The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download and review our 2019 Annual Report

Academics Review gives UN agency ‘F’ for evaluation of glyphosate

| March 24, 2015

The GLP curated this excerpt as part of a daily selection of biotechnology-related news, opinion and analysis.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph evaluation of certain insecticides and herbicides earns an F grade for failure to consider all the available studies, placing weight on weak and discredited studies (several in the advocacy community are already using this report claiming it is a vindication of the discredited Seralini GMO cancer claims), and most importantly failure to consider if glyphosate is a carcinogen at the doses to which consumers would normally be exposed.

It would require doses of hundreds or even thousands of times higher throughout a lifetime–a highly unlikely event–for even a single case of cancer to be caused by glyphosate.  Many commonly encountered substances including coffee would fall into the same carcinogenic category if evaluated using the IARC flawed approach to this report.  Experts around the globe have objected to IARCs reclassification of glyphosate.

Related article:  Farmers, ag companies launch court challenge of California's Prop 65 listing of glyphosate

The greater concern here is that it appears that IARC has been unduly influenced by anti-chemical activists who have persuaded it to take a politically popular hazard-based decision which is inconsistent with the weight of evidence and the underlying science.  Agencies like IARC have an important role to play.  It is shameful when that role is undermined by special interests for political objectives.

Read full original article: IARC glyphosate cancer review fails on multiple fronts

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend