Latest study finds glyphosate not cancer-causing
Posted on October 7th, 2016
by
The group of 16 scientists, from Canada, the United States, Denmark, Brazil and the United Kingdom and other countries, decisively concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.”
The authors bluntly rejected the findings of an International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) panel, which decided in March 2015 that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans.
IARC is a division of the World Health Organization and its report had massive implications for public policy around glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide.
This spring, the European Union came close to banning glyphosate. Several countries, such as France and the Netherlands, refused to support an extension of glyphosate’s registration in Europe.
Yet another study is refuting the idea that glyphosate causes cancer.
After months of bickering, the European Commission granted an 18-month, temporary approval for the herbicide.
In North America, the IARC decision energized environmental groups and organic advocates, which lobbied the U.S. government to test foods for glyphosate residues.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which had not previously tested for glyphosate, relented in February and promised to monitor residues in corn, soybeans, milk, eggs and other food.
In response to the IARC report, Monsanto asked Intertek Scientific & Regulatory Consultancy to assemble four expert panels in the areas of exposure, epidemiology, cancer in experimental animals and genotoxicity, which is the study of cellular changes.
In the paper, which Monsanto funded but did not review before publication, the experts said:
- Even when using worst-case assumptions, systemic exposures to applicators, bystanders and the general public are very small…. There is an extremely large margin of safety from exposure to glyphosate via normal uses:” exposure experts
- Glyphosate epidemiologic literature does not indicate a causal relationship between glyphosate exposure and NHL (non Hodgkin’s lymphoma):” the epidemiology panel
- Contrary to the IARC report, there is not sufficient evidence that glyphosate is carcinogenic for lab animals such as mice and rats.
- Extensive reviews of the genotoxicity … all support a conclusion that glyphosate is inherently not genotoxic:” genotoxicity experts
The conclusions of the 16 member panel support the findings of agencies around the world. Health Canada, the European Food Safety Authority and a joint WHO and United Nations Food and Agriculture panel published similar scientific reviews in 2015 and 2016. All of the organizations reported that glyphosate is not carcinogenic for humans.
October 7th, 2016 at 12:54 pm
It has been proven that Glyphosate causes a host of new diseases.
In particular, Glyphosate inhibits and disrupts gut flora, causing diseases, including Kidney disease.
October 7th, 2016 at 4:52 pm
[Quote] The group of 16 scientists, from Canada, the United States, Denmark, Brazil and the United Kingdom and other countries, decisively concluded that “glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans. [Unquote]
Of course. What else do you expect from corporate sponsored scientists from these countries. Their economic prosperity depends on this. New owner of Monsanto, Bayer also has a very colourful history of denying harm of its products for decades after finally accepting and withdrawing products.
Cancer is not the only problem caused by glyphosate. There is a host of other sicknesses.
October 7th, 2016 at 5:58 pm
I do not believe this article since WHO deemed that Glyphosate was cancer causing. Even if it does not cause cancer there are many other diseases which are caused by Glyphosate. Please see: http://www.ecowatch.com/15-health-problems-linked-to-monsantos-roundup-1882002128.html
There is a group now taking Agribusiness to courts. See: https://foodrevolution.org/blog/food-and-health/monsanto-tribunal/
October 7th, 2016 at 7:33 pm
May be it is the raw materials and manufacturing methods. So, not from every source.
October 8th, 2016 at 12:48 am
In Sri Lanka the question is not whether Glyphosate causes cancer or not but is sure causes CKD!
Any relation with Gyphosate to cancer is irrelevant.
October 8th, 2016 at 3:35 am
All the countries cited in this study are the “so-called” SATELLITES of the US/UK group with Brazil also now tacked on after Rousseff was ousted as President, and there is good reason to consider this study’s findings untrustworthy. It is really a problem to get an Independent study on this and until such time another is found I am more inclined to accept the IARC findings. However, even that is concerned with whether Glyphosate is carcinogenic.
Our concerns while remaining in focus on CKDu, also looks at the weedicide as a probable culprit in causing many other chronic conditions as well.
This “latest” study is likely a fix and unless more studies show repeatable results, ! am inclined to reject it,
October 8th, 2016 at 3:35 am
It has been newly found that GLUTEN intolerance is caused by gut flora disruption by Glyphosate in the body system.
GLUTEN is mainly found in wheat flour.
