No abstract

Exposure of handlers'/operators' hands is a main route of agricultural pesticides entry into their body. Non-occupational handlers still lack information about appropriate selection of protective gloves to minimize exposure and reduce adverse effects of these chemicals. According to the results of our previous survey, six commercially available, water-resistant gloves commonly used by non-professional gardeners were evaluated for permeation of Acetamiprid, Pirimicarb, and Chlorpyrifos-methyl (Chlorp-m) pesticides by means of in vitro testing. In-use conditions were mimicked as close as possible. Chlorp-m through latex was observed inside the glove from >10 to ⩽15 min; however, Acetamiprid and Pirimicarb through neoprene/latex and all the three pesticides through butyl were not observed inside gloves for the duration of the experiments (the Breakthrough time (BT)>8 h). The 1-h exposure proved the interior glove contamination with Chlorp-m through disposable latex, vinyl, and nitrile gloves (51, 33, and 41% of applied dose (AD), respectively) just as with Acetamiprid and Pirimicarb through latex glove (11 and 14%AD, respectively). However, when storing the used gloves for 4 days after the exposure, no release of the three pesticides from the butyl and Acetamiprid from neoprene/latex gloves was detected. In all other cases, pesticides were found in the interior glove (36-79, 31-63, and 51-81%AD for Acetamiprid, Pirimicarb, and Chlorp-m, respectively). If used repeatedly, gloves contaminated in this way lose their protective function but give the user a false sense of security. The results suggest that (i) water-resistant gloves are not necessarily pesticide resistant; (ii) disposable latex gloves commonly worn by non-professional gardeners provide inadequate protection even for a short-time contact with pesticides; (iii) to assess the efficiency of reusable gloves, not only BT value but also the reservoir/release effect of parent pesticide and its degradation products should be evaluated; and (iv) awareness-raising activities for non-occupational handlers of pesticides should be enhanced.

As many chemicals, also agricultural pesticides (APs) can be hazardous if not used safely. Under typical working conditions, the majority of exposure to the APs is through the hand-skin. Wearing appropriate gloves should be a standard practice when handling the APs. Unlike professionals, amateurs applying the APs in their gardens or vineyards are not trained for the workplace hygiene. In this survey conducted in the spring 2015 across the Slovak Republic, practices regarding the use of protective gloves were obtained. 520 copies of the "paper-and-pencil" questionnaire were distributed to amateur users and specialized stores selling the APs (return rate of 59 %). A set of ten questions a "closed-ended" or "multiple-choice" type was offered. 75 % of respondents wear gloves when handling the APs. Regrettably, among users wearing gloves, 58 % use the same disposable gloves repeatedly, 67 % wear the reusable gloves from last season, and 53 % do not wash outside of the reusable gloves with detergent before removing them. 30 % of glove users wear all available gloves including absolutely inappropriate materials like fabric and leather, 28 % do not recognize the glove material which they use, 20 % use disposable Latex and 3 % Vinyl and Polyethylene gloves. Only 19 % of glove users wear a material that is generally considered a good choice for handling the APs (7 % Neoprene & Latex, 5 % Neoprene, 5 % Nitrile, and 2 % Butyl rubber). The survey showed the need for better education about adequate protective gloves not only for amateur users but also for retailers selling the APs and protective equipment.