NAFDAC Raises Alarm Over Pesticide Residues in Beans, Reveals ₦800 Million Seizures of Banned Chemicals

By Simpson Global Media News Desk

Nigeria’s food safety regulator, the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), has raised fresh concerns about pesticide misuse in the country’s food supply after a market study detected chemical residues above permitted safety limits in some samples of beans.

The warning, announced by NAFDAC Director-General Professor Mojisola Adeyeye during a media briefing in Lagos on Friday, October 9, 2026, came alongside details of enforcement operations targeting prohibited agricultural chemicals across several states.

The agency disclosed that banned agrochemicals worth more than ₦800 million were seized in Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Oyo states in 2025. It also reported that a separate operation in Kebbi State intercepted 67,428 litres of paraquat, a prohibited pesticide, alongside banned atrazine products.

The findings have renewed attention on the risks associated with using agricultural chemicals incorrectly, particularly when pesticides intended for specific farming applications are applied to harvested food to protect it from insects and other pests.

NAFDAC said the market study detected residues of pyrethroids and dimethoate above permitted safety limits in some bean samples. The agency did not disclose the number of samples tested, their precise collection locations or the measured residue concentrations in the reports reviewed.

The findings therefore do not establish that all beans sold in Nigeria are contaminated. They do, however, highlight the importance of food testing, appropriate pesticide use, effective enforcement and reliable information for farmers, traders and consumers.

The agency has called on farmers, agrochemical dealers, distributors and other participants in the food supply chain to comply with approved pesticide regulations, while warning against the sale and use of prohibited products.

What NAFDAC Discovered in Beans

Beans are an important source of protein for many Nigerian households and are widely consumed in meals across the country.

Their affordability, versatility and availability make them a regular part of household diets. However, like other stored agricultural commodities, beans can be vulnerable to insects and other pests after harvesting.

Farmers and traders may use pesticides to control pests, but the safety of the resulting food depends on the chemical involved, the way it is applied, the quantity used and whether the treatment is authorised for that particular purpose.

According to NAFDAC, a recent market study found pyrethroid and dimethoate residues above permitted safety limits in some samples of beans.

The finding raises concerns because pesticide residues may remain on food when chemicals are used incorrectly or when the required interval between application and consumption is not observed.

NAFDAC specifically warned against using dimethoate to preserve harvested beans against pests such as weevils. The agency explained that approval for a pesticide to be used on a crop during cultivation does not automatically mean it can be applied to harvested produce during storage.

That distinction is central to the regulator’s warning.

Pesticides are developed and approved for particular uses, with instructions governing the target pest, application method, dosage and safety precautions. A product that is authorised for one agricultural application may be unsuitable or unlawful for another.

The agency also noted that certain pyrethroids can be permitted for post-harvest storage under approved conditions. Their use must nevertheless follow the relevant instructions, including prescribed waiting periods where applicable.

The reported findings do not mean every bean sample contains unsafe residues, nor do they establish that every consumer who has eaten beans has been exposed to harmful levels of pesticides.

Instead, they identify a food safety concern that requires appropriate testing, compliance with regulations and action against unsafe practices.

Why Pesticide Residues Matter to Public Health

Pesticides are used in agriculture to protect crops against insects, weeds, fungi and other threats that can reduce yields or damage stored produce.

When properly selected and applied according to approved instructions, authorised products can play a role in protecting crops and supporting food production.

Problems arise when prohibited chemicals are used, approved products are applied incorrectly or food is harvested or consumed before required safety intervals have elapsed.

Depending on the chemical, amount of exposure and duration, pesticide exposure can cause different health effects. Acute exposure to certain pesticides can result in symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, dizziness, breathing difficulties or other serious reactions. Some chemicals can cause severe poisoning, while repeated or prolonged exposure to particular substances may carry additional health risks.

The presence of a pesticide residue does not automatically mean that food will cause illness. The actual risk depends on the substance, its concentration, the amount consumed and the relevant toxicological safety standards.

That is why laboratory testing and established residue limits matter. They help regulators assess whether food complies with applicable safety requirements rather than relying on appearance, smell or assumptions about how it was produced.

In the case of the beans examined in NAFDAC’s study, the agency reported that some samples exceeded permitted limits. The available reports do not provide enough numerical detail to independently assess the degree of exceedance or estimate the exposure of consumers.

The findings nevertheless underline the importance of preventing unsafe chemicals from entering the food chain and investigating products that fail regulatory standards.

Public health protection also requires clear communication. Consumers need accurate information about identified risks without being led to believe that all food in a particular category is dangerous.

