Complete Turf Care
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2013
- Messages
- 2,011
- Location
- South Louisiana
- Tractor
- 2022 Kubota Grand L6060 (no loader), 2017 Kubota Grand L6060, 2011 Kubota L5740 HSTC-3, 1997 Kubota M4700
Below is from this recent study of the World Health Organization released in May of 2016 http://www.who.int/foodsafety/jmprsummary2016.pdf?ua=1
Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide. Several epidemiological studies on cancer
outcomes following occupational exposure to glyphosate were available. The evaluation of these
studies focused on the occurrence of NHL. Overall, there is some evidence of a positive association
between glyphosate exposure and risk of NHL from the case膨ontrol studies and the overall metaanalysis.
However, it is notable that the only large cohort study of high quality found no evidence of
an association at any exposure level. Glyphosate has been extensively tested for genotoxic effects
using a variety of tests in a wide range of organisms. The overall weight of evidence indicates that
administration of glyphosate and its formulation products at doses as high as 2000 mg/kg body weight
by the oral route, the route most relevant to human dietary exposure, was not associated with
genotoxic effects in an overwhelming majority of studies conducted in mammals, a model considered
to be appropriate for assessing genotoxic risks to humans. The Meeting concluded that glyphosate is
unlikely to be genotoxic at anticipated dietary exposures. Several carcinogenicity studies in mice and
rats are available. The Meeting concluded that glyphosate is not carcinogenic in rats but could not
exclude the possibility that it is carcinogenic in mice at very high doses. In view of the absence of
carcinogenic potential in rodents at human-relevant doses and the absence of genotoxicity by the oral
route in mammals, and considering the epidemiological evidence from occupational exposures, the
Meeting concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure
through the diet. The Meeting reaffirmed the group ADI for the sum of glyphosate and its metabolites
of 0? mg/kg body weight on the basis of effects on the salivary gland. The Meeting concluded that it
was not necessary to establish an ARfD for glyphosate or its metabolites in view of its low acute
toxicity.
And this article from Snopes.
Monsanto Suppressing Evidence of Cancerous Herbicide in Food?
And below is from page 160 of this article http://www.msal.gob.ar/agroquimicos/pdf/Williams-et-al-2000.pdf
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY STATEMENT
This assessment was conducted for adult applicators
and children (age 1 to 6 years) because they have the
highest potential exposures. Estimates of exposure described
for these two subpopulations and used in these
risk calculations are considered excessive compared to
those likely to result in the general population from the
use of Roundup herbicide. MOE analyses compare the
lowest NOAELs determined from animal studies to
worst-case levels of human exposure. MOEs of greater
than 100 are considered by authoritative bodies to
indicate confidence that no adverse health effects
would occur (WHO, 1990). The MOEs for worst-case
chronic exposure to glyphosate ranged from 3370 to
5420; the MOEs for AMPA ranged from greater than
269 to 83,300; and for POEA the MOEs ranged 461 to
1380. Based on these values, it is concluded that these
substances do not have the potential to produce adverse
effects in humans. Acute exposures to glyphosate,
AMPA, and POEA were estimated to be 7360
1,730,000 times lower than the corresponding LD50
values, thereby demonstrating that potential acute exposure
is not a health concern. Finally, under the intended
conditions of herbicide use, Roundup risks to
subpopulations other than those considered here would
be significantly lower. It is concluded that, under
present and expected conditions of new use, there is no
potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to
humans.
Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide. Several epidemiological studies on cancer
outcomes following occupational exposure to glyphosate were available. The evaluation of these
studies focused on the occurrence of NHL. Overall, there is some evidence of a positive association
between glyphosate exposure and risk of NHL from the case膨ontrol studies and the overall metaanalysis.
However, it is notable that the only large cohort study of high quality found no evidence of
an association at any exposure level. Glyphosate has been extensively tested for genotoxic effects
using a variety of tests in a wide range of organisms. The overall weight of evidence indicates that
administration of glyphosate and its formulation products at doses as high as 2000 mg/kg body weight
by the oral route, the route most relevant to human dietary exposure, was not associated with
genotoxic effects in an overwhelming majority of studies conducted in mammals, a model considered
to be appropriate for assessing genotoxic risks to humans. The Meeting concluded that glyphosate is
unlikely to be genotoxic at anticipated dietary exposures. Several carcinogenicity studies in mice and
rats are available. The Meeting concluded that glyphosate is not carcinogenic in rats but could not
exclude the possibility that it is carcinogenic in mice at very high doses. In view of the absence of
carcinogenic potential in rodents at human-relevant doses and the absence of genotoxicity by the oral
route in mammals, and considering the epidemiological evidence from occupational exposures, the
Meeting concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure
through the diet. The Meeting reaffirmed the group ADI for the sum of glyphosate and its metabolites
of 0? mg/kg body weight on the basis of effects on the salivary gland. The Meeting concluded that it
was not necessary to establish an ARfD for glyphosate or its metabolites in view of its low acute
toxicity.
And this article from Snopes.
Monsanto Suppressing Evidence of Cancerous Herbicide in Food?
And below is from page 160 of this article http://www.msal.gob.ar/agroquimicos/pdf/Williams-et-al-2000.pdf
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY STATEMENT
This assessment was conducted for adult applicators
and children (age 1 to 6 years) because they have the
highest potential exposures. Estimates of exposure described
for these two subpopulations and used in these
risk calculations are considered excessive compared to
those likely to result in the general population from the
use of Roundup herbicide. MOE analyses compare the
lowest NOAELs determined from animal studies to
worst-case levels of human exposure. MOEs of greater
than 100 are considered by authoritative bodies to
indicate confidence that no adverse health effects
would occur (WHO, 1990). The MOEs for worst-case
chronic exposure to glyphosate ranged from 3370 to
5420; the MOEs for AMPA ranged from greater than
269 to 83,300; and for POEA the MOEs ranged 461 to
1380. Based on these values, it is concluded that these
substances do not have the potential to produce adverse
effects in humans. Acute exposures to glyphosate,
AMPA, and POEA were estimated to be 7360
1,730,000 times lower than the corresponding LD50
values, thereby demonstrating that potential acute exposure
is not a health concern. Finally, under the intended
conditions of herbicide use, Roundup risks to
subpopulations other than those considered here would
be significantly lower. It is concluded that, under
present and expected conditions of new use, there is no
potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to
humans.
