Glyphosate, EU, Tragedy in the Making

Published in Poisons Beware

When the World Health Organization defined Glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”, it should have put an immediate stop to the sale and use of Glyphosate-based herbicides.

Survival depends on a clean environment. Survival depends on a clean environment. Photo: Vivian Grisogono

The report was published in March 2015, and a press release was issued by WHO on March 20th summarizing the methods and results. The full report appeared in IARC Monographs Volume 112: evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides. In preparing the report on Glyphosate, international expert scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer worked for nearly a year evaluating “reports that have been published or accepted for publication in the openly available scientific literature” as well as “data from governmental reports that are publicly available”. The studies listed in the references for the IARC paper totalled 269.

Introduction to the WHO summary

The wording of the IARC report was suitably cautious, and the message was abundantly clear. Glyphosate poses a risk to human health.

Glyphosate-based herbicide in the Stari Grad Plain. Photo: Vivian Grisogono

Industry reaction

Unsurprisingly, Glyphosate producers condemned the IARC report. The loss of the Glyphosate market would mean huge reductions in their income.

Agro-chemical giant Monsanto hired a panel of scientists to counteract the findings of the IARC experts. The claim that the panel was 'independent' was undermined by the revelation that two of the 16 experts had been employed by Monsanto in the past, and a further ten had been Monsanto consultants. The company also published a rebuttal on its website by Robb Fraley, Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer. He referred to the IARC classification of Glyphosate as “erroneous”, and cast aspersions on the integrity and capacities of the IARC scientists with statements such as: “...IARC reports not only create unnecessary confusion with consumers, but they also fuel efforts by activist groups to mislead the public with shoddy science.” Robb Fraley's statement put emphasis on a Reuters 'Special Report: How the World Health Organization's Cancer Agency confuses consumers', by journalist Kate Kelland, with input from Himanshu Ojha, edited by Richard Woods. A heavily biased opinion piece by two non-scientists, it does not lend much weight to the Monsanto arguments.

Monsanto is well-known for its adroitness in handling the media, and biased journalism in its favour has come under an increasing spotlight in 2016.

Monasanto's credibility is further marred by its persistent refusal to disclose certain toxicity studies regarding Glyphosate - and then denigrating its detractors for basing their criticisms on 'incomplete evidence'.

There is even a Glyphosate website, purporting to bring 'balance to the debate' over the poison. It has been created by a group of agro-chemical companies. Smoothly written spin, it touts the supposed benefits of Glyphosate in European agriculture, and discounts all contrary views as 'scaremongering'. It repeats many of the reassuring statements about glyphosate which have been shown to be untrue or misleading, for instance the belief that glyphosate acts through pathways which are not present in animals. Relatively recent research shows otherwise. The website is promoted as a Google ad, and appeared as a banner under an article I wrote for Total Croatia News in May 2016 entitled 'EU Taking the Piss'.

Google ad with link to the industry-prepared Glyphosate website, Total Croatia News, May 2016.

The home page of the Glyphosate website is beguiling, resplendent with pretty pictures of rural scenes, full of bland statements preaching objectivity. It's designed to appeal to the unwary, promoting a poison that any informed  person has long since found unacceptable. The poison vending machine is very well oiled, not a trick is missed.

Glyphosate website home page.

It's a strange world where people are made more aware of the Zika virus threat than the actual harm being done by the world's most widely used poison. 

Glyphosate-based herbicides in fields near Jelsa. Photo: Vivian Grisogono

Glyphosate-based herbicide in fields near jelsa. Photo: Vivian Grisogono

Respective roles

The IARC has the task of warning the public of potential cancer hazards in the products and materials which we use as common practice. It is a worthwhile humanitarian task, and people are free to accept, ignore or reject the IARC findings as they wish. The agro-chemical companies are in the business of selling their products, poisonous, hazardous or otherwise, for maximum possible gain. Consumers have the choice of not buying particular products, but heavy marketing combined with relentless political pressure have made it extremely difficult to form balanced views - until it is too late. The spread of agro-chemical poisons around the world has been inexorable. A huge amount of money has been invested in making this happen. There is no such finance available for publicizing the alternative view.