NAFDAC Reveals Major Seizures of Prohibited Agrochemicals

Beyond the bean samples, NAFDAC disclosed enforcement operations intended to stop prohibited pesticides from being sold or used in Nigeria.

The agency said it seized banned agrochemicals worth more than ₦800 million in Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Oyo states during 2025.

It also provided details of enforcement activity in the North-West between September 2024 and July 2026.

During that period, operations resulted in the seizure, interception or recovery of 2,974 cartons of pesticides containing paraquat, with an estimated value of ₦148.7 million.

The agency also reported the interception of 120 cartons of pesticides containing chlorpyrifos, valued at more than ₦17 million.

In a separate operation in Kebbi State, NAFDAC intercepted 5,619 cartons containing 67,428 litres of paraquat and another 500 cartons of atrazine products.

The figures describe separate enforcement activities and should not be added together without accounting for their different reporting periods, locations and methods of valuation.

Nevertheless, the seizures indicate the scale of the regulatory challenge confronting authorities attempting to remove prohibited agricultural chemicals from circulation.

Illegal pesticide products can enter supply chains through unauthorised imports, distribution networks or local manufacturing operations. They may be sold to farmers and traders who do not fully understand their risks or the legal restrictions governing their use.

NAFDAC has said that enforcement must address not only illegal imports but also the unauthorised manufacture, distribution and sale of prohibited products within Nigeria.

The agency is working to identify and remove such chemicals from the market and pursue enforcement action against those responsible where the evidence supports it.

Paraquat, Chlorpyrifos and Atrazine: Why the Ban Matters

NAFDAC identified paraquat, chlorpyrifos and atrazine among the prohibited pesticide products targeted by its enforcement measures.

The agency said the phase-out periods for pesticides containing these substances ended on January 1, 2026. Under the completed regulatory measures described by NAFDAC, the products could no longer legally be manufactured, imported, distributed, sold or used in Nigeria.

Paraquat is a herbicide used to control weeds. It is particularly concerning because poisoning can cause severe injury and may be fatal. Exposure can occur through swallowing, inhalation or contact, depending on the circumstances and product formulation.

Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate insecticide that affects the nervous system. Its hazards have prompted restrictions in different jurisdictions, although regulatory decisions and permitted uses vary by country.

Atrazine is a herbicide used to control weeds in certain agricultural settings. Its environmental and health risks have been the subject of regulatory assessment and debate internationally.

The substances have different properties and uses, and their risks should not be treated as identical. What connects them in NAFDAC’s announcement is the agency’s position that the relevant phase-out periods in Nigeria have ended and the prohibited products should no longer be circulating legally.

The continued discovery of such chemicals after a ban creates several enforcement challenges.

Authorities must identify the source of the products, establish how they entered the market, trace distributors and determine whether additional stocks remain in circulation. They may also need to investigate unauthorised storage facilities and manufacturing sites.

For farmers, the regulatory position means they must not rely on informal advice or the availability of a product in a market as proof that it is legal to use.

A pesticide’s presence on a shop shelf does not necessarily demonstrate that it is registered, approved for a particular crop or permitted for a particular application.

Farmers and agricultural businesses should consult current NAFDAC guidance and purchase products only through recognised, authorised channels.

Illegal Production and Cross-Border Distribution

NAFDAC attributed the continued circulation of prohibited pesticides partly to illegal importation and movement across Nigeria’s borders.

Products banned in Nigeria may enter through neighbouring countries or unauthorised supply channels. Others may be manufactured locally in facilities operating outside the regulatory system.

In July 2026, the agency sealed four unauthorised pesticide and agrochemical manufacturing facilities in Bichi, Kano State.

According to the enforcement information disclosed by NAFDAC, officers discovered unlabelled products, bulk chemicals and packaging materials associated with illicit production.

The agency also reported arrests in connection with enforcement operations, with one case undergoing prosecution at the time of the announcement.

These cases illustrate why removing individual consignments from the market may not be sufficient to address the problem.

If the suppliers, manufacturing sites and distribution networks responsible for prohibited chemicals remain active, new consignments may continue to appear after earlier seizures.

Effective enforcement therefore requires cooperation among regulators, customs and border authorities, law enforcement agencies, state governments and agricultural stakeholders.

It also requires reliable tracking of products from importation or manufacturing through distribution and sale. Proper records can help investigators identify the source of illegal consignments and determine which businesses supplied them.

NAFDAC said it was strengthening collaboration with relevant institutions and expanding its enforcement capacity to improve regulatory coverage.

The success of those efforts will depend on sustained implementation, adequate resources, consistent inspections and the ability to act against repeat violations.

