Quantifying Exposure to 

Pesticides on Commercial 

Aircraft 

Clifford P. Weisel, Ph.D.

Sastry Isukapalli, Ph.D.

National Air Transportation Center of Excellence for 

Research in the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE)

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

Piscataway, NJ

February 2012

Report No. RITE-ACER-CoE-2012-2
NOTICE

___________

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship

of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest

of information exchange. The United States Government

assumes no liability for the contents thereof.

___________

This work was funded by the U.S Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of Aerospace Medicine under 

Cooperative Agreements 07-C-RITE and 10-C-RITE.

___________

This publication is available in full-text from 

the publications Web site of the 

National Air Transportation Center of Excellence for

Research in the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE) at:

www.acer-coe.org
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

Quantifying Exposure to Pesticides on Commercial Aircraft February 2012

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report 

No.

Weisel, Clifford; Isukapali, Sastry

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute

675 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854

11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period 

Covered

Office of Aerospace Medicine

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Ave., S.W.

Washington, DC 20591 14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplemental Notes

Work was accomplished under Public law 108-76.

16. Abstract

Many countries require aircraft disinsection, treating aircraft landing in their countries using insecticides, to minimize 

the spread of non-native potential disease vectors and harmful pests. Disinsection is done while passengers are onboard aircraft, immediately prior to boarding, or as a residual treatment on all cabin surfaces. The most common 

pesticides used contain a 2 % synthetic pyrethroid insecticide, typically permethrin or d-phenothrin. A wipe sampler 

that employed filter paper and water for the collection of pyrethroids from soft and hard surfaces in the aircraft cabin

was developed. It was evaluated in a laboratory setting and recoveries were 80-100% from table trays, seat handles 

and rugs; and 40-50% from seat cushions. The wipe sampler is easy to use, requires minimum training, and is 

compatible with current air security regulations. Surface wipe samples were collected from various surfaces on 15 US 

domestic and 45 international flights. While pesticides were essentially not detected in samples collected from US 

domestic flights, permethrin was routinely detected on all surface types on flights that entered or left countries 

requiring residual treatment or performed maintenance of aircraft servicing those countries. The surface loadings 

were all below 1μg/cm2, more than an order of magnitude below the application guidelines which could be due to 

transference to passengers’s clothing or skin when they sat or touched surfaces containing the pesticide or the 

pesticides degraded over time. Air concentrations and deposition levels measured for a simulated disinsection of a 

mock Boeing 767 was consistent with the literature indicating that it was an appropriate facility to evaluate potential 

pesticide exposure from disinsection. A CFD model of air concentrations and surface loadings following pesticide 

application during flight was formulated and model concentrations similar to those measured in the mock facility.

These results indicate that potential inhalation, dermal and ingestion exposures of flight crewmembers and passengers 

to pyrethroid pesticides are likely to occur. Urine samples were collected from 28 flight attendants, 18 – 65 years of 

age, with 17 working on the flights that were not disinsected with pyrethroid insecticides, and 11 working on 

disinsected flights. Flight attendants working on disinsected planes had significantly higher urinary levels of 

permethrin metabolites in the post- and 24hr-post flight samples than the pre flight urine. Flight attendants working on 

international flights connected to Australia where residual treatment is mandated had higher urinary permethrin 

metabolite levels than those on either domestic or other international flights or the general US population matched on 

age. This study documents that flight attendants on commercial aircrafts disinsected with pyrethroid insecticides are 

exposed to pesticides at levels that result in elevated body burden and internal accumulation comparable to pesticide 

applicators, exceeding levels in the general US population. It is expected that flying public would be similarly 

exposed to pesticides on those flights. 

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

Aircraft cabin, disinsection, pesticide, pyrethroid, , urinary 

metabolite, flight attendants, wipe sampler 

19. Security Classif. (of this 

report)

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of 

Pages

22. 

Price

Unclassified Unclassified

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
4

Abbreviations:

GC/MS – gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer

EI – electron impact

SIM – Selective monitoring mode

WHO – World Health Organization

μg – microgram

μg/cm2– microgram per square centimeter

cfm – cubic feet per minute

ACH – Air Exchange Rate\

DDT – dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane

LOD – limit of detection

GM – Geometric means

SD – Standard deviation

NC – Not calculated 

3-PBA – 3-phenoxybenzoic acid

cis-Cl2CA – cis-3-(2,2-Dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane carboxylic acid 

trans-Cl2CA – trans-3-(2,2-Dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane carboxylic acid 

cis-Br2CA – cis-3-(2,2-dibromovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid

4F-3-PBA – 4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzoic acid 

Key words: disinsection, flight attendant, pyrethroid, insecticide, pesticide, exposure

Table of Contents

1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Wipe Sampler Development .......................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Materials and Methods ................................................................................ 6

 Materials ..................................................................................................... 6

 Application .................................................................................................. 6

 Wipe Sampler ............................................................................................. 6

 Sample Analyses ......................................................................................... 6

2.1.2 Results and Discussions ................................................................................ 6

2.1.3 Conclusions .................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Pesticide Loadings on In-Use Aircraft............................................................. 8

3.1.1 Methods ........................................................................................................... 8

 Collection of Samples from Commercial Aircraft .................................... 8

 Simulated Aircraft Cabin ........................................................................... 8

 Sample Preparation and Analysis ............................................................... 8

3.1.2 Results and Discussions ................................................................................. 9

 Surface Deposition Levels ............................................................................ 9

 Simulated Aircraft Disinsection Study ...................................................... 9

3.1.2 Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 9

4.1 CFD Model ............................................................................................... 11

4.1.1 Methods ............................................................................................................. 11

4.1.2 Results and Discussions .................................................................................. 11

4.1.3 Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 11

5.1 Urinary Levels of Pesticide Metabolites ........................................................... 14

5.1.1 Methods ............................................................................................................. 14

 Samples and Data Collection ....................................................................... 14

5.1.2 Results and Discussions .................................................................................. 14

5.1.3 Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Overall Conclusions ............................................................................................ 17

7.1 Implications ......................................................................................................... 17

8.1 References ............................................................................................................ 18
5

1.1 Introduction

Disinsection of aircraft, e.g. the spraying of pesticides within commercial aircraft, began in the mid 1940’s to halt the 

reintroduction of mosquitoes that carry malaria from areas from which it was eradiated (Sullivan et al 1962). Initially a 

mixture of pyrethrins and DDT was used and was determined to be effective to kill mosquitoes the entered the aircraft cabin 

or cargo hold. Since the 1970s disinsection of commercial aircraft has been mandated by a limited number of countries to 

prevent the transport of insects which pose health threats to humans, animals and plants (Gantz et al. 2000). The most 

commonly used pesticides are a 1-2% solution of permethrin or d-phenothrin. Residual application needs to be effective for at 

least 8 weeks with typical application rates of 50μg/cm2on carpets and up to 20μg/cm2on other surfaces including seats, tray 

tables etc (Rayman 2006, New Zealand MAF 2007). The use of pesticides within an enclosed area, such as an airplane cabin, 

either while passengers and crew are on board or as residual treatment potentially exposes individuals to pesticides via 

inhalation, dermal absorption or ingestion if food contacts sprayed areas. Application methods used are in concert with the 

recommendations for aircraft disinsection by the World Health Organization (Rayman, 2006) though concerns have been 

raised about potential adverse health effects from the exposures to pesticides from these application methods (van Netten 

