Mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and malaria remain major public health challenges in South Asia, particularly in Bangladesh, where mosquito repellents are widely used as primary preventive tools. This study presents a comparative evaluation of commonly used repellent products, including mosquito coils, liquid vaporizers and aerosols, DEET-based creams, and natural formulations, focusing on their efficacy, protection duration, and potential health risks. Efficacy was assessed using controlled laboratory methods, including chamber-based exposure and arm-in-cage tests against Aedes aegypti (Barnard & Xue, n.d.). Safety was evaluated through in vivo toxicological analysis in a rat model, incorporating clinical observations, hematological and biochemical profiling, and histopathological examination. The results indicated an overall mean effectiveness of 85%, with DEET-based creams demonstrating the highest efficacy (95%), while natural repellents showed the lowest (70%). Mosquito coils provided the longest protection duration (∼10 hours) but were associated with the highest health risk due to combustion-related emissions. Vaporizers and aerosols offered moderate efficacy with moderate health risk. Toxicological findings revealed that coil exposure induced significant respiratory stress, elevated liver enzymes (ALT, AST), increased leukocyte count, and notable lung tissue damage. Vaporizer and aerosol exposure resulted in mild physiological changes, whereas DEET-based and natural repellents showed minimal systemic toxicity. Overall, the study highlights a clear trade-off between efficacy and safety across repellent types. These findings emphasize the need for informed product selection, stronger regulatory control, and the development of safer, cost-effective, and sustainable mosquito repellent technologies for effective vector control in endemic regions.

All the authors agree that they have no conflict of interest

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5887648/

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Biomedical Research and Innovation Center, Biomedical Engineering Department, MIlitary Institute of Science and Technology

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data used here are the author's original data and open to all for used