All foods/Gluten-free food

2016 · United Kingdom · UK Pesticide Residues in Food monitoring · Annual

Pesticide residues found on gluten-free food

28.1% of standard-grown samples had at least one detected residue. Standard-grown means samples not identified as organic (called conventional in the source data). Detection does not, by itself, mean the food was unsafe.

Compare with other foods →
Any residue28.1%Lower organic-buying priority

64 samples, standard-grown

No quantified residue71.9%Lower organic-buying priority

All reported results below quantification

Multiple residues12.5%Moderate organic-buying priority

Two or more residues detected

Median residue count0Lower organic-buying priority

Highest observed count: 3

Above published limit0%Lower organic-buying priority

Parser-based MRL comparison

Organic: any residue0%Moderate organic-buying priority

10 samples, interpret cautiously

Residue detail

What was found on gluten-free food?

The most frequently detected residues across all 74 samples. This is the complete available table for this monitoring entry.

74samples checked

Detection does not establish harm. Health risk depends on both toxicity and the amount a person is exposed to.

What do these types mean?
  • FungicideControls fungal diseases such as moulds and mildews.
  • InsecticideControls insects that damage crops or stored food.
  • HerbicideControls weeds competing with a crop.
  • Growth regulatorChanges plant growth, development or ripening.
  • Other / mixedCovers multiple substances or a role that cannot be reliably assigned from the published name.

These labels describe agricultural function, not a toxicity ranking.

ResidueTypeSamplesMedianHigher resultTypical published limit
chlormequatGrowth regulator6 (8.1%)0.6 mg/kg1.7 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
haloxyfop (sum)Other / mixed6 (8.1%)0.02 mg/kg0.04 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
glyphosateHerbicide3 (4.1%)0.2 mg/kg1.2 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
tricyclazoleOther / mixed3 (4.1%)0.09 mg/kg0.09 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
deltamethrinInsecticide2 (2.7%)0.2 mg/kg0.3 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
tebuconazoleFungicide2 (2.7%)0.03 mg/kg0.04 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
mepiquatGrowth regulator2 (2.7%)0.065 mg/kg0.1 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
chlorpyrifos-methylOther / mixed2 (2.7%)0.015 mg/kg0.02 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
pirimiphos-methylInsecticide2 (2.7%)0.16 mg/kg0.3 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗
diphenylamineOther / mixed1 (1.4%)0.03 mg/kg0.03 mg/kgNot published
Health summary pending

No reviewed substance-specific summary is available, so no health effect is inferred.

Search WHO/FAO JMPR ↗

“Higher result” is an approximate 95th-percentile observed concentration, not a safety threshold. Amounts of different pesticides should not be added together or compared directly. Functional types describe their usual agricultural role; they are not hazard or toxicity rankings.

ADI and ARfD are intake reference values, not limits for one food sample. A personal assessment would also require consumption, body-weight and wider exposure data. Source programmes report legal Maximum Residue Level results separately.

What this tells you

A monitoring result, not a verdict.

The UK programme is risk-based and targets foods where residues may be expected. It is not a test of every gluten-free food product sold in United Kingdom. This entry’s latest included annual release is from 2016.

Published MRLs or tolerances are regulatory limits associated with pesticide use. Consumer-risk assessment is a separate process.

Broader sample coverage. At least 50 samples: broader monitoring coverage, but still targeted rather than random.

Compare organic and standard-grown results →

Common questions

How to read these gluten-free food results

Were pesticide residues detected on gluten-free food?

28.1% of 64 standard-grown samples in the 2016 UK Pesticide Residues in Food monitoring dataset had at least one quantified residue.

Does that mean gluten-free food were unsafe?

No. A laboratory detection is not, by itself, a consumer-risk finding. Regulators assess dietary risk separately.

Should I buy organic gluten-free food?

The monitored organic samples had a 0% detection rate, compared with 28.1% for standard-grown samples. This is a shopping-priority comparison, not a health-risk score.