Heavy metals in Apple

Quick read

Fresh apples are usually low in lead, with medians below reporting limits in large monitoring sets, but some regional submissions and dried apple run higher; cadmium is the metal closest to the EU pome-fruit limit.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Metals of concern:
Lead and cadmium; arsenic and mercury are mostly below detection in fresh apple.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}
Main drivers:
The market and laboratory sampled, irrigation water, and drying, which concentrates metals.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}
Practical framing:
Ask for lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fruit, with a quantification limit well below 20 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Apple overview

Fresh apples are usually low in lead in large monitoring datasets, but not uniformly so. In WHO GEMS/Food, the median lead result for fresh apple was below laboratory reporting limits in every large regional set, and 15 of 3,321 European results and 13 of 982 results from the Americas exceeded 100 µg/kg, the EU and Codex maximum for fruit.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →} Apples submitted from the Western Pacific region under random sampling were higher, with a median of about 24 µg/kg, and all 56 of the 806 regional results above 100 µg/kg were collected between 2001 and 2008.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Cadmium, arsenic and mercury in fresh apple are mostly below detection.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} All 27 FDA Total Diet Study composites of raw red apple bought in the United States in 2017–2020 were below reporting limits for lead (4 µg/kg), cadmium (1 µg/kg), mercury (1 µg/kg) and nickel (40 µg/kg), and seven had total arsenic between 3 and 20 µg/kg.^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} Cadmium is the metal closest to its limit in Europe: 112 of 4,582 European results exceeded 20 µg/kg, the EU maximum for pome fruit, although the European median stayed below 2 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Dried apple carries more metal per kilogram than fresh apple because drying removes water, and several small market studies report much higher values that their own methods cannot support.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →} The practical control is a lot-specific lead and cadmium result on the fresh fruit, measured with a quantification limit well below 20 µg/kg, rather than an assumption based on variety or origin.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

What counts as apple

This page covers fresh apple fruit (Malus domestica) as bought or harvested: whole apples with the peel on, peeled apple flesh and apples analysed washed or unwashed, together with dried apple as a separate form.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →} Each form is kept apart because peeling removes the skin, washing removes surface soil, and drying concentrates everything the fruit carried, so results on different forms are not interchangeable.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}

Apple juice and applesauce have their own pages, and apple baby foods (purees, pouches, juices and cereals with apple) belong with applesauce and infant foods, so their results are not used here.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{10Napier MD, et al. · 2024Childhood Lead Exposure Linked to Apple Cinnamon Fruit Puree Pouches — North Carolina, June 2023–January 2024MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly ReportRead source →} Nor are cider, vinegar, pomace, pies and other foods that only contain apple, or other fruits called apple, such as pineapple, custard apple, star apple, rose apple and crab apple.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Basis matters for apples, which are about 85% water.^{11Elbagermi MA, Edwards HGM, Alajtal AI · 2012Monitoring of Heavy Metal Content in Fruits and Vegetables Collected from Production and Market Sites in the Misurata Area of LibyaISRN Analytical ChemistryRead source →} Monitoring programmes report results on the fruit as sold or eaten, while several laboratory studies report dry weight, which for fruit of that water content is roughly six to seven times the fresh-weight value; this page never mixes the two.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{12Afrin S · 2020Determination and Risk Analysis of Heavy Metals in Different Fruits Collected from Different Shops of Dhaka CityM.S. Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, DhakaRead source →}^{11Elbagermi MA, Edwards HGM, Alajtal AI · 2012Monitoring of Heavy Metal Content in Fruits and Vegetables Collected from Production and Market Sites in the Misurata Area of LibyaISRN Analytical ChemistryRead source →}

Heavy metal contamination profile of apples

The table holds every apple result extracted from WHO GEMS/Food, the FDA Total Diet Study and 26 further monitoring, market, orchard and diet studies: one row for each statistic a source reports for a form of apple, group and metal.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{13Centre for Food Safety (Hong Kong) · 2013The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic ContaminantsCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →}^{16Centre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · 2012The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}^{17Hadi QM, Mahdi FA, Hamood FJ, Abbas SH, Abojassim AA · 2025Health Impact of Heavy Metals in Samples of Dried Fruits in IraqInternational Journal of Analytical ChemistryRead source →}^{18Mahmood BA, Alkubaisy SA, Marouf EAAK, Mohammed EH · 2025Estimation of some heavy metal concentrations in selected dried fruit samples available in local markets and assessment of their health risksInternational Journal of Environmental ImpactsRead source →}^{12Afrin S · 2020Determination and Risk Analysis of Heavy Metals in Different Fruits Collected from Different Shops of Dhaka CityM.S. Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, DhakaRead source →}^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}^{11Elbagermi MA, Edwards HGM, Alajtal AI · 2012Monitoring of Heavy Metal Content in Fruits and Vegetables Collected from Production and Market Sites in the Misurata Area of LibyaISRN Analytical ChemistryRead source →}^{21Jane Houlihan, Charlotte Brody · 2019What’s in My Baby’s Food? A National Investigation Finds 95 Percent of Baby Foods Tested Contain Toxic Chemicals That Lower Babies’ IQ, Including Arsenic and LeadHealthy Babies Bright FuturesRead source →}^{22Reczajska W, Jedrzejczak R, Szteke B · 2005Determination of Chromium Content of Food and Beverages of Plant OriginPolish Journal of Food and Nutrition SciencesRead source →}^{23Wang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, Liu S, Cui W · 2020Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaFood Science & NutritionRead source →}^{24Amer MM, Sabry BA, Marrez DA, Hathout AS, Fouzy ASM · 2019Exposure assessment of heavy metal residues in some Egyptian fruitsToxicology ReportsRead source →}^{25Liang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, Liu X · 2019Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthRead source →}^{26Altunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, Tuzen M · 2023Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationFoods 2023, 12, 3620Read source →}^{27Mohammad Rezaei, Yousef Fakhri, Maryam Abtahi, Majid Keramati, Gholamreza Ghasemi, Mohammad H. Moradi, Hamed Shariatifar, Mahsa Mousavi Khaneghah · 2020Essential elements in the different type of fruits, soil and water samples collected from Markazi province, Iran: a health risk assessment studyQuality Assurance and Safety of Crops & FoodsRead source →}^{28Mania M, Rebeniak M, Chabros E, Orshulyak O, Postupolski J · 2021The content of lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury and tin in fruit and their products based on monitoring studies – exposure assessmentRoczniki Państwowego Zakładu Higieny (Annals of the National Institute of Hygiene)Read source →}^{29Magdalene Unaegbu, Vincent C. I. Eze, Ebere C. I. Omeje, Ezinne A. O. Agbo, Ebere V. Chukwuma · 2016Heavy metal, nutrient and antioxidant status of selected fruit samples sold in Enugu, NigeriaInternational Journal of Food ContaminationRead source →}^{30Bora FD, Bunea A, Pop SR, Banita SI, Dusa DS, Chira A, Bunea CI · 2022Quantification and Reduction in Heavy Metal Residues in Some Fruits and Vegetables: A Case Study Galați County, RomaniaHorticulturaeRead source →}^{31Carolyn Harper, Fernando Llados, Gary Diamond, Lara L. Chappell, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry · 2005Toxicological Profile for Tin and Tin CompoundsU.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease RegistryRead source →} GEMS/Food rows are HMI-calculated medians of individual national submissions by WHO region, sampling type and portion label; non-detects remain intervals between zero and the reporting limit and are never read as zero.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Ratings place a result against an HMI reference for the same form of apple and basis, built from GEMS/Food region-by-year medians, FDA Total Diet Study collections, ten raw apples analysed by FDA in 2016 and published survey medians.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{22Reczajska W, Jedrzejczak R, Szteke B · 2005Determination of Chromium Content of Food and Beverages of Plant OriginPolish Journal of Food and Nutrition SciencesRead source →}

Because most fresh-apple results are below detection, the lead, cadmium and arsenic references have no clearly separated middle range, so many rows cannot be rated and are compared within their own dataset instead.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} Dry-weight laboratory results and results with no stated basis are never pooled with as-sold results, and values that fail a check against their own paper are held and stay visible with the reason.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{12Afrin S · 2020Determination and Risk Analysis of Heavy Metals in Different Fruits Collected from Different Shops of Dhaka CityM.S. Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, DhakaRead source →}^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}^{23Wang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, Liu S, Cui W · 2020Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaFood Science & NutritionRead source →}^{25Liang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, Liu X · 2019Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthRead source →}^{26Altunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, Tuzen M · 2023Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationFoods 2023, 12, 3620Read source →}^{27Mohammad Rezaei, Yousef Fakhri, Maryam Abtahi, Majid Keramati, Gholamreza Ghasemi, Mohammad H. Moradi, Hamed Shariatifar, Mahsa Mousavi Khaneghah · 2020Essential elements in the different type of fruits, soil and water samples collected from Markazi province, Iran: a health risk assessment studyQuality Assurance and Safety of Crops & FoodsRead source →}

Comparison methods and scope

Each row is one statistic a source reports for one form of apple, group and metal. Fresh apple, peeled apple, unwashed apple and dried apple are kept apart, and dry-weight results never share a reference with fresh or as-sold results. Ratings place a result against an HMI reference built from monitoring results for the same form of apple. Same-study contrasts compare unwashed with washed apples, dried with fresh apple, wastewater-irrigated with well-water apples, or two areas of one diet study. Held rows failed a check against their own paper and are shown but not compared.

