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

In wake of California jury’s glyphosate verdict, New Zealand likely won’t revisit conclusion that herbicide is safe

| | August 16, 2018

A lot has been said about a recent court case ruling about Monsanto’s Roundup ….. Adding to the mix, in New Zealand the Associate Environment Minister, Eugenie Sage, has said she will ask the [country’s environmental protection agency] to consider declaring Monsanto’s weed-killer, Roundup, hazardous.

[Eugenie Sage’s] call to revise the status of Roundup looks to be a political exercise. In my opinion it would be fruitless, and time-wasting. She’d want to first show that the court case introduces new safety evidence. My understanding (so far) is that it doesn’t.

Editor’s note: The jury verdict on glyphosate was based primarily on IARC’s 2015 monograph, which called the herbicide a “probable carcinogen.”

IARC reports possible hazards: things that in some setting, in some amount, in some way might cause cancer. Something maybe a hazard, but no risk if you are not exposed to the substance. Similarly, there may be no risk if the dose is small …. IARC gives a heads-up as to what substances ‘might’ be hazards. It is for regulatory bodies to take this and decide where risks—if any—might lie, and how [to] manage this.

Related article:  Juror in glyphosate-cancer trial urges judge to uphold $80 million verdict appealed by Bayer

The NZ EPA has already reviewed IARC’s report on their own initiative in 2016 …. This would suggest there is nothing further to be done.

Read full, original article: USA Court ruling on glyphosate— the role of IARC and Eugenie Sage’s call

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Click the link above to read the full, original article.
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.

Send this to a friend