Agriculture in Thailand, which employs over 30 percent of the workforce and contributes significantly to the country’s gross domestic product, is a key sector of its economy. Import and use of pesticides has increased over the past decade due to Thailand's major role as a leading exporter of food and agricultural products. The widespread and poorly regulated use of pesticides presents a potential risk to the health of farmers, farm families, the general population including children and the environment. This article is a result of the Southeast Asia GEOHealth Network Meeting of February 2019. It summarizes the current situation on pesticide use and regulation in Thailand and reports research findings on the potential health and environmental impacts of pesticide use, as well as highlighting gaps in research that could play an important and influential role in future policy initiatives on pesticides. Although Thailand has made remarkable progress in improving agricultural health and safety and similarly strong research and policy programs are being developed in other countries in the region, there are still significant gaps in research and policy that need to be filled.

This cross-sectional analysis study aimed to identify the prevalence and factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among Thai Burley tobacco farmers. Subjects included 603 burley tobacco farmers from Sukhothai province. Farmers were interviewed twice, (during planting and harvesting seasons), with a questionnaire consisting of demographic and health characteristics, musculoskeletal symptoms, and ergonomic exposure questions. The subjects average age was 49.5 years, more were female (58.5%), most had only a primary education (74.3%), 38% were overweight or obese. Farmers had a significantly higher prevalence of MSDs in the lower back (37.1%), knee (28.7%), shoulder (22.9%), wrist (19.9%), and hip (8.3%) during the harvesting season than in the planting season (p < 0.05). Models found that factors influencing MSDs prevalence during planting included long work hours in seedling, tasks such as topping tobacco plants, and using machine tools, after controlling for age, gender, and body mass index (BMI). While in the harvesting season, models found tasks conducted as a group had lower MSDs prevalence than individual work when carrying fresh tobacco to the barn, piercing/threading and curing the leaves, baling the bundles, and transporting the finished goods. We recommended working in groups to reduce workload and MSDs, especially during harvesting, in burley tobacco farming.

The association between worksite temperature and perceived work ability (WA) in various educational classes remains unknown. Therefore, we interviewed 286 poultry industry workers in Thailand about their WA and linked their responses to worksite temperature. WA was based on the self-assessment of current work ability compared with their lifetime best ability (scores 0–10). Education was classified as high (university or vocational school) or low (less education). Temperature was classified as cold (−22–10°C) or warm (10–23°C). WA and the occurrence of a low WA were regressed on worksite temperature, education, and their interaction with the adjustment for sex, age, job category, physical work strain, moving between cold and warm sites, thermal insulation of clothing, relative humidity, and air velocity. The average worksite temperature was 10°C for high- and 1°C for low-educated workers. The average WA score was 8.32 (SD, 1.33; range, 4–10) and classified as low (<8) in 23% of the workers. In highly-educated workers, the adjusted mean WA decreased from 9.11 in the warm areas to 8.02 in the cold areas and the prevalence of a low WA increased from 11 to 30%, while no significant change was observed in less-educated workers. The WA score was estimated to decline by 10% more (95% CI, 4–16%) in the cold areas for the more vs. less-educated workers and the prevalence of a poor WA was estimated to increase 3.09 times (95% CI, 1.43–5.45) more. Highly-educated workers in this industry are a risk group that should be given customized advice.

The self-assessed threshold temperature for cold in the workplace is not well known. We asked 392 chicken industry workers in Thailand what they regard as the cold threshold (CT) and compared subgroups of workers using linear and quantile regressions by CT sextiles (percentiles P₁₇, P₃₃, P₅₀, P₆₇, and P₈₃, from warmest to coldest). The variables of interest were sex, office work, and sedentary work, with age, clothing thermal insulation, and alcohol consumption as adjustment factors. The mean CT was 14.6 °C. Office workers had a 6.8 °C higher mean CT than other workers, but the difference ranged from 3.8 °C to 10.0 °C from P₁₇ to P₈₃. Sedentary workers had a 2.0 °C higher mean CT than others, but the difference increased from 0.5 °C to 3.0 °C through P₁₇–P₈₃. The mean CT did not differ between sexes, but men had a 1.6–5.0 °C higher CT at P₁₇–P₅₀ (>20 °C) and a 5.0 °C lower CT at P₈₃ (<10 °C). The CT was relatively high at warm (≥10 °C), dry (relative humidity 0.35 m/s) worksites. We conclude that office, sedentary, and female workers and those working at warm, dry, and draughty sites are sensitive to the coldest temperatures, whereas male workers are sensitive even to moderate temperatures.