New Study Raises Alarm
About Glyphosate Pesticides at Levels the EPA Claims Are "Safe"
By for Common
Dreams
A
new study on
glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup—one of the world's most
widely used weedkillers—is fueling persistent concerns about the pesticide's
impact on sexual development, genotoxicity, and intestinal bacteria, even when
exposure is limited to a level currently considered "safe" by U.S.
regulators.
While
the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World
Health Organization (WHO), and California have
classified glyphosate as a probable human
carcinogen, U.S.and European regulators
have continued to authorize farmers to use it, and Republicans in Congress have
even threatened to
cut off funding to the WHO over the issue.
"What your average consumer needs to know is that there's absolutely no scientific evidence backing up the EPA's claims of 'safe levels.'" —Katherine Paul, Organic Consumers Association
They exposed rats to glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) in drinking
water at the "safe" level set by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) over a three-month period, "starting from prenatal life until
13 weeks after weaning."
"The results show that GBHs—even at
doses deemed safe and over a relatively short exposure time (which in
human-equivalent terms correspond from embryo life to 18 years of age)—are able
to alter certain important biological parameters, markers chiefly relating to
sexual development, genotoxicity, and alteration of the intestinal microbiome...especially
in females," according to the study's website.
Daniele Mandrioli, associate director of
the institute's cancer research center, explained to the Guardian that
this "shouldn't be happening," and noted that in humans,
"disruption of the microbiome has been associated with a number of
negative health outcomes, such as obsesity, diabetes, and immunological
problems."
Philip J. Landrigan, a member of the
study's research team and a professor at New York's Icahn School of Medicine at
Mount Sinai, expressed worries that glyphosate may pose a long-term cancer risk
"that might affect a huge number of people, given the planet-wide use of
the glyphosate-based herbicides."
Acknowledging that "by its very
nature and purpose, the pilot study does not resolve the uncertainties puzzling
the various agencies," Landrigan concluded that "these early warnings
must be further investigated in a comprehensive long-term study."
Consumer advocates in the U.S. also
responded with calls for further studies, pointing out that "there have
been no long-term, peer-reviewed studies of the potential health impact of
glyphosate exposure at levels lower than the EPA's guidelines."
"This new pilot study confirms what
many responsible scientists have been saying all along: There is no such thing
as 'safe' levels when it comes to glyphosate, especially when it comes to
children," remarked Ronnie
Cummins, international director of the U.S.-based Organic Consumers Association
(OCA), which supports the testing food products—including Ben
& Jerry's ice cream—for levels of glyphosate.
"What your average consumer needs
to know is that there's absolutely no scientific evidence backing up the EPA's
claims of 'safe levels,'" OCA U.S. director Katherine Paul told Common Dreams. "So when Ben &
Jerry's says it doesn't matter that there's glyphosate in their ice
cream—because the levels are beneath EPA guidelines—that's total bunk."
Meanwhile, Monsanto—which has tried to
influence scientific health reports about Roundup—maintains that "there is
no link between glyphosate and cancer," and accused the Ramazzini
Institute of being "an activist organization with an agenda."
The
institute has supported the study of cancer for more than two decades and,
according to its website,
its top priorities are conducting scientific research, performing early
diagnosis, and spreading information about "environmental toxic and
carcinogenic risks."