2002, Kilburn 2004, Murawski 2005, Gratz et al., 2000 Hocking and Hocking 2005, Rayman 2006). Currently, twenty-four

countries (17 for all flights and 7 for flights originating from specific regions) (US DOT 2011, 

http://ostpxweb.ost.dot.gov/policy/safetyenergyenv/disinsection.htm accessed 1-26-2012) require airlines to perform 

disinsection on international flights landing within their borders, and most countries reserving the right to require disinfection 

when there is a perceived threat of vector-borne disease (Sutton et al., 2007). 

Permethrin and d-phenothrin have been confirmed as the active agents in commercially available pesticide produced 

specifically for use on aircraft to be sprayed while or before passengers and crew are on board (van Netten 2002). The air 

concentration of d-phenothrin were determined to rapidly decline once the airplane’s air conditional system was operational 

and the insecticide has been found to effectively kill flying insects during the spray as was the residue on the surfaces (BergerPreiss et al 2006). Measurable air concentrations of permethrin has been reported on two domestic US flights, though 

spraying of aircraft within the US has been banned (Spicer et al., 2004). Pesticide levels on surface followed an exponential 

decline over a couple of months (Mohan and Weisel 2010).

The health effects of pyrethroids have been studied prior to their introduction as the most commonly used insecticides in 

commercial and residential settings. The World Health Organization (WHO) conducted series of field trials on various 

materials and methods for the aircraft disinsection (Sullivan et al. 1964; Sullivan et al. 1972), and published the latest 

recommendations on this basis in 1995 (WHO/HQ 1995), but additional data have identified new risks that were not 

considered by WHO in its original risk estimate. For examples, pyrethroids are recognized to be lipophilic components and 

potential neurotoxicants that modify the kinetics of voltage-sensitive sodium and calcium channels (Clark and Symingtong

2007; Ray and Fry 2006; Shafer and Meyer 2004; Shafer et al. 2005; Soderlund et al. 2002). 

Pyrethroids are considered to have low mammalian toxicity (Narahashi 2001; Soderlund et al. 2002), and the WHO described 

aircraft disinsection as a procedure that would not cause a risk to human health “if carried out with the recommended 

precautions” (Rayman, 2006; WHO/HQ, 1995). However, many anecdotal cases of adverse health effects suggested to be due 

to pyrethroids exposure on aircrafts have been reported by flight attendants to government agencies, labor unions, airlines, and 

environmental groups. These include irritations of the skin and mucosa, sore throat, vomiting, abdominal pain, headache, 

dizziness and nausea, etc. (Murawski 2005; Sutton et al., 2007).

Only limited sampling of aircraft surfaces for pesticides has been reported. Collection was done by placing pads on different 

surfaces while pesticide was being sprayed (Berger-Preiss et al. 2004, 2006) or within the framework of an occupational 

evaluation (Sutton et al. 2007). Collection of wipe samples from some airline surfaces, such as seats which have soft fabric 

material and a foam backing, can be difficult since soft materials can absorb the liquid used as a wetting agent to facilitate 

sample collection. Wipe sampling is a common approach used in occupational settings to screen for potential dermal exposure 

to complement use of patches, measurement on clothing, direct measures of skin contamination using rinses and swabs, and 

biological monitoring. Wipe sampling in occupational settings has included using a variety of different media, such as cotton 

gauze, cotton swabs, disposable paper towels, and filter paper with acetone, hexane, methanol, water, ethyl ether and 

petroleum ether used as wetting agents depending upon the contaminant being collected. Wipe samplers using filters have 

been reported for hard surfaces in occupational settings but not for soft surfaces that might absorb the wetting agent.

Collecting wipe samples from surfaces on aircraft to evaluate potential exposure and residual pesticide levels on materials 

present in in-use aircraft need to be done without disruption of the airline’s operation. An additional practical consideration in 

sampling from in-use aircraft is sampling materials need to pass through security and not adversely affect the surfaces of the 

aircraft. Biomarker measurements, such urinary metabolite concentrations are used to establish exposures to environmental 

contaminants. No measurements of urinary metabolite levels of pyrethroid insecticides have been reported for flight 

attendants though urinary levels at other populations including pregnant women, infants, children and general population exist

(Barr et al. 2010).
6

2.1 Development of Wipe Sampler

2.1.1 Materials and Methods:

Testing of the wipe samplers was done in a room containing an economy row of three airline seats, a section of a carpet from 

an aircraft and additional parts from an aircraft. The aircraft materials were sprayed with permethrin to achieve the loadings 

typically used for disinsection of aircraft (Raymond 2006) in order to test the collection efficiency of the different wipe 

samplers. 

Materials

A used, economy aircraft three-seat row with tray tables was employed for this analysis. Commercial grade permethrin was 

sprayed on selected surfaces after dilution to a 0.5% solution by adding 37ml of the pesticide concentrate to one liter of water 

and mixing well in the sprayer tank. Clear plastic sprayers (3 oz) were used to wet the filter papers used to wipe surfaces. 

Application of pesticide spray

To evaluate the wipe samplers a known amount of the pesticide permethrin was sprayed onto a used coach airline seat, food

tray, rug section and arm rest. A uniform spray was obtained by adjusting the applicator nozzle and spraying the pesticide over 

the surface in two back and forth passes. The reproducibility of the residue loading was checked by placing filter paper (9cm) 

in a Petri dish at multiple locations over a 2m

2

area, equivalent to the size of a seat cushion and back. The loading across the 

surface had a residual standard deviation (RSD) of ±7.7%. The application rate was determined with each experiment by 

placing a filter paper on the surface and measuring the amount of pesticide deposited. Sprayed surfaces were allowed to air 

dry prior to sampling. 

Wipe Samplers

The collection efficiencies of the sampler for the pesticide permethrin were evaluated for two hard surfaces: airplane tray 

tables and airplane arm rests, and two soft surfaces: airplane seat cushions and airplane carpet. The surfaces evaluated were 

used or surplus materials from commercial aircraft. 