How Farmers May Accidentally Put Consumers at Risk

The regulator’s warning is not limited to deliberate illegal activity.

NAFDAC said the misuse of otherwise approved pesticides can also leave residues above permitted safety limits.

Common unsafe practices include applying chemicals in quantities greater than those recommended on the product label, using pesticides on crops or against pests for which they are not approved, harvesting produce before the required pre-harvest interval and mixing products improperly.

Another concern is the use of chemicals designed for field application to protect harvested produce in storage.

The distinction matters because the safety instructions for a product are tied to its approved use. Applying the same substance in a different way can create exposure risks that the original instructions were not designed to address.

A farmer who applies an excessive dose may leave more residue on a crop than permitted. A trader who uses an unauthorised chemical to preserve stored beans may expose consumers to substances that should not be used for that purpose.

Unsafe handling can also affect people who are not directly involved in pesticide application.

Farm workers, household members, children and others may be exposed if chemicals are stored carelessly or used without suitable protective measures.

NAFDAC also warned against storing pesticides alongside food, animal feed or household items; reusing empty pesticide containers for domestic purposes; and disposing of chemical residues or containers improperly.

These practices can create avoidable risks in homes, farms, warehouses and communities.

The agency urged farmers to read and follow product labels, apply only recommended quantities and observe all safety precautions.

It also stressed the need for distributors and agro-input dealers to obtain products through legitimate channels and provide accurate guidance to customers.

Food Safety Begins Before Produce Reaches the Market

The discovery of excessive residues in some bean samples highlights the importance of monitoring food throughout the supply chain.

Food safety does not begin only when produce reaches a market, shop or kitchen. Decisions made during cultivation, harvesting, drying, storage, transport and processing can affect the safety of the final product.

At the farm level, producers need access to accurate information about approved pest-control methods. They must understand which chemicals can be used, how much to apply and how long to wait before harvesting.

During storage, traders and warehouse operators need suitable pest-management methods that comply with regulatory requirements.

Transporters and distributors must ensure that food is not contaminated through contact with chemicals or improperly handled containers.

Regulators, meanwhile, need systems for sampling products, testing for residues, investigating suspicious consignments and communicating findings to the public.

NAFDAC’s market study demonstrates the role that testing can play in identifying problems that may not be visible to consumers.

Beans that appear normal may still require laboratory analysis to determine whether pesticide residues comply with applicable limits. Visual inspection alone cannot reliably establish chemical safety.

Testing is particularly important where the misuse of chemicals is suspected, but the findings must be interpreted carefully. Authorities need to know which substances were detected, at what concentrations and whether the levels exceed the relevant limits.

Publishing sufficient information about testing methods and results can help strengthen public confidence and support evidence-based responses.

What Consumers Should Know

NAFDAC’s announcement is a reason to take food safety seriously, but consumers should avoid panic or assume that all beans available in Nigerian markets are unsafe.

The agency reported excessive residues in some samples. The available reports do not establish that every batch of beans has been affected, nor do they identify all products or locations that may be involved.

Consumers can take practical steps to reduce avoidable risks while recognising that household practices cannot reliably remove every chemical residue.

Beans and other food produce should be purchased from reputable sellers where possible, stored properly and prepared using normal food hygiene practices.

Washing produce and cooking food appropriately can help with some contaminants and food safety risks, but these measures cannot be relied upon to make food containing prohibited or excessive pesticide residues safe.

Consumers should not attempt to identify pesticide contamination by taste, smell or appearance. Many chemical residues cannot be detected reliably through these methods.

Where NAFDAC issues a specific recall, public warning or product identification notice, consumers should follow the instructions provided by the agency.

If someone suspects acute pesticide poisoning following an exposure, they should seek urgent medical attention and provide healthcare professionals with any available information about the substance involved. They should not wait for symptoms to become severe before seeking help.

The wider responsibility for ensuring that food complies with safety standards rests with producers, suppliers, regulators and other participants in the food chain, not consumers alone.

NAFDAC Expands Training and Regulatory Oversight

The agency said it had trained more than 2,000 agro-input dealers on responsible pesticide handling and application.

Such training can help improve knowledge of approved products, application instructions, safe storage and the risks associated with misuse.

Agro-input dealers occupy an important position between manufacturers and farmers. Their advice can influence which products farmers purchase and how those products are used.

Training is therefore valuable, particularly when it is accompanied by accessible guidance, regular inspections and accountability for violations.

NAFDAC also said it was expanding its investigation and enforcement zonal offices from three to six.

