The insecticide Flupyradifurone proves to be much more harmful for bees than previously thought. It also potentially poses a risk to a child’s developing brain. Like all neonicotinoids, it can pass the blood-brain barrier. In a request to the European Commission, PAN Europe and Générations Futures ask the EU for an urgent revision, including the latest scientific evidence.
The pesticide was approved in 2015. It was presented by producer Bayer as an alternative to the other, more bee-toxic neonicotinoids. This proves to be new wine in an old bottle, since, in fact, it can be considered just another neonicotinoid. The last revision by EFSA in 2022 already showed serious risks for wild bees, but this did not trigger any restrictions by the European Commission.
Many pesticides that can seriously harm biodiversity have been allowed on the market. This is justified with an over 20-years-old guideline co-written by pesticide industry staff. [1] See for more details our campaign Restore Biodiversity, protect Bees and Bugs, where we advocate for a guideline that really protects insects and other so-called 'non-target arthropods'. [2]
Science shows negative impacts on non-target organisms
Since the EFSA advice, the EU has not made a move. Even worse, the 10-year EU approval has been extended for 3.5 years, until June 2029. In the meantime, evidence of flupyradifurone’s negative impacts on pollinators has been accumulating in the academic literature. Already 72 new studies on the substance’s effects on non-target organisms are available and have not been evaluated by EFSA. Of these 72 publications, 44 concern impacts on bees and bumblebees. The vast majority of these studies report toxic effects, particularly on wild species and often at environmental exposure levels. See the list of these studies as an annex to the letter.
Effect on the brain and development not properly assessed
Another gap in the EU pesticide assessment is a proper evaluation of the effect on our brains and nervous system. Scientists discovered that neonicotinoids can pass the placental and the blood-brain barrier in mammals. For this reason, the maximum residue levels in food of another toxic neonicotinoid, acetamiprid, were significantly reduced in 2025. It seems that the Commission does not learn from past experience with similar pesticides and keeps working in silos. It means that this class of pesticides can potentially do much more harm to humans than previously thought. Read more about this gap in the evaluation of neurotoxic properties in the Save our Brain campaign. [3]
Latest scientific evidence has to be taken into account
Pesticide evaluations are usually based on old industry studies. In two groundbreaking rulings, the EU Court of Justice declared in April 2024 that the assessment of pesticides by EU Member States is not in accordance with the law. [4] The rulings should put an end to the common practice of disregarding recent independent scientific knowledge. The court case was started by PAN Europe.
Now we clearly see also in this case why it is important to take the latest independent science into account. If we are serious about protecting health and the environment - the foundation of the EU pesticide law - there is no place for pesticides like flupyradifurone in our fields and crops.
Read more: Letter to the EU Commission asking to revise the Flupyradifuron authorisation
Notes:
[1] Industry writing its own rules | PAN Europe
[2] Restore Biodiversity, protect Bees and Bugs
[3] Save our Brain
[4] EU Court: member states do not properly carry out pesticide assessments