Filter findings

AnalyteFood formCollection regionCollection periodSourceCompare withComparable findings only

224 of 224 findings · 12 analytes

About this table

Food formCollection scopeFindingComparisonEvidence

Apple findings from WHO GEMS/Food and FDA monitoring, total diet studies and every extracted market, orchard and processing study, in µg/kg with each source’s form of apple, basis, statistic and censoring retained.
Food form	Collection scope	Finding (µg/kg)

45 findings · 15 studies · 2 spread figures folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2003–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000–2001	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2003–2017	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated, whole fruit2011	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO, random2000–2017	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	SEARO, random2012	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	SEARO, sampling unstated2012–2013	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random2001–2014	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random, whole fruit2003–2008	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted2001–2008	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, washed1998	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Shwapno super shop, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Agora super market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Prince Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Kawran Bazar fruit market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Meena Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Alexandria markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Cairo markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	El-Fayoum markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Giza markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Amateur growers, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Market, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBramwell et al. 2022	Allotments, Newcastle, UKCollection date unreported	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBramwell et al. 2022	Allotments, Newcastle, UKCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedElbagermi et al. 2012	Misurata markets, Libya2010Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: 4–32 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHoulihan and Brody 2019	US Total Diet Study 2014–20172014–2017	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedLiang et al. 2019	Beijing marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	mean.Same samples: 190–510 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRahim et al. 2020	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSalhotra and Verma 2017	Jagdalpur market, India2017Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Jilin provinceCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Other areas, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Songhua River area, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, unwashedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, unwashed1998	median.
2 findings · 2 studies
Fresh apple, peeledLee et al. 2023	Supermarkets, South Korea2019	mean.
Fresh apple, peeledRusin et al. 2021	Polish marketCollection date unreported	mean.
7 findings · 4 studies
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2006–2018	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2007–2017	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO, random2011–2013	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO, random, whole fruit2018	median.
Dried appleHadi et al. 2025	Iranian product, Iraq retail2025Basis not stated	not detected.
Dried appleMahmood et al. 2025	Anbar retail, IraqCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
Dried appleRusin et al. 2021	Polish marketCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
2 findings · 1 study
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	US apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	not detected.
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	South African apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	not detected.

41 findings · 15 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EMRO, sampling unstated2019	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2001–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000–2006	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2003–2017	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO, random2003–2017	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random1998–2014	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted1998–2008	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, washed1998	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Shwapno super shop, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Agora super market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Prince Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Kawran Bazar fruit market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Meena Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAltunay et al. 2023	Sivas greengrocer, TurkeyCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Alexandria markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Cairo markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	El-Fayoum markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Giza markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Amateur growers, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Market, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedElbagermi et al. 2012	Misurata markets, Libya2010Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHoulihan and Brody 2019	US Total Diet Study 2014–20172014–2017	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedLiang et al. 2019	Beijing marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	mean.Same samples: 30–80 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRahim et al. 2020	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSalhotra and Verma 2017	Jagdalpur market, India2017Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007Dry weight	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedSembratowicz et al. 2010	Lublin outskirts allotments2007	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Jilin provinceCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Other areas, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Songhua River area, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, unwashedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, unwashed1998	median.
2 findings · 2 studies
Fresh apple, peeledLee et al. 2023	Supermarkets, South Korea2019	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peeledRusin et al. 2021	Polish marketCollection date unreported	mean.
5 findings · 3 studies
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2004–2018	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2003	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2003–2017	median.
Dried appleHadi et al. 2025	Iranian product, Iraq retail2025Basis not stated	sample value.
Dried appleRusin et al. 2021	Polish marketCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
2 findings · 1 study
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	US apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	not detected.
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	South African apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	not detected.

29 findings · 9 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2001–2015	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random, whole fruit2014–2023	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000–2012	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted, whole fruit2020–2022	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2002–2012	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated, whole fruit2017–2022	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random1998–2014	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted2000–2008	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, washed1998	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Amateur growers, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedBora et al. 2022	Market, Romania2020–2021	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	8 of 10 US and NZ applesCollection date unreported	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	Organic Red Delicious, USACollection date unreported	sample value.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	Red Delicious, USACollection date unreported	sample value.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHoulihan and Brody 2019	US Total Diet Study 2014–20172014–2017	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedLiang et al. 2019	Beijing marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Well water, Y12021Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Well water, Y22022Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Well water + fertiliser, Y12021Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Well water + fertiliser, Y22022Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Wastewater 50%, Y12021Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Wastewater 50%, Y22022Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Wastewater 100%, Y12021Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNasirpour et al. 2026	Wastewater 100%, Y22022Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	mean.Same samples: 80–130 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Jilin provinceCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Other areas, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Songhua River area, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, unwashedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, unwashed1998	median.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, peeledLee et al. 2023	Supermarkets, South Korea2019	below LOD.
3 findings · 1 study
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2010–2015	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random, whole fruit2015	median.
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2011	median.

6 findings · 4 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random, whole fruit2016–2023	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random2010–2022	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	Ten US and NZ applesCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	Ten US and NZ applesCollection date unreported	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2012	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: up to 10 µg/kg (range; lowest below the limit)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2012	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHoulihan and Brody 2019	US Total Diet Study 2014–20172014–2017	mean.

1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA 2016	Ten US and NZ applesCollection date unreported	not detected.

9 findings · 4 studies
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2001–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000–2001	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, sampling unstated2010–2017	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random1998–2014	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted2001–2008	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, washed1998	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHoulihan and Brody 2019	US Total Diet Study 2014–20172014–2017	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedLiang et al. 2019	Beijing marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, unwashedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, unwashed1998	median.
2 findings · 2 studies
Dried appleWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2008–2015	median.
Dried appleMania et al. 2021	Imported, Polish market2015Basis not stated	sample value.

16 findings · 8 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Shwapno super shop, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Agora super market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Prince Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Kawran Bazar fruit market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Meena Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Alexandria markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Cairo markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	El-Fayoum markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Giza markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedElbagermi et al. 2012	Misurata markets, Libya2010Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: 20–130 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRahim et al. 2020	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, peeledLee et al. 2023	Supermarkets, South Korea2019	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Dried appleMahmood et al. 2025	Anbar retail, IraqCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
2 findings · 1 study
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	US apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	sample value.
Laboratory juice extract of fresh appleUnaegbu et al. 2016	South African apple, EnuguCollection date unreportedPer litre of extract	not detected.

26 findings · 9 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, targeted2000	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Shwapno super shop, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Agora super market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Prince Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Kawran Bazar fruit market, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAfrin 2020	Meena Bazar, Dhaka2018–2019Dry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Alexandria markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Cairo markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	El-Fayoum markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedAmer et al. 2019	Giza markets, EgyptCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedLiang et al. 2019	Beijing marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedNawab et al. 2017	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa markets2016–2017Basis not stated	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRahim et al. 2020	Khyber Pakhtunkhwa marketsCollection date unreportedDry weight	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedReczajska et al. 2005	Polish plantations2001	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedReczajska et al. 2005	Polish plantations2001	mean.Same samples: 2–63 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedReczajska et al. 2005	Polish plantations2001	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedReczajska et al. 2005	Polish plantations2001	p90.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedReczajska et al. 2005	Recovery-test sample, Poland2001Basis not stated	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Delijan orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Khomein orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Khondab orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	below LOD.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Mahallat orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Saveh orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Tafresh orchards, IranCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedRezaei et al. 2020	Six Markazi orchardsCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, peeledLee et al. 2023	Supermarkets, South Korea2019	mean.
2 findings · 2 studies
Dried appleHadi et al. 2025	Iranian product, Iraq retail2025Basis not stated	not detected.
Dried appleMahmood et al. 2025	Anbar retail, IraqCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.

5 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2007–2009	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: 220–600 µg/kg (range)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Jilin provinceCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Other areas, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWang et al. 2020	Songhua River area, JilinCollection date unreported	mean.