The wipe method used a Whatman Circle Filter Paper (9cm) as the sampling medium. These filters were selected for 

evaluation because they are readily availability, inexpensive and the target pesticides, as well as many other contaminants that 

are often measured in wipe samples, are not detectable in extracts or digests of the filter. For hard surfaces the filter was 

placed on the surface to be sampled, sprayed with approximated 0.7ml of water using a mister, rotated by approximately 90° 

to moisten the surface (being careful to minimize any tearing of the filter), and transferred to a storage container. The process 

was repeated with a second wet filter and then the residual liquid was wiped from the surface with a dry Whatman Circle 

Filter. A similar procedure was followed for the soft surfaces, such as seat cushion and rugs with pressure was applied to the 

second and third dry filters to “blot” or collect the water that was on the surface or seeped below the surface of seat material or 

rug pile. 

Sample Analysis

The sampling media was placed in a 40ml vial with a measured volume of between10-30ml hexane added to completely cover 

the filter material and the vial sonicated for 20 minutes to extract the permethrin. The hexane volume was reduced (initially to

1.0ml and subsequently to 0.2 ml) under a stream of air at room temperature and 1.0μl was injected onto an Agilent 

6890/5973 GC-MS. The method detection limit was 2μg/cm2 when the final volume was 200μl. The calibration curve was 

linear over the entire range of the concentrations analyzed, with samples whose concentration exceeded the linear range 

diluted as needed. Permethrin was not detected in the blank samples and spike recoveries done directly to the extracts and on 

the filter indicated no losses or interferences were present in the analysis. External standards were analyzed with each sample 

batch indicating that permethrin was stable over the sample analysis time period.

2.1.2 Results and Discussion:

The Whatman Filter was found to be compatible with water as a wetting agent and provided consistent recoveries from both 

hard (>90%) and soft surfaces (40% seat cushions, 70% rugs). Similar materials have been used to successfully collect wipe 

samples with different wetting agents from hard surfaces within occupational settings for a variety of contaminants (McArthur 

1992) and from home surfaces (Boeninger et 2008) but no literature reports of its use for collection of contaminants from soft 

surfaces were found. 

To evaluate how many different filters provided the optimum recovery of permethrin from the soft surfaces a sequence of 

filters that alternated one wet and two dry filters were used with each filter analyzed individually (Figure 1). These tests were 

done the day after the surface was sprayed to allow for water from the spray to evaporate from the surface prior to sampling. 

Minimal amounts of pesticide were recovered from the surface after three sequential surface wipes of three filters were used 

indicating that a three series of three wipes (one wet and two dry) was optimal for recovery. Collection of samples from the 

surface was found to decrease with time, presumable due to losses from the surface as similar declines were observed from 
7

both hard and soft surfaces (Figure 2a and 2b). These results suggest that the most important factor in recovering permethrin 

from soft surfaces appeared to be solubilizing the permethrin into the wetting agent rather than the collection of dust particles 

that might contain the pesticide.

The amount of pesticide recovered from a seat cushion was less than half of the applied pesticide suggesting that some of the 

pesticide might be absorbed by the polyurethane foam within the seat cushion and not completely released to the water. 

Subsequent sampling from the area that had been previously sampled did not recover any additional pesticide while recoveries 

of 40% of the amount sprayed were retrieved from areas adjacent to the initially sampled area. This suggests that the 

pesticides not collected by the method are not retrievable by the wipe collection method being used, but rather absorbed into 

the seating material. Thus, pesticides not collected by the sample might not present a potential dermal exposure to the 

passengers or crew onboard aircraft.

Contact pressure and time can be important considerations in recovery of some substances from surface onto filter paper. The

recovery from the seat was examined using two different individuals, one male and one female, who were expected to apply 

different amount of pressure because of differences in their size and strength. The recoveries of pesticides for the two 

individuals were 37.7±5.3 and 39.7±3.8%, indicating that there were no inter-individual differences for these two individuals.

2.1.3 Conclusion:

A simple wipe pesticide sampler was developed using Whatman Filters and water as a wetting agent to collect permethrin 

from both soft cushion and rug surfaces in addition to hard surfaces. Consistent recoveries were obtained from each surface 

type. While wipe samplers have been used successfully for collection of pesticides from hard surfaces, wipe samplers have 

not be used to collect pesticides from in-use aircraft seats and rugs, which this method was designed for. Thus, the wipe 

sampler can be used to estimate potential dermal exposure to individuals sitting for extended times on cushioned seats. People 

are potentially exposed to pesticides from airline seats if bare skin contacts the seat or from transfer of the pesticide residual to 

a person’s clothing. The transfer of pesticides from the seat to a person would be facilitated if either a liquid spills onto the 

surface or the seat become moist from perspiration that results from sitting for an extended time period. The sampler uses 

materials that can readily be brought through security and onto planes and the sample collection presents no disruption to the 

flight crew procedures, though permission should be obtained before sampling is done to avoid any misunderstanding with the 

flight crew or fellow passengers.

Figure 1. Sequential Analysis (μg) of Each Filter Wipe from an Airline Seat to Establish the Optimal Number of Filters to 

Use for Maximum Recovery.

Recovery from Seat

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Wipe Number

Amount Collected

Conc (ng/ul)

Cumlative

Amount

Spiked

Wet

Dry

Dry

Set 1

Set 2

Wet

Dry

Dry Wet

Dry Dry Wet Dry Dry Wet Dry Dry

Set 3 Set 4 Set 5
8

Residue on Carpet

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time Since Application (days)

Loading (μg/cm

2

)

Figure 2a & b. Surface Loading Residue of Permethrin on Airline Seats (a) and Airline Carpet (b) with Time Since 

Application

Residual on Airline Seat

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 50 100 150 200

Time Since Application (Days)

Concentration (μg/cm

2

)

3.1 Pesticide Surface Loading on In-Use Aircraft

3.1.1 Methods

Collection of Samples from Commercial Airlines

Wipe samples were collected from around the passenger seat and common areas using of filter pack of 9.0 cm round 

Whatman 41 cellulose fiber filters with water as a wetting agent (Mohan and Weisel 2010). Samples were collected from hard 

surfaces (front and back of the tray tables, arm rests, walls, galleys), rugs, and soft surfaces (seat cushions, backs of seats) 

within the aircraft cabin on 15 US domestic flights, 18 flights landing in Central or South America, 8 flights landing in 

Australia or New Zealand, 4 flights landing in Africa or Europe and 15 flights landing in Asia during 2008 and 2009 with 

some destinations flown to multiple times. 

