By this point, I am sure you have several questions… Among those, 1) how does one agency conclude glyphosate is probably carcinogenic while other agencies conclude glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic to humans? And 2) what is a Group 2A probable carcinogen?
According to the IARC, an agent is a group 2A probable carcinogen “…if there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. Limited evidence means that a positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer but that other explanations for the observations (technically termed chance, bias, or confounding) could not be ruled out.” Other common agents classified as a Group 2A probable carcinogens by IARC include emissions from frying food, consuming red meat, hairdresser or barber profession, malathion, and night shift work, among others. It is also important to note the IARC classifies processed meat (hot dogs, bacon, some deli meats, etc.) as carcinogenic to humans along with consuming alcohol, tobacco products and exposure to solar radiation.
Unfortunately, there is not a straightforward answer to the first question; however, there are differences in the way IARC and other agencies including the U.S. EPA and EFSA reached their classification.
1) IARC only included studies or research that were publicly available in their assessment whereas U.S. EPA and EFSA included all research including non- published, confidential studies that regulatory agencies require registrants to complete.
2) IARC does not consider the effect of dose in their assessment contrary to U.S. EPA and EFSA that incorporates potential exposure routes and dose.
3) From IARC Monograph: “Te data from all of the studies combined show a statistically significant association between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and exposure to glyphosate.” What does this mean? IARC utilizes trends and correlations to reach their classification. For brevity, correlation does not constitute a cause and effect relationship.
4) U.S. EPA completed a comprehensive risk assessment that included a systematic evaluation and assessment and is more rigorous than IARC’s evaluation. Tis process is governed by Federal Laws including FQPA (Food Quality Protection Act [1996]) and PRIA (Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018), among others.
IARC is not a regulatory agency. Further, IARC is the only agency in the world to classify glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.
Table 2. IARC Classifications of the Carcinogenicity of Various Items or Activities. Group
Requirements Group 1
Sufficient evidence in humans and animals. Causal (mechanistic) relationship established.
Group 2A
Limited evidence in humans. Sufficient evidence in animals. Strong mechanistic evi- dence in human cells or tissue.
Classification
Carcinogenic to humans
Probably
carcinogenic to humans
Example Agents
• Alcoholic beverages • Tobacco products • •
Sunlight Cured meat (bacon, etc.)
• Glyphosate • • • • •
Group 2B
Limited evidence in humans. Sufficient evidence in animals. Strong evidence in experimental systems.
Possibly
carcinogenic to humans
• Coffee •
• Table salt • • •
Group 3
No evidence in humans. Sufficient evidence in animals.
Not classifiable •
Emissions from frying Consuming red meat
Hairdresser or barber profession Malathion
Night shift work
Talcum (baby powder) Aloe vera
Gasoline engine exhaust Pickled vegetables
Caffeine, tea
• Magnetic fields • Cholesterol •
50 Hair dye products TPI Turf News September/October 2019
As a result of the aforementioned developments, several lawsuits have been alleged against Bayer as they acquired Monsanto in June 2018. Currently, there are over 13,000 plaintiffs with lawsuits alleged against Bayer in the United States and three have gone before a jury thus far. Te jury
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