6 findings · 3 studies · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	EURO, random2007–2009	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, random1998–2011	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted2000–2001	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, washed1998	median.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedATSDR 2005	French diet study (quoted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: up to 12 µg/kg (range; lowest below the limit)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.
1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, unwashedWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO, targeted, unwashed1998	median.

1 finding · 1 study · 1 spread figure folded in
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	mean.Same samples: up to 5 µg/kg (range; lowest below the limit)
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedHong Kong TDS 2013	Hong Kong retail2010–2011	range.

1 finding · 1 study
Fresh apple, peel on or not statedFDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	United States, national2017–2020	median.

Shared dataset methods and interpretation

Source summaries retain their original statistic, material, basis and censoring. Each source drawer identifies methods and overlapping samples. No matched reference or pooled distribution is inferred.

HMI apple Pb reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Pb reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤4	1–7 (bounded)
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤4	1–7 (bounded)

78 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	72	33%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	33%
Bramwell et al. 2022	1	33%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection, and published survey medians. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

3 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Pb:99c89bdb29cf

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Pb reference · Fresh apple, unwashed

Reference and scope

HMI apple Pb reference · Fresh apple, unwashed. Fresh apple, unwashed; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤5	≤5	≤5
Alternative weighting	≤5	≤5	≤5

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, unwashed on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, unwashed and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh_unwashed-fw-Pb:692b3d8336f1

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Pb reference · Dried apple

Reference and scope

HMI apple Pb reference · Dried apple. Dried apple; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤10	16–23.5 (bounded)	29.6–31 (bounded)
Alternative weighting	≤10	16–23.5 (bounded)	29.6–31 (bounded)

17 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	17	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of dried apple on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for dried apple and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-dried-fw-Pb:2dea402a7126

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Cd reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Cd reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤1	≤2
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤1	≤2

70 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	65	50%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Cd:c9c808ba6050

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Cd reference · Fresh apple, unwashed

Reference and scope

HMI apple Cd reference · Fresh apple, unwashed. Fresh apple, unwashed; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤2.5	≤2.5	≤2.5
Alternative weighting	≤2.5	≤2.5	≤2.5

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, unwashed on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, unwashed and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh_unwashed-fw-Cd:6869063e67a2

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Cd reference · Dried apple

Reference and scope

HMI apple Cd reference · Dried apple. Dried apple; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1.6	≤3.5	1.5–6.5 (bounded)
Alternative weighting	≤1.6	≤3.5	1.5–6.5 (bounded)

17 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	17	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of dried apple on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for dried apple and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-dried-fw-Cd:a098410d0b7c

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tAs reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple tAs reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤3	≤6.1	≤6.1
Alternative weighting	≤3	≤6.1	≤6.1

56 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	50	33%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	33%
FDA 2016	1	33%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection, the median of ten raw apples in the FDA 2016 survey. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

3 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-tAs:e84694498248

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tAs reference · Fresh apple, unwashed

Reference and scope

HMI apple tAs reference · Fresh apple, unwashed. Fresh apple, unwashed; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤5	≤5	≤5
Alternative weighting	≤5	≤5	≤5

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, unwashed on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, unwashed and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh_unwashed-fw-tAs:c4870c146493

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tAs reference · Dried apple

Reference and scope

HMI apple tAs reference · Dried apple. Dried apple; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤4.8	4.8–10 (bounded)	16
Alternative weighting	≤4.8	4.8–10 (bounded)	16

6 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	6	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of dried apple on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for dried apple and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-dried-fw-tAs:ce93f47110f2

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple iAs reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple iAs reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤2.2	≤3.6	≤20
Alternative weighting	≤2.2	≤3.6	≤20

10 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	9	50%
FDA 2016	1	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, the median of ten raw apples in the FDA 2016 survey. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-iAs:36f7b461c819

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple DMA reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple DMA reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤3	≤3	≤3
Alternative weighting	≤3	≤3	≤3

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA 2016	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, the median of ten raw apples in the FDA 2016 survey. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

fda2016-infant-toddler-foods-inorganic-arsenic is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, peel on or not stated and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA 2016

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-DMA:052558cda611

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tHg reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple tHg reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤1	≤1.35
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤1	≤1.35

37 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	32	50%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-tHg:1888dfc70d0b

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tHg reference · Fresh apple, unwashed

Reference and scope

HMI apple tHg reference · Fresh apple, unwashed. Fresh apple, unwashed; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤5	≤5	≤5
Alternative weighting	≤5	≤5	≤5

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, unwashed on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, unwashed and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh_unwashed-fw-tHg:0383d2d04ccb

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple tHg reference · Dried apple

Reference and scope

HMI apple tHg reference · Dried apple. Dried apple; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	0.39	1.1	13–15 (bounded)
Alternative weighting	0.39	1.1	13–15 (bounded)

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	3	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of dried apple on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for dried apple and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-dried-fw-tHg:f8f37eeb414f

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Ni reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Ni reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤40	31.5–51.5 (bounded)	63
Alternative weighting	≤40	31.5–51.5 (bounded)	63

6 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	50%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Ni:8cc9cc2bc584

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Cr reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Cr reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤9	9–30 (bounded)	30–50 (bounded)
Alternative weighting	≤9	9–30 (bounded)	30–50 (bounded)

7 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	33%
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	33%
Reczajska et al. 2005	1	33%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection, and published survey medians. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

3 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Cr:83e5faef6916

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Al reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Al reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤236	1160	1430
Alternative weighting	≤236	1160	1430

3 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	3	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, peel on or not stated and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Al:42cec4fcbc21

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Sn reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple Sn reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤8.74	9.85–10.5 (bounded)	20
Alternative weighting	≤8.74	9.85–10.5 (bounded)	20

10 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	10	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, peel on or not stated and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-Sn:f8209cc781a7

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple Sn reference · Fresh apple, unwashed

Reference and scope

HMI apple Sn reference · Fresh apple, unwashed. Fresh apple, unwashed; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤10	≤10	≤10
Alternative weighting	≤10	≤10	≤10

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, unwashed on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, unwashed and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh_unwashed-fw-Sn:34f18ca92c1b

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI apple U reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated

Reference and scope

HMI apple U reference · Fresh apple, peel on or not stated. Fresh apple, peel on or not stated; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤1	≤1
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤1	≤1

5 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020	5	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians of fresh apple, peel on or not stated on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis: individual WHO GEMS/Food results summarised per WHO region, sampling type and collection year, FDA Total Diet Study composites summarised per national collection. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Peeled, unwashed and dried apple, dry-weight results and results without a stated basis are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1–Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

fda2022-tds-elements-fy2018-fy2020 is the only compatible sampling family for fresh apple, peel on or not stated and this metal in the completed apple ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas. Many results are non-detects with differing limits, which widens the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study 2018–2020

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:apple-fresh-fw-U:5f6e2d685a84

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

How metals reach apples

Metals reach apples from orchard soil and water through the tree, and from dust and soil on the fruit surface.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →} The EU applies its lead limit for fruit after washing and separating the edible part, which reflects where regulators expect surface soil to be removed.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Apple trees appear to move little lead into the fruit.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →} On urban allotments in Newcastle, where soils averaged 327 mg/kg lead, apples had a median of 1 µg/kg lead on a fresh-weight basis, the lowest of every crop group measured, against medians of 23 µg/kg for root vegetables and 19 µg/kg for shrub fruit such as raspberries.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Irrigation water can matter for arsenic.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} In a Golden Delicious orchard near Mashhad, Iran, fruit from trees watered with treated municipal wastewater carried about 380–390 µg/kg arsenic on a dry-weight basis in the second year against 140–150 µg/kg with well water, while first-year results did not separate clearly (630–780 µg/kg in every treatment).^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} These values were read from a bar chart, the method was not one usually sensitive enough for arsenic, and no detection limit or reference material was reported, so the direction is more reliable than the size.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}

Older orchard practices are a possible lead source that no study in the library measured directly. In the Newcastle study, eating more bought tree fruit was associated with higher blood lead in gardeners and non-gardeners alike, and the authors suggested historic lead arsenate sprays as one explanation without testing it.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Which apples and markets measured lower

For lead in fresh apple, the lowest results in the evidence come from the Americas and the United States.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} Results submitted to GEMS/Food from the Americas in 2000–2017 had a median at or below 2.1 µg/kg across 982 apples, and all 27 FDA Total Diet Study composites from 2017–2020 were below 4 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} European submissions had a median below 10 µg/kg across 3,321 apples, with reporting limits of 3–50 µg/kg that make lower European values impossible to resolve.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Higher lead was reported from the Western Pacific and South-East Asia regions.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Western Pacific apples under random sampling had a median of about 24 µg/kg, and 32 of 262 random-sampling results from 1998–2004 exceeded 100 µg/kg against none of 12 from 2010–2014, so this pattern belongs mostly to older submissions.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Ten apples from South-East Asia in 2012–2013 had a median of 75 µg/kg; ten results cannot represent a region.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} WHO regions are reporting regions, not growing areas, so these are lowest observed patterns by market, not rankings of producing countries.