Simulated aircraft cabin 

Controlled spraying experiments were conducted within a mock Boeing 767 aircraft cabin located at Kansas State 

University that had a volume of 95 m3(width × length × height: 5.0 m × 9.6 m × 2.3 m) and 11 rows of 7 seats across. The 

seats were occupied by heated mannequins to simulate the heat load from passengers so that the turbulence within the 

cabin realistically represents that for an occupied commercial aircraft. The simulated aircraft was disinsected with 

commercially available aircraft disinfection products, pre-spray and top of descent, containing 2% permethrin and 2% dphenothrin by weight, respectively. Two people simultaneously sprayed the plane while walking along the two isles in a 

fashion analogous to the method used by flight attendants while passengers would be on-board. Air samples were 

collected onto adsorbent traps for subsequent analyses for permethrin and d-phenothrin. Deposition samples were 

collected using Whatman circle filter (9 cm) placed in an opened Petri dish. 

Sample preparation and analysis

The filter set and tenax air samples were extracted, assisted by ultrasonication for 45 minutes and mechanical shaking, into

30 ml and 10 ml, respectively, of hexane with an internal standard (500 ng/μl). The hexane was reduced to approximately 

200μl under a stream of clean air and analyzed by GC/MS vial for analysis. A 1 μl aliquot of the concentrated solution 

analyzed by GC/MS using a RTX5 column and the MS operated in the EI mode using selected ion monitoring (SIM). 

3.1.2 Results and Discussions

Surface deposition levels of pyrethroids

Pyrethroid pesticides were detected in only a single sample collected in the aircraft cabin on US domestic flights consistent

with pesticide sprays not currently approved for use in the US for airplanes (US EPA 2008, US EPA 2009). Permethrin 

surface loadings were commonly detected on aircraft flying international routes that likely entered countries mandating 

disinsection. The mean permethrin levels were from below detection (0.001ug/cm2) to 0.46 μg/cm2 while d-phenothrin was 

mostly below detection. The levels measured were all well below the application guidelines for surface loading for residual 

treatment which are 50 μg/cm2on rugs and 20 μg/cm2on other surfaces within the aircraft cabin. The lower levels than the 

treatment loading likely reflect that permethrin levels on airline seats degrade exponentially with time when undisturbed 

surfaces are left exposed, with a decline of a factor of two was observed within 30 days (Mohan and Weisel 2010) and would 

also be expected to be removed when surfaces are contacted by passengers or cleaned by maintenance crew leading to 

potential dermal exposure.

For a single flight, typically it was found that either all or none of the wipes samples had detectable levels of permethrin 

consistent with the entire aircraft being treated and redistribution occurring. Similar permethrin loadings of 0.17-0.69 μg/cm2
9

were reported for wipe samples taken by a flight attendant reported as a personal communication in a National Research 

Council report (NRC 2002). In a Californian study surface loadings were measured between 15 minutes and 28 hours after 

residual treatment was applied (Sutton et al 2007). The surface loadings in that study varied over six orders of magnitude 

from 0.0015 to 3500 μg/cm2, with mean and median values of 58 and 0.16 μg/cm2across the various surface types sampled 

from 9 aircraft. The highest loadings were on material (blankets, tissues, headset) which were not sampled in the current 

study. Wipe samples from hard surfaces had median, mean and maximum values of 0.075, 17 and 416 μg/cm2, respectively, 

while fabric pieces which were cut from seat covers (soft surfaces) and directly extracted had median, mean and maximum 

values of 1.0, 3.9 and 11 μg/cm2. The median loadings reported for those samples collected shortly after spraying were similar 

to the maximum value measured in the current study. 

Tukey box plots portraying the median, 25%, 75% and the range of the loadings for samples that had measurable values for 

each surface type sampled are given in Figure 4. All types of surfaces have similar loadings, though some individual values 

for the rug and seat top were higher. The presence of permethrin on tray table indicates potential indirect ingestion exposure 

to permethrin could occur in addition to dermal exposure when hands or bare arms or legs touch the various surfaces within a 

treated airplane.

Simulated Aircraft/Disinsection Study

The permethrin and d-phenothrin air concentrations measured in the mock Boeing 767 cabin over 40 minutes during and 

following disinsection when the air ventilation system was operated at a high flow rate ranged from 39 to 112 μg/m3, while 

when the air ventilation system was set at a low flow rate ranged from 105 to 260 μg/m3. These values are similar to those 

reported by Berger-Preiss et al. (2004), who measured a median d -phenothrin air concentration of 21 μg/m3(3 - 80 μg/m3) in 

a 40 minute sample during and following an in-flight spraying application. In that study between 107 - 204 grams of aerosols 

containing 0.32 % pyrethrin were released into an A310 aircraft cabin with the air ventilation system operating. 

The median deposition measured for both permethrin and d-phenothrin during the simulated disinsection for the high 

ventilation condition varied across the plane from 0.08 to 0.13 μg/cm2 with a maximum value was 0.19, while under low 

ventilation condition the range was 0.64 to 0.69 μg/cm2 with a maximum value of 1.2 μg/cm2. Berger-Preiβ (2004) measured 

d-phenothrin surface loadings of 0.10 to 1.16 μg/cm2following a pre-embarkment stray method. The deposition levels 

measured during top of decent spraying on two flights collected in a similar manner by placing a filter out while the flight 

attendant walked down the aisle were 0.014 and 0.25 μg/cm2for permethrin and 0.005 and 0.025 μg/cm2for d-phenothrin. 

The in-flight deposition values are more reflective of with the high ventilation condition of the simulation study.

3.1.3 Conclusions

Permethrin was routinely detected on flights to and from countries that require residual disinsection treatment and counties 

having maintenance facilities for airlines but at levels that were at least one order of magnitude lower than the application 

guidelines. These lower levels likely reflect degradation with time and removal from surfaces due to contact of the surfaces by 

passengers and actions by the cleaning crew. d-Phenothrin was only detected on a few flights but was present in the two 

deposition samples collected while active spraying was done with passengers aboard. Air and surface deposition levels of 

pesticides measured in a mock Boeing 767 aircraft cabin were consistent with other controlled studies and in-flight 

measurements with the levels being a function of the ventilation conditions. While the number of samples collected is 

insufficient to determine the distribution of surface loadings on aircraft, these results indicate that potential inhalation, dermal 

and ingestion exposures of the flight crewmember and passenger to pyrethroid pesticides are likely to occur.
10

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics of Pesticide Loading Measured on International Flights Grouped by Surface Type and 

Destination

Destination 

Continent

Mean * 

Permethrin 

Loading 

(μg/cm2) 

Mean * 

Phenothrin 

Loading 

(μg/cm2)

Max 

Permethrin 

(μg/cm)

Max 

Phenothrin 

(μg/cm)

