Welcome to Review 543, which covers the latest news on glyphosate and other pesticides, especially those associated with GMO crops.

GLYPHOSATE

Bayer is now a takeover candidate

Bayer boss Werner Baumann ignored warnings before buying the glyphosate manufacturer Monsanto. Bayer is now threatened with being broken up and Baumann is retiring at the age of 60. This is a very mild punishment for moral and economic failure, writes the journalist Jost Maurin of the German news outlet Taz. Baumann still received bonuses while the company bled: Billions of dollars were lost in damages paid to glyphosate-cancer plaintiffs. Bayer has lost around half its market value since the takeover. Thousands of jobs have been eliminated. Bayer is now a takeover candidate itself.

Roundup settlement of up to $45 million wins final approval

Bayer has settled one of several class action battles over claims that its Roundup products lack cancer warning labels, and will pay millions in attorneys' fees to end a long dispute involving the company and product maker Monsanto. The settlement approved in federal court shows Bayer will pay the eight lead plaintiffs $5,000 each, plus reimbursement of $210,888 in expenses. More than 200,000 class members can submit claims to cash in on the settlement fund. Bayer will also pay $5.75 million in attorneys' fees, a sharp reduction by US District Judge Vince Chhabria from the $11.25 million which plaintiffs requested last year. The agreement is a drop in the bucket for the billions of dollars that Bayer has already paid to settle cancer claims stemming from Roundup use

California takes fight over cancer label on glyphosate to Ninth Circuit

A lawyer for the state of California has told a Ninth Circuit panel that whatever the US EPA thinks about the carcinogenicity of glyphosate, the science is clear and the state should be able to require a warning label on the products. In 2020, US District Court judge William Shubb permanently barred California from such requirements, ruling that the scientific evidence pointing to the carcinogenicity of glyphosate is too scant to warrant a warning and that forcing companies to include a warning on their labels would be compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment. He noted the California Department of Pesticide Regulation agreed to require warning labels only after the International Agency for Research on Cancer ruled in 2015 that there was a probable link between glyphosate exposure and cancer. The US EPA released an interim decision years ago concluding there is a lack of evidence the chemical causes cancer in humans. But this past June, the Ninth Circuit ordered the EPA to reexamine its determination, finding the agency shirked its duty to adequately consider the risk. At a recent hearing, California Supervising Deputy Attorney General Laura Zuckerman said Shubb's ruling was in error because the warning about the chemical is factual. The panel did not indicate when it will rule.

Glyphosate linked yet again to cancer

Scientists in the US have found that people exposed to glyphosate herbicides have biomarkers (a naturally occurring molecule or gene found in body fluids or tissues) linked to the development of cancer and other diseases. In their study, the researchers analysed urine levels in farmers across the US and found that the high levels of the pesticide were linked with signs of a reaction in the body called oxidative stress that causes damage to DNA. Cancer initiation and progression have been linked in previous studies to oxidative stress by increasing DNA mutations or inducing DNA damage. GMWatch has reported on this study before in a Review but as it's an important one, this article is a reminder.

Glyphosate-based herbicide disrupts energy metabolism and activates inflammatory response through oxidative stress in mice liver

Growing evidence suggests the liver is a major target of glyphosate. A new 30-day study in mice reveals the systematic mechanism underlying liver toxicity from glyphosate-based herbicide: The herbicide disrupts energy metabolism and activates an inflammatory response through oxidative stress. This is yet another study linking the main mechanism of toxicity of glyphosate (oxidative stress) to a hallmark of cancer (inflammation).

Glyphosate disrupts animal and human reproductive functions

A new literature review highlights the mechanisms by which glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides disrupt male and female fertility. The review finds that plasma concentrations of most hormones regulating reproductive function — or expression of their receptors — are altered at the levels of the entire reproductive system — the hypothalamus, pituitary gland, ovaries, testicles, placenta, and uterus — by exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides. Intergenerational impacts, such as obesity, diseases of the kidney and testes, polycystic ovary syndrome, and difficulties of childbirth, are also reported. The authors comment that glyphosate-based herbicides are more toxic than glyphosate alone due to the presence of co-formulants.

Study links Roundup exposure to juvenile liver damage

A study has found an association between exposure to Roundup herbicide and severe liver damage. The study was conducted by researchers from the University of California Berkeley's School of Public Health, including Brenda Eskenazi. The researchers used more than two decades of epidemiological information gathered from mothers and children who gave samples of blood, urine, and saliva along with exposure and health records. The aim of the study was to assess whether lifetime exposure to glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Roundup, and its chemical breakdown product AMPA, is associated with markers for liver and metabolic disease in young adults. According to the results of the study, there is a link between Roundup exposure in young children and the development of liver damage, metabolic conditions, and other health conditions. These conditions can be precursors for more serious diseases, including liver cancer and cardiometabolic diseases like stroke and diabetes, according to Eskenazi.

