On March 20, 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) labeled glyphosate, the most commonly used herbicide in the world, as a probable human carcinogen.
A recent Reuters investigative piece, however, has drawn attention to the lack of scientific integrity of IARC and its scientists. It has become clear that the organization suffers from a troubling conflict-of-interest problem and activists are now misrepresenting the agency’s scientifically flawed findings in their advocacy efforts against glyphosate.
. . . .
As Reuters and Science have reported, leading scientists feel IARC “confuses the public and policy makers.” The agency, which has determined that 988 of the 989 substances it has evaluated are potentially carcinogenic, is supposed to “assess hazard” and it does not take into account “typical levels of exposure or consumption” and therefore, “is not a measurement of risk.” However, this distinction is often lost, as IARC’s director Kurt Straif concedes that, “There are activist groups who want to say, ‘This is now an IARC carcinogen and we need to take all action against it.’”
The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. Read full, original post: The Shady Politics Of The IARC Glyphosate Hazard Assessment
