Glyphosate does not cause cancer, says EU committee

The statement comes as part of the EU’s current risk assessment process on glyphosate, which is among the most widely used herbicides in the EU but is also very controversial.

This assessment process is set to inform the bloc’s decision on whether to renew the contentious herbicide’s approval after the current approval expires at the end of 2022.

Whether glyphosate can be classed as a carcinogen, that is, whether it is a driver for cancer in humans, is one of the issues around the herbicide that are contested not only between stakeholders but also in the scientific community and between different public agencies.

For its part, the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has previously evaluated the substance as “probably carcinogenic,” while the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has concluded it is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk” to humans when consumed through their diet.

With its most recent assessment, the ECHA’s Risk Assessment Committee confirms its earlier verdict classing glyphosate as not carcinogenic. However, it reaffirmed that it can cause “serious eye damage” and is also “toxic to aquatic life with long-lasting effects.”

In a statement, the Glyphosate Renewal Group – the group of agrochemical companies which together are applying for the substance’s renewed approval – welcomed the RAC opinion and said it “remains committed to complying with all aspects of the ongoing EU regulatory process.”

However, health and environmental campaigners were less happy with the assessment, saying the agency had not taken all relevant evidence into account.

Angeliki Lyssimachou, a senior science policy officer at HEAL, the umbrella organisation of EU environmental and health associations, said the ECHA had dismissed the scientific arguments on glyphosate’s link to cancer brought forth “by independent experts.”

“The failure to recognise the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate is a mistake, and should be considered as a big step backwards in the fight against cancer,” she added.