Total 

Flights 

Sampled

Number 

Permethrin 

Above 

Detection

Number 

Phenthrin 

Above 

Detection

Hard Surface

Asia 0.025±.032 .0023±.0003 0.099 0.0021 19 9 2

Australia 0.018±.015 ND 0.037 6 6 0

Caribbean ND ND 9 0 0

Europe 0.004±.02 0.018±.002 0.0037 0.018 1 1 1

N. America 0.024±.032 0.002±.0002 0.076 0.002 23 6 3

S. America ND ND 3 0 0

Soft Surface

Asia 0.033±.021 0.0045 0.062 0.0045 18 4 1

Australia 0.039±.031 ND 0.0096 6 6 0

Caribbean ND ND 6 0 0

Europe 0.006±.093 ND .006 1 1 0

N. America .093±.199 ND 0.449 14 5 0

S. America ND ND ND 2 0 0

Leather

Asia 0.0075 0.0021 0.0075 0.0021 1 1 1

Rug

Asia 0.012±.008 ND 0.022 14 6 0

Australia 0.27 ND 0.462 2 2 0

Caribbean ND ND 3 0 0

N. America 0.018±.022 ND 0.033 8 2 0

S. America ND ND 1 0 0

Deposition

Asia 0.034±.002 0.031±.026 0.035 0.061 3 2 3

* Mean of samples with detectable levels of indicated pesticide

Figure 4. Tukey Box and Whisker Plot of Permethrin Concentration for Samples with Measureable Levels by Surface 

Sampled – (Displayed are: Midline of box is median, Box is lower and upper quartile, and minimum and maximum at end of 

line. Outliers are given as individual numbers)
11

4.1 THE CFD MODEL

4.1.1 Methods:

The CFD model of the 11 row twin-aisle airliner cabin mockup based on the one developed by Mazumdar and Chen (2008) 

and modified to the cabin dimensions of the experimental mockup to include a 10-3 m

3

cubical volumes at the breathing zone

is shown. Simulations were done for two different air exchange rates: 29 ACH (1400 cfm) and at 1 ACH (48 cfm). The 

amount sprayed, 776.5 mg, walking speed of the people spraying along with the height release were all assumed to be the 

same in all experiments. Thus, experimental variability was not accounted for in the model.

To simulate a moving spray, the pesticide release was modeled using a series of sequential linear sources (8 nos.) along the 

length of the cabin. Each source remained active for a second, as the sources became sequentially active from Row 1 towards 

Row 11. The cabin surface area to volume ratio from the CFD model was 3.78 m2/m3. The pesticide was modeled as species 

which gave the flexibility to appropriately scale the exposures for any specified amount of pesticide spraying. The deposition 

of pesticide on the cabin surfaces was modeled using the species reaction module. Degradation or backward reaction of the 

pesticide was not considered. To simulate the temporal variation of pesticide deposition and air concentration, time steps 

from 0.05 s, during the initial period of pesticide spraying, to 0.1 s, when the pesticide deposition rate and the air 

concentration were less, was used. 

4.1.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The airflow across the cabin cross-section at 1400 CFM (29 CH) shows high momentum of air from the overhead slot which 

is distributed to the side walls and rises at the center of the cabin (Figure 5a). A nearly symmetric vortex structure is observed 

across the cabin cross-section. At 48 CFM (1 ACH) the thermal plume from the passengers dictate the flow pattern in the 

cabin. The flow pattern shown for the 1 ACH case is the reverse of what is observed for the 29 ACH case but at a significantly 

lower average airflow velocity (Figure 5b). The pesticide air concentration and deposition loading for sideways spraying is 

shown in Figure 4XX for the 29 ACH condition at several time points: 8 seconds (during the spraying), 1 minute and 4 

minutes. The air concentration buildup while spraying is apparent at 8 seconds, a nearly uniform air concentration is observed 

at 1 minute, which then decays further as ventilation of the cabin dominants with no new sources (4 minutes). The deposition

shows an increase in the cumulative loading with time over the three points displayed. Further, an asymmetry of pesticide 

concentration across the cabin cross-section is observed. The net deposition is greater near the aisle. The loadings on some of 

the seats and passengers were higher than 0.25 μg/cm2. The net depositions increased over the initial 240 seconds (4 minutes),

with very little change subsequently. An asymmetry in pesticide deposition is observed across the cabin. At the lower 48 

CFM (1 ACH) itt took longer for the pesticide concentration to go below 10 μg/m3compared to 480 seconds (8 minutes) for 

the 29 ACH case. 

The CFD estimates of pesticide deposition are shown as box plots showing the average value and the 25 and 75 percentile 

values on the surfaces along with the experimental data in Figure 7. The maximum and minimum depositions observed on 

those surfaces are also presented. The median, maximum, minimum and the 25 and 75 percentile values on the surfaces were 

obtained from the CFD deposition results in the computational cells on each surface. The CFD model predicts the depositions 

of pesticide on the lap and seat-top at high air exchange rate reasonably well. Multiple experimental data is shown at several 

locations as the measurements were repeated several times to test the repeatability of the results. Both CFD and experimental 

measurements show no major variation in deposition characteristics for sideways and overhead spraying at the high air 

exchange rate. The spatial variation of net deposition across the cabin is not significant as uniform mixing is expected at a high 

air exchange rate. 

However, CFD results in Figure 8 shows that the spatial variation can be significant at low air exchange rates. The window 

seats (6A & 6G) have much less deposition compared to the middle seats (3D, 6D & 9D). No major variation in deposition 

characteristics is observed for sideways and overhead spraying. Surface deposition levels varied from 0.33 to 1.22 μg/cm2 for 

the low-ventilation experiments compared to 0.05 to 0.20 μg/cm2for the high ventilation case. A more uniform deposition 

behavior across the seats is seen in the experiments compared to CFD. The CFD model simulates the depositions at the middle 

seats (3D, 6D & 9D) reasonably well. However it predicts a much lower deposition for the window seats (6A & 6G). The 

CFD simulations were done assuming that the momentum of released pesticide spray was negligible. The pesticide hence 

followed the bulk airflow.

4.1.3 CONCLUSION

A CFD model was effectively able to model the spatial and temporal variation of pesticide deposition and concentration in a 

mock Boeing 767. Two contrasting flow features were observed for the high (29 ACH) and the low (1 ACH) air-exchange 

rate indicated air-exchange rate has a significant impact on the deposition characteristics of pesticide inside the cabin.The 

pesticide air concentrations fell below 10 μg/m3 within 8 minutes and 20 minutes for 29 ACH & 1 ACH respectively. Surface 

deposition levels varied from 0.33-1.22 μg/cm2 for the low-ventilation experiments compared to 0.05-0.20 μg/cm2for the high 

ventilation case. The CFD model simulated the measured depositions of pesticide across the cabin reasonably well for the high

air-exchange rate. However at the low air-exchange rate, discrepancies were observed between CFD simulations and 

experimental measurements near the window seats.
12

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. Comparison of airflow across the cabin cross-section for (a) 1400 CFM (29 ACH) and (b) 48 

CFM (1 ACH)

Concentration (μg/m3) Net deposition (μg/cm2)

t=8s

t=8s

t=60s t=60s

t=480s t=480s

Figure 4. The concentration of pesticide at breathing level and net deposition on passengers and seats for 

sideways spraying at1400 CFM (29 ACH)
13

Experiments

Sideways Overhead

Figure 7. Comparison of CFD predictions (box plot) with experimental measurements of pesticide 

deposition on the lap and seat-top of passengers 3D, 6A, 6D, 6G & 9D the high ventilation rate

Sideways Overhead

Figure 8. Comparison of CFD predictions (box plot) with experimental measurements of pesticide 

deposition on the lap and seat-top of passengers 3D, 6A, 6D, 6G & 9D at the low ventilation rate

Lap Lap

Seat-top Seat-top

Lap Lap

Seat-top Seat-top
14

5.1 Urinary Level of Pesticide Metabolites in Flight Crew

5.1.1 Methods

Sample and data collection

Twenty eight flight attendants working on commercial aircrafts were recruited with 7 flight attendants flying on domestic US

routes and 21 on international routes. Eleven subjects were categorized into a “disinsection group” based on the following 

criteria: (1) either working on aircrafts that entered countries requiring disinsection, and indications were made that 

pyrethroids were used to meet the requirement; or (2) information provided by the subjects indicating that the aircrafts had 

been treated previously using residual treatment method even though they only entered the countries which do not require 

disinsection. Three urine samples were provided by each flight attendant, one before the selected flight, one upon landing 

and a third 24 hours later. The urine samples were analyzed for pyrethroid metabolites by GC/MS and creatinine by UV 

spectroscopy. Appropriate quality control steps were taking including recovery studies, use of internal standards, blank 

analyses and duplicate analyses. Both parametric and non-parametric statistical analyses were performed dependent upon the 

distribution of the raw or log transformed data.

5.1.2 Results and Discussion

Tables 5 the distributions of the volume based of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA, the primary metabolites from permethrin and 

d phenothrin. Similar results were obtained for the creatinine corrected values, with the total GM for trans-Cl2CA in the 

disinsection group being 3.92 μg/g adjusted for creatinine while that for non-disinsection group was 0.58 μg/g adjusted for 

creatinine. The total GM of cis-Cl2CA in the disinsection group was 0.98 μg/g adjusted for creatinine, and that for nondisinsection group was 0.23 μg/g adjusted for creatinine. The metabolites cis-Br2CA and 4F-3-PBA were also measured but 

the data are not presented here since they are metabolites of pyrethroids not used on the aircraft flown and therefore were 

detectable in less than a quarter of the samples.

For flight attendants who did not fly on planes that were disinsected, the urinary levels of pyrethroid metabolites in pre-flight 

samples were not significantly different from those in post-flight samples nor were they significantly different from those in 

24hr-post flight samples. For flight attendants who flew on planes that were disinsected, the 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA 

levels in the post-flight samples had significantly higher levels than those in the pre-flight samples (3-PBA: p < 0.0001; cisCl2CA: p = 0.0005; trans-Cl2CA: p < 0.0001) with the average increasing percentages of 569 %, 797 % and 857 %, 

respectively. The post flight samples were also significantly higher than those in the 24hr-post-flight samples (3-PBA: p = 

0.0004; cis-Cl2CA: p = 0.01; trans-Cl2CA: p = 0.008). Urinary levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA in the 24hr-post-flight 

samples were also significantly higher than those in pre-flight samples (3-PBA: p = 0.0006; cis-Cl2CA: p = 0.001; transCl2CA: p < 0.0001). 

The levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA in pre-flight samples from the disinsection group were higher (approximately 

twice) than those from non-disinsection group (3-PBA: p = 0.01; cis-Cl2CA: p = 0.01; trans-Cl2CA: p = 0.001). The 

disinsection group also had higher levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA in post-flight samples than those in non-disinsection 

group (3-PBA: p < 0.0001; cis-Cl2CA: p = 0.002; trans-Cl2CA: p = 0.0005), and in 24hr-post-flight samples (3-PBA: p = 

0.0009; cis-Cl2CA: p = 0.005; trans-Cl2CA: p = 0.002). Figure 5 presents the distribution of the combined urinary 

pyrethroid metabolite levels by exposure conditions and sampling types. Wide variations in concentrations were measured, 

ranging from 0.34 μg/g to 11.2 μg/g creatinine in the non-disinsection group, and from 0.60 μg/g to 93.8 μg/g creatinine in the 

disinsection group.

Significant associations were identified between urinary levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA and the post-disinsection 

duration, the period of the time between when the plane was disinsected and when the post flight urine samples was collected 

(R

2

= 0.71, 0.65 and 0.59, respectively). This association followed an exponential decay (Figure 6). 

The GMs and the medians of the total levels of 3-PBA in the non-disinsection group were approximately 2 – 3 times of 

NHANES levels. However, no significant percentile differences were found between them (p = 0.69). Urinary levels of 3-

PBA in the post-flight samples from flight attendants who flew on planes that were disinsected were more than 10 times higher 

than the GMs in the NHANES data, as well as for each of the percentiles examined (p = 0.016). The GM and median of 3-

PBA in the pre-flight samples were 5 times higher than the NHANES levels. For 3cis- and trans-Cl2CA in the post- and 24hrpost urine samples from disinsection group were also higher than the NHANES levels at each percentile (75th, 90th and 95th).

The significantly higher levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans- Cl2CA in the post-flight urine samples for the flight attendants who 

flew on disinsected aircraft and the increase in post to pre-flight samples for that group indicate that residual disinsection of 

aircraft results in an increase in body burden of pesticides in flight attendants. Permethrin was reported by the flight attendants 

to be the pesticide used to treat the aircrafts flown. This is consistent with the pattern of metabolites, 3-PBA, cis and transC12CA, measured to be included in the post-flight samples. 

Previous studies revealed rapid metabolization and excretion of pyrethroids with levels returning to base line with one to 

several days (Eadsforth et al. 1988, Sams and Jones 2011, Leng et al. 1997). Similar results were observed in this study with 
15

the levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans-Cl2CA in 24hr-post flight urine samples greatly reduced compared to the post-flight 

samples. In spite of the rapid metabolization and excretion of pyrethroids, the creatinine adjusted levels of urinary permethrin

metabolites in pre-flight samples from participants who flew on routes to countries requiring disinsection were above the 

corresponding background levels observed in the U.S. general population and flight attendants who flew domestic routes. This 

suggests a possible chronic higher body burden of pesticides for those flight attendants who routine fly on disinsected aircraft.

