The World Health Organisation report into the carcinogenicity of glyphosate

Lyon, France, 20 March 2015 – The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, has assessed the carcinogenicity of five organophosphate pesticides. A summary of the final evaluations together with a short rationale have now been published online in The Lancet Oncology, and the detailed assessments will be published as Volume 112 of the IARC Monographs.

What were the results of the IARC evaluations?
The herbicide glyphosate and the insecticides malathion and diazinon were classified as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A).

For the herbicide glyphosate, there was limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The evidence in humans is from studies of exposures, mostly agricultural, in the USA, Canada, and Sweden published since 2001. In addition, there is convincing evidence that glyphosate also can cause cancer in laboratory animals. On the basis of tumours in mice, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group C) in 1985. After a re-evaluation of that mouse study, the US EPA changed its classification to evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans (Group E) in 1991. The US EPA Scientific Advisory Panel noted that the re-evaluated glyphosate results were still significant using two statistical tests recommended in the IARC Preamble. The IARC Working Group that conducted the evaluation considered the significant findings
from the US EPA report and several more recent positive results in concluding that there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. 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.

Download a copy of the report in full.

Monsanto Disagrees with IARC Classification for Glyphosate

http://news.monsanto.com/news/monsanto-disagrees-iarc-classificatio...

We join fellow members of both the EU and U.S. glyphosate taskforces in our disagreement with IARC’s classification for several reasons:

There is no new research or data here. Each of the studies considered by IARC have been previously reviewed and considered by regulatory agencies – most recently by the German government on behalf of the European Union.
Relevant, scientific data was excluded from review. IARC received and purposefully disregarded dozens of scientific studies – specifically genetic toxicity studies – that support the conclusion glyphosate is not a human health risk.
The conclusion is not supported by scientific data. IARC’s classification is inconsistent with the numerous multi-year, comprehensive assessments conducted by hundreds of scientists from countries worldwide who are responsible for ensuring public safety.
IARC’s classification does not establish a link between glyphosate and an increase in cancer. It’s important to put IARC’s classifications into perspective. IARC has classified numerous everyday items in Category 2 including coffee, cell phones, aloe vera extract and pickled vegetables, as well as professions such as a barber and fry cook.

Replies

PRO
Phil Voice March 22, 2015 at 8:24am
Monsanto Disagrees with IARC Classification for Glyphosate

http://news.monsanto.com/news/monsanto-disagrees-iarc-classificatio...

We join fellow members of both the EU and U.S. glyphosate taskforces in our disagreement with IARC’s classification for several reasons:
- There is no new research or data here. Each of the studies considered by IARC have been previously reviewed and considered by regulatory agencies – most recently by the German government on behalf of the European Union.
- Relevant, scientific data was excluded from review. IARC received and purposefully disregarded dozens of scientific studies – specifically genetic toxicity studies – that support the conclusion glyphosate is not a human health risk.
- The conclusion is not supported by scientific data. IARC’s classification is inconsistent with the numerous multi-year, comprehensive assessments conducted by hundreds of scientists from countries worldwide who are responsible for ensuring public safety.
- IARC’s classification does not establish a link between glyphosate and an increase in cancer. It’s important to put IARC’s classifications into perspective. IARC has classified numerous everyday items in Category 2 including coffee, cell phones, aloe vera extract and pickled vegetables, as well as professions such as a barber and fry cook.
BensBotanics March 22, 2015 at 8:42am

What a surprise, Monsanto disagrees!

The thing to bear in mind here is exposure; a tub of glyphosate on a shelf won't radiate carcinogens, but regular repeated use will, if there are carcinogenic properties, put people at risk. Who's most at risk here, the guy adhering to regulations and who has professional standard training to use pesticides, or the home gardener who sprays without fully understanding the instructions on the bottle (ie sprays too much, too frequently and at too high a dose)?

If glyphosate products get fully removed from use, both from the general market and the professional market, as a knee-jerk reaction then we're a little stuffed for herbicides!
PRO

Gary RK March 22, 2015 at 9:49am

Quell Surprise....This subject gets regular airing by the two sides......

One has too look past 'reports' from either side to the behind the scenes issues of money, polictical lobbying and clout, both sides have agenda's that do not fully rationally fit their cause.

Surely there is no surprise that a product we 'need' to support current demand for food production, lifestyles, farming etc which 'kills' certain plant categories maybe a risk... is there ??

Kneejerk reactions to have everything banned is short sighted and niave at best. Of course such products need continual improvement, restrictied use to professionals and gudiance.

Common sense suggests the truth lay somewhere in the middle otherwise by now we'd al be dead from a 100 other things the so called experts/doom sayers have said would wipe us out.

One things for sure, you can't trust a scentific body (nor business) when they have a 'mission' to prove a 'fact'.

Dirty tatics, lies, smears and inclusive reports, where the News catches just the headline are no way to resolve the issue...
- PRO
  
  Phil Voice > Gary RK March 22, 2015 at 7:32pm
  
  This perennial argument isn't helped by journalists who are just being paid to fill column inches.
  
  "Amateur gardeners and professional farmers have been urged to “think very carefully” about using the popular herbicide Roundup, which contains glyphosate."
  
  Clearly no consideration for the hundreds of thousands of professional gardeners!
  
  "people who are most at risk are those applying the weedkiller to their plants."
  
  "“Professional gardeners would industrial strength glyphosate to totally wipe their garden of all plants. Amateur gardeners can also buy it as Roundup in a formulation which is not as strong,” "
  
  "Home gardeners should hand weed to be on the safe side.”
  
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11487118/Weedk...
Agrigem - Sarah Kimm March 23, 2015 at 10:35am

There is a good response here…

http://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2015/03/20/march-madness-from-the-united-nations/

Cheers Ollie
Landscape Juice March 27, 2015 at 5:47pm

Lobbyist Claims Monsanto's Roundup Is Safe To Drink, Freaks Out When Offered A Glass
PRO

Phil Voice July 15, 2015 at 1:47pm

Toxicologist critical of 'dodgy science' in glyphosate bans

"Australian toxicologist Dr Ian Musgrave said the [Glyphosate] ban flies in the face of good science, as glyphosate (commonly sold as Roundup) is ranked 2A, lower than alcoholic beverages and formaldehyde, which are class one proven carcinogens."

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-27/toxicologist-worries-glyph...
- PRO
  
  Phil Voice > Phil Voice July 15, 2015 at 4:38pm
  
  Weedkiller suspected of causing cancer deemed 'safe'
  
  2A best-selling herbicide that the World Health Organisation suspects causes cancer could get a new lease of life in Europe after being deemed safe by a key assessment based largely on classified industry reports."
  
  http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/15/weedkiller-suspe...