Injury guide
Have Parkinson’s disease and a possible paraquat history to check? Keep the diagnosis and exposure records.
Updated Oct 4, 202615 sources
See If You Qualify
Free · No obligation · About 2 minutes
Updated Oct 4, 202615 sources
This may apply to you if
These are cited sources. Their inclusion does not imply that they endorse People’s Justice or reviewed this page.
Srishti Shrestha · Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences · First author, Agricultural Health Study Parkinson cohort
Finding: The prospective cohort did not find a statistically significant overall association for reported paraquat use. Exposure and disease measurement limits prevent treating that as proof of no possible effect.
Shrestha: pesticides and incident Parkinson disease, original cohort (opens in a new tab) · Sep 10, 2020 · Checked Oct 3, 2026
Kimberly C. Paul · Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles · First author of the cited agricultural exposure case-control study
Finding: Modeled historical paraquat applications were associated with Parkinson disease under several exposure measures and periods; proximity is not personal dose or a legal acceptance boundary.
Paul: agricultural paraquat applications and Parkinson disease, original case-control study (opens in a new tab) · Feb 2, 2024 · Checked Oct 3, 2026
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, first-author affiliation · Environmental Research · 2020
Read the source: Pesticide use and incident Parkinson disease in the Agricultural Health Study (opens in a new tab) · Checked Oct 3, 2026
University of California, Los Angeles, first-author affiliation · International Journal of Epidemiology · 2024
Read the source: Agricultural paraquat dichloride applications and Parkinson disease (opens in a new tab) · Checked Oct 3, 2026
Not covered by this case
The process
You answer a few questions
About two minutes. Nothing is sent until you agree on the last step and press submit.
A lawyer looks at it
A lawyer at the firm reads your answers and checks them against the current case criteria.
The firm decides and gets in touch
If the firm takes your case, you get the terms in writing to read before you sign. You can always say no.
Have Parkinson’s disease and a possible paraquat history to check? Keep the diagnosis and exposure records. Studies do not decide your own cause. Ask a doctor about care and a lawyer about a claim.
It is a brain disorder that affects movement. Shaking, stiffness and slow movement can occur. A doctor should assess the actual signs.
NIH describes changes in brain cells that normally produce dopamine, a chemical that helps movement. Similar symptoms require clinical assessment. A diagnosis identifies a disease, not automatically the pesticide or other factor that caused it.
New shaking or stiff muscles need a care check. Tell the doctor when signs began. Suspected contact with paraquat needs care at once.
Parkinson symptoms can progress gradually and affect walking or other daily tasks. Acute paraquat poisoning is a different care problem. Do not wait for a legal reply after a suspected exposure or treat a symptom list as a dose test.
Doctors use the history and a nerve-system exam. There is no single specific test. Treatment can help symptoms, but this page cannot choose your plan.
NIH describes medicines and selected surgery as options for symptom control, without a cure. Discuss the actual findings and care choices with the treating clinician. A legal review should not require a particular procedure or a change in care.
Some exposure models show an association with Parkinson’s. A separate cohort had a result that was not clear enough to rule out chance. Neither decides your cause.
The California study compared 829 people with Parkinson’s and 824 people without it. It used addresses and past spraying records. The farm cohort’s overall paraquat result was not statistically significant, meaning it could reflect chance. Both designs have limits. Two California authors disclosed work as experts for plaintiffs.
Ask a lawyer about actual paraquat exposure, diagnosed harm and law. A diagnosis alone does not confirm a claim. Have your own filing period checked.
A study’s distance window does not set legal eligibility, and EPA’s safety review does not decide individual damages. Keep the actual diagnosis and exposure account separate from generalized advertising. Ask whether the receiving firm has agreed to act for you.
Keep care reports, work or address dates and product details you know. Mark missing facts rather than guessing. Ask providers about covered health files.
The access rule has defined exceptions; it does not promise every person every file. Keep documents with dates and their source. Read written legal fees and expenses, including possible costs after a loss, before agreeing to representation.
Syngenta’s corporate predecessor ICI identified paraquat neurotoxicity in 1958 and confirmed brain penetration in 1966
Paraquat exposure was associated with an overall odds ratio of 1.64 for Parkinson’s disease, confirming a statistically significant increased risk
People who reported using paraquat had about 2.5 times the odds of Parkinson’s disease (odds ratio 2.5; 95% CI 1.4–4.7)
The review is free and private. Asking for it doesn’t commit you to anything.
Register your interestParaquat causes Parkinson’s disease through a multi-step neurotoxic cascade. First, paraquat crosses the blood-brain barrier using amino acid transport systems. Once in the brain, it is taken up by dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra. Inside these neurons, paraquat undergoes redox cycling — repeatedly gaining and losing electrons — generating massive quantities of reactive oxygen species (free radicals). This oxidative stress inhibits mitochondrial complex I, disrupting cellular energy production and creating a self-amplifying cycle of damage. The result is selective death of dopamine-producing neurons and accumulation of alpha-synuclein protein aggregates called Lewy bodies. The loss of these neurons produces the cardinal symptoms of Parkinson’s: tremor, rigidity, slowness of movement, and balance problems.
Parkinson’s disease typically develops 10 to 20 or more years after initial paraquat exposure. This long latency period is consistent with the progressive nature of dopaminergic neuron loss — symptoms do not appear until approximately 60–80% of dopamine-producing neurons have been destroyed. Because of this latency, individuals who were exposed to paraquat during the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s may only now be receiving Parkinson’s diagnoses. The long delay also means that many people may not initially connect their Parkinson’s to past paraquat exposure, which is why the discovery rule in most states is critical to preserving filing rights.
The Farming and Movement Evaluation (FAME) study, published by Dr. Caroline Tanner and colleagues in Environmental Health Perspectives in 2011, was a case-control study nested in the Agricultural Health Study, with 110 Parkinson’s cases and 358 controls. Researchers collected lifetime pesticide use through telephone interviews. People who reported using paraquat had about 2.5 times the odds of Parkinson’s disease (odds ratio 2.5; 95% CI 1.4–4.7). That is an association; it doesn’t show that paraquat caused any one person’s illness. A larger 2020 prospective analysis of the Agricultural Health Study (66,110 participants) found no statistically significant association for ever-use of paraquat (hazard ratio 1.09; 95% CI 0.84–1.41).
Checked against 13 primary sources by People's Justice editors · Updated
How we make moneyPeople's Justice research team · Updated Oct 4, 2026