Within European monitoring, imported and domestic apples differed mainly in the high tail.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} None of 1,222 apples labelled imported exceeded 100 µg/kg lead against 14 of 1,875 labelled domestic, while the share above 50 µg/kg was similar (3.5% against 3.7%).^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} The export does not name the country of growth, so this cannot show which producing countries are lower.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

For cadmium, monitored apple is consistently low, and the Americas were again lowest.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Only 20 of 650 apples submitted from the Americas had detectable cadmium, the highest at 50 µg/kg, while 112 of 4,582 European results exceeded the 20 µg/kg EU limit for pome fruit, with a maximum of 500 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →} Total arsenic was mostly below detection in Europe and the Western Pacific, and inorganic arsenic has too few results (13 in GEMS/Food, ten in the FDA 2016 survey) to compare regions.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}

No variety or production label measured reliably lower.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →} Cultivar labels submitted from the Americas in 2014–2016 (Gala, McIntosh, Red Delicious, Golden Delicious, Granny Smith, Spartan and others) all had lead medians below the 5 µg/kg reporting limit, and apples labelled organic had a median of 1–2 µg/kg against no more than 2.2 µg/kg for others.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} In the FDA 2016 survey, inorganic arsenic was below detection in all ten apples, organic and conventional, across nine named varieties.^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}

Which regions or markets measured lowest in lead?

Apples submitted to GEMS/Food from the Americas (median at or below 2.1 µg/kg, 982 results) and the US Total Diet Study (all 27 composites below 4 µg/kg) were lowest.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} European results had a median below 10 µg/kg, and Western Pacific random-sampling results a median of about 24 µg/kg, mostly from 1998–2009.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Reporting limits differ between regions, so part of the gap between the Americas and Europe reflects laboratory sensitivity rather than the fruit.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Does apple variety change lead or cadmium?

Not measurably in the evidence: every named cultivar submitted from the Americas in 2014–2016 had a lead median below the 5 µg/kg reporting limit, and only single results reached 63 µg/kg (McIntosh) and 43 µg/kg (Gala).^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} No study compared cultivars for cadmium.

Washing, peeling and drying

Washing, peeling and drying are the processing steps with apple evidence, and only drying has a clear measured effect. In a 1998 Western Pacific survey, washed and unwashed apples both had lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury medians below reporting limits of 2.5–5 µg/kg, so washing could not be shown to lower these metals at such low levels.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} No study measured peeled and unpeeled apples from the same lot; peeled apples bought in South Korea averaged 46 µg/kg lead and peeled apples on the Polish market 9 µg/kg, a difference between markets and laboratories rather than an effect of peeling.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →}

Drying concentrates metals per kilogram.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →} Dried apple submitted to GEMS/Food from Europe had a lead median of 26–29 µg/kg under random sampling against below 10 µg/kg for fresh apple, and on the Polish market dried apple averaged 127 µg/kg lead and 23 µg/kg cadmium on a dry-weight basis against 9 and 1 µg/kg in fresh peeled apple.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →} Single dried-apple products have reported 897 µg/kg cadmium (an Iranian product sold in Iraq), 63 µg/kg lead and 257 µg/kg chromium (Iraq) and 16 µg/kg mercury (an import to Poland), on bases the papers do not state.^{17Hadi QM, Mahdi FA, Hamood FJ, Abbas SH, Abojassim AA · 2025Health Impact of Heavy Metals in Samples of Dried Fruits in IraqInternational Journal of Analytical ChemistryRead source →}^{18Mahmood BA, Alkubaisy SA, Marouf EAAK, Mohammed EH · 2025Estimation of some heavy metal concentrations in selected dried fruit samples available in local markets and assessment of their health risksInternational Journal of Environmental ImpactsRead source →}^{28Mania M, Rebeniak M, Chabros E, Orshulyak O, Postupolski J · 2021The content of lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury and tin in fruit and their products based on monitoring studies – exposure assessmentRoczniki Państwowego Zakładu Higieny (Annals of the National Institute of Hygiene)Read source →}

Does peeling an apple remove lead?

No study in the library measured peeled and unpeeled apples from the same lot, so the size of any reduction is unknown.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →} Peeled apples in two market surveys averaged 46 µg/kg lead in South Korea and 9 µg/kg in Poland, a difference that tracks the market and laboratory rather than peeling.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →}

Mitigation from orchard to market

Controls for metals in apples act at the orchard, during handling and storage, and at lot release. The only measured orchard comparison is irrigation water: wastewater-irrigated Golden Delicious fruit carried more arsenic than well-water fruit in one of two years, while the choice among three rootstocks made no significant difference to fruit arsenic.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} Siting evidence is observational: apples grown on lead-contaminated urban allotment soil still had the lowest lead of any crop measured there.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Handling controls rest on guidance and descriptive comparisons rather than tested effects.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{32German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · 2020FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersBfR FAQ of 20 July 2020Read source →} The EU defines its limits on washed fruit with the edible part separated, German risk assessors advise against wrapping cut apples or storing apple puree in aluminium foil, and washed and unwashed apples in one survey could not be told apart because both were below detection.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{32German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · 2020FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersBfR FAQ of 20 July 2020Read source →} Testing a lot detects lead and cadmium but does not remove them, so release testing is a verification step rather than a reduction.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

About this table

ControlMaterialEffectsEvidence

Control

Material

Effects

Evidence

Irrigate with well water rather than treated wastewatercultivation · As reported

Apple

tAs · Increased

tAs · Context

1

Nasirpour et al. 2026

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

Total arsenicIncreasedAbout 2.8 times higher with 100% wastewater (year 2)Fruit total arsenic, dry weight100% wastewater versus well water, year 2Whole fruit, dry weightHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (390 − 140) / 140 × 100 = 178.6%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Total arsenicIncreasedAbout 2.7 times higher with 50% wastewater (year 2)Fruit total arsenic, dry weight50% wastewater versus well water, year 2Whole fruit, dry weightHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (380 − 140) / 140 × 100 = 171.4%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Total arsenicNot clearly different in year 1 (about 780 against 690 µg/kg)Fruit total arsenic, dry weight100% wastewater versus well water, year 1Whole fruit, dry weightContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Well-water control against 50% and 100% treated wastewater, same orchard, cultivar and year; three rootstocks pooled.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Fruit from trees irrigated with 100% or 50% treated municipal wastewater carried about 2.5–2.8 times the arsenic of well-water fruit in the second year; first-year results did not separate clearly.

Context	Selected control
Material	Golden Delicious apples, orchard near Mashhad, Iran, 2021–2022
Stage	cultivation
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands
Period	As reported
Conditions	One orchard and cultivar over two seasons.
Tested scale	Field
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Orchard field experiment. One orchard and cultivar over two seasons.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Total arsenic (tAs)	As reported	About 2.8 times higher with 100% wastewater (year 2)	140 → 390 µg/kg	Absolute values unextracted	Whole fruit, dry weight	Fig. 1U p.7; Table 3 p.4
Total arsenic (tAs)	As reported	About 2.7 times higher with 50% wastewater (year 2)	140 → 380 µg/kg	Absolute values unextracted	Whole fruit, dry weight	Fig. 1U p.7
Total arsenic (tAs)	As reported	Not clearly different in year 1 (about 780 against 690 µg/kg)	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Whole fruit, dry weight	Fig. 1U p.7; Duncan letters

No detection limit, reference material or recovery reported; values read from a chart.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One orchard and cultivar over two seasons.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Rootstock choice (MM111, MM106 or EM9)cultivation · As reported

Apple

tAs · Context

1

Nasirpour et al. 2026

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

Total arsenicNo significant rootstock effect on fruit arsenicFruit total arsenic, dry weightRootstock main effectWhole fruit, dry weightContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Three rootstocks under the same irrigation treatments.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Rootstock had no significant effect on fruit arsenic; it changed leaf lead and nickel, but fruit lead and nickel were not reported.

Context	Selected control
Material	Golden Delicious apples, orchard near Mashhad, Iran
Stage	cultivation
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands
Period	As reported
Conditions	One orchard and cultivar.
Tested scale	Field
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Orchard field experiment. One orchard and cultivar.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Total arsenic (tAs)	As reported	No significant rootstock effect on fruit arsenic	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Whole fruit, dry weight	Table 3 p.4

Fruit lead and nickel not reported.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One orchard and cultivar.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Grow apples rather than root vegetables on lead-contaminated soilprimary production · As reported

Apple

Pb · Decreased

1

Bramwell et al. 2022

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadDecreasedLowest crop group on the same soilsMedian fruit or vegetable lead, fresh weightApples versus root vegetables, same sitesFresh weightHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (1 − 23) / 23 × 100 = -95.7%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Apples against other crop groups grown on the same sites.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

On allotment soils averaging 327 mg/kg lead, apples had a median of 1 µg/kg lead on a fresh-weight basis, the lowest of every crop group, against 23 µg/kg for root vegetables.

