In Lynne Plambeck’s May 3, “SCV Voices” article, “Time to Expand Ban on Roundup,” she does a good job of shading the truth. Or perhaps she is only ignorant of all the data available beyond that provided by the World Health Organization.
While WHO found in 2015 that Roundup “probably” was carcinogenic, this finding is at odds with the United States EPA.
In September 2016 the EPA released an exhaustive report that found glyphosate (the chemical of concern in Roundup) is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses encountered by those applying the chemical.
The EPA also found during an extensive study of 45,000 persons who used Roundup over many years that there was no association between glyphosate and Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma.
Additionally, Health Canada, their equivalent of our EPA, states, “No pesticide regulatory authority in the world currently considers glyphosate to be a cancer risk to humans at the levels at which humans are currently exposed.”
Finally, a Reuters investigation found that WHO had edited out non-carcinogenic findings during their study, thereby falsely weighting the study in one direction.
All this and more is available by googling, “WHO Roundup finding.” Rather than promoting junk science, it would be refreshing to see Ms. Plambeck disclose all studies.
So far I see no reason to ban Roundup. The recent $80 million awarded in a lawsuit was done by lay folks and based on limited information. Taking basic precautions when applying any chemical is a sound practice. Banning a chemical based on junk science is anything but sound practice.
Clay Porlier
Santa Clarita
