Brazil is the biggest market for pesticides in the world. In the registration process, a pesticide must be authorized by the Institute of the Environment, Health Surveillance Agency and Ministry of Agriculture. Evaluations follow a package of toxicological studies submitted by the companies and also based on the Brazilian law regarding pesticides. We confronted data produced by private laboratories, submitted to the Institute of the Environment for registration, with data obtained from scientific databases, corresponding to mutagenicity, carcinogenicity and teratogenicity of pesticides. All studies submitted by the companies were carried out by private laboratories. From 247 pesticide formulations analyzed, none showed positive results for mutagenicity, carcinogenicity or teratogenicity. From 574 articles in the scientific literature, 84% published by public laboratories showed positive results, while 79% of those showing negative results came from private laboratories. There is an ethical concern about a conflict of interest between public/independent laboratories and private laboratories that produce data for registering pesticides. We demonstrated that there is a clear contradiction between public and private laboratories. Brazilian regulatory authorities have approved the registration of pesticides based almost exclusively on the monographs provided by the pesticide industry, because the use of scientific articles or information from the independent literature is strongly belittled by the industry. Pesticide companies argue that scientific articles cannot be trusted. Also, according to the industry, pesticide registration cannot be refused based on results from scientific articles. Thus, the registration of pesticides with mutagenic, carcinogenic and teratogenic risks has been approved in Brazil.
Keywords: Bioethics; cancer; conflict of interests; malformation; mutations; pesticides; regulatory science.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.