Context	Selected control
Material	Apples from urban allotments, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Stage	primary production
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
Period	As reported
Conditions	Urban allotments on lead-enriched soil.
Tested scale	Field survey
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational survey. Urban allotments on lead-enriched soil.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Lowest crop group on the same soils	23 → 1 µg/kg	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh weight	Discussion p.3507

Observational; sample numbers not given in this paper.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Urban allotments on lead-enriched soil.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Wash apples before analysis or eatingfood preparation · As reported

Apple

Pb · Context

Cd · Context

1

WHO GEMS/Food

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadBoth below detection (<5 µg/kg)Median leadWashed versus unwashedFresh apple, as analysedContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

CadmiumBoth below detection (<2.5 µg/kg)Median cadmiumWashed versus unwashedFresh apple, as analysedContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Washed against unwashed apples in the same survey (24 and 18 results).

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Washed and unwashed apples both had lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury medians below reporting limits of 2.5–5 µg/kg, so any effect of washing could not be measured at these levels.

Context	Selected control
Material	Apples in a 1998 Western Pacific targeted survey
Stage	food preparation
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
Period	As reported
Conditions	One national survey; reporting limits above most apple values.
Tested scale	Monitoring dataset
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational survey. One national survey; reporting limits above most apple values.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Both below detection (<5 µg/kg)	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh apple, as analysed	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv WPRO 1998 washed/unwashed
Cadmium (Cd)	As reported	Both below detection (<2.5 µg/kg)	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh apple, as analysed	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv WPRO 1998 washed/unwashed

Observational; not a controlled washing experiment.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

One national survey; reporting limits above most apple values.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Test the washed edible part against the fruit limitslot acceptance and release · As reported

Apple

Pb · Context

Cd · Context

Guidance

Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915

HMI source record · Original source

Official guidance; not an independent experimental dataset. Reused across actions without adding studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadRegulatory definition; effect not measuredLead limit basisWashed edible partFresh fruit, wet weightContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

CadmiumRegulatory definition; effect not measuredCadmium limit basisWashed edible partFresh fruit, wet weightContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Regulatory definition; no measured comparison.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

EU limits of 0.10 mg/kg lead for fruit and 0.020 mg/kg cadmium for pome fruit apply on a wet-weight basis after washing and separating the edible part.

Context	Selected control
Material	Fresh fruit including apples, EU market
Stage	lot acceptance and release
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
Period	As reported
Conditions	Apples placed on the EU market.
Tested scale	Regulation
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Regulatory or official guidance. Apples placed on the EU market.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Regulatory definition; effect not measured	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh fruit, wet weight	Annex I 3.1.1.2 and group remark 3.1.1, PDF p.27
Cadmium (Cd)	As reported	Regulatory definition; effect not measured	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh fruit, wet weight	Annex I 3.2.1.2 and group remark 3.2.1, PDF p.31

No measured effect size for washing apples.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Apples placed on the EU market.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Ask for growing origin and lot lead resultssourcing and procurement · As reported

Apple

Pb · Context

1

WHO GEMS/Food

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadFewer high results among imports (observational)Lead results above 100 µg/kgImported versus domestic labelFresh apple, as soldContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Imported against domestic labels within European apple submissions.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

None of 1,222 apples labelled imported exceeded 100 µg/kg lead against 14 of 1,875 labelled domestic; the share above 50 µg/kg was similar.

Context	Selected control
Material	Fresh apples submitted to GEMS/Food from Europe, 2000–2020
Stage	sourcing and procurement
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands
Period	As reported
Conditions	European market submissions; country of growth not identified.
Tested scale	Monitoring dataset
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational survey. European market submissions; country of growth not identified.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Fewer high results among imports (observational)	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	Fresh apple, as sold	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv EURO apple lead by FoodOriginName

Observational; labels describe origin relative to the reporting country only.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

European market submissions; country of growth not identified.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Judge dried apple against dried-fruit limitsfood processing · As reported

Apple

Pb · Increased

1

WHO GEMS/Food

HMI source record · Original source

One dataset family. Linked analytes, repeated seasons and reports are not independent studies.

Effects and comparators

LeadIncreasedHigher per kilogram after drying (observational)Median leadDried versus fresh apple, EURO random samplingAs soldHigh · HMI calculates the relative change from the retained source means: (29 − 10) / 10 × 100 = 190.0%. This is a descriptive contrast of means; no confidence interval or significance test is inferred.

Dried against fresh apple in the same dataset, region and sampling type.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Dried apple had a lead median of 26–29 µg/kg under random sampling against below 10 µg/kg for fresh apple, because drying removes water.

Context	Selected control
Material	Dried and fresh apple submitted to GEMS/Food from Europe
Stage	food processing
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands
Period	As reported
Conditions	Dried apple as sold.
Tested scale	Monitoring dataset
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Observational survey. Dried apple as sold.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Higher per kilogram after drying (observational)	10 → 29 µg/kg	Absolute values unextracted	As sold	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv EURO dried and fresh lead

Different products and laboratories; not a paired drying experiment.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Dried apple as sold.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Do not wrap cut apples or store apple puree in aluminium foilstorage and handling · As reported

Apple

Al · Context

Guidance

German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR)

HMI source record · Original source

Official guidance; not an independent experimental dataset. Reused across actions without adding studies.

Effects and comparators

AluminiumGuidance; effect not measuredAluminium uptake from foilFoil versus other storageAs storedContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Official guidance; no measured apple comparison.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Acidic foods such as cut apples take up aluminium from foil and uncoated aluminium containers; the advice is to use other materials.

Context	Selected control
Material	Cut apples and apple puree in household storage
Stage	storage and handling
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands · Consumers
Period	As reported
Conditions	Household and catering storage.
Tested scale	Official guidance
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Regulatory or official guidance. Household and catering storage.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Aluminium (Al)	As reported	Guidance; effect not measured	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	As stored	BfR aluminium FAQ

No apple measurement reported.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Household and catering storage.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Use a method that sees well below the limitlot acceptance and release · As reported

Apple

Pb · Context

Cd · Context

Context

WHO GEMS/Food

HMI source record · Original source

Contextual literature cited by this report; not a new intervention dataset.

Effects and comparators

LeadDetection, not removalMethod reporting limitReported limits versus required sensitivityAs soldContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

CadmiumDetection, not removalMethod reporting limitReported limits versus required sensitivityAs soldContext · No supported numerical treatment contrast is retained for this finding. A direction, market association, source-selection strategy or guidance statement alone does not establish a percentage change.

Reporting limits in submissions against the fruit limits.

How magnitude is classified

HMI editorial magnitude bands: Low is a change greater than 0% and below 25%; Moderate is 25% to below 50%; High is 50% or more, relative to that control’s own comparator. Direction is shown separately. These are descriptive display bands, not validated efficacy cutoffs, occurrence-baseline positions, statistical significance, evidence certainty, safety or net benefit. A range spanning bands retains both labels; a qualitative label has no implied percentage.

Control in context

Laboratories in the Americas mostly reported apple lead with detection limits of 1–5 µg/kg, while 50 European lead non-detects had limits of 100 µg/kg or more and 42 cadmium non-detects limits above 20 µg/kg; testing detects metals and does not remove them.

Context	Selected control
Material	Fresh apple results submitted to GEMS/Food
Stage	lot acceptance and release
Audience	Ingredient suppliers · Brands
Period	As reported
Conditions	Any lot-release testing for apples.
Tested scale	Laboratory method
Sample units	Source sampling units; no independent intervention units unless stated.
Trade-offs	Other metals, yield, taste and cost not quantified unless stated.
Verification	Confirm with lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, using an adequate quantification limit.

Design, applicability and operating conditions

Regulatory or official guidance. Any lot-release testing for apples.

One study family.

As reported by the source

Reduces metal reaching or remaining on apples, or detects it before release.

Source measurements and linked outcomes

Analyte	Period	Effect	Converted values	Original means (SD)	Basis	Locator
Lead (Pb)	As reported	Detection, not removal	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	As sold	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv LOD/LOQ fields
Cadmium (Cd)	As reported	Detection, not removal	Numerical baseline not extracted	Absolute values unextracted	As sold	primary/gemsfood-apple-records.csv LOD/LOQ fields

Method fitness only.

Ratios are calculated from the source values shown in outcomes.