This would not be a problem if the effects of pesticides could be restricted. A 2016 survey showed that some Californian organic wines contained traces of Glyphosate, following similar findings in German beers. Not to mention the presence of Glyphosate in city-dwellers' urine, the correlation between urinary Glyphosate residues and ill-health, and a host of other unwanted contaminations. Given the pervasive effects of Glyphosate-based herbicides, people who want to choose organic, pesticide-free foodstuffs are being denied. It is not reassuring to know that when previous 'safe limits' for Glyphosate residues in foodstuffs were exceeded in the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency simply raised its estimates of those so-called 'safe limits'.

European Parliament - headed off from the right direction?

In advance of the European approval for Glyphosate expiring in June 2016, members of the EU Parliament expressed their worries over unconditional renewal. From the Press release following the EU vote on March 22nd 2016:

' “So long as serious concerns remain about the carcinogenicity and endocrine disruptive properties of the herbicide glyphosate, which is used in hundreds of farm, forestry, urban and garden applications, the EU Commission should not renew its authorisation. Instead, it should commission an independent review and disclose all the scientific evidence that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) used to assess glyphosate,” said Environment Committee MEPs on Tuesday.

“The European Commission should not renew the approval of the herbicide substance glyphosate on the EU market for another 15 years, until 2031, without any restrictions as proposed,” said the Environment Committee in a non-legislative resolution passed by 38 votes to 6, with 18 abstentions.'

However, the EU Commission has shown determination to keep Glyphosate on its approved list. The Commission had recommended giving Glyphosate approval for a further 15 years, but finally reduced the proposal to seven years. It seems the MEPs, despite their grave concerns, accepted this compromise, as a further vote for a non-legislative Resolution was carried by 374 votes to 225, with 102 abstentions, in April 2016. The MEPs did express grave concerns in the Resolution, and suggested several measures to restrict the use of Glyphosate, in particular proposing a ban on its use in or near public parks, public gardens and playgrounds. As reported in Slobodna Dalmacija on April 14th 2016, Croatian MEPs Biljana Borzan and Marijana Petir were among those opposing the 15-year renewal of Glyphosate. Marijana Petir wanted the approval to be extended for a maximum of three years, preferably one, which she and others felt would be sufficient to establish firm evidence of Glyphosate's dangers and to develop a better alternative.

Glyphosate-based herbicide, field between Jelsa and Svirče. Photo: Vivian Grisogono

Glyphosate's origins and future

The 2015 IARC document describes how Glyphosate started: “Glyphosate was first synthesized in 1950 as a potential pharmaceutical compound, but its herbicidal activity was not discovered until it was re-synthesized and tested in 1970  Székács A, Darvas B (2012)”. The arrival of Glyphosate on the herbicide scene was well timed, as it coincided with the partial but significant ban on its predecessor DDT. Coincidence? The dangers of DDT were well known long before the ban. So was the ban on DDT delayed until Monsanto had come up with an alternative? The present situation seems like a mirror of those times. Seven more years to come up with an alternative so that Glyphosate can be retired without financial loss? 

Glyphosate usage worldwide

Worldwide production and usage of the poison is huge, as the IARC report acknowledged: 

“Glyphosate is reported to be manufactured by at least 91 producers in 20 countries, including 53 in China, 9 in India, 5 in the USA, and others in Australia, Canada, Cyprus, Egypt, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, Israel, Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan (China), Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and Venezuela (Farm Chemicals International, 2015). Glyphosate was registered in over 130 countries as of 2010 and is probably the most heavily used herbicide in the world, with an annual global production volume estimated at approximately 600 000 tonnes in 2008, rising to about 650 000 tonnes in 2011, and to 720 000 tonnes in 2012 (Dill et al., 2010; CCM International, 2011; Hilton, 2012; Transparency Market Research, 2014).”

In like vein, the MEPs' draft Motion of March 2016 stated: “systemic herbicide glyphosate currently has the highest global production volume of all herbicides; whereas its global use has increased dramatically, by a factor of 260, in the last 40 years (from 3 200 tons in 1974 to 825 000 tonnes in 2014)”.

