices, and meet changing consumer preferences. Biotechnology and regulatory frameworks also influence this complex landscape. Researchers and policymakers are actively seeking innovative solutions to address these challenges and maintain a safe and sustainable food supply. In the meanwhile, it is deeply concerning to consider the exposure of hard-working farmers, who work tirelessly to provide food for our tables, to these chemicals that possess the potential to negatively affect their well-being. We must pursue and advocate farming practices that are both safe and sustainable. Also, as end consumers, it is crucial for us to ensure that we thoroughly wash produce before consumption.

​

Sources:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599768/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/.../pii/S001393512300991X...

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.11091

https://www.scientificamerican.com/.../high-rates-of.../....

https://www.cdc.gov/.../OP-DPM_BiomonitoringSummary.html...