Few data are available in the open literature with which the results in this study can be compared with although pyrethroid 

metabolites in urine have been studied for almost 30 years in different occupational settings. In a study by Kolmodln-Hedman

et al. (1982), the highest urinary level of permethrin metabolites detected were 260 μg/L in the morning void in one forestry 

worker following a 6-hour permethrin exposure to 11 – 85 μg/m3, but no detectable amount of metabolites were observed in 

the afternoon samples. Concentrations of 3-PBA in urine samples from ten workers working in greenhouses for more than 12 

h after application of deltamethrin ranged from < LOD – 52 μg/L (Tuomainen et al. 1996). Pest control workers had reported

concentrations of 3-PBA from < 0.5 – 277 μg/L (Leng et al. 1997). These results suggested that urinary metabolite levels of 

pyrethroids varied greatly among different occupations. In this study, the creatinine adjusted concentrations of 3-PBA ranged 

from 2.18 – 71.0 μg/g for flight attendants flying on disinsected aircrafts through residual treatment, suggesting their exposure

to permethrin is similar to pesticides applicators. None of the flight attendants in this study reported spraying pesticides

themselves; rather the aircrafts they flew on had been treated previously on the ground using the residual disinsection method 

to meet the requirement. Exposure to residual treatment would likely be associated with dermal uptake of pyrethroids as flight 

attendants spend up to 15 hours working, sitting and sleeping on surfaces in the international flights that were treated. In 

addition, potential nonintentional ingestion of pyrethroids contaminated food could also occur by contacting dirty hands or 

surfaces, e.g. tray tables. Potential inhalation exposure can not be ruled out since permethrin is a semi-volatile organic 

compound that could slowly partition into the gaseous phase from the internal surfaces of the aircraft, and be consequently 

inhaled into human bodies. In addition, the resuspended particles containing permethrin could also be inhaled particularly 

when laying down in the crew rest areas. 

5.1.3 Conclusions

Flight attendants working on the pyrethroids disinsected aircraft had significant higher concentrations of 3-PBA, cis- and 

trans- Cl2CA in the post- and 24hr-post flight urine samples than those working on non-disinsected aircrafts and the general 

U.S. population, indicating they had elevated body burden due to practice of disinsection of aircrafts with pyrethroids, 

predominantly permethrin. The creatinine adjusted levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans- Cl2CA in the post-flight urine samples 

reflected the short-term exposure to pyrethroids, while those in the pre-flight urine samples suggested the accumulation of 

body burden under steady state in a long-term period for those flight attendants routinely working on pyrethroid treated 

aircrafts. Post-disinsection duration was positively associated with the levels of 3-PBA, cis- and trans- Cl2CA. This study 

suggests that an evaluation of the potential health risks from this occupational exposure to pyrethroids should be done.

Table 5. Distribution of volume-based urinary concentrations of 3-PBA pyrethroid metabolites 

among the flight attendants and NHANES General US Population (μg/L)

Metabolite GM (SD) Range

3-PBA

 Non-disinsectiona

Pre-flight 0.86 (0.86) 0.11–3.40

Post-flight 1.01 (0.60) 0.22–2.33

24-hr-post 1.06 (1.13) 0.13–3.86

 Disinsectionb 

Pre-flight 1.36 (1.20) 0.30–3.62

Post-flight 14.40 (22.97) 0.78–81.53

24-hr-post 4.53 (5.86) 1.34–20.78

NHANES 2001-2002

Total 0.318

Age 20-59 0.314

Abbreviations: GM, geometric mean; SD, standard deviation.

a

Including flight attendants working on disinsected aircrafts.

a

Including flight attendants working on non-disinsected aircrafts.

cData for general US population from Barr et al. (2010). 
16

Figure 4 The distribution of the combined urinary pyrethroid metabolite levels by exposure conditions 

and sampling types

Figure 5 Post-disinsection durations and the urinary concentrations of pyrethroid metabolites in the 

disinsection group
17

6.1 Overall Conclusions:

These results indicate that measureable levels, within the WHO guidelines, of pyrethroid pesticides are present on surfaces 

throughout aircraft that are disinsection if they fly into countries which require this practice, countries where maintenance of 

aircraft that service these countries is done or into countries whose routes may include areas requiring disinsection of aircraft. 

Thus, potential inhalation, dermal and ingestion exposures of flight crewmembers and passengers to pyrethroid pesticides are 

likely to occur on an array of flights. Elevated permethrin body burdens for flight attendants working on aircraft that were 

disinsected with pyrethroid insecticides were documented based on urinary metabolite levels being significantly higher 

immediately after a flying on a disinsected aircraft and compared to other flight attendants working on other routes or the 

general US population matched on age. The risks to crew members and the flying public associated with exposure to 

pyrethroids at the levels need to be reviewed.

7.1 Implications and Recommendations:

This study documented that flight attendants on commercial aircrafts disinsected with pyrethroid insecticides are exposed to 

pesticides at levels that result in elevated body burden and internal accumulation of the pyrethroids exceeding the general US 

population and comparable to pesticide applicators. It is expected that flying public would be similarly exposed to pesticides

on those flights. The risk calculation done by WHO when recommendations on the practice of disinsection were made prior 

to the results on the body burden to crewmembers on disinsected aircraft and to recent toxicological studies on adverse effects 

of these disinsection. A review of the risk due to pesticide exposure crew and passengers on aircraft flying into countries 

required disinsection should be done and alternate approaches to prevent the transport of insects on commercial aircraft should 

be evaluated.
18

8.1 References:

AQIS/MAFBNZ Schedule of Aircraft Disinsection Procedures, 2010. Available: 

http://www.daff.gov.au/aqis/avm/aircraft/disinsection/procedures [accessed 21 March 2011].

Barr DB, Olsson AO, Wong LY, Udunka S, Baker SE, Whitehead RD, et al. 2010. Urinary Concentrations of 

Metabolites of Pyrethroid Insecticides in the General US Population: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 

1999-2002. Environ Health Perspect 118(6): 742-748.

Berger-Preiss, E., Koch, W., Behnke, W., Gerling, S., Kock, H., Eflein, L., and Appel, K.E. In-flight spraying in aircrafts: 

determination of the exposure scenario Intl J Hyg Environ Health 2004,207:419-430.

Berger-Preiss E. Koch W. Gerling S. Kock H. Klasen J. Hoffmann G. Appel KE. Aircraft disinsection: exposure 

assessment and evaluation of a new pre-embarkation method. Intl J Hyg Environ Health. 2006,209:41-56. 

Boeniger, M., Neumeister, C. and Booth-Jones, A. Sampling and analytical method development and hand wipe 

measurements of dermal exposures to Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. JOEH 2008,5:417- 425.

Bradman A. Whyatt RM. Characterizing exposures to nonpersistent pesticides during pregnancy and early childhood in 

the National Children's Study: a review of monitoring and measurement methodologies. Environ Health Perspect 2005, 

113:1092-1029.

Clark JM. and Symington, SB. 2007. Pyrethroid action on calcium channels: neurotoxicological implications. 

Invertebrate Neuroscience, 7 (1): 3-16.

