The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
When the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently released and then abruptly withdrew a draft document on the cancer risks posed by the pesticide glyphosate, Monsanto jumped at the chance to say that its signature chemical had been exonerated.
The EPA says it has more work to do. In the meantime, the Environmental Working Group took a closer look at the science underpinning the World Health Organization’s decision last year to classify glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen.”
Here’s what we found: A growing body of research is finding a link between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, especially with some specific subtypes of the cancer.
In the now-retracted document, the EPA initially found insufficient evidence to classify glyphosate as a probable carcinogen, citing some studies that haven’t been able to associate glyphosate exposure with higher risks of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
The trouble is, there are many kinds of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and by trying to link a whole group of different cancers to glyphosate exposure, the EPA draft may have missed associations with specific kinds of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
One such study, published in 2008 by Swedish researchers, found that exposure to glyphosate tripled the risk of a subtype of non-Hodgkin called small lymphocytic lymphoma.
This alarming link may be masked when the data is lumped in with other kinds of non-Hodgkin lymphoma that have different causes.
Moreover, there is often a lag time between exposure to a carcinogen and when people find out they have cancer. The same Swedish study found that a person’s risk of being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma began to rise more than 10 years after exposure.
This is disturbing, given that the use of glyphosate in the U.S. exploded 20-fold over the past two decades and most of the herbicide has been sprayed in just the past 10 years. We may be just beginning to see the public health consequences of this herbicide.
Studies that take a closer look at specific types of cancer show alarming evidence of the potential for glyphosate to increase cancer risk. They should not be ignored.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
By Dr. Brian R. Shmaefsky
One year after the Flint Water Crisis I was invited to participate in a water rights session at a conference hosted by the US Human Rights Network in Austin, Texas in 2015. The reason I was at the conference was to promote efforts by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to encourage scientists to shine a light on how science intersects with human rights, in the U.S. as well as in the context of international development. My plan was to sit at an information booth and share my stories about water quality projects I spearheaded in communities in Bangladesh, Colombia, and the Philippines. I did not expect to be thrown into conversations that made me reexamine how scientists use their knowledge as a public good.
The shipping industry is coming to grips with its egregious carbon footprint, as it has an outsized contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and to the dumping of chemicals into open seas. Already, the global shipping industry contributes about 2 percent of global carbon emissions, about the same as Germany, as the BBC reported.
The Jefferson Memorial in Washington, DC overlooks the Tidal Basin, a man-made body of water surrounded by cherry trees. Visitors can stroll along the water's edge, gazing up at the stately monument.
But at high tide, people are forced off parts of the path. Twice a day, the Tidal Basin floods and water spills onto the walkway.