The glyphosatethe most widespread herbicide in the world, is again under accusation: a new scientific publication provides evidence that strengthens the link between the substance and the onset of tumors. Let’s talk about the new study, Posted on Environmental Healththe result of over ten years of work of theRamazzini Institute of Bolognaone of the most important independent research realities in Europe, which for years has been fighting to shed light on the risks related to the use of this pesticide.
To lead the research, Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, biologist and reference scientist in the field of environmental research and member of the Italian Biologists Foundation (FIB). “We never gave up – he said – and our efforts have been awarded“.
The document presents a detailed analysis on the potentially carcinogenic effects of glyphosate, offering new scientific elements in a debate that has been on for years now and complex.
If in 2015 the international agency for cancer research (IARC) had classified glyphosate as “probable carcinogen for humans”, the European food safety authority (EFSA) had instead excluded concrete risks for health. But today, thanks to this new research, the picture could radically change: the correlation between glyphosate and cancer seems to find more and more solid confirmations.
This study is one of the most complete ever conducted on this active ingredient and its commercial formulations, and is the first to have examined the carcinogenic effects of glyphosate starting from the prenatal life until the entire life span (animal).
The study
Research is part of the global study on glyphosate (GGS), an independent project conceived by the Ramazzini Institute to transparently examine the toxicological effects of glyphosate and the main herbicides that contain it (GBH).
The study, as still happens in many toxicological research, has been conducted on rats sprague -Dawley (SD), males and females, exposed to Three different doses of glyphosate (including the one considered “acceptable” by the EU), starting from the 6th day of gestation and throughout life.
The glyphosate was administered through drinking water At three levels: the acceptable daily dose (ADI) established by the EU of 0.5 mg/kg of body weight per day, 5 mg/kg/day and the level without adverse effects observed (Noael) EU of 50 mg/kg/day.The two GBH formulations were administered to equivalent doses in glyphosate.
The results are clear: in all the treated groups they occurred significant increases-and dose-dependent-of the incidence of benign and evil tumors in numerous organs (including liver, leather, thyroid, ovaries, breast gland, pancreas, nervous system, spleen, urinary bladder). Some of these tumors are rare in SD rats, which strengthens the value of evidence.
In the conclusions of the study we read:
Our results provide a complete and accurate overview of the carcinogenicity of glyphosate and GBH (ed. They support the conclusion of the IRC according to which there is “sufficient proofs of carcinogenicity (of glyphosate) in experimental animals”. Our results are also consistent with the epidemiological tests that show increases in the incidence of multiple neoplasms in humans exposed to glyphosate and GBH. Our results indicate that, while glyphosate alone is able to cause numerous benign and evil tumors, the coating of the GBH can increase the carcinogenicity of glyphosate, in particular in the case of leukemia.
The glyphosate and its derivatives, even to the doses to date considered safe, are therefore confirmed potentially dangerous. The published data are consistent with the previous EARC assessments and forcefully support the thesis of the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.
A decisive, independent and rigorous contribution, which once again focuses on the need for an urgent review of European and international regulations on the use of this herbicide. Being a study conducted on animals, it will now be essential to deepen the effects on humans with epidemiological and mechanistic investigations, to reach a solid and definitive risk assessment, capable – hopefully – to convince the authorities to finally prohibit its use.
