The situation at school number 137 in Novosibirsk has drawn scrutiny after the school administration and local authorities looked into a troubling claim from a parent. The parent asserted that, following a routine pest-control operation conducted at the institution, several children became ill rather quickly. This account was reported by Ngs.ru, citing a Siberian source familiar with the circumstances surrounding the incident and the subsequent health concerns voiced by the family involved. The core of the report centers on the timing and the sequence of events, as well as the potential health effects experienced by pupils in the days that followed the treatment.
Witnesses described a range of symptoms that appeared to cluster around the same period after disinfection procedures. Students reportedly experienced discomfort described as a burning sensation on the skin, irritation in the eyes, and a sense of malaise that prompted medical attention. The individuals speaking to the press emphasized that these were not isolated complaints but rather a wave of reactions that prompted concern among parents and school staff about the safety of the measures taken to control pests inside the educational facility. The accounts were given to media representatives who sought clarification on what occurred during and after the disinfection process.
According to the school administration, the pest-control work conducted on February 2 followed established guidelines and was carried out with attention to safety standards. The school noted that after the disinfection, the facility underwent cleaning and enhanced ventilation as part of standard practice to reduce the presence of any residual chemicals and to restore comfortable conditions for students and staff. The chemical products used by the pest-control company were described as those approved for use in environments that accommodate educational activities, with the intention of minimizing risk to occupants once the procedures were completed. This clarification was provided to address concerns about exposure and to reassure families that appropriate products were selected for the setting.
The matter drew attention from the district attorney’s office, which expressed a commitment to review the events in detail. Officials indicated that they would evaluate whether the actions taken by the school authorities and by the contracting pest-control organization complied with sanitary and epidemiological regulations and whether the quality of the services delivered met the required standards. The review would cover the procedures used before, during, and after the disinfection, including the handling of any potential hazards and the adequacy of safety measures implemented to protect students during their time on campus. The objective, as stated by the department’s press service, is to ensure accountability and to determine whether any adjustments to policy or practice are warranted in light of the observed reactions and the documented information about the incident.
Meanwhile, a separate post by a resident of Novosibirsk had circulated in the community, mentioning a quirky and unusual advertisement: the sale of cockroaches for a significant sum. This unrelated item appeared to be part of a broader online chatter surrounding pests and pest control, but it did not appear to have a direct bearing on the incident at the school. Nevertheless, it contributed to the wider conversation in the public sphere about pest management practices, the perception of risk, and how communities respond to reports of illness linked to environmental interventions. The episode underscores the importance of clear communication, thorough verification of facts, and careful consideration of the health implications when schools perform pest-control operations in enclosed, high-occupancy spaces.