Basis as stated in outcomes; no mass balance reported.

Trade-offs and implementation

Pesticide residues are outside this table.

Not assessed.

Not quantified.

Not assessed.

Applicability and verification

Any lot-release testing for apples.

Lot testing.

See source.

Extraction limits and next actions

Unresolved field	Next action
controlled commercial-scale apple intervention effect	No controlled commercial apple intervention study in the library; keep effects unquantified unless measured.

Provenance and assessment

As disclosed by the source.

Source facts and HMI calculations are distinguished above. These selected source findings do not constitute a systematic review; outcome-level appraisal remains incomplete.

Trade-offs and limits of controls

Treated wastewater saves fresh water for orchards but raised fruit arsenic in one of two years in the only apple study, and the authors still recommended diluted or alternating use.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} Its rootstock comparison found that rootstocks changed lead and nickel in the leaves without any fruit measurement for those metals, so a rootstock chosen for one metal cannot be assumed neutral for others.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}

Peeling may remove surface soil along with part of the fruit, but no study in the library measured how much lead or cadmium peeling removes from apples. Drying turns a low fresh concentration into a higher dried one, so a dried-apple result must be read against a dried-fruit limit, such as China’s 0.5 mg/kg for lead, rather than the 0.10 mg/kg fresh-fruit limit.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →} Aluminium foil is convenient for packing cut fruit, but acidic foods such as apple can take up aluminium from it.^{32German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · 2020FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersBfR FAQ of 20 July 2020Read source →}

Testing apples for metals

A useful apple test must be able to see well below the limits it is checked against.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →} Laboratories reporting apple lead to GEMS/Food from the Americas mostly used detection limits of 1–5 µg/kg, but European limits ranged from 3 to 50 µg/kg, and 50 European lead non-detects had limits of 100 µg/kg or more, too high to show whether the 100 µg/kg limit was met.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} For cadmium, 42 European non-detects had limits above the 20 µg/kg EU pome-fruit maximum.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Several small studies report values that their own methods cannot support.^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}^{23Wang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, Liu S, Cui W · 2020Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaFood Science & NutritionRead source →}^{25Liang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, Liu X · 2019Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthRead source →}^{26Altunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, Tuzen M · 2023Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationFoods 2023, 12, 3620Read source →}^{27Mohammad Rezaei, Yousef Fakhri, Maryam Abtahi, Majid Keramati, Gholamreza Ghasemi, Mohammad H. Moradi, Hamed Shariatifar, Mahsa Mousavi Khaneghah · 2020Essential elements in the different type of fruits, soil and water samples collected from Markazi province, Iran: a health risk assessment studyQuality Assurance and Safety of Crops & FoodsRead source →} Market surveys from Pakistan, Poland, China, India and Turkey printed apple means below their stated detection limits, cadmium near 1,000 µg/kg alongside implausible iron, nickel near 12,000 µg/kg with similar values in every food tested, or identical substituted values across foods; these are held on this page and shown with the specific conflict.^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}^{23Wang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, Liu S, Cui W · 2020Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaFood Science & NutritionRead source →}^{25Liang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, Liu X · 2019Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthRead source →}^{26Altunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, Tuzen M · 2023Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationFoods 2023, 12, 3620Read source →}

State the form and basis on every result: fresh apple as sold, peeled apple and dried apple are different materials, and a dry-weight result is several times a fresh-weight one.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →} Arsenic in apples should be read as total arsenic unless speciated; where it was speciated, inorganic arsenic was below 2.2 µg/kg in ten US-bought apples and averaged 6 µg/kg in Hong Kong retail apples.^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{16Centre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · 2012The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}

Buying and verifying apples

Ask for lot-specific lead and cadmium results on the fresh fruit, with the laboratory’s quantification limit, compared with the destination-market limit.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →} The EU sets 0.10 mg/kg lead for fruit and 0.020 mg/kg cadmium for pome fruit on a wet-weight basis, after washing and separating the edible part.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →} Codex sets 0.1 mg/kg lead for fruits, measured on the whole fruit after removing stems, and no cadmium limit for fruit.^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →} China sets 0.1 mg/kg lead and 0.05 mg/kg cadmium for fresh fruit and 0.5 mg/kg lead for dried fruit, and Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong set 0.1 mg/kg lead for fruit.^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →}^{34Food Standards Australia New Zealand · 2024Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFederal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908Read source →}^{35Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation Cap. 132VRead source →}

None of these markets sets an arsenic or mercury limit for fresh fruit, and the EU nickel limits added in 2024 do not cover fruit.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →}^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →}^{34Food Standards Australia New Zealand · 2024Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFederal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908Read source →}^{35Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation Cap. 132VRead source →} Record where the apples were grown as well as where they were packed or bought, because monitoring datasets identify only the reporting market and an imported or domestic label.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Ask for dried apple to be tested as dried product and judged against a dried-fruit limit where one applies; the EU instead requires fresh-fruit limits to be adjusted for the drying factor.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →}

Exposure from apples

Fresh apple is widely eaten by children and adults, but no source in the library estimated lead or cadmium exposure from fresh apples with verified concentrations. In total diet studies, apple was below detection for lead, cadmium and mercury in the United States and averaged 11 µg/kg lead and 6 µg/kg inorganic arsenic as eaten in Hong Kong.^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{13Centre for Food Safety (Hong Kong) · 2013The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic ContaminantsCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}^{16Centre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · 2012The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}

The apple products most associated with exposure concerns are juice and purees, which have their own pages.^{10Napier MD, et al. · 2024Childhood Lead Exposure Linked to Apple Cinnamon Fruit Puree Pouches — North Carolina, June 2023–January 2024MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly ReportRead source →}^{36FDA CFSAN · 2023Action Level for Inorganic Arsenic in Apple Juice: Guidance for IndustryU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied NutritionRead source →} The United States has an action level of 10 parts per billion inorganic arsenic for apple juice, and the 2023 lead poisoning cluster linked to apple-cinnamon fruit puree pouches was traced to the cinnamon, not to the apples.^{10Napier MD, et al. · 2024Childhood Lead Exposure Linked to Apple Cinnamon Fruit Puree Pouches — North Carolina, June 2023–January 2024MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly ReportRead source →}^{36FDA CFSAN · 2023Action Level for Inorganic Arsenic in Apple Juice: Guidance for IndustryU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied NutritionRead source →} In the Newcastle gardeners’ study, eating more bought tree fruit was associated with higher blood lead, an observational link that does not identify apples as the cause.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Evidence review and remaining gaps

This assessment covers every source record in the HMI library that names apple, plus every apple row in the WHO GEMS/Food exports and the FDA Total Diet Study and baby-food datasets; each of the 129 source records has a recorded decision based on its content.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} 28 sources contribute apple results, and 11 contain values held in part because they could not be reconciled with their own methods.^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}^{21Jane Houlihan, Charlotte Brody · 2019What’s in My Baby’s Food? A National Investigation Finds 95 Percent of Baby Foods Tested Contain Toxic Chemicals That Lower Babies’ IQ, Including Arsenic and LeadHealthy Babies Bright FuturesRead source →}^{23Wang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, Liu S, Cui W · 2020Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaFood Science & NutritionRead source →}^{25Liang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, Liu X · 2019Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthRead source →}^{26Altunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, Tuzen M · 2023Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationFoods 2023, 12, 3620Read source →}^{27Mohammad Rezaei, Yousef Fakhri, Maryam Abtahi, Majid Keramati, Gholamreza Ghasemi, Mohammad H. Moradi, Hamed Shariatifar, Mahsa Mousavi Khaneghah · 2020Essential elements in the different type of fruits, soil and water samples collected from Markazi province, Iran: a health risk assessment studyQuality Assurance and Safety of Crops & FoodsRead source →}^{29Magdalene Unaegbu, Vincent C. I. Eze, Ebere C. I. Omeje, Ezinne A. O. Agbo, Ebere V. Chukwuma · 2016Heavy metal, nutrient and antioxidant status of selected fruit samples sold in Enugu, NigeriaInternational Journal of Food ContaminationRead source →}

Remaining gaps are origin-linked data: no source links apple metal results to the country or orchard where the fruit was grown at scale, and inorganic arsenic in apples rests on fewer than 30 results.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{16Centre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · 2012The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →} Several primary papers cited by reviews in the library, including a Bangladeshi market survey of apples, are not yet in the library.

References identify the sources used in these answers. The Sources index preserves additional discovery links; inclusion there does not mean a source has been reviewed for this assessment. Corrections, completed searches, new direct evidence and changes in requirements should reopen the relevant answer.

Apple FAQs

What heavy metals are found in apples?