October 8th, 2016 at 12:20 pm
A very interesting entry from the internet :
Solutions to Detox The World
On March 20 2015 the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency IARC declared that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen. IARC reached its decision based on the view of 17 top cancer experts from 11 countries, who met to assess the carcinogenicity of 5 pesticides.
The Detox Project supports proven sustainable solutions to feed the planet’s growing population without using harmful GMOs and large amounts of toxic pesticides:
How Microbes can Feed the World
How Organic can Feed the World
How IAASTD World Experts advise to Feed The World
The 1st chart below (How Microbes can Feed the World-1) shows a 2 phase approach to sustainable agriculture can include Farmers, Agribusiness, Government and Universities:
Phase I: 50% less chemicals (Farmers & Agribusiness need a 2-year transition to organic)
Phase II: Organic
Agribusiness can make the transition to sustainable agriculture. On December 10, 2013 Monsanto announced: Monsanto and Novozymes Team Up to Provide Sustainable Bioagricultural Solutions. On March 23, 2015 Monsanto CEO Hugh Grant stated: “The thing that often frustrates me in the debate is that there is never an alternative (to GM crops)… The other side of this is still pretty empty.”
Approximately 80% of all GMOs worldwide are glyphosate-resistant, with Monsanto’s Roundup-Ready GMOs the world leader. The World Health Organisation’s cancer agency finding that glyphosate can probably cause cancer in humans means that glyphosate and glyphosate-resistant GM crops are NOT acceptable solutions to feed the world. There are proven sustainable solutions:
How Microbes can Feed the World – 1
A report by the American Academy of Microbiology, a non-profit scientific society with almost 40,000 members.
FeedTheWorld microbes Click to download this report : Go to: detoxproject.org
—–
In Lanka, we ought to tie such ideas to downsizing of the SL Army.
Here is an island wide, life saving project for ex=Army groups.
October 8th, 2016 at 4:41 pm
Loading the soils with chemical fertilizers and weedicides kills the beneficial bacteria in the soils. They found use of Glyphosate for more than 11 years kills the soils totally. The beneficial bacteria die. Chemicals alone cannot create good healthy soil and plant life. Please see:
NPK-University Soil Microbiology With Harley Smith – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PssluRwbOc4
October 8th, 2016 at 4:51 pm
Another interesting article from the web on alternative ways to grow Crops without harmful chemicals :
Microbes Will Feed the World, or Why Real Farmers Grow Soil, Not Crops
By Brian Barth on April 22, 2014
From the MODERN FARMER
Out on the horizon of agriculture’s future, an army 40,000 strong is marching towards a shimmering goal. They see the potential for a global food system where pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers are but relics of a faded age.
They are not farmers, but they are working in the name of farmers everywhere. Under their white lab coats their hearts beat with a mission to unlock the secrets of the soil — making the work of farmers a little lighter, increasing the productivity of every field and reducing the costly inputs that stretch farmers’ profits as thin as a wire.
‘Producing more food with fewer resources may seem too good to be true, but the world’s farmers have trillions of potential partners that can help achieve that ambitious goal. Those partners are microbes.’
The American Society of Microbiologists (ASM) recently released a treasure trove of their latest research and is eager to get it into the hands of farmers. Acknowledging that farmers will need to produce 70 to 100 percent more food to feed the projected 9 billion humans that will inhabit the earth by 2050, they remain refreshingly optimistic in their work. The introduction to their latest report states:
“Producing more food with fewer resources may seem too good to be true, but the world’s farmers have trillions of potential partners that can help achieve that ambitious goal. Those partners are microbes.”
Mingling with Microbes
Linda Kinkel of the University of Minnesota’s Department of Plant Pathology was one of the delegates at ASM’s colloquium in December 2012, where innovators from science, agribusiness and the USDA spent two days sharing their research and discussing solutions to the most pressing problems in agriculture.
“We understand only a fraction of what microbes do to aid in plant growth,” she says. “But the technical capacity to categorize the vast unknown community [of microorganisms] has improved rapidly in the last couple of years.”
Microbiologists have thoroughly documented instances where bacteria, fungi, nematodes — even viruses — have formed mutually beneficial associations with food plants, improving their ability to absorb nutrients and resist drought, disease and pests. Microbes can enable plants to better tolerate extreme temperature fluctuations, saline soils and other challenges of a changing climate. There is even evidence that microbes contribute to the finely-tuned flavors of top-quality produce, a phenomenon observed in strawberries in particular.
