Barbara F. Morrissey
Pacific Northwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center
Washington State Department of Health
Pesticide Program
1-888-586-9427
Public Health
Always working for a safer and healthier Washington
Pesticide Program

Illness Surveillance / Prevention
DOH, Pesticide Program

Investigations of Pesticide incidents – 2001 data*
DOH compared to enforcement agencies

*Pesticide cases investigated as reported in the 2003 WA annual PIRT report
Distribution of 2001 cases* by County

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
DOH classification of investigated cases 2001 data

Definite, probable, possible
Causal relationship must be plausible:
- Signs and symptoms documented during investigation are consistent with the known toxicology of the pesticide(s) involved.
- The time of symptom onset and pattern must be plausible for the exposure documented.
| Definite | + objective evidence of exposure | + objective clinical evidence of health effect | |
| Probable |
1 | ||
| 2 | |||
| Possible | Report by case, witnesses, spray records | Two or more symptoms reported by HCP or case | |
DOH cases* 2000-2001 data

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
Tip of the Iceberg?
Nature of exposure
Agricultural cases, 2000-2001 cases*

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
Activity of person exposed
Agricultural cases, 2000-2001 cases*

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
Exposures to Pesticide Residues
Agricultural Cases, 1995-1999

Systemic and Topical Illness/Injury* Trend
Agricultural Handlers and AChE Inhibitors

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
** Handler = mix, load, or apply, repair spray equipment
Top crops involved
Agricultural cases, 2000-2001

*cases considered definitely, probably, or possibly due to pesticide exposure
Key prevention messages Agricultural cases
- Target prevention in apples, potatoes
- Handlers – eye protection, other PPE
- Drift reduction to protect field workers/bystanders
- More attention to field residue exposure (are re-entry intervals followed, protective?)

Photo: Doug Wilson, ARS photo gallery
- 24 y/o male
- Licensed applicator
- October chemigation for potatoes
- Shift is from 5PM to 4 AM
- Checks application every 2 hours
- Metam sodium (Sectagon 42) (Forms MITC in soil, fumigant)
- Possible replacement for methyl bromide
- Known irritant to eyes, respiratory, skin
- Full PPE (respirator and suit) while in field
- In his pick-up truck 100 ft from field when he wasn't checking the field (no PPE)
- Fell asleep in truck after shift (4 AM)
- Awoke at 10 AM - strong smell in truck
- Temperature inversion
Initial symptoms
- Burning in lungs and throat
- Chest tightness
- Went to ER, same day
- Chest X-ray: negative
- Recheck at 7 days
- Dx. Exposure to inhaled irritant/mild bronchospasm
- Prescribed inhaler
- DOH followed -
8 wks
- c/o Burning in lungs
- c/o Shortness of breath
- Classified “Possible”
- DOH provided case description to EPA during metam sodium re-registration .
- Letters of support for research into drift reduction and alternatives to chemigation for potato field fumigation
Disclaimer and Reproduction Information: Information in NASD does not represent NIOSH policy. Information included in NASD appears by permission of the author and/or copyright holder. More
Reviewed for NASD: 06/2006