Residues of glyphosate-based herbicides in soil negatively affect plant-beneficial microbes

Researchers at the University of Turku have found that even very low levels of glyphosate-based herbicide residues have a negative effect on endophytic microbes, which live within leaves and roots of plants. They are essential partners of plants, which depend on them for health and survival. They promote nutrition, disease resistance and stress tolerance of the host plants. Samples collected from strawberry plants growing in a field showed that even though the overall composition of a microbial community and the growth of strawberries were unaffected by the herbicide, certain endophytic microbes known for their plant-beneficial functions were relatively less abundant in the strawberry plants that had been exposed to herbicide residues in soil.

Organic diets quickly reduce the amount of glyphosate in people’s bodies

A study found levels of the widespread herbicide and its breakdown products reduced, on average, more than 70 percent in both adults and children after just six days of eating organic. This study was published in 2020 and we've reported on it before, but as it's important, we're giving a reminder.

LUXEMBOURG'S GLYPHOSATE BAN OVERTURNED

Administrative Court annuls Luxembourg's ban on glyphosate

The Administrative Court has upheld a decision by which Luxembourg's ban on glyphosate, which is used in Bayer's plant protection products, is deemed unlawful. The pesticide had been prohibited in Luxembourg since 1 January 2021. The Grand Duchy was the sole country in the EU to take steps against the substance and manufacturer Bayer therefore initiated legal action against the Luxembourg government, arguing that it was a violation of EU law.

Luxembourg to lobby EU against glyphosate after ban lifted

Agriculture minister Claude Haagen said Luxembourg will continue its fight against glyphosate and appealed to farmers not to start using the pesticide again after a court on 30 March lifted a ban that has been in place for the last two years. Luxembourg from 1 January 2021 had withdrawn market authorisation for products containing glyphosate. This included eight pesticides by the company Bayer, which had argued that "it is not lawful for Luxembourg to unilaterally establish a general ban" as the substances were approved for use in the EU. An administrative court on 15 July 2022 cancelled the government’s ban. And it confirmed this verdict on 30 March 2023 after the government filed an appeal. "I want to make a warm appeal to the whole sector – farmers, vintners and people producing fruits and vegetables – not to use glyphosate. It worked the last two years without," said Haagen, adding: "We all know how fragile our environment is."

Luxembourg’s new agrarian law will encourage farmers and growers to voluntarily renounce glyphosate

Luxembourg's agriculture minister Claude Haagen emphasised that the government will continue its efforts to reduce the use of pesticides and that the measures provided for in the country's new agrarian law will encourage farmers, wine growers and market gardeners to contribute to more sustainable agriculture by voluntarily renouncing the use of pesticides – glyphosate in particular. Producers will be able to activate the eco-scheme "waiver of the use of phytopharmaceuticals", which compensates among other things for the loss of income linked to the renunciation of substances called "big-movers", including glyphosate. This is calculated at 70 euros/ha. The government will also implement measures to promote and support organic farming and to protect biodiversity.

Yes, EU countries can ban glyphosate products – but Luxembourg made mistakes

Glyphosate producer Bayer stated that Luxembourg's ban was made in violation of EU law and without any scientific argumentation. But this is not true, explains Pesticide Action Network Europe in a blog post. Instead, Luxembourg made several mistakes in bringing its case against glyphosate. PAN Europe clarifies the legal procedure that EU Member States should follow to ban glyphosate-based herbicides or any other synthetic pesticide that harms health and the environment. PAN Europe also lists several precedents of Member States banning certain pesticides that are authorised at EU level.

Glyphosate should be banned in the EU – Prof Chris Portier (video)

Prof Chris Portier, who was an invited expert to the International Agency for Research on Cancer for its investigation into glyphosate that concluded in 2015 that it was a probable human carcinogen, explains in a few seconds why according to EU law and the scientific evidence, glyphosate should be banned in the EU.

The arguments to ban glyphosate pile up

Pesticide Action Network Europe's #STOPGlyphosate Week ended with one main message: There is abundant scientific evidence that glyphosate can cause harm, and there are enough alternatives to end its use. Independent research points to its negative impacts on bees, soil health, aquatic life and biodiversity in general. The widespread use of the herbicide poses a threat to human health caused by genotoxicity, disruption of the microbiome, potential neurotoxicity, liver damage and endocrine-disrupting properties. The EU food safety agency EFSA cannot simply overlook all this evidence and come up with positive advice to expose EU citizens and nature to another 15 years of widespread use of glyphosate based herbicides. This would completely bypass the precautionary principle that is the foundation of the EU pesticide regulation.

EU Take Action: One year to ban glyphosate (and save our biodiversity)

In the coming year, we have the chance to ban the use of glyphosate in Europe. If you are in the EU, please sign the petition!