Lead is the metal most often detected in fresh apples, usually at a few micrograms per kilogram; cadmium, arsenic and mercury are mostly below detection.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} Aluminium occurs at higher levels, around 380 µg/kg in Hong Kong retail apples and a median of 930 µg/kg in 16 European results.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{13Centre for Food Safety (Hong Kong) · 2013The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic ContaminantsCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →}

How do heavy metals get into apples?

From orchard soil and irrigation water through the tree, and from soil and dust on the skin.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} Apple trees move little lead into the fruit: apples on lead-contaminated allotment soil had a median of 1 µg/kg lead, the lowest of every crop measured there.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Are organic apples lower in heavy metals?

Not measurably: apples labelled organic in GEMS/Food submissions from the Americas had a lead median of 1–2 µg/kg against no more than 2.2 µg/kg for other apples, and inorganic arsenic was below detection in organic and conventional apples alike in the FDA 2016 survey.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →} An organic label describes how the fruit was grown, not a test result for metals.

Which apple varieties have the lowest levels?

None can be named: every cultivar submitted from the Americas in 2014–2016, including Gala, McIntosh, Red Delicious, Golden Delicious and Granny Smith, had a lead median below the 5 µg/kg reporting limit.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} In the FDA 2016 survey, inorganic arsenic was below detection in all nine named varieties tested.^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}

Which countries or regions produce apples with the lowest lead?

Apples reported from the Americas and the United States were lowest: a GEMS/Food median at or below 2.1 µg/kg and all 27 US Total Diet Study composites below 4 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →} These are reporting markets, not growing areas, so the evidence cannot name the producing countries with the lowest lead.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Do foods made from apples also contain heavy metals?

Dried apple carries more per kilogram because water is removed: European dried apple had a lead median of 26–29 µg/kg against below 10 µg/kg for fresh.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} Apple juice and applesauce are covered on their own pages and are not compared here.

What do the levels in apples mean for health?

No source in the library estimated how much lead or cadmium people take in from fresh apples, so the evidence cannot say what share of intake apples supply. Measured fresh-apple levels are mostly below the limits set for fruit, but a concentration below a limit is not by itself a measure of individual risk.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Are there legal limits for heavy metals in apples?

Yes: the EU sets 0.10 mg/kg lead for fruit and 0.020 mg/kg cadmium for pome fruit, Codex 0.1 mg/kg lead for fruits, and China 0.1 mg/kg lead and 0.05 mg/kg cadmium for fresh fruit.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}^{6Codex Alimentarius Commission · 1995General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme)Read source →}^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →} Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong set 0.1 mg/kg lead for fruit, and China sets 0.5 mg/kg lead for dried fruit; none of these markets sets an arsenic or mercury limit for fresh apple.^{33National Health Commission, State Administration for Market Regulation · 2025GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of ChinaRead source →}^{34Food Standards Australia New Zealand · 2024Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFederal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908Read source →}^{35Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation Cap. 132VRead source →}

Does washing apples remove heavy metals?

Washing removes soil and dust from the skin, and the EU applies its limits to washed fruit, but the only apple comparison could not show an effect because washed and unwashed apples were both below detection.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →}

Does peeling apples lower heavy metals?

Unknown for apples: no study in the library measured peeled and unpeeled fruit from the same lot.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →} Peeled apples bought in South Korea and Poland averaged 46 and 9 µg/kg lead, a difference between markets rather than an effect of peeling.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →}^{9Lee J, Hwang I, Park YS, Lee DY · 2023Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaApplied Biological ChemistryRead source →}

Is the arsenic in apples the more toxic inorganic form?

Where it was measured, inorganic arsenic in apples was low: below 2.2 µg/kg in all ten US-bought apples in the FDA 2016 survey and an average of 6 µg/kg in Hong Kong retail apples.^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}^{16Centre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · 2012The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionRead source →} Most apple arsenic results are total arsenic, which includes less toxic organic forms, and fewer than 30 inorganic arsenic results exist.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{15U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationRead source →}

Are apples a concern for babies and children?

Fresh apple itself measured low in the studies here, but the 2023 lead poisoning cluster linked to apple-cinnamon fruit puree pouches was traced to the cinnamon, not the apples.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{10Napier MD, et al. · 2024Childhood Lead Exposure Linked to Apple Cinnamon Fruit Puree Pouches — North Carolina, June 2023–January 2024MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly ReportRead source →} Apple juice and apple baby foods are covered on their own pages.

Is dried apple higher in heavy metals than fresh apple?

Per kilogram, yes, because drying removes most of the water: on the Polish market dried apple averaged 127 µg/kg lead and 23 µg/kg cadmium on a dry-weight basis against 9 and 1 µg/kg in fresh peeled apple.^{5Rusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, Szymala I · 2021Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsScientific ReportsRead source →} Single dried products from Iraq and Iran reported up to 897 µg/kg cadmium on an unstated basis, so dried apple is worth testing as dried product.^{17Hadi QM, Mahdi FA, Hamood FJ, Abbas SH, Abojassim AA · 2025Health Impact of Heavy Metals in Samples of Dried Fruits in IraqInternational Journal of Analytical ChemistryRead source →}^{18Mahmood BA, Alkubaisy SA, Marouf EAAK, Mohammed EH · 2025Estimation of some heavy metal concentrations in selected dried fruit samples available in local markets and assessment of their health risksInternational Journal of Environmental ImpactsRead source →}

Do apples from orchards irrigated with wastewater carry more arsenic?

In the one apple study, yes in the second year: Golden Delicious fruit watered with treated wastewater carried about 380–390 µg/kg arsenic on a dry-weight basis against 140–150 µg/kg with well water.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →} First-year results did not separate clearly, and the values were read from a chart without a reported detection limit.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}

Are apples grown in urban gardens high in lead?

Not in the evidence available: on Newcastle allotments with soil averaging 327 mg/kg lead, apples had a median of 1 µg/kg lead, lower than every other crop measured.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →} Root vegetables and soft fruit from the same sites were much higher, so the crop matters more than the site for apples.^{14Lindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, Nan Lin · 2022Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesEnvironmental Geochemistry and HealthRead source →}

Are imported apples higher in lead than locally grown ones?

In European monitoring the opposite held in the high tail: none of 1,222 apples labelled imported exceeded 100 µg/kg lead against 14 of 1,875 labelled domestic.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} The share above 50 µg/kg was similar, and the export does not name the country of growth.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Has lead in apples been falling?

In Western Pacific submissions it fell: 32 of 262 random-sampling results from 1998–2004 exceeded 100 µg/kg against none of 12 from 2010–2014.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} In Europe the median stayed below 10 µg/kg from 2000 to 2020, with fewer than 1% of results above 100 µg/kg in each period.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

How can I tell whether an apple metals test is good enough?

Check that the quantification limit is far below the limit being checked: under 20 µg/kg for cadmium and well under 100 µg/kg for lead.^{3European Commission · 2023Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006Official Journal of the European UnionRead source →} Laboratories reporting apples from the Americas used lead limits of 1–5 µg/kg, while some European non-detects had limits of 100 µg/kg or more, which cannot show compliance.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

Can aluminium foil add aluminium to cut apples?

German risk assessors advise against wrapping cut apples or storing apple puree in aluminium foil or uncoated aluminium, because acidic foods take up aluminium from it.^{32German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · 2020FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersBfR FAQ of 20 July 2020Read source →} The advice is qualitative; no apple measurement is given.^{32German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · 2020FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersBfR FAQ of 20 July 2020Read source →}

Why do some studies report much higher heavy metals in apples?

Mostly because of basis and method: dry-weight results are several times fresh-weight ones, and several market surveys printed values below their own detection limits or implausibly high across every food tested.^{4Nasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, Mirzaei M · 2026The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterBMC Plant BiologyRead source →}^{12Afrin S · 2020Determination and Risk Analysis of Heavy Metals in Different Fruits Collected from Different Shops of Dhaka CityM.S. Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, DhakaRead source →}^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →} Those values are shown on this page but held from comparisons, with the specific conflict stated.^{7Rahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, Alrawi LI · 2020Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsJournal of Physical ScienceRead source →}^{8Sembratowicz I, Rusinek E, Ognik K · 2010Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsPolish Journal of Environmental StudiesRead source →}^{19Unknown authors · 2017Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsPeer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{20Salhotra P, Verma R · 2017Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateIOSR Journal of Applied ChemistryRead source →}

References

Works cited on this page, in citation-number order. See Sources for this page’s source inventory. Each title links to a source record with bibliographic details, reported findings, and document provenance.

GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsWorld Health Organization · GEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment Programme · 2026 · extranet.who.intDataset
FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsU.S. Food and Drug Administration · FDA Total Diet Study · 2022 · www.fda.govDataset
Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006European Commission · Official Journal of the European Union · 2023 · eur-lex.europa.euRegulation
The changes of heavy metals and some necessary elements in leaf, fruit and soil on apple cultivar golden delicious by applying urban treated wastewaterNasirpour M, Khoshkam M, Rezaei Z, and Mirzaei M · BMC Plant Biology · 2026 · doi.org/10.1186/s12870-025-08080-7Peer-reviewed
Concentration of cadmium and lead in vegetables and fruitsRusin M, Domagalska J, Rogala D, Razzaghi M, and Szymala I · Scientific Reports · 2021 · doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91554-zPeer-reviewed
General Standard for Contaminants and Toxins in Food and Feed (CXS 193-1995)Codex Alimentarius Commission · Codex Alimentarius (Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme) · 1995 · www.fao.orgGovernment
Analysis of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of the Most Widely Consumed FruitsRahim M, Saqib NU, Wahid F, Khan N, and Alrawi LI · Journal of Physical Science · 2020 · doi.org/10.21315/jps2020.31.2.5Peer-reviewed
Contents of Nitrates (III) and (V), Lead and Cadmium in Select Domestic FruitsSembratowicz I, Rusinek E, and Ognik K · Polish Journal of Environmental Studies · 2010Peer-reviewed
Occurrence and health risk assessment of antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead in fresh fruits consumed in South KoreaLee J, Hwang I, Park YS, and Lee DY · Applied Biological Chemistry · 2023 · doi.org/10.1186/s13765-023-00799-xPeer-reviewed
Childhood Lead Exposure Linked to Apple Cinnamon Fruit Puree Pouches — North Carolina, June 2023–January 2024Napier MD and et al. · MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report · 2024 · doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7328a2Government
Monitoring of Heavy Metal Content in Fruits and Vegetables Collected from Production and Market Sites in the Misurata Area of LibyaElbagermi MA, Edwards HGM, and Alajtal AI · ISRN Analytical Chemistry · 2012 · doi.org/10.5402/2012/827645Peer-reviewed
Determination and Risk Analysis of Heavy Metals in Different Fruits Collected from Different Shops of Dhaka CityAfrin S · M.S. Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka · 2020Peer-reviewed
The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic ContaminantsCentre for Food Safety (Hong Kong) · Centre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region · 2013 · www.cfs.gov.hkGovernment
Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sitesLindsay Bramwell, Jane Entwistle, Jackie Morton, Anne-Helen Harding, and Nan Lin · Environmental Geochemistry and Health · 2022 · doi.org/10.1007/s10653-021-01095-7Peer-reviewed
Analytical Results from Inorganic Arsenic in Rice Cereals for Infants, Non-Rice Infant Cereal and Other Foods Commonly Eaten by Infants and ToddlersU.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2016 · www.fda.govDataset
The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Inorganic ArsenicCentre for Food Safety FEHD HKSAR · Centre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region · 2012 · www.cfs.gov.hkGovernment
Health Impact of Heavy Metals in Samples of Dried Fruits in IraqHadi QM, Mahdi FA, Hamood FJ, Abbas SH, and Abojassim AA · International Journal of Analytical Chemistry · 2025 · doi.org/10.1155/ianc/3934929Peer-reviewed
Estimation of some heavy metal concentrations in selected dried fruit samples available in local markets and assessment of their health risksMahmood BA, Alkubaisy SA, Marouf EAAK, and Mohammed EH · International Journal of Environmental Impacts · 2025 · doi.org/10.56578/ijei080514Peer-reviewed
Levels, dietary intake, and health risk of potentially toxic metalsUnknown authors · Peer-reviewed article · 2017 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0764-xPeer-reviewed
Determination of heavy metals contamination in some vegetables and fruits samples from the market of Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh StateSalhotra P and Verma R · IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry · 2017 · doi.org/10.9790/5736-100502110113Peer-reviewed
What’s in My Baby’s Food? A National Investigation Finds 95 Percent of Baby Foods Tested Contain Toxic Chemicals That Lower Babies’ IQ, Including Arsenic and LeadJane Houlihan and Charlotte Brody · Healthy Babies Bright Futures · 2019 · www.hbbf.orgNGO
Determination of Chromium Content of Food and Beverages of Plant OriginReczajska W, Jedrzejczak R, and Szteke B · Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences · 2005Peer-reviewed
Contamination and health risk assessment of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum from a total diet study of Jilin Province, ChinaWang B, Liu Y, Wang H, Cui L, Zhang Z, Guo J, et al. · Food Science & Nutrition · 2020 · doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1851Peer-reviewed
Exposure assessment of heavy metal residues in some Egyptian fruitsAmer MM, Sabry BA, Marrez DA, Hathout AS, and Fouzy ASM · Toxicology Reports · 2019 · doi.org/10.1016/j.toxrep.2019.06.007Peer-reviewed
Analysis of Heavy Metals in Foodstuffs and an Assessment of the Health Risks to the General Public via Consumption in Beijing, ChinaLiang G, Gong W, Li B, Zuo J, Pan L, and Liu X · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2019 · doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16060909Peer-reviewed
Ultra-Sensitive Determination of Cadmium in Food and Water by Flame-AAS after a New Polyvinyl Benzyl Xanthate as an Adsorbent Based Vortex Assisted Dispersive Solid-Phase Microextraction: Multivariate OptimizationAltunay N, Hazer B, Lanjwani MF, and Tuzen M · Foods 2023, 12, 3620 · 2023 · doi.org/10.3390/foods12193620Peer-reviewed
Essential elements in the different type of fruits, soil and water samples collected from Markazi province, Iran: a health risk assessment studyMohammad Rezaei, Yousef Fakhri, Maryam Abtahi, Majid Keramati, Gholamreza Ghasemi, Mohammad H. Moradi, et al. · Quality Assurance and Safety of Crops & Foods · 2020 · doi.org/10.15586/qas.v12i3.777Peer-reviewed
The content of lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury and tin in fruit and their products based on monitoring studies – exposure assessmentMania M, Rebeniak M, Chabros E, Orshulyak O, and Postupolski J · Roczniki Państwowego Zakładu Higieny (Annals of the National Institute of Hygiene) · 2021 · doi.org/10.32394/rpzh.2021.0188Peer-reviewed
Heavy metal, nutrient and antioxidant status of selected fruit samples sold in Enugu, NigeriaMagdalene Unaegbu, Vincent C. I. Eze, Ebere C. I. Omeje, Ezinne A. O. Agbo, and Ebere V. Chukwuma · International Journal of Food Contamination · 2016 · doi.org/10.1186/s40550-016-0031-9Peer-reviewed
Quantification and Reduction in Heavy Metal Residues in Some Fruits and Vegetables: A Case Study Galați County, RomaniaBora FD, Bunea A, Pop SR, Banita SI, Dusa DS, Chira A, et al. · Horticulturae · 2022 · doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8111034Peer-reviewed
Toxicological Profile for Tin and Tin CompoundsCarolyn Harper, Fernando Llados, Gary Diamond, Lara L. Chappell, and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry · 2005 · www.atsdr.cdc.govGovernment
FAQs about aluminium in food and products intended for consumersGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · BfR FAQ of 20 July 2020 · 2020 · www.bfr.bund.deGovernment
GB 2762-2025: National Food Safety Standard — Maximum Levels of Contaminants in FoodsNational Health Commission and State Administration for Market Regulation · National Food Safety Standard of the People’s Republic of China · 2025 · www.fzmq.gov.cnStandard
Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of contaminants and natural toxicantsFood Standards Australia New Zealand · Federal Register of Legislation, Authorised Version F2024C00908 · 2024 · www.legislation.gov.auRegulation
Hong Kong Cap. 132V Food Adulteration (Metallic Contamination) Regulations, consolidated 5 September 2025Hong Kong e-Legislation · 2025 · www.elegislation.gov.hkRegulation
Action Level for Inorganic Arsenic in Apple Juice: Guidance for IndustryFDA CFSAN · U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition · 2023 · www.fda.govGuidance

Sources

Browse Apple Sources for sources cited on this page and additional discovery candidates. The searchable index distinguishes verified citation use from discovery relationships whose relevance has not been established.

Update history

22 October 2026 — Rebuilt from every apple record in the library: WHO GEMS/Food and FDA Total Diet Study monitoring results, 26 market, orchard and diet studies, pooled apple comparisons, verified limits and stage-led controls.

Referenced by

Graph View

1

2

Food and Drug Administration

3

European Commission

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

Heavy metals in Apple

Apple overview

What counts as apple

Heavy metal contamination profile of apples

How metals reach apples

Which apples and markets measured lower

Washing, peeling and drying

Mitigation from orchard to market

Trade-offs and limits of controls

Testing apples for metals

Buying and verifying apples

Exposure from apples

Evidence review and remaining gaps

Apple FAQs

References

Sources

Update history

Related ingredients

Referenced by

Graph View