A California jury recently awarded a $289 million judgment against Bayer, the maker of the herbicide. Lawyers somehow convinced the jury it caused the plaintiff’s cancer ….
It’s hard not to feel for victims of cancer, but there are several hundred studies concluding glyphosate is safe when it’s properly applied and does not cause cancer ….
Even though all this research was peer reviewed, some people are skeptical because the company funded part of it …. [W]hile financial interests are worth considering in weighing the evidence of safety, those interests alone shouldn’t be cause to dismiss wholesale mountains of independently verified research.
Likewise, the financial interests of activist groups opposed to the use of glyphosate never get the same scrutiny …. Many organic producers and retailers are involved in the anti-glyphosate campaign. Twenty such companies …. signed a petition to get the EPA to place greater restrictions on the use of the herbicide.
Glyphosate kills weeds that choke out production crops …. As a result, foods produced with conventional farming are often cheaper than organic. Organic companies pushing to restrict or ban glyphosate will therefore benefit financially from such laws.
Read full, original article: The debate on glyphosate: Where’s the balance?