PESTICIDES IN GENERAL

Mayan beekeepers implicate Bayer/Monsanto in livelihood-harming die-off of 300,000+ bees

A collective of Mayan beekeepers (Colectivo de Comunidades Mayas) in Mexico is implicating chemical industry giant Bayer/Monsanto in a massive die-off of more than 300,000 bees among their combined apiaries. According to Mexico News Daily, the total value of losses represent a staggering $663,000 US dollars (12 million pesos). The incident is the latest instance of the pesticide and agrichemical industry setting up shop in a local community and wrecking the health of the local ecology. Mayan beekeepers explain that Bayer/Monsanto recently started operations on a ranch in the southern Mexican state of Campeche. A local businessman placed the 50 hectare ranch on loan to the company. Since that arrangement, the company has aerially sprayed row crops like corn and soy with undisclosed chemicals.

Despite clear evidence of continuing dicamba pesticide harm, EPA makes only minor changes to its approval

According to the USDA and US EPA’s own estimates, at least 64,000 and perhaps well over 200,000 distinct dicamba drift damage episodes occur each year. But despite such clear evidence of continuing harm, the EPA is proposing more of the same: Slightly earlier "cutoff dates" after which dicamba cannot be sprayed, and even this only applies to four of the 34 states for which it is registered (Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and South Dakota). Dicamba is sprayed over-the-top of genetically engineered dicamba-tolerant crops.

Bayer sues four Missouri farmers for illegally spraying dicamba, saving and replanting seeds from the company’s GM crops

Bayer is suing four farmers in Missouri for illegally spraying older versions of dicamba on its GM soybeans, as well as doing so after the state's cutoff date for spraying the herbicide. The lawsuits allege that the farmers are in violation of their user agreements with Bayer and have harmed the company’s reputation with the US EPA. Bayer alleges the farmers also saved seeds from Bayer's dicamba-tolerant crops and replanted them – a violation of their user agreement. During the course of the investigation into saving seeds, Bayer said it found evidence of the farmers illegally spraying older versions of dicamba – which are legal to buy but can't be used on the crops. Critics say the lawsuits are an attempt by Bayer to blame the older version of the weedkiller for damage caused by the widespread legal use of dicamba on crops.

Scientific study shows synthetic pesticides significantly more dangerous than natural ones

The European Green Deal's targets of expanding organic agriculture to 25%, halving pesticide use and risk, and protecting sensitive areas from negative pesticide impacts by 2030 are increasingly making natural pesticides permitted in organic farming the subject of political interest. While many see natural pesticides as promising alternatives to synthetic pesticides, the European pesticide industry warns of "ecological trade-offs implied by an increase of organic agriculture" such as an "increased overall volume of pesticide use in Europe". On behalf of IFOAM Organics Europe, the European umbrella organisation for organic agriculture, GLOBAL 2000 subjected these alleged "ecological trade-offs" to a fact check. They found that synthetic active substances allowed in conventional farming are far more hazardous and problematic than natural active substances approved in organic farming. Plus, organic pesticides are not often used, as intelligent system design means they are not often needed.

Scientists warn pesticide impacts may be worse than we thought

University of British Columbia researchers recently published a paper that summarises what they say is a growing body of evidence showing that pesticides are having harmful ecological impacts beyond what is already well understood, and that these impacts are not being recognised by current testing and regulations. The authors of the paper looked at dozens of studies to draw their conclusions. Lead author Risa Sargent said, "When we did our review of studies we found evidence that... previously thought-to-be-safe pesticides are actually having significant ecological harm. We have a picture emerging of anthropogenic threats for very, very important ecosystem players. We’re using more pesticides, and we are increasingly seeing impacts we had not expected – patterns of ecosystem disruption. There is this nice quote by E.O. Wilson: 'It's the little things that rule the world.'" About glyphosate, Sargent said, "The use... is enormous. Some of the research we looked at showed quite clear impacts of glyphosate on ecological interactions that support animal microbiomes. Research shows that glyphosate can impede animal gut microbial growth, which can cause significant problems."

"A Vicious Cycle": How pesticide use and climate change make each other worse, and what we can do about it

The energy required to produce all of the glyphosate used worldwide in 2014 was as much as the yearly energy needed to power 6.25 million cars. That’s one of the striking findings from "Pesticides and Climate Change: A Vicious Cycle", a report from Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) detailing how these two environmental problems interact to make our food system less just and resilient. "We found essentially that climate change impacts are predicted to make pest pressures worse and make pesticides less effective, ultimately increasing pesticide use due to climate change, while at the same time pesticides release greenhouse gas emissions," PANNA organising co-director and report co-author Asha Sharma said.

US: Lawsuit launched against Biden administration over failure to act on petition to prohibit pesticides in endangered species critical habitat

The Center for Biological Diversity has filed a notice of intent to sue the US Fish and Wildlife Service for failing to respond to a 2019 petition to prohibit nearly all uses of pesticides in areas designated as critical habitat for endangered species. Since the petition was submitted, the Environmental Protection Agency has released more than a dozen assessments finding that various pesticides are causing grave harm to many of the nation’s most endangered plants and animals. But the Service has failed to put in place any on-the-ground conservation measures to protect species from the pesticides.

..................................................................

We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible by readers’ donations. Please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!