Glyphosate-based herbicide and discarded bottle. Photo Frank Verhart

The organic alternative

Russia banned the import of genetically modified (GMO) crops, joining several other countries with similar intentions. Russian President Vladimir Putin spotted the gap in the market. Organic foodstuffs are now an important part of Russia's exports, and Vladimir Putin aims to make Russia the largest exporter of organic produce. Meanwhile, Russians are discovering the joys and benefits of innovative fine dining using home-produced foodstuffs. One of the world's smallest countries, Bhutan, is among those opting for organic production, aiming to be 100% organic by the year 2020.

Precautionary Principle

In public health, the Precautionary Principle should prevail. Where there is any doubt of any kind about the safety of a product, it should not be allowed or condoned.

In the case of Glyphosate, there is no doubt at all about its potential harmful effects. Practical experience has demonstrated an array of problems in human and environmental health arising from its continued use. The scientific evidence showing the dangers of Glyphosate-based herbicides is massive and growing. The IARC paper focuses on just one potential hazard, but it is one of very many. There have been detailed accounts of the dangers of Glyphosate over many years, including a 2012 overview from the Permaculture Institute, and Eco Hvar's own report, both of which present the scientific evidence condemning Glyphosate use. Eco Hvar has also compiled a list of relevant research articles for ease of reference. 

EC stance deeply concerning

The blatantly biased behviour of the European Commission in supporting the maximum approval renewal period for Glyphosate is cause for the gravest concern. The EU Parliament is due to hold a further vote on the subject in May. If this proves inconclusive, the Commission will have the final say. Parliament's Resolutions are non-binding on the Commission. Following the April vote, Croatian MEP Biljana Borzan expressed the optimistic view that the Commission will not dare to ignore the clear message from the Parliamentarians. The signs so far - tragically - are that such optimism may be wishful thinking. The very fact that such an important decision should be strung out for over a year following the IARC report is in itself a travesty in total opposition to the Precautionary Principle. The further time suggested for 'further research' is clearly just a delaying tactic.

As for the need for a substitute product to take Glyphosate's place, it would be comforting to think that this would take the form of a truly organic alternative that would not cause harm to humans, soil, insects, plants or animals. The track record of the agro-chemical industry in modern times indicates that this too is wishful thinking.

Those of us who do not want to be force-fed poisons face a bleak future in Europe and most other countries in the world. No doubt this will be a factor which UK voters take into account when they decide on whether to vote for staying in or leaving the EU in June, ironically the same month when Glyphosate's current approval expires.

© Vivian Grisogono 2016

You are here: Home poisons be aware Glyphosate, EU, Tragedy in the Making

Eco Environment News feeds

  • Products withdrawn because of serious contamination are on the rise, report finds

    The number of meat and poultry products recalled in the US for potentially life-threatening health hazards has nearly doubled since 2013, according to a report by a consumer watchdog group.

    The US Department of Agriculture logged 97 meat recalls for serious health hazards in 2018, ranging from 12 million pounds of raw beef that made close to 250 people ill withsalmonella to the withdrawal of 174,000 pounds of chicken wraps for possible contamination with listeria.

    Continue reading...

  • Alaskans have been enjoying free, organic meat for the past 50 years. Should other places stop turning their noses up?

    My mother texts me four photos of a dead moose the week I leave Alaska. It is freshly hit. The pebbled pink brains fanning across the pavement have not yet grayed in the brisk autumn air. The animal will not go to waste. For the past 50 years, Alaska has been the only state where virtually every piece of large roadkill is eaten.

    Every year, between 600 and 800 moose are killed in Alaska by cars, leaving up to 250,000lb of organic, free-range meat on the road. State troopers who respond to these collisions keep a list of charities and families who have agreed to drive to the scene of an accident at any time, in any weather, to haul away and butcher the body.

    Continue reading...

  • As Hitachi and Toshiba abandon plans for new British nuclear reactors, Damian Carrington assesses the merits of the technology

    All sources of electricity face the same trilemma in the 21st century: carbon emissions, continuity of supply and cost. The UK government has placed a big bet on nuclear power, but reactors meet only two of the three challenges. Nuclear power is low carbon and a secure source of electricity – but it is hugely expensive.

    In the era of climate change, generating power without belching out carbon emissions is vital. While building nuclear plants and fuelling them requires concrete, transport and so on, the overall emissions are similar to windand solar power. All produce far less carbon than coal or gas-powered stations.

    Continue reading...

  • A complete overhaul of what we eat may be the only way to meet the needs of a planet in crisis. So what’s on – and off – the menu?

    The world faces many challenges over the coming decades, but one of the most significant will be how to feed its expanding global population. By 2050, there will be about 10 billion of us, and how to feed us all, healthily and from sustainable food sources, is something that is already being looked at. The Norway-based thinktank Eat and the British journal the Lancet have teamed up to commission an in-depth, worldwide study, which launches at 35 different locations around the world today, into what it would take to solve this problem – and the ambition is huge.

    The commissioners lay out important caveats. Their solution is contingent on global efforts to stabilise population growth, the achievement of the goals laid out in the Paris Agreement on climate change and stemming worldwide changes in land use, among other things. But they are clear that it depends on far more than just these basic requirements. The initial report presents a flexible daily diet for all food groups based on the best health science, which also limits the impact of food production on the planet.

    Continue reading...

  • Paris agreement for the sea recommended as rates of plastic pollution to skyrocket

    A new global agreement to protect the seas should be a priority for the government to stop our seas becoming a “sewer”, according to a cross-party group of MPs.

    Plastic pollution is set to treble in the next decade, the environmental audit committee warned, while overfishing is denuding vital marine habitats of fish, and climate change is causing harmful warming of the oceans as well as deoxygenation and acidification.

    Continue reading...

  • Scientist Brad Lister returned to Puerto Rican rainforest after 35 years to find 98% of ground insects had vanished

    “We knew that something was amiss in the first couple days,” said Brad Lister. “We were driving into the forest and at the same time both Andres and I said: ‘Where are all the birds?’ There was nothing.”

    His return to the Luquillo rainforest in Puerto Rico after 35 years was to reveal an appalling discovery. The insect population that once provided plentiful food for birds throughout the mountainous national park had collapsed. On the ground, 98% had gone. Up in the leafy canopy, 80% had vanished. The most likely culprit by far is global warming.

    Continue reading...

  • Rising temperatures can be charted back to the late 1950s, and the last five years were the five hottest on record

    Last year was the hottest ever measured, continuing an upward trend that is a direct result of manmade greenhouse gas emissions.

    The key to the measurements is the oceans. Oceans absorb more than 90% of the heat that results from greenhouse gases, so if you want to measure global warming you really have to measure ocean warming.

    Continue reading...

  • Campaigners say it will cut pollution, but opponents claim it will hit poor people hardest

    “I’m just really glad the ULEZ is coming. Children’s lungs can’t wait,” says Jemima Hartshorn, a Brixton resident who helped set up campaign group Mums For Lungs.

    Continue reading...

  • The continent’s largest land mammal plays crucial role in spiritual lives of the tribes

    On 5,000 hectares of unploughed prairie in north-eastern Montana, hundreds of wild bison roam once again. But this herd is not in a national park or a protected sanctuary – they are on tribal lands. Belonging to the Assiniboine and Sioux tribes of Fort Peck Reservation, the 340 bison is the largest conservation herd in the ongoing bison restoration efforts by North America’s Indigenous people.

    The bison – or as Native Americans call them, buffalo – are not just “sustenance,” according to Leroy Little Bear, a professor at the University of Lethbridge and a leader in the bison restoration efforts with the Blood Tribe. The continent’s largest land mammal plays a major role in the spiritual and cultural lives of numerous Native American tribes, an “integrated relationship,” he said.

    Continue reading...

  • Prospects for species look dire as federal science body finds that only one of the country’s 16 populations is believed to be stable

    Half of Canada’s chinook salmon are endangered, with nearly all other populations in precarious decline, according to a new report, confirming fears that prospects for the species remain dire.

    The reportby the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada concluded that eight of the country’s 16 populations are considered endangered, four are threatened, one is of special concern and the health of two remain unknown.

    Continue reading...

Eco Health News feeds

Eco Nature News feeds