GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Resources
      • GM Myth Makers
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
      • GM Booklet
      • GM Book
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
  • Resources
    • Non-GM Successes
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
    • GM Booklet
    • GM Book
  • Donations
  • Contact
  • About

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

GENE EDITING MYTHS, RISKS, & RESOURCES

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

CITIZENS’ GUIDE TO GM

GMO Myths and Truths front cover

PLEASE SUPPORT GMWATCH

Donations

If you like what we do, please help us do more. You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card. Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. We greatly appreciate that as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

EU health commissioner moves towards disclosure of industry pesticide studies

Details
Published: 06 March 2016
Twitter

EU Commissioner Vytenis_Andriukaitis

Cracks appear in wall of secrecy around pesticide authorisations

Europe’s health and food safety commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis has indicated that his directorate, DG SANTE, is exploring the possibility of full transparency for industry studies on pesticides.

Currently the industry studies submitted to support regulatory authorisations of pesticides are kept secret under commercial confidentiality agreements with regulators. But now Andriukaitis has said that this needs to change.

Andriukaitis said, “We are ready to assess the legal environment,” as there are certain legal protections on industry data. But, he added, “It’s absolutely crystal clear, we need to change today’s situation. We see different options, but at the moment, yes, the idea is to change the rules, especially keeping in mind the overriding public interest.”

Andriukaitis’s move came during a press conference closing the Environment Council meeting on 4 March. The discussion turned[1] to the upcoming vote on the European re-authorization of the weedkiller glyphosate and the difference of opinion on glyphosate’s carcinogenicity between the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency IARC and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

While IARC said that glyphosate is a “probable” carcinogen, EFSA, basing its view on a report by Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), said it is unlikely to pose a cancer risk. However, while IARC used only data that was in the public domain, BfR based its report on secret industry studies that were unavailable to IARC or to the public.

Andriukaitis made his statement in reply to a journalist who asked whether the commissioner agreed that in light of the glyphosate debate, there was an overriding public interest argument for full transparency of the industry studies, including the raw data. At present only summaries are available via government regulatory agencies and increasingly, questions have been raised over the agencies’ interpretations of the industry data. Doubts can only be resolved by independent analysis of the raw data.

Alongside other NGOs and scientists, GMWatch has argued for the transparency of regulatory data on pesticides for many years. The public cannot be expected to take on trust claims of safety for pesticides when they are based on secret studies carried out or commissioned by the very same companies that stand to profit from the sale of those pesticides.

The pharmaceutical industry has had to accept the policy of the European Medicines Agency to make clinical trials data public. The time is long overdue for the pesticide industry to follow suit. Andriukaitis’s statement may represent the first cracks in the wall of secrecy that surrounds and protects pesticide approvals.

Notes

1. In the video of the press conference, the discussion on glyphosate starts at 16:13; the journalist asks about data transparency from 23:30 onwards.

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

GM Book

Resources

Non-GM Successes

GM Myth Makers

GM Myths

GM Quotes

GM Booklet

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2025 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design