Gratz NG, Steffen R, Cocksedge W. 2000. Why aircraft disinsection? Bulletin of the World Health Organization 78(8): 

995-1004.

Hocking, M.B., and Hocking, D., 2005. Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces. Berlin: Springer,

1st edition, page: 170-171. 

Kilburn, K.H., Effects of Onboard Insecticide Use on Airline Flight Attendants. Arch Environ Health: An Intl J 2003, 

58(6): 284-291.

Kolmodin-Hedman B, Swensson A, Akerblom M. 1982. Occupational exposure to some synthetic pyrethroids 

(permethrin and fenvalerate). Arch Toxicol 50:27-33.

Leng G, Gries W, Selim S. 2006. Biomarker of pyrethrum exposure. Toxicology Letters 162(2-3): 195-201.

Leng G, Kuhn KH, Idel H. 1997. Biological monitoring of pyrethroids in blood and pyrethroid metabolites in urine: 

Applications and limitations. Science of the Total Environment 199(1-2): 173-181.

Leng G, Leng A, Kuhn KH, Lewalter J, Pauluhn J. 1997. Human dose-excretion studies with the pyrethroid 

insecticide cyfluthrin: urinary metabolite profile following inhalation. Xenobiotica 27(12): 1273-1283.

McArthur, BR. and Lees, PSJ. Effect of contact time and contact pressure on the transfer of oil to surface sample media. 

Appl Occup Environ Hyg 1995, 10:23-28.

Mohan, K.R. and Weisel, C.P., 2010. Sampling scheme for pyrethroids on multiple surfaces on commercial aircrafts. 

Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 54 (4): 417-426.

Murawski, J, Occupational and Public Health Risks (page 25-52) and Insecticide Use in Occupied Areas of Aircraft 

(pages 169- 192) in Air Quality in Airplane Cabins and Similar Enclosed Spaces – Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, 

Hocking, MB editor, 2005.

Murawski, J., 2005. Insecticide use in occupied areas of aircraft. Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 4, Part H: 

169-190.

Naeher LP, Tulve NS, Egeghy PP, Barr DB, Adetona O, Fortmann RC, et al. 2010. Organophosphorus and pyrethroid 

insecticide urinary metabolite concentrations in young children living in a southeastern United States city. Science of the 

Total Environment 408(5): 1145-1153.

Narahashi T. 2001. Neurophysiological effects of insecticides. In: Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology. Vol 1: Principles 

(Krieger R, Doull J, Ecobichon D, eds). San Diego:Academic Press, 335–350. 

New Zealand MAF Quarantine Service (MQS) and Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) Schedule of 

Aircraft Disinsection Procedures 15 February 2007 accessed 2008. 

http://www.afpmb.org/coweb/guidance_targets/vector_and_pestcontrol/mqs_aqis_disinsection_procedures.pdf 

NRC. (2002). The airliner cabin environment and the health of passengers and crew, pp 108-110. In: Lippmann M 

(ed). Committee on Air Quality in Passenger Cabins of Commercial Aircraft, Board on Environmental Studies and 

Toxicology, National Research Council.

Rayman RB. 2006. Aircraft disinsection. Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine 77(7): 733-736.

Shafer TJ, Meyer DA, Crofton KM. 2005. Developmental neurotoxicity of pyrethroid insecticides: Critical review 

and future research needs. Environ Health Perspect 113(2): 123-136.

Shafer TJ, Meyer DA. 2004. Effects of pyrethroids on voltage-sensitive calcium channels: a critical evaluation of 

strengths, weaknesses, data needs, and relationship to assessment of cumulative neurotoxicity. Toxicology and Applied 

Pharmacology 196(2): 303-318.

Soderlund DM, Clark JM, Sheets LP, Mullin LS, Piccirillo VJ, Sargent D, et al. 2002. Mechanisms of pyrethroid 

neurotoxicity: implications for cumulative risk assessment. Toxicology 171(1): 3-59.

Spicer, C.W., Murphy, M.J., Holdren, M.W., Myers, J.D., Macgregor, I.C., Holloman, C., James, R.R., et al., 2004. 

Related air quality and other factors to comfort and health symptoms reported by passengers and crew on commercial 
19

transport aircraft (Part I). AHHRAE Report 2007 1262-TRP. American Society for Heating, Refrigerating, and Air 

conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA.

Sullivan WN, Azurin JC, Wright JW and Gratz NG. 1964. Studies on aircraft disinsection at ‘‘blocks away’’ in tropical 

areas. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 30: 113–118.

Sullivan WN, Keiding J, Wright JW. Studies on aircraft disinsection at "blocks away”. Bull World Health 

Organ. 1962;27:263–273

Sullivan WN, Pal R., Wright JW, Azurin JC, Okamoto R, Mcguire JU and Waters RM, 1972. Worldwide studies on 

aircraft disinsection at ‘‘blocks away’’. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 46: 485–491.

Sutton PM, Vergara X, Beckman J, Nicas M, Das R. 2007. Pesticide illness among flight attendants due to aircraft 

disinsection. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 50(5): 345-356.

Tomalik-Scharte D, Lazar A, Meins J, Bastian B, Ihrig M, Wachall B, et al. 2005. Dermal absorption of permethrin 

following topical administration. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 61(5-6): 399-404.

Tuomainen A, Kangas J, Liesivuori J, Manninen A. 1996. Biological monitoring of deltamethrin exposure in 

greenhouses. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 69(1): 62-64.

U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) Disinsection Webpage 

http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/policy/safetyenergyenv/disinsection.htm Accessed 12-2011

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for phenothrin [Case No. 0426], 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Permethrin [Case No. 2510, 

EPA 738–R–09–306], Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

van Netten C. Analysis and implications of aircraft disinsectants. Sci Total Environ 2002, 293:257-262.

Wei B, Mohan KR, Weisel CP. 2011 Exposure of flight attendants to pyrethroid insecticides on commercial flights: 

Urinary metabolite levels and implications.

WHO. Revision of the International Health Regulations: progress report, January 1998. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 1998; 73: 

17-9.

WHO. World Health Organization International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1995c. Report of the Informal 

Consultation on Aircraft Disinsection; Geneva, 6–10 November 1995c. Geneva: WHO. WHO/ PCS/95.51. 59 p. 

WHO. World Health Organization. 1985a. Safe use of pesticides. Ninth report of the WHO expert committee on vector 

biology and control. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 720:1–60. 19.

WHO. World Health Organization. 1985b. Recommendations on the disinsecting of aircraft. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 60:45–

52. 

WHO/HQ 1995. Report of the Informal Consultation on Aircraft Disinsection. International Programme on Chemical Safety, 

World Health Organization, Geneva. Available: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/HQ/1995/WHO_PCS_95.51_Rev.pdf [accessed 21 

March 2011].