Monsanto, now part of Bayer, developed glyphosate, a chemical weedkiller that has faced class-action litigation in the US. It is the world’s most widely used pesticide and is currently approved for use in the EU until 15 December 2023. However, in 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”.
To determine the impact of glyphosate on human health, animals, and the environment, Member States conducted a risk assessment followed by EFSA’s peer review. These findings will be used by the European Commission and Member States to decide whether glyphosate should remain on the EU list of approved pesticide active substances.
The latest assessment revealed no critical areas of concern regarding the effects of glyphosate, although there are some data gaps, such as a lack of information about the toxicity of one component present in the glyphosate-based pesticide formulation submitted for evaluation. The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) also conducted a hazard assessment, which concluded that glyphosate did not meet the scientific criteria to be classified as a carcinogenic, mutagenic, or reprotoxic substance.
Regarding biodiversity, EFSA’s experts acknowledge that the risks associated with glyphosate use are complex and depend on multiple factors. They also note a lack of harmonized methodologies and agreed-upon specific protection goals in this area. Consequently, firm conclusions cannot be drawn, and risk managers may consider implementing mitigation measures.
EFSA’s Risk Assessment Production Department Head, Guilhem de Seze, highlighted that the evaluation of glyphosate involved numerous scientists from EFSA and the Member States, as well as an extensive collection of studies and scientific articles. This process, spanning over three years and including valuable public input, formed the basis of the risk assessment and peer review.
However, Greenpeace expresses concerns that the latest assessment could lead to a renewed market authorization for glyphosate, endangering people’s health. Greenpeace EU pesticides campaigner Eva Corral emphasizes the need for the Commission and EU governments to protect people and nature by rejecting glyphosate’s re-approval and promoting sustainable farming practices.
Foodwatch, another campaigner, criticizes EFSA’s assessment, emphasizing the contrasting evaluation by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”. In foodwatch’s opinion, until the evidence refuting potential cancer risks is presented, the European Commission should prioritize the precautionary principle and withdraw glyphosate’s approval.
Industry watchdog group Corporate Europe Observatory also supports these concerns, noting that the EU pesticide authorization system neglects independent and peer-reviewed scientific studies linking glyphosate to severe health and environmental problems. Several studies indicate that glyphosate is genotoxic, neurotoxic, damages the gut microbiome, and poses serious threats to soil, aquatic life, and biodiversity.