“But we’re only at the tip of the iceberg,” says Kinkel.
In the Field
Statements such as, “There are 10 to the 6th fungal organisms in a gram of soil!” and, “This bacterial biofilm has tremendous communication properties!” are breakroom banter among microbiologists, but what does it all mean for farmers? The answers reach back into the millennial past of agriculture, back to the dawn of life on earth.
Whenever a seed germinates in the wild or a crop is planted by a farmer, the microbial community that helps that species to grow and thrive is mobilized. Chemical signals enter the soil via the exudates of the plant and a symphony of underground activity commences. Genetic information is exchanged; the various microbial players assume their positions on the tissues of the plant; often, one microbe colonizes another, providing a service that helps the first microbe to assist the plant whose roots it is embedded in.
Though this elaborate dance takes place without any input from humans, we have been tinkering with it for a long time.
For example, the process of nitrogen fixation in plants of the legume family (which includes beans, peas, peanuts and many other crop plants) is one of the little bacterial miracles that makes our planet habitable. Anyone who has ever observed the roots of a legume knows that they are covered in strange white or pinkish growths, about the size of ants, which appear to be an infection of some sort. Undoubtedly, ancient farmers had an intuitive understanding that these warty protuberances had something to do with the noticeable ability of legumes to improve the soil, but it wasn’t until the late 19th century that the mystery began to unfold.
While Louis Pasteur was discovering how to preserve milk and becoming famous as the father of microbiology, a relatively unknown colleague of his with a penchant for plants was making another discovery, of perhaps even greater historical importance. In 1888, Martinus Beijerinck, discovered that tiny bacteria called Rhizobia infect the roots of legumes, causing the swollen nodules. Rather than an infection that weakens the plant, the nodules are the fertilizer factories of the plant kingdom, disassembling atmospheric nitrogen — which plants are unable to use — and refashioning it in a soluble, plant-friendly form.
Rhizobia are key ingredients of the earth’s verdancy and harnessing the bacteria to improve soil fertility has long been one of the cornerstones of sustainable agriculture. Yet, modern day microbiologists are now aware of scores of other equally profound plant-microbe interactions, discoveries they believe will have a big impact as human populations continue to soar on a planet of finite resources.
Making the Translation
In her lab at the university, Kinkel experiments with antibiotic bacteria that suppress plant pathogens and tests various soil management strategies to see their effects on microbial communities. In Colombia, microbiologists have learned to propagate a fungus that colonizes cassava plants and increases yields up to 20 percent. Its hyphae — the tiny tentacles of fungi — extend far beyond the roots of the cassava to unlock phosphorus, nitrogen and sulfur in the soil and siphon it back to their host, like an IV of liquid fertilizer.
In Colombia, microbiologists have learned to propagate a fungus that colonizes cassava plants and increases yields up to 20 percent
Though microbiologists can coerce soil to produce extraordinary plant growth in their labs and test plots, transferring the results to everyday agricultural practices is not a straightforward process.
“Connections to farmers are a weak link,” Kinkel laments, alluding to a “snake oil effect” where farmers have become leery of salesmen hawking microbial growth enhancers that don’t pan out in the field. “The challenge of [these] inoculants,” she says, “is they may not translate in all environments.”
Though researchers continue to develop promising new microbial cocktails, there is an increased focus on guiding farmers to better steward the populations that already exist in their soil. Kinkel is working on an approach she believes will help farmers sustain optimal microbial communities by ensuring they have the food they need — carbon — at all times. She calls it ‘slow release carbon’, but it’s not something farmers will see in supply catalogs any time soon. Kinkel says she has access to resources for her academic research, but lacks a “deliberate pipeline for product development.”
It Takes a Global Village
The 26 experts from around the world convened at the ASM colloquium concluded their discussions with a bold goal for the future of agriculture: They’ve challenged themselves to bring about a 20 percent increase in global food production and a 20 percent decrease in fertilizer and pesticide use over the next 20 years.
With an indomitable belief that science will do its part to make this dream a reality, the scientists are looking to their corporate and regulatory counterparts to build a pipeline of information to farmers. They’re hoping that top-down investments in research and technology will meet directly with grassroots changes in the culture of farming — without all the snake oil-vending agribusiness interests in the middle. Ultimately, they envision a future where farmers again trust in the unseen forces of the soil — instead of the fertilizer shed — for answers to their challenges.