The expansion is intended to strengthen its ability to investigate suspected violations and improve regulatory coverage.

Other measures identified by the agency include scientific assessment and registration of pesticide products before market entry, inspection of manufacturing and storage facilities, border checks, market surveillance, laboratory testing and enforcement against illegal production and distribution.

These activities are intended to prevent prohibited or non-compliant products from entering the supply chain and to identify risks when they do.

The agency also said it provided free interim testing for export products to encourage compliance with applicable safety standards and reduce the risk of consignments being rejected in destination markets because of pesticide residues or other regulatory violations.

Such measures have implications for both public health and agriculture. Produce that complies with safety requirements is important for consumers at home and for Nigerian businesses seeking access to international markets.

However, the long-term effectiveness of the programme will depend on implementation, the availability of laboratory services, adequate staffing and cooperation across the public and private sectors.

Protecting Farmers Without Compromising Safety

Pesticides remain important tools for crop protection, and the challenge for regulators is to ensure that their benefits are not undermined by unsafe or unlawful use.

Farmers face pressure to protect harvests from pests that can reduce yields, damage stored produce and affect household income. In some situations, inadequate access to technical advice or approved alternatives may make unsafe practices more likely.

That context does not justify the use of prohibited chemicals, but it highlights why enforcement should be accompanied by practical education and access to compliant pest-management options.

Farmers need clear information about approved products and their uses. They also need access to trained agricultural extension personnel and reliable suppliers who can explain how to control pests without exposing consumers and workers to unnecessary risks.

Where a product has been banned, relevant authorities and agricultural stakeholders can help farmers understand the restriction and identify lawful alternatives suitable for the crops and pests they manage.

Education should also cover the safe disposal of chemical containers, appropriate protective equipment, storage requirements and emergency procedures following accidental exposure.

For dealers and distributors, compliance includes verifying that products are authorised, maintaining appropriate records and avoiding the sale of prohibited chemicals.

For manufacturers and importers, it means meeting registration and labelling requirements and ensuring that products are not marketed for unauthorised purposes.

A coordinated approach can help protect public health while supporting farmers’ ability to produce and preserve food.

The Economic Consequences of Unsafe Food

Food safety problems can affect more than individual consumers.

When produce fails regulatory requirements, farmers and traders may face financial losses, while exporters can encounter rejected consignments, additional testing expenses and damage to commercial relationships.

The circulation of prohibited pesticides can also create costs for regulators, including investigations, laboratory analysis, product seizures and legal proceedings.

For households, illness associated with chemical exposure may create additional medical expenses and lost working time. The actual effects depend on the type and level of exposure, and the available bean-study reports do not quantify the number of people affected.

Unsafe agricultural practices can also undermine confidence in food markets. Consumers need assurance that the food they purchase has been produced and handled in accordance with appropriate safety standards.

That assurance is particularly important in a country where beans and other staple foods play a major role in household nutrition.

Effective regulation can therefore support both public health and the commercial interests of responsible farmers and food businesses.

The challenge is to ensure that enforcement is consistent and that reliable information reaches everyone involved, from chemical manufacturers and importers to farmers, traders and consumers.

What Happens Next?

NAFDAC has said it will continue enforcement operations, laboratory testing, public education and engagement with relevant stakeholders to reduce the circulation of prohibited pesticides.

The agency’s next steps will be important in determining whether the reported seizures lead to a sustained reduction in illegal products and unsafe practices.

Key areas to watch include further enforcement actions, investigations into suppliers, the identification of illegal manufacturing and distribution networks, and the availability of more detailed information about pesticide residues found in food samples.

The regulator’s ability to provide clear public guidance on affected products and appropriate safety measures will also be important.

Farmers and agrochemical dealers should monitor official regulatory information and ensure that products they purchase, sell or use comply with current requirements.

Consumers, meanwhile, should rely on verified public advisories rather than unconfirmed social media claims about contaminated food.

The latest findings do not establish that all beans sold in Nigeria are unsafe. They do demonstrate why food safety systems must identify chemical residues that exceed permitted limits and prevent prohibited pesticides from entering the food supply.

A Shared Responsibility for Safer Food

NAFDAC’s warning places renewed focus on the relationship between agricultural practices, food regulation and public health.

The detection of excessive pesticide residues in some bean samples is a specific concern that requires careful investigation, while the reported seizures of prohibited agrochemicals point to wider enforcement challenges.

The agency’s message is that pesticides must be used only when authorised and in accordance with approved instructions. Products that have been prohibited must not remain in legal circulation, and unsafe practices involving approved chemicals must also be addressed.

Farmers need practical guidance