House science committee to consider cutting US funding for IARC cancer agency

Screen Shot at AM x

The House Science, Space and Technology Committee [Tuesday, Feb. 6] is likely to consider whether Congress should cut off millions of dollars of U.S. funding for an international cancer agency.

The potential move was prompted by a controversial 2015 determination that the widely used herbicide glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic.”

The finding by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer has been questioned by Monsanto Co., which uses glyphosate in its popular Roundup weed killers, as well as many Republican lawmakers.

The science committee, in particular, has been dogged in its second-guessing of IARC’s work. Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who leads the Environment Subcommittee, have signed onto several letters to top officials at WHO, the Department Health and Human Services, and U.S. EPA asking about their potential roles in the glyphosate decision.

Related article:  How Monsanto's 'big bet' on dicamba tolerant GMOs may have backfired

Late last year, Smith, Biggs and Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), the vice chairman of the full committee, went so far as to threaten to withdraw American support for IARC. The international body has received more than $48 million from the U.S. since 1985, $22 million of which has gone to its Monograph Programme.

The science committee leaders’ warning was part of an attempt to secure a witness from IARC for Tuesday’s hearing. It appears those efforts were unsuccessful.

Read full, original post: Lawmakers to debate cutting cancer funding over glyphosate (registration required)

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend