Despite continued public debate, weed killer glyphosate is safe, EPA says

| | September 11, 2018

An EPA official said [September 10th] the agency’s work shows that glyphosate — the herbicide found in Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup — is not dangerous to humans despite continued public debate about its safety.

“ [T]he agency doesn’t feel that there’s any meaningful risk to human health based on exposure to glyphosate,” Michael Goodis, director of registration division in EPA’s Office of Pesticides, said at a conference hosted by the National Association of Departments of Agriculture. “This is consistent with determinations from other countries and regulatory authorities.”

[The EPA’s] 2017 draft risk assessment found that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic. The agency intends to release an interim registration decision for glyphosate in 2019 after reviewing “a considerable number of comments” on that initial assertion, Goodis said.

Related article:  Lifting Sri Lanka's glyphosate herbicide ban welcomed by tea industry

Read full, original article: EPA official: Glyphosate is safe (Behind Paywall)

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.

14 thoughts on “Despite continued public debate, weed killer glyphosate is safe, EPA says”

  1. ????? Who wrote this misinformation….”First, glyphosate effectively kills weeds, but not much else. Humans and animals don’t possess the metabolic machinery—the shikimate acid pathway—used by the herbicide to kill plants. That means glyphosate is not metabolized well in the human body, greatly reducing its potential to do harm?????…..BUT, the human gut microbiome DOES possess the shikimate pathway metabolic machinery…..??? lactobacillus? ???

    • Possession doesn’t mean harm is done. First the glyphosate would have to get there in sufficient quantity to overcome the ability of the microbiome residents to reproduce.

    • Nielson et al., (2018) showed that due to the composition of the chyme, an inhibitory effect on gut microorganisms doesn’t begin until it reaches about 50X the ADI.

      This finding helped to resolve a long-standing discrepancy between in vivo and in vitro studies.

        • Do you enjoy tossing random and unsupported ideas against the wall to see what sticks, because those are quite frankly idiotic failing.

          What variable in the gut causes the levels of cck to change?

          Acidity, amino acids, and lipids. Before reaching the measured NOAEL, what would the effect of glyphosate be on these levels from normal exposure (at or below the ADI)?


          With no inhibitory effect with regards to amino acid synthesis, nor is there any detectable alteration in microflora growth, your hypothesis needs quite a bit of work, as there isn’t any evidence that, until you reach a level that inhibits the microflora growth, you aren’t altering the lipid content of the chyme in any meaningful way.

          Trypsin (and chymotrypsin)…same story.

          Guess what would have a bigger effect?

          The person electing to have a bacon cheeseburger for lunch.

          Oh, and next time do rember that results from cell culture worrk rarely had a direct application to in vivo results.

          Please keep flailing, the shorter your posts, the quicker I can debunk them.

          • Dear Obfuscate99
            University of Nebraska Medical Center letter
            FROM: Samuel M Cohan MD Ph.D
            TO: Esther Barajas-Ochoa
            Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
            “Glyphosate danger/IARC Misclassification of Gyphosphate”
            Interdisciplinary Toxicology – Glyphosate: Pathway to Modern diseases: celiac sprue and gluten intolerance
            Gastroenterology 1987; (92) pp 449-458
            Role of cholecytokinin in the negative feedback control of pancreatic enzyme secretion in Conscious Rats
            Effects of low doses of glyphosate on DNA damage, cell proliferation and oxidative stress in HepG2 cell line.
            Environ. Sci Pollut Res Int. 2017
            Kasyba V.

          • 1. No dose effect seen in any of the cited studies. No causal relationship observed let alone tested in any of the cited studies. Claims if endocrine disruption not supported by experimental data. No causal mechsnism identified.

            This wasn’t anywhere close to a proper study, and it doesn’t even count as a formal review article. No compliant studies showed any of the effects implied, and in fact, the author’s conclusions contradict the OECD-453 studies donrnto date…but ad the author didn’t bother to actuslly validate their hypotheses it’s meely a personal communication.

            2. Samsel and Seneff always make bold hypotheses that blame glyphosate for almost every condition under the sun.

            Do you know what they don’t do?

            Experentally test their hypotheses. Seneff just scrapes journal articles for bits that she and Samsel like, but then don’t bother to test any of it.

            It’s actually rather amusing that some of the researchers who collaborate with Seralini view Samsel and Seneff as nut jobs.

            3. This one doesn’t even involve glyphosate, and there’s no causal linkage between glyphosate exposure at or below the ADI and and CCK expression or activity.

            Do you bother reading the papers themselves, or just scan the abstracts?

            4. Wow, so now I know you have no clue about the underlying science. This was cell.culture work, but the doses used we’re for whole body exposure limits. Take a look at the alpha and beta elimination phases for glyphosate, particularly the amount of that total dose that makes in into the organism, as opposed to simply passing throygh the digestive tract.

            I have to ask, do you have any meaningful background in toxicology, biochemistry, or molecular biology? All.of these citations don’t provide the degree of support that you seem to want to attributr to them.

            Once again, the gold standard isn’t test for chronic toxicity using OECD 452 or 453. The real.qurstion you should be asking is why haven’t any of the groups you cited haven’t conducted a compliant study in over two decades.

            Asemtioned earlier, industry, accademic, and government groups have ..many times.

            The science does not support your position, and you don’t seem to understand experimental design, let alone the underlying chemistry n

    • Humans don’t have the shikimic acid pathway, which produces the 3 aromatic amino acids needed for complete protein synthesis. We get them from the food we eat, which is digested into the individual amino acids, including the aromatic amino acids. As a result of digestion, all the individual amino acids are present in the digestive fluids in our stomach and small intestine, which is where our gut microflora, including lactobacillus, live. IF there was enough glyphosate in what we eat (which is highly unlikely) to inhibit the shikimic acid pathway, there would still be plenty of the aromatic amino acids present for us to share with the poor little lactobacilli – and they would get them before we did.

        • Surfactants are even less likely to get into tummies. they are easy to wash off. Because they are surfactants. Individual genetic difference? Gee, are you referring the the micorbiota, the humans, or both? do you realize that zero foods have been tested and no reason has been shown that such is necessary.

      • Molecular Mechanisms of Pesticide Toxicity
        Olfa Tebourbi, Mohsen Sakly and Khémais Ben Rhouma
        Laboratory of Integrated Physiology, Science Faculty of Bizerte Tunisia

      • Molecular Mechanisms of Pesticide Toxicity
        Olfa Tebourbi, Mohsen Sakly and Khémais Ben Rhouma
        Laboratory of Integrated Physiology, Science Faculty of Bizerte

  2. WHERE IS THE REST OF THE ARTICLE ?? (and relevant excerpts)…(e.g., “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.”

Leave a Comment

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

Send this to a friend