Hungarian Tap Water Contaminated with Glyphosate and Other Pesticides

One in five Hungarian municipalities has tap water contaminated with herbicides, insecticides, and other agricultural chemicals. Glyphosate is also present in the drinking water of several municipalities, according to data obtained by Átlátszó.

“An increasing number of deep groundwater sources used for drinking water are being contaminated by pesticides, including areas designated as protected water bodies. Pesticides that have been banned for decades are also being detected,” according to the National Center for Public Health and Medicine’s latest Drinking Water Quality 2023 report. The term ‘pesticides’ encompasses various types of chemicals, including insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, algaecides, and rodenticides.

Drinking water quality is monitored and overseen by Hungary’s National Centre for Public Health and Pharmacy. Testing includes bacteria, nitrites, heavy metals like lead and arsenic, as well as specific pesticides, suggested by the chief medical officer.

Although annual test results are publicly available, they can only be accessed individually. With the help of a reader, we scraped and compiled the official database to analyse the broader picture. This allowed us to identify how many towns had drinking water samples contaminated with pesticides.

In addition to finding agricultural chemicals twenty per cent of Hungarian towns, four municipalities had pesticide levels that exceeded the safety threshold.

Glyphosate found in rivers and lakes

Our previous article revealed that glyphosate — the most widely used pesticide — and its breakdown product, AMPA, were detected in three-quarters of the lakes and rivers tested, and in 14 percent of groundwater samples, according to a water quality report we obtained.

The publicly available data did not include records specific to glyphosate, so we submitted a freedom of information request. The resulting data revealed that glyphosate was detected in drinking water samples from 124 municipalities in the 2023 survey.

In one town, Vasvár, glyphosate concentrations exceeded the safety threshold. The local waterworks stated in a press release that the sample was taken from a public street fountain where herbicide spraying may have occurred shortly before testing.

Below and above the threshold

When testing reveals a water source has exceeded the safety threshold, the waterworks responsible should immediately report the results to the Centre for Public Health and Pharmacy and take corrective measures. In response to our freedom of information request, the authority confirmed that the necessary actions were taken in all cases observed in 2023.

The authority also noted that “sensitive analytical methods allow for the detection of substances at concentrations way below the threshold. Drinking water below the threshold is safe to consume”.

For pesticides, two key values are used: the acceptable daily intake (ADI) and the so-called acute reference dose. The ADI represents the amount a person can theoretically consume daily over a lifetime without adverse effects. The acute reference intake refers to the maximum amount that can be ingested in a short period of time (24 hours) without posing a health risk. The ADI for glyphosate was established based on a 90-day toxicological study in dogs and a two-year study in rats. The highest dose without observed adverse effects in these animal tests was divided by a safety factor of 100 — known as the uncertainty factor — to calculate the acceptable daily intake for humans. The acute reference dose (ARfD) was determined similarly, using data from rabbit studies and applying the same uncertainty factor of 100.    

Dr. Judit Háhn, senior research fellow at the Department of Environmental Safety at the Hungarian University of Agricultural and Life Sciences, told Átlátszó that, given the conservative methodology and the applied uncertainty factor, it is virtually impossible to ingest enough glyphosate through drinking water to exceed the acceptable daily intake (ADI).

However, Háhn added that since these values were established, a substantial body of new scientific evidence has emerged on the biological effects of glyphosate.

The pesticide threshold used in the European Union, including Hungary, was established in 1980, based on the scientific knowledge and analytical technology available at the time. It has remained unchanged since then. The limit is the same for nearly all pesticide substances: a maximum of 0.1 micrograms of any single substance per litre of water, and a combined total not exceeding 0.5 micrograms. If the pesticide content in drinking water surpasses this limit, the water is legally considered non-compliant with quality standards for human consumption.

Scientist working in laboratory. Source: Motion Array.

‘The limit values are calculated for a healthy adult; however, children’s developing bodies and nervous systems are more sensitive to toxic substances. Therefore, long-term exposure to levels below the threshold could still pose a risk to them’, said Gergely Simon, a chemical expert at Greenpeace Hungary.

Another major concern is the so-called cocktail effect, where the combined impact of multiple chemicals remains largely unknown. ‘This represents an almost unmanageable risk,’ stressed Gergely Simon.

The health effects of glyphosate have been debated for many years

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the UN’s World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’ after a working group of 17 experts reviewed around 1,000 research studies. While IARC found sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in animal studies, evidence in humans was considered limited.

Nevertheless, IARC found a positive association between between glyphosate exposure and the development of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.      

Monsanto, the US agrochemical company that developed glyphosate, referred to the IARC report as ‘junk science.’ Critics of the report argued that some of the studies reviewed were scientifically flawed or relied on questionable methodologies.

During the EU’s glyphosate reapproval process, experts reviewed 2,400 studies and found no clear evidence of carcinogenic, mutagenic, or endocrine-disrupting effects in humans. Based on these findings, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) approved the continued use of glyphosate in the EU for another 10 years in 2023.

However, the EU’s assessment has been just as contested as the IARC report. Critics argue that the evaluators prioritized the glyphosate industry’s interests, downplayed risks, and overlooked certain research studies. In response, several NGOs challenged the EU’s decision at the European Court of Justice in December 2024.

Some countries have taken action

Due to concerns about potential health and environmental effects, several countries have introduced restrictions on glyphosate-based products. The Netherlands and Austria, for instance, have banned the use of glyphosate herbicides in public spaces. In Germany, their use is prohibited in protected water areas and domestic gardens.

In Hungary, the National Food Chain Safety Office told Átlátszó that spraying in public areas is allowed only at night, between 10 p.m. and 4 a.m., and must be supervised by a qualified, licensed professional. Glyphosate use is also banned in nurseries, kindergartens, schools, playgrounds, and healthcare facilities.

Meanwhile, in France, farmers suffering from Parkinson’s disease are automatically entitled to compensation, as the government has officially recognized the scientific link between glyphosate exposure and the development of the disease.

Written and translated by Orsolya Fülöp, the Hungarian version of this story is here. Cover photo: Motion Array. Data visualisation: Krisztián Szabó. Supported by the Journalismfund Europe.