Logo image
Back
Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the international agency for research on cancer (IARC) and the european food safety authority (EFSA)
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the international agency for research on cancer (IARC) and the european food safety authority (EFSA)

Christopher J Portier, Bruce K Armstrong, Bruce C Baguley, Xaver Baur, Igor Belyaev, Robert Bellé, Fiorella Belpoggi, Annibale Biggeri, Maarten C Bosland, Paolo Bruzzi, …
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, Vol.70(8), pp.741-745
2016
DOI: 10.1136/jech-2015-207005
PMCID: PMC4975799
PMID: 26941213
url
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2015-207005View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

Commentary Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Christopher J Portier, 1 Bruce K Armstrong, 2 Bruce C Baguley, 3 Xaver Baur, 4 Igor Belyaev, 5 Robert Bellé, 6 Fiorella Belpoggi, 7 Annibale Biggeri, 8 Maarten C Bosland, 9 Paolo Bruzzi, 10 Lygia Therese Budnik, 11 Merete D Bugge, 12 Kathleen Burns, 13 Gloria M Calaf, 14 David O Carpenter, 15 Hillary M Carpenter, 16 Lizbeth López-Carrillo, 17 Richard Clapp, 18 Pierluigi Cocco, 19 Dario Consonni, 20 Pietro Comba, 21 Elena Craft, 22 Mohamed Aqiel Dalvie, 23 Devra Davis, 24 Paul A Demers, 25 Anneclaire J De Roos, 26 Jamie DeWitt, 27 Francesco Forastiere, 28 Jonathan H Freedman, 29 Lin Fritschi, 30 Caroline Gaus, 31 Julia M Gohlke, 32 Marcel Goldberg, 33 Eberhard Greiser, 34 Johnni Hansen, 35 Lennart Hardell, 36 Michael Hauptmann, 37 Wei Huang, 38 James Huff, 39 Margaret O James, 40 C W Jameson, 41 Andreas Kortenkamp, 42 Annette Kopp-Schneider, 43 Hans Kromhout, 44 Marcelo L Larramendy, 45 Philip J Landrigan, 46 Lawrence H Lash, 47 Dariusz Leszczynski, 48 Charles F Lynch, 49 Corrado Magnani, 50 Daniele Mandrioli, 51 Francis L Martin, 52 Enzo Merler, 53 Paola Michelozzi, 54 Lucia Miligi, 55 Anthony B Miller, 56 Dario Mirabelli, 57 Franklin E Mirer, 58 Saloshni Naidoo, 59 Melissa J Perry, 60 Maria Grazia Petronio, 61 Roberta Pirastu, 62 Ralph J Portier, 63 Kenneth S Ramos, 64 Larry W Robertson, 65 Theresa Rodriguez, 66 Martin Röösli, 67 Matt K Ross, 68 Deodutta Roy, 69 Ivan Rusyn, 70 Paulo Saldiva, 71 Jennifer Sass, 72 Kai Savolainen, 73 Paul T J Scheepers, 74 Consolato Sergi, 75 Ellen K Silbergeld, 76 Martyn T Smith, 77 Bernard W Stewart, 78 Patrice Sutton, 79 Fabio Tateo, 80 Benedetto Terracini, 81 Heinz W Thielmann, 82 David B Thomas, 83 Harri Vainio, 84 John E Vena, 85 Paolo Vineis, 86 Elisabete Weiderpass, 87 Dennis D Weisenburger, 88 Tracey J Woodruff, 89 Takashi Yorifuji, 90 Il Je Yu, 91 Paola Zambon, 92 Hajo Zeeb, 93 Shu-Feng Zhou 94 The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme identifies chemicals, drugs, mixtures, occupational exposures, lifestyles and per- sonal habits, and physical and biological For numbered affiliations see end of article. Correspondence to Dr Christopher J Portier, Environmental Health Consultant, Thun, CH-3600, Switzerland; cportier@me.com agents that cause cancer in humans and has evaluated about 1000 agents since 1971. Monographs are written by ad hoc Working Groups (WGs) of international scientific experts over a period of about 12 months ending in an eight-day meeting. The WG evaluates all of the publicly available scientific information on each substance and, through a transparent and rigorous process, 1 decides on the degree to which the scientific evidence supports that substance’s potential to cause or not cause cancer in humans. For Monograph 112, 2 17 expert scien- tists evaluated the carcinogenic hazard for four insecticides and the herbicide glypho- sate. 3 The WG concluded that the data for glyphosate meet the criteria for classi- fication as a probable human carcinogen. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the primary agency of the European Union for risk assessments regarding food safety. In October 2015, EFSA reported 4 on their evaluation of the Renewal Assessment Report 5 (RAR) for glyphosate that was prepared by the Rapporteur Member State, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR). EFSA concluded that ‘glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential’. Addendum 1 (the BfR Addendum) of the RAR 5 discusses the scientific rationale for differing from the IARC WG conclusion. Serious flaws in the scientific evaluation in the RAR incorrectly characterise the potential for a carcinogenic hazard from exposure to glyphosate. Since the RAR is the basis for the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) conclusion, 4 it is critical that these shortcomings are corrected. THE HUMAN EVIDENCE EFSA concluded ‘that there is very limited evidence for an association between glyphosate-based formulations and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), overall inconclusive for a causal or clear associa- tive relationship between glyphosate and cancer in human studies’. The BfR Addendum ( p. ii) to the EFSA report explains that ‘no consistent positive asso- ciation was observed’ and ‘the most powerful study showed no effect’. The IARC WG concluded there is limited evi- dence of carcinogenicity in humans which means “A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpret- ation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or con- founding could not be ruled out with rea- sonable confidence.” 1 The finding of limited evidence by the IARC WG was for NHL, based on hig
 ISRP Project 1 2015-2020

Details

Metrics

24 Record Views
128 Times Cited - Web of Science
Logo image