IARC assessment of glyphosate only served to confuse policy makers, public

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

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

newborn infant baby mother
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: The truth about vitamin K shots
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
ChatGPT Image Jun 16, 2026, 12_03_37 PM
Kennedy accused of trying to ‘bully’ science journal that retracted study linking vaccines to infant deaths
Screen Shot at AM
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Right-wing politics bad for your health? Separating speculation from science
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-3-2026-04_29_13-PM
Viewpoint: While unvaccinated children are dying overseas, Congress challenges Trump and Kennedy’s block on aid
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_29_11-AM
What’s behind Anthropic’s warning about the accelerating development of AI
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_01_45-AM-2
Viewpoint—Recursive self-improvement: AI leader Anthropic calls for AI slowdown
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-15-2026-11_00_13-AM-2
Glucosamine alert: Alzheimer’s progresses faster among those taking the popular supplement
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-11.23.32-AM
In a rebuke to RFK, Jr.’s anti-vax crusade, journal retracts study claiming hepatitis B vaccine–autism link
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-12.33.01-PM
Who’s responsible when AI lies? Google challenging court ruling that search results are not protected from legal liability
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-2.12.30-PM
Some plants can poison you. So how did humans figure out what is safe to eat?
Screenshot-2026-06-14-at-9.53.54-AM
Is the World Cup a perfect storm for the spread of infectious diseases?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.