The Superior Health Council (SHC) had already prepared an advisory report in January, but did not want to publish it immediately “because of the general and justified attention to the corona epidemic in which the SHC also issued recommendations”. “Now is the time, however, to look to the future and seize the opportunity of the necessary economic recovery to ensure that a more sustainable economy is built that has no place for glyphosate,” it said.
The use of glyphosate has been under discussion for some time after the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified the weed killer as ‘probably carcinogenic’. After a lengthy procedure, the EU decided to temporarily extend the use of glyphosate until December 2022. In the meantime, a special committee has revised the procedures for the use of plant protection products at the request of Europe. This revision was approved by the European Parliament in January 2019 and a series of companies subsequently started the procedure to renew the license for glyphosate beyond December 2022.
Given the importance of the glyphosate file and given the mission of the SHC, the council considered it important to also take a position. “We do not want to give a new systematic overview of the scientific literature, but the intention is to gain a bird’s eye view of the complexity of the situation and to formulate recommendations for the Belgian health authorities,” said a press release.
According to the SHC, glyphosate has a complex toxic profile. “Not only is it carcinogenic, it also has endocrine disrupting properties, there are effects on the gut microbiome of humans and animals and there is an effect on pollinators. These are all areas of concern ”, it sounds. “Today, the focus is mainly on the potential carcinogenicity of glyphosate, but other aspects of toxicity can also be important and are also less controversial.” The SHC sees this as sufficient reason to take action. “Glyphosate has dangerous properties,” the advisory board concludes.
At the same time, the advice states that there are reasons to believe that glyphosate is only mildly carcinogenic and that the risk for humans is limited. “The scientific literature shows that glyphosate has genotoxic, oxidative stress-inducing and endocrine disrupting properties that indicate carcinogenicity, but this effect is difficult to demonstrate in animal studies and the epidemiological evidence for its carcinogenicity in humans is limited.”
In that context, the Superior Health Council also points to a meta-analysis that includes the most recent update of the largest study in the US. That study included more than 50,000 glyphosate users and five case control studies. “That study shows that only a small group of users with the highest exposure to glyphosate shows a limited increased risk of lymph cancer. For the majority of users, no difference with non-users is seen ”, according to the analysis of the SHC.
Given the massive worldwide use of this herbicide, the Health Council is aware of the important role of glyphosate, not only in agriculture but also in the economy in general. At the same time, the council notes that there is not yet a valid alternative to glyphosate. “Our conclusion is that the glyphosate file is not only complex because of its toxicity, but also because of the social aspects,” it says.
As a result of all these findings, the SHC recommends stopping the use of glyphosate as soon as possible. “Although the risk of negative effects for humans after exposure to glyphosate is limited, we still recommend that the weed killer be banned before the end of the term of the permit (December 15, 2022),” he said. The council asks the competent authorities, preferably at the European level, to draw up a coherent plan before that date to stop the use of glyphosate.
At the same time, the council calls for work to be done on an acceptable alternative to glyphosate. This may be another chemical with similar properties, but other non-chemical methods of weed control should also be considered. Given the global importance of glyphosate, the SHC recommends that this approach be organized and coordinated at an international level.
Source: own reporting
– .
