Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease claims

Paraquat claims allege that exposure to the herbicide — which is restricted-use in the United States and requires certification to apply — contributed to the development of Parkinson’s disease, and that the manufacturers failed to warn applicators of that risk.

Reviewed by Omar A. Cooper, Esq. · Last updated September 3, 2026

What the litigation is about

Paraquat dichloride is one of the most tightly restricted herbicides in American agriculture: it is restricted-use, and only certified applicators may handle it. The EPA publishes the current registration status and handling requirements.

The claims are brought overwhelmingly by people who mixed, loaded or applied the product, or who worked in the fields where it was applied.

Who may qualify

Eligibility in this litigation generally turns on:

• documented exposure — mixing, loading, applying, or working in treated fields;
• a diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease or a recognised parkinsonian condition;
• the interval between exposure and diagnosis;
• applicator licensing records, which are often the cleanest proof of exposure.

What we will ask you for

A review moves quickly when you have these to hand — and none of them are required to call:

• restricted-use applicator certification records;
• employment records for farm, nursery or agricultural work;
• the neurologist’s diagnosis and its date;
• the specific product names and years of use;
• the locations and crops involved.

No outcome can be promised in any mass tort, and eligibility is not the same as recovery. What an eligibility review gives you is a straight answer about whether a claim exists and whether it is worth pursuing.

Sources: U.S. EPA — paraquat dichloride · U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation — pending MDL statistics

Common questions