Browner's statement, however, didn't quite tell the full story. We now find ourselves in a strange world where the regulatory focus of FQPA is aimed at nonfood uses of a pesticide. The general population's exposure to chlorpyrifos through food could not seriously be impacted solely by the elimination of backyard gardens. Finally, the agreement left intact the insecticide's use on more than 40 other crops or groups of crops. Many exposure avenues exist for chlorpyrifos, ranging from agricultural runoff that may infiltrate water supplies to lawn and residential pest-control applications that permit exposure through dermal contact or inhalation.
Foodstuffs can be a minor component in a person's overall pesticide exposure.
One of the evaluations required by FQPA involved a cumulative risk assessment of all OPs, not just chlorpyrifos. However, at this time, no general agreement exists on how to conduct a cumulative risk analysis. All OPs are known neurotoxins, and people exposed to recognized levels of them will develop characteristic symptoms of poisoning. However, different OPs have different toxicity levels. Therefore, it is possible that ingesting a single serving of a treated crop might result in poisoning.