A video by Nigerian health communicator Aproko Doctor has drawn attention to a disturbing question: what exactly is being added to some cassava during the production of fufu? In the video, he raises concerns about reports of detergent and paracetamol being used during cassava processing to speed up fermentation.

The claim sounds bizarre enough to dismiss as social media alarm. But the concern about detergent is not new, and Nigerian researchers have studied what happens when it is introduced into cassava intended for fufu.

A 2007 study by researchers at the University of Benin examined the effect of detergent on microorganisms responsible for cassava fermentation. They found that detergent changed the microbial population and, at higher concentrations, inhibited the organisms and killed most of them.

That matters because fermentation is not simply a waiting period before cassava becomes fufu. It is part of the process that changes the cassava and makes it suitable for consumption.

A later Nigerian study, published in Toxicology Reports in 2020, examined the effects of detergent-processed cassava on the kidneys of male Wistar rats. The researchers found increased mortality as detergent concentration increased, along with elevated creatinine and urea levels, changes in urine composition and structural damage to kidney tissue. They concluded that the practice had adverse effects on kidney structure and function and recommended that it be discontinued.

This does not mean eating detergent-processed fufu has been proven to cause kidney disease in humans. The study was conducted on rats, so its findings cannot simply be transferred to people. But it provides a serious toxicological warning about deliberately introducing detergent into food.

Also Read: The common misconception about PCOS, now PMOS.

The paracetamol claim requires similar caution. Aproko Doctor has raised concerns about reports that crushed paracetamol is also being used to accelerate cassava fermentation. However, there is not enough reliable evidence to establish how widespread this practice is among Nigerian fufu producers. It should therefore be treated as a claim requiring investigation, rather than presented as a nationwide practice.

The bigger problem, however, extends far beyond fufu.

When preservation becomes a health risk

Food preservation is not inherently dangerous. In fact, it is essential. Refrigeration, drying, smoking, salting, pasteurisation, fermentation and approved food preservatives all help prevent food deterioration.

Modern food production also uses legitimate chemical preservatives. Sodium benzoate, benzoic acid, sulphites, sorbates and other approved substances can be used in particular foods and at controlled concentrations.

The problem begins when food sellers use substances that are not intended for food preservation, or when legitimate preservatives are used without adequate knowledge of their correct application.

A 2023 study of 50 fruit and vegetable retailers across selected markets in Lagos found that 22, or 44 percent, reported using chemical preservatives. More concerning was the nature of some of the chemicals identified. The study reported Gammalin 20, Sniper, aluminium phosphide, DDT, calcium carbide and brodifacum.

Among the 22 chemical users, six reported using Gammalin 20, four Sniper, four aluminium phosphide, three DDT, three calcium carbide and two brodifacum.

These are not simply different versions of ordinary food preservatives. Several are pesticides or other chemicals never intended to be deliberately added to food as a preservation method.

The study was small and does not establish that 44 percent of food sellers across Lagos use chemicals. It was a survey of 50 retailers in selected markets. But it demonstrates that the practice exists and identifies the types of chemicals involved.

That distinction matters. A preservative approved for a particular food and used within permitted limits is not equivalent to treating vegetables with an agricultural pesticide.

Fermentation is not the enemy

Traditional Nigerian fermentation is not inherently unsafe. In many foods, it is an important biological process that can improve characteristics, digestibility and safety.

The danger comes when fermentation is poorly controlled, contaminated or deliberately manipulated with substances that were never meant to be part of the process.

A Nigerian study published in Toxins analysed 191 samples of fermented foods from southwestern Nigeria, including ogi, ogi baba, ogiri, iru and ugba. Researchers tested the samples for 23 different mycotoxins.

They found that 82 percent of the samples contained one or more mycotoxins. Fumonisin B1 was detected in 83 percent of ogi baba samples, while 20 percent of ugba samples contained aflatoxin B1, at concentrations ranging from 3 to 36 micrograms per kilogram. Sterigmatocystin was detected in 29 percent of ogi samples. The researchers also found that 98 percent of surveyed food sellers were unaware of mycotoxin contamination and its associated risks.

The lesson is that returning to traditional methods does not automatically make food safe. Food can become dangerous through contamination, poor storage, unsafe processing and inappropriate chemical use.

Why are people taking the shortcut?

The economic pressure behind these practices cannot be ignored. Cassava takes time to ferment. Fresh fruits and vegetables spoil. Fish and meat deteriorate quickly. Nigeria’s heat makes storage more difficult, while unreliable electricity and inadequate cold chain infrastructure can make refrigeration expensive or unavailable to small traders.

For someone whose income depends on selling perishable food, spoilage means lost money. That creates an incentive to make food last longer, soften faster or look fresher for longer. This is where preservation becomes a public health issue.

A trader may see a chemical as a cheap solution to a storage problem. A processor may see a shortcut as a way to reduce fermentation time. A consumer, however, has no way of knowing what was added to the food unless the process is properly monitored.

The responsibility therefore cannot rest entirely on consumers. Someone buying fufu cannot taste detergent, inspect a laboratory report or determine whether a chemical was added to cassava days earlier.

Nigeria already has regulations governing food additives, but the informal food economy remains difficult to monitor. The challenge is not simply creating rules. It is ensuring that safe preservation methods are affordable, understood and used across the food chain.

Better fermentation control, drying, refrigeration, food-grade packaging, pasteurisation and other preservation technologies can help producers extend shelf life without resorting to inappropriate chemicals.

Nigeria does not have to choose between food that spoils quickly and food preserved with questionable substances. It needs safer ways to make food last.

The concern raised by Aproko Doctor therefore goes beyond what may be hiding inside someone’s fufu. It points to a larger question about how Nigerians preserve food in a country where perishables are difficult to store, and informal food businesses serve millions every day.

When the race to make food last longer becomes more important than keeping it safe, preservation itself can become a health risk.

Cynthia Nwanonyiri