Viewpoint: Why it’s harmful for regulators and consumers to trust cancer designations by the UN sub-agency IARC

image

IARC‘s hazard identification scheme, which assesses the carcinogenic potential of a chemical in a simple binary manner, is now obsolete. Since it was set in the early 1970s, the scheme has basically remained unchanged and has not reached the level of regulatory science of the 21st century. Whether to reform or abolish it, the world’s scientific, regulatory, and political circles are faced with a decision.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Of the nearly 1,000 chemicals investigated in the history of IARC’s monograph program, only one was classified as “probably not carcinogenic.” For almost all chemicals, there is evidence that they are carcinogenic, and the process of concluding that they should be treated as such, or that they are “classifiable” (the available evidence cannot draw conclusions), is nearly worthless information for public health professionals.

However, IARC’s process is hazard-based, so if a substance has the potential to cause carcinogenicity, it will try to “label” it as carcinogenic, regardless of the circumstances. The premise itself is flawed. This has created a useless and even absurd mechanism to put chemicals in the same group with orders of magnitude different amounts that are likely to cause cancer.

[Editor’s note: This article has been translated from Japanese and edited for clarity.]

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Picture1
Hiroshima at 81: America’s new nuclear bomb, a buried Iranian target, and a question no one wants to ask
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-31-2026-07_35_35-AM
Wikipedia has assembled an informative list of fake news websites from across the ideological spectrum
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 09_08_15 AM 2
The retreat of environmental extremism: Why activist NGOs are losing favor
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 10_17_59 AM
Viewpoint: What does it mean when critics of conventional agriculture say many fruits and vegetables are “linked” to pesticide poisoning?
Screenshot-2026-07-31-at-10.10.55-AM
Viewpoint: ‘Misinformation' about the effects of offshore wind turbines on marine life could derail offshore wind farm projects 
ChatGPT Image Jul 31, 2026, 08_05_37 AM
With trust in RFK, Jr.'s CDC vaccine advice collapsing, physicians scramble to fill the information gap
Screenshot-2026-07-31-at-9.37.42-AM
Obsessing about ultra-processed foods but ignoring what matters far more: A balanced diet
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT Image Jul 29, 2026, 06_26_01 PM 2
Facts & Fallacies podcast: Organic food myths make a comeback on Instagram, with Dr. Kevin Folta
leeteam
How Kennedy and his family could pocket millions from Merck’s $50 million vaccine injury settlement that he oversaw
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-10-2026-12_21_03-PM
Viewpoint: Is there new evidence that the animal deworming drug ivermectin decreases the risk of Covid and cancer? Don’t waste your money.
Screenshot-2026-07-30-at-3.07.42-PM
Controversy over WNBA star Sophie Cunningham’s comment opposing trans females in women’s sports reinvigorates the culture wars
Screenshot-2026-07-09-at-1.09.25-PM
Anti-vaccine myths rattle health care
Screenshot-2026-08-03-at-2.15.16-PM
Viewpoint: Trump’s relaxed controls on supplying China with microchips could undermine U.S. AI dominance
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.