Pest Management Regulatory Agency issues statement as part of Health Canada’s re-evaluation of the herbicide
Health Canada says glyphosate is not a risk to human health when used according to label directions.
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency issued a proposed re-evaluation decision in mid April on gly-phosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and the world’s most popular herbicide.
The agency said it considered data from product registrants, published scientific reports and data from other regulatory bodies when writing the report.
“Short- and long-term (lifetime) animal toxicity tests, as well as numerous peer-reviewed studies from the published scientific literature, were assessed for the potential of glyphosate to cause neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, chronic toxicity, cancer, reproductive and developmental toxicity and various other effects,” PMRA scientists said in a statement that was published on Health Canada’s website.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
“Toxicology studies in laboratory animals describe potential health effects from varying levels of exposure to a chemical and identify the dose at which no effects are observed. The health effects noted in animals occur at doses more than 100 times higher (and often much higher) than levels to which humans are normally exposed when glyphosate products are used according to label directions.”
The PMRA concluded that gly-phosate doesn’t pose a health risk to farmers and other occupations that handle the product.
As well, agency scientists said acute and chronic dietary risks for residues of glyphosate in food and water “are not of concern.”
The report contradicts a recent World Health Organization decision to classify glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
Global media coverage of the WHO announcement has intensified public interest in glyphosate, and many consumers now want information about glyphosate residues on food.
Most governments do not test for glyphosate residues because the herbicide is thought to be safe.
Reuters reported last week that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency might change its policy and “may recommend sampling for glyphosate in the future.”
The PMRA mentioned the WHO decision in its report, making a distinction between a hazard assessment and a risk assessment.
“It is important to note that a hazard classification is not a health risk assessment. The level of human exposure, which determines the actual risk, was not taken into account by WHO (IARC),” the PMRA said.
“Pesticides are registered for use in Canada only if the level of exposure to Canadians does not cause any harmful effects, including cancer.”
James Bus, senior managing scientist for toxicology and mechanistic biology with Exponent, a U.S. scientific consulting firm, said the methodology is critical when it comes to pesticide evaluation.
“(The World Health Organization is) asking the question: is it possible that glyphosate might be a carcinogen, regardless of the conditions of exposure that you might encounter … in the real world,” said Bus, who worked at Dow for more than a decade.
“In the last 25 to 30 years, or even longer perhaps, a hazard based approach to evaluation of chemicals is fundamentally one which … is an outdated process.”
Gideon Forman, executive director of the Canadian Physicians for the Environment, said the World Health Organization is more credible than Health Canada, so it’s clear that glyphosate does cause cancer.
“We’re science based, so we try to find the best science we can when making interventions in public policy,” he said.
“The (assessment) approach matters … (but) for us it’s patently obviously that we should listen to the World Health Organization on this issue of glyphosate and take the appropriate action. If it’s probably carcinogenic, (we) should phase it out.”
Forman said Canadian farmers should abandon pesticides and shift to more sustainable production methods.
“We would like to see agriculture move away from these heavy chemical inputs to a more non-toxic way of doing agriculture,” he said.
“And we know that is commercially viable because the organic market is growing in leaps and bounds.”
Interested parties have 60 day, from April 13 to comment on Health Canada’s proposed re-evaluation of glyphosate.
robert.arnason@producer.com
