CDC warns of growing, deadly Salmonella outbreak linked to cantaloupe - University of Minnesota Twin Cities
The effectiveness of unregulated botanical blacklegged-tick repellants and killers varies widely, with some offering minimal protection against bites and the pathogens they transmit to humans, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study.
Published last week in Emerging Infectious Diseases, the study summarized the evidence on products used in the United States and their efficacy compared with that of products registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as safe and effective. The bite of the blacklegged, or deer, tick (Ixodes scapularis) can cause Lyme disease, ehrlichiosis, and other diseases.
The author, Lars Eisen, PhD, noted that while the availability of unregulated anti-tick products, many based on botanical oils, is proliferating, assessments of such products are limited. These products are EPA-exempt because their active and inactive ingredients are considered to pose limited risk to human health or the environment when applied to skin, clothing, or vegetation.
"Evaluations of minimum risk tick repellents have typically focused on individual active ingredients rather than formulated products, which often combine multiple active ingredients," he wrote.
Repellent effect much shorter with botanicals
Some products killed blacklegged ticks at rates similar to chemical pesticides, while others had little effect. In addition, different products based on the same active ingredients (eg, rosemary oil) varied considerably in their tick-killing ability.
Evaluations of minimum risk tick repellents have typically focused on individual active ingredients rather than formulated products, which often combine multiple active ingredients.
One study that compared the ability to repel ticks in the United States among 19 minimum-risk active ingredients showed that total protection ranged from under 10 minutes (eg, castor oil) to less than 1 hour (eg, citronella oil) and 1 or 2 hours (eg, cinnamon oil), compared with the entire 6-hour observation period with the chemical DEET.
"Consumers should be aware that effectiveness to kill and repel ticks can differ among unregulated minimum risk products," Eisen wrote. "There also is a need to better understand the reasons why members of the public choose to use EPA-registered versus minimum risk 25(b) exempt tick toxicant and repellent products, based on perceptions about effectiveness and safety for humans, pets, and the environment."
Comments
Post a Comment