[15] In January 2016, the Brazilian Association for Collective Health (Abrasco; Portuguese: Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva) criticized the introduction of pyriproxyfen in Brazil.

[16] On February 3, the rumor that pyriproxyfen, not the Zika virus, is the cause of the 2015-2016 microcephaly outbreak in Brazil was raised in a report of the Argentinean organization Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages (PCST).

[20] In addition, the coordinator for the PCST statement, Medardo Ávila Vazquez, acknowledged in an interview that "the group hasn't done any lab studies or epidemiological research to support its assertions, but it argues that using larvicides may cause human deformities.

[22][23] The Health Minister of Brazil, Marcelo Castro, criticized this step, noting that the claim is "a rumor lacking logic and sense.

Neurologist Vanessa van der Linden stated in an interview, "Clinically, the changes we see in the scans of babies suggest that the injuries were caused by congenital infection and not by larvicide, drug or vaccine.

Gorski also pointed out the extensive physiochemical understanding of pyriproxyfen coded in the WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, which concluded in a past evaluation that the insecticide is not genotoxic, and that the doctor organization making the claim has been advocating against all pesticides since 2010, complicating their reliability.

"[29] A colleague also from the University of Adelaide stated that "While the evidence that Zika virus is responsible for the rise in microcephaly in Brazil is not conclusive, the role of pyriproxyfen is simply not plausible.