Is Folpet safe for babies and kids?
Elevated risk for kids(Babies-specific data is limited; this page draws from human pregnant context.) Prenatal exposure to Folpet may affect fetal development through endocrine disruption pathways. Several fungicide classes (azoles, dicarboximides) interfere with steroid biosynthesis.
What is folpet?
The IUPAC name is 2-(trichloromethylsulfanyl)isoindole-1,3-dione.
Also known as: 2-(trichloromethylsulfanyl)isoindole-1,3-dione, Faltan, Orthophaltan, Phthaltan.
- IUPAC name
- 2-(trichloromethylsulfanyl)isoindole-1,3-dione
- CAS number
- 133-07-3
- Molecular formula
- C9H4Cl3NO2S
- Molecular weight
- 296.6 g/mol
- SMILES
- C1=CC=C2C(=C1)C(=O)N(C2=O)SC(Cl)(Cl)Cl
- PubChem CID
- 8607
Risk for babies
Elevated riskPrenatal exposure to Folpet may affect fetal development through endocrine disruption pathways. Several fungicide classes (azoles, dicarboximides) interfere with steroid biosynthesis.
Suspected reproductive toxicant (GHS H361) or suspected endocrine disruptor. Precautionary approach warranted. Animal studies or limited human data suggest developmental toxicity potential.
Risk for pregnant and nursing people
Elevated riskPrenatal exposure to Folpet may affect fetal development through endocrine disruption pathways. Several fungicide classes (azoles, dicarboximides) interfere with steroid biosynthesis.
Suspected reproductive toxicant (GHS H361) or suspected endocrine disruptor. Precautionary approach warranted. Animal studies or limited human data suggest developmental toxicity potential.
Regulatory consensus
11 regulatory and scientific bodies have classified Folpet. The classifications differ — that's the data.
| Agency | Year | Classification | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| US EPA | 1994 | B2 | US EPA IRIS classification of folpet as Group B2 (probable human carcinogen) based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals — duodenal adenocarcinomas in mice at high doses in chronic bioassays, mirroring the carcinogenic profile of the structurally related compound captan. Folpet and captan share the trichloromethylthio (-SCCl₃) functional group and produce similar reactive metabolites (thiophosgene-like intermediates) in the gastrointestinal lumen, with local cytotoxicity to duodenal epithelium proposed as the carcinogenic mechanism. IARC evaluated folpet in Monograph 30 (1983) as Group 3 (not classifiable), based on limited animal evidence available at that time. Evidence in humans is inadequate for both IARC and EPA classifications. The high-dose mouse GI tumor mechanism and its relevance to human risk at environmental exposures are the same debate as for captan. EPA uses a cancer slope factor for dietary risk assessment from folpet residues. |
| IARC | 1983 | Group 3 | IARC Monograph 30 (1983) evaluated folpet alongside captan and assigned Group 3 based on inadequate evidence in humans and limited animal evidence. Not re-evaluated since 1983. |
| EPA CTX / EPA OPP | — | Group B2 Probable Human Carcinogen | |
| EPA CTX / CalEPA | — | Known human carcinogen | |
| EPA CTX / Genetox | — | Genotoxicity: positive (Ames: positive, 10 positive / 2 negative reports) | |
| EPA CTX / Genetox | — | Genotoxicity: positive (Ames: positive, 10 positive / 2 negative reports) | |
| EPA CTX / Skin-Eye | — | Eye Irritation: Eye Irrit. 2 (score: high) | |
| EPA CTX / Skin-Eye | — | Skin Sensitization: Skin Sens. 1 (score: high) | |
| EPA CTX / Skin-Eye | — | Skin Sensitization: Category 1 (score: high) | |
| EPA CTX / Skin-Eye | — | Eye Irritation: Category 6.4A (Category 2A) (score: high) | |
| EPA CTX / Skin-Eye | — | Skin Sensitization: Category 6.5B (Category 1) (score: moderate) |
Regulators apply different standards of evidence — animal-data weighting, exposure-pattern assumptions, epidemiological power thresholds — which is why two scientific bodies can review the same data and reach different conclusions. The disagreement is the data.
Where kids encounter folpet
- Industrial Facilities — Manufacturing plants, Chemical storage areas, Waste treatment sites
- Occupational Environments — Factories, Warehouses, Transportation vehicles
Safer alternatives
Lower-risk approaches that achieve a similar outcome to Folpet:
-
Physical/mechanical pest control (IPM)
Trade-offs: More labor-intensive. May not be sufficient for severe infestations.Relative cost: 1.2-2×
Frequently asked questions
What products contain folpet?
Folpet appears in: Manufacturing plants (Industrial facilities); Chemical storage areas (Industrial facilities); Factories (Occupational environments); Warehouses (Occupational environments).
Why do regulators disagree about folpet?
Folpet has been classified by 11 agencies including US EPA, IARC, EPA CTX / EPA OPP, EPA CTX / CalEPA, EPA CTX / Genetox, with differing conclusions. Regulators apply different standards of evidence (animal data weighting, exposure-pattern assumptions, epidemiological power thresholds), which is why two scientific bodies can review the same data and reach different conclusions. See the regulatory consensus table on this page for the full picture.
See Folpet in the baby app
Look up products containing folpet, compare to alternatives, and explore the full data record.
Open in baby View raw API dataSources (2)
- US EPA IRIS: Folpet — Cancer Classification B2 (Probable Human Carcinogen), Cancer Slope Factor, and Chronic Reference Dose (1994) (1994) — regulatory
- US EPA: Folpet Reregistration Eligibility Decision — Dietary Risk Assessment, Occupational Exposure, Captan Structural Analog, and Ecological Risk (2004) (2004) — regulatory
Reference data, not professional advice. Aggregates publicly available regulatory and scientific data; not a substitute for veterinary, medical, legal, or regulatory advice. Why we built ALETHEIA →