Published on
Updated
Reading 3 min.
A gardener from Meudon, near Paris, will be posthumously compensated for lymphoma linked to pesticides, in particular glyphosate: a substance whose authorization was renewed for 10 years by Brussels at the end of 2023, despite strong criticism from environmental NGOs.
“Probable” carcinogen for WHO
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2015 classified glyphosate, the active ingredient in several herbicides, as a “probable carcinogen” for humans.
According to the agency, “case-control studies of occupational exposure conducted in Sweden, the United States and Canada have shown increased risks of non-Hodgkin lymphoma“(blood cancer).
The WHO said it had “limited evidence” but experts considered it sufficient to warn of a carcinogenic effect in humans.
According to the IARC, there is “compelling evidence” that glyphosate can also cause cancer in laboratory animals.
Risk of blood cancer for Inserm
These conclusions were confirmed in 2021 by a study by the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (Inserm). The French institute concluded that “the existence of an increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphomas” with “a medium level of presumption“.
The expertise also pointed to “excess risks” for multiple myeloma and leukemia, but with a level of “low presumption”, due to “less solid” results.
“We based ourselves on epidemiological studies of very large cohorts of agricultural populations: we looked at those who were exposed to glyphosate, those who were not and we were able to conclude on a difference in the incidence of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.“, explained to AFP last winter Xavier Coumoul, professor of toxicology at the University of Paris, co-author of the Inserm expertise.
No “critical concern” for the European agency
Latest study to date: that of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), published in July 2023, on which the European Commission relied to propose renewing the use of the pesticide.
EFSA has “no identified area of critical concern” of glyphosate in humans, animals and the environment. In the agency’s scientific methodology, a concern is defined as “critical” when it affects all proposed uses of the active substance being evaluated, therefore preventing its authorization.
She nevertheless notes “high long-term risk in mammals” for half of the proposed uses of glyphosate and recognizes that the lack of data prevents any definitive analysis.
Before it, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) had ruled that the available scientific evidence did not allow glyphosate to be classified as a carcinogen.
Why do the results differ?
Because the methodologies differ.
European agencies work on data mainly from studies produced by manufacturers, who analyze the toxicity of their product before they are placed on the market, which is regulatory.
“Their tests are robust but they eliminate some of the academic research or epidemiological studies“, explains Xavier Coumoul.
“They can exclude certain studies because they will consider that the models are not relevant“, while the WHO or Inserm take into account many scientific articles, he adds. Studies some of which are considered unreliable by European agencies.
Furthermore, the WHO takes into account studies carried out on marketed products, that is to say formulations based on glyphosate (such as RoundUp), while the European agency only studies the molecule alone.
Other potential risks
In October, a French family made public the fact that the Pesticide Victims Compensation Fund had identified the link between a teenager’s congenital malformations and his pregnant mother’s exposure to glyphosate, a “first” according to them .
At the global level, there have already been court cases won in the United States in cancer cases.
In addition to the risk of cancer, Inserm has put forward the possibility that glyphosate has effects on certain hormonal systems, suggesting a potential endocrine disruptor. Glyphosate, in addition to plants, also targets certain bacteria and fungi. It could therefore also have an action on the microbiota, including the intestinal microbiota or that of ecosystems.
But according to European agencies, the study of the intestinal microbiota is currently not part of the European framework for evaluating pesticides.
“Agencies Completely Ignored Assessment of Some Key Effects of Glyphosate“, according to Générations Futures, an environmental defense association.
The EFSA, for its part, considers that its final report published in July is “the most comprehensive and transparent assessment of a pesticide ever carried out by EFSA and EU Member States“.