World Health Organization Report Contradicts Scientific Findings on Glyphosate
23 March 2015 A new report from the World Health Organization has classified glyphosate with a “2A” rating as a probable carcinogen, a finding that goes against both long-standing and recent scientific research conducted in the United States and Germany.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, assessed the carcinogenicity of five organophosphate pesticides and published a summary of their findings in the Lancet Oncology.
John Combest, spokesman for Monsanto, the maker of Roundup, told Farm Chemicals International, “Glyphosate has a 40-year history of safe use and is supported by one of the most extensive worldwide human health databases ever compiled on an ag product.” Combest added that regulators continue to find there is no evidence of carcinogenicity based on risk assessments by countries including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and most recently the German BfR on behalf of the European Union.
Dr. Phillip Miller, vice president of Global Regulatory Affairs, Monsanto, said, “As consumers ourselves, the safety of our products is paramount to each of us who work at Monsanto, and our company is built on a foundation of science. All labeled uses of glyphosate are safe for human health and supported by one of the most extensive worldwide human health databases ever compiled on an agricultural product.”
In January 2015, the German government completed a rigorous, four-year evaluation of glyphosate for the EU, reviewing all the data that IARC considered, plus significantly more, and concluded that glyphosate was unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk in humans. In addition, U.S. Agricultural Health Study data from the National Center for Biotechnology Information and National Institute of Health demonstrated that glyphosate exposure in more than 57,000 pesticide applicators was not associated with cancer.
Miller said that Monsanto joins fellow members of the EU and U.S. glyphosate taskforces in its disagreement with the classification for several reasons: there is no new research or data that was used; the most relevant, scientific data was excluded from review; the conclusion is not supported by scientific data; and there is no link between glyphosate and an increase in cancer when the full data set is included in a rigorous review.
“We don’t know how IARC could reach a conclusion that is such a dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe,” Miller added. “We have issued an urgent request for appropriate personnel of the WHO to sit down with the global glyphosate taskforces and other regulatory agencies to account for the scientific studies used in their analysis and, equally as important, to account for those scientific studies that were disregarded.”
“It is imperative for society that conclusions about a matter as important as human safety be non-biased, thorough and based on science that adheres to internationally recognized standards. The one thing about true science is that it is not selective. Unfortunately, this review does not meet the standards used by respected agencies around the world.”
European Crop Protection Association Director General Jean-Charles Bocquet said the conclusions were a result of incomplete data review and omitted key evidence. IARC’s conclusions “contradict the world’s most robust and stringent regulatory systems – namely the European Union and the United States – in which crop protection products have undergone extensive reviews based on multi-year testing and in which active ingredients such as glyphosate and malathion been found not to present a carcinogenic risk to humans.”
“Where the full evidence is taken into account – and the evaluation covers actual use – there is no proof that pesticides cause cancer in humans. This is clearly shown by several studies on farmers’ health. Farmers (who are the most exposed to pesticides) live longer and in better health than the rest of the population. Cancer incidence and mortality is lower in farming populations than in the rest of the population for all major types of cancer but skin cancers,” Bocquet said.
Details on IARC Findings
IARC said it based its findings on studies of mostly agricultural exposures in the United States, Canada and Sweden since 2001. It classified glyphosate and the insecticides malathion and diazinon as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A). For glyphosate, there was “limited evidence of carcinogenicity” in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and there was “convincing evidence” that glyphosate can cause cancer in laboratory animals, IARC said.
According to IARC, glyphosate also caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells, although it gave negative results in tests using bacteria. One study in community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby.
IARC also classified the insecticides tetrachlorvinphos — which is used on livestock and companion animals, including in pet flea collars in the U.S. but is banned in the EU — and parathion as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B), based on what it said was convincing evidence that these agents cause cancer in laboratory animals. All authorized uses of parathion were cancelled in the EU and the U.S. by 2003.
For malathion, IARC said there is “limited evidence of carcinogenicity” in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and prostate cancer. Malathion also caused tumors in rodent studies, and caused chromosomal damage and disrupted hormone pathways, IARC said.
For diazinon — of which production volumes have been relatively low and decreased further after 2006 due to restrictions in the U.S. and the EU — there was “limited evidence of carcinogenicity” in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and lung cancer. In addition to the agricultural exposure studies in the United States, Canada and Sweden, the Group 2A classification was “also based on strong evidence that diazinon induced DNA or chromosomal damage,” according to IARC.
See more information in the IARC’s press release.
Get The Newsletter Today!
