Glyphosate weedkiller unlikely to impact ovarian function, studies find

| July 29, 2020
Monsanto Roundup pesticide ap img
This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

Exposure to the chemical glyphosate changed the level of some ovarian proteins in mice but did not impact ovarian steroid production, an indication glyphosate may not adversely affect reproduction, according to a new study.

Two studies, published in the peer-reviewed academic journals Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology and Reproductive Toxicology, analyzed how ovarian function in mice responded to various levels of exposure to glyphosate, a chemical extensively used to kill weeds. The research found the highest exposure levels included in the experiments resulted in increased ovarian weight and follicle number, but Aileen Keating, an associate professor of animal science at Iowa State University and lead author, said the research did not uncover evidence that glyphosate affects the healthy functioning of ovaries.

“The big takeaway is that while we did find some changes in ovarian proteins, many of the endpoints we examined were not altered by glyphosate exposure,” Keating said.

Keating, whose research focuses on reproductive health, said it’s unclear if the increased ovarian size or altered protein abundance that resulted from the highest exposure level could cause changes in the ability of mice to reproduce. Answering that question will require further study, she said. The study found glyphosate exposure did not affect heart, liver, spleen, kidney or uterus weights. Keating said the study’s conclusions largely agreed with findings published years ago meant to determine how the chemical can be used safely.

The researchers introduced glyphosate to groups of mice orally, mimicking how humans could be exposed to glyphosate residue in water or in crops used for food production. Groups of mice were exposed to different glyphosate levels and for periods of 5, 10 or 20 weeks.  The researchers chose the doses, measured in milligrams per kilogram of bodyweight, to approximate potential glyphosate levels that humans could be exposed to.

Related article:  Talking Biotech: University of Florida's Kevin Folta on fear-mongering claims of glyphosate-in-vaccines, food
Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

However, Keating noted that it remains unclear how much glyphosate humans are exposed to regularly, which made it difficult to judge what levels were appropriate for the experiments. Additionally, they used only the active compound contained in weed treatments, not the additional ingredients.

The use of glyphosate has sparked controversy regarding its proposed health effects. Accordingly, Keating said the researchers designed the study to be as unbiased as possible. For instance, the scientists didn’t know the glyphosate treatment of individual samples as they conducted their analysis, which meant perceived expectations or biases could not affect the results.

“It’s a commonly used chemical, and there’s been some alarm in the media about its use,” she said. “We need more well designed, independent studies to see if this is something we should be concerned about.”

Read the original post

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
a a b b a f ac a

Video: Death by COVID: The projected grim toll in historical context

The latest statistics, as of July 10, show COVID-19-related deaths in U.S. are just under 1,000 per day nationally, which is ...
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 ...
types of oak trees

Infographic: Power of evolution? How oak trees came to dominate North American forests

Over the course of some 56 million years, oaks, which all belong to the genus Quercus, evolved from a single undifferentiated ...
biotechnology worker x

Can GMOs rescue threatened plants and crops?

Some scientists and ecologists argue that humans are in the midst of an "extinction crisis" — the sixth wave of ...
food globe x

Are GMOs necessary to feed the world?

Experts estimate that agricultural production needs to roughly double in the coming decades. How can that be achieved? ...
eating gmo corn on the cob x

Are GMOs safe?

In 2015, 15 scientists and activists issued a statement, "No Scientific consensus on GMO safety," in the journal Environmental Sciences ...
Screen Shot at PM

Charles Benbrook: Agricultural economist and consultant for the organic industry and anti-biotechnology advocacy groups

Independent scientists rip Benbrook's co-authored commentary in New England Journal calling for reassessment of dangers of all GMO crops and herbicides ...
Screen Shot at PM

ETC Group: ‘Extreme’ biotechnology critic campaigns against synthetic biology and other forms of ‘extreme genetic engineering’

The ETC Group is an international environmental non-governmental organization (NGO) based in Canada whose stated purpose is to monitor "the impact of emerging technologies and ...
Share via
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend