Project Bibliography

Benbrook, 2016c

John Peterson Myers, Michael N. Antoniou, Bruce Blumberg, Lynn Carroll, Theo Colborn, Lorne G. Everett, Michael Hansen, Philip J. Landrigan, Bruce P. Lanphear, Robin Mesnage, Laura N. Vandenberg, Frederick S. vom Saal, Wade V. Welshons and Charles M. Benbrook. “Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement,” Environmental Health, 2016, 15:19, DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0117-0.

ABSTRACT:

The broad-spectrum herbicide glyphosate (common trade name “Roundup”) was first sold to farmers in 1974. Since the late 1970s, the volume of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) applied has increased approximately 100-fold. Further increases in the volume applied are likely due to more and higher rates of application in response to the widespread emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds and new, pre-harvest, dessicant use patterns. GBHs were developed to replace or reduce reliance on herbicides causing well-documented problems associated with drift and crop damage, slipping efficacy, and human health risks. Initial industry toxicity testing suggested that GBHs posed relatively low risks to non-target species, including mammals, leading regulatory authorities worldwide to set high acceptable exposure limits. To accommodate changes in GBH use patterns associated with genetically engineered, herbicide-tolerant crops, regulators have dramatically increased tolerance levels in maize, oilseed (soybeans and canola), and alfalfa crops and related livestock feeds. Animal and epidemiology studies published in the last decade, however, point to the need for a fresh look at glyphosate toxicity. Furthermore, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer recently concluded that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” In response to changing GBH use patterns and advances in scientific understanding of their potential hazards, we have produced a Statement of Concern drawing on emerging science relevant to the safety of GBHs. Our Statement of Concern considers current published literature describing GBH uses, mechanisms of action, toxicity in laboratory animals, and epidemiological studies. It also examines the derivation of current human safety standards. We conclude that: (1) GBHs are the most heavily applied herbicide in the world and usage continues to rise; (2) Worldwide, GBHs often contaminate drinking water sources, precipitation, and air, especially in agricultural regions; (3) The half-life of glyphosate in water and soil is longer than previously recognized; (4) Glyphosate and its metabolites are widely present in the global soybean supply; (5) Human exposures to GBHs are rising; (6) Glyphosate is now authoritatively classified as a probable human carcinogen; (7) Regulatory estimates of tolerable daily intakes for glyphosate in the United States and European Union are based on outdated science. We offer a series of recommendations related to the need for new investments in epidemiological studies, biomonitoring, and toxicology studies that draw on the principles of endocrinology to determine whether the effects of GBHs are due to endocrine disrupting activities. We suggest that common commercial formulations of GBHs should be prioritized for inclusion in government-led toxicology testing programs such as the U.S. National Toxicology Program, as well as for biomonitoring as conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  FULL TEXT


Laborde et al., 2015

Laborde A, Tomasina F, Bianchi F, Bruné MN, Buka I, Comba P, Corra L, Cori L, Duffert CM, Harari R, Iavarone I, McDiarmid MA, Gray KA, Sly PD, Soares A, Suk WA, Landrigan PJ, “Children’s Health in Latin America: The Influence of Environmental Exposures,” Environmental Health Perspectives,  2015 Mar; 123(3), DOI: 10.1289/EHP.1408292.

ABSTRACT:

BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases are increasing among children in Latin America.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: To examine environmental risk factors for chronic disease in Latin American children and to develop a strategic initiative for control of these exposures, the World Health Organization (WHO) including the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Collegium Ramazzini, and Latin American scientists reviewed regional and relevant global data.

RESULTS: Industrial development and urbanization are proceeding rapidly in Latin America, and environmental pollution has become widespread. Environmental threats to children’s health include traditional hazards such as indoor air pollution and drinking-water contamination; the newer hazards of urban air pollution; toxic chemicals such as lead, asbestos, mercury, arsenic, and pesticides; hazardous and electronic waste; and climate change. The mix of traditional and modern hazards varies greatly across and within countries reflecting industrialization, urbanization, and socioeconomic forces.

CONCLUSIONS: To control environmental threats to children’s health in Latin America, WHO, including PAHO, will focus on the most highly prevalent and serious hazards—indoor and outdoor air pollution, water pollution, and toxic chemicals. Strategies for controlling these hazards include developing tracking data on regional trends in children’s environmental health (CEH), building a network of Collaborating Centres, promoting biomedical research in CEH, building regional capacity, supporting development of evidence-based prevention policies, studying the economic costs of chronic diseases in children, and developing platforms for dialogue with relevant stakeholders.  FULL TEXT

 


Landrigan and Benbrook, 2015

Landrigan, Philip, Charles Benbrook. “GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health,” New England Journal of Medicine, 2015 373:8, DOI:  10.1056/NEJMp150660.

ABSTRACT:

Not Avaiable

Full Text


Landrigan and Benbrook, 2015

Phillip Landrigan and Charles Benbrook, “GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health,” Commentary in New England Journal of Medicine, 2015, 373:8, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1505660.

ABSTRACT:

Not Available

FULL TEXT


Myers et al., 2016

Myers JP, Antoniou MN, Blumberg B, Carroll L, Colborn T, Everett LG, Michael Hansen, Landrigan PJ, Lanphear BP, Mesnage R, Vandenberg LN, Vom Saal FS, Welshons WV, Benbrook CM, “Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement,” Environmental Health, 2016, 15:19, DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0117-0.

ABSTRACT:  The broad-spectrum herbicide glyphosate (common trade name “Roundup”) was first sold to farmers in 1974. Since the late 1970s, the volume of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) applied has increased approximately 100-fold. Further increases in the volume applied are likely due to more and higher rates of application in response to the widespread emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds and new, pre-harvest, dessicant use patterns. GBHs were developed to replace or reduce reliance on herbicides causing well-documented problems associated with drift and crop damage, slipping efficacy, and human health risks. Initial industry toxicity testing suggested that GBHs posed relatively low risks to non-target species, including mammals, leading regulatory authorities worldwide to set high acceptable exposure limits. To accommodate changes in GBH use patterns associated with genetically engineered, herbicide-tolerant crops, regulators have dramatically increased tolerance levels in maize, oilseed (soybeans and canola), and alfalfa crops and related livestock feeds. Animal and epidemiology studies published in the last decade, however, point to the need for a fresh look at glyphosate toxicity. Furthermore, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer recently concluded that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” In response to changing GBH use patterns and advances in scientific understanding of their potential hazards, we have produced a Statement of Concern drawing on emerging science relevant to the safety of GBHs. Our Statement of Concern considers current published literature describing GBH uses, mechanisms of action, toxicity in laboratory animals, and epidemiological studies. It also examines the derivation of current human safety standards. We conclude that: (1) GBHs are the most heavily applied herbicide in the world and usage continues to rise; (2) Worldwide, GBHs often contaminate drinking water sources, precipitation, and air, especially in agricultural regions; (3) The half-life of glyphosate in water and soil is longer than previously recognized; (4) Glyphosate and its metabolites are widely present in the global soybean supply; (5) Human exposures to GBHs are rising; (6) Glyphosate is now authoritatively classified as a probable human carcinogen; (7) Regulatory estimates of tolerable daily intakes for glyphosate in the United States and European Union are based on outdated science. We offer a series of recommendations related to the need for new investments in epidemiological studies, biomonitoring, and toxicology studies that draw on the principles of endocrinology to determine whether the effects of GBHs are due to endocrine disrupting activities. We suggest that common commercial formulations of GBHs should be prioritized for inclusion in government-led toxicology testing programs such as the U.S. National Toxicology Program, as well as for biomonitoring as conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  FULL TEXT


Portier et al., 2016

Christopher J Portier, Bruce K Armstrong, Bruce C Baguley, Xaver Baur, Igor Belyaev, Robert Bellé, Fiorella Belpoggi, Annibale Biggeri, Maarten C Bosland, Paolo Bruzzi, Lygia Therese Budnik, Merete D Bugge, Kathleen Burns, Gloria M Calaf, David O Carpenter, Hillary M Carpenter, Lizbeth López-Carrillo, Richard Clapp, Pierluigi Cocco, Dario Consonni, Pietro Comba, Elena Craft, Mohamed Aqiel Dalvie, Devra Davis, Paul A Demers, Anneclaire J De Roos, Jamie DeWitt, Francesco Forastiere, Jonathan H Freedman, Lin Fritschi, Caroline Gaus, Julia M Gohlke, Marcel Goldberg, Eberhard Greiser, Johnni Hansen, Lennart Hardell, Michael Hauptmann, Wei Huang, James Huff, Margaret O James, C W Jameson, Andreas Kortenkamp, Annette Kopp-Schneider, Hans Kromhout, Marcelo L Larramendy, Philip J Landrigan, Lawrence H Lash, Dariusz Leszczynski, Charles F Lynch, Corrado Magnani, Daniele Mandrioli, Francis L Martin, Enzo Merler, Paola Michelozzi, Lucia Miligi, Anthony B Miller, Dario Mirabelli, Franklin E Mirer, Saloshni Naidoo, Melissa J Perry, Maria Grazia Petronio, Roberta Pirastu, Ralph J Portier, Kenneth S Ramos, Larry W Robertson, Theresa Rodriguez, Martin Röösli, Matt K Ross, Deodutta Roy, Ivan Rusyn, Paulo Saldiva, Jennifer Sass, Kai Savolainen, Paul T J Scheepers, Consolato Sergi, Ellen K Silbergeld, Martyn T Smith, Bernard W Stewart, Patrice Sutton, Fabio Tateo, Benedetto Terracini, Heinz W Thielmann, David B Thomas, Harri Vainio, John E Vena, Paolo Vineis, Elisabete Weiderpass, Dennis D Weisenburger, Tracey J Woodruff, Takashi Yorifuji, Il Je Yu, Paola Zambon, Hajo Zeeb,Shu-Feng Zhou, “Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA),” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2016, 0:0, DOI: 10.1136/JECH-2015-207005.

ABSTRACT:

Not Available

FULL TEXT

 


Vandenberg et al., 2017

Laura N Vandenberg, Bruce Blumberg, Michael N Antoniou, Charles M Benbrook, Lynn Carroll, Theo Colborn, Lorne G Everett, Michael Hansen, Philip J Landrigan, Bruce P Lanphear, Robin Mesnage, Frederick S vom Saal, Wade V Welshons, John Peterson Myers, “Is it time to reassess current safety standards for glyphosate-based herbicides?”,  Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2017, 0, DOI: 10.113/jech-2016-208463.

ABSTRACT:

Use of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) increased ∼100-fold from 1974 to 2014. Additional increases are expected due to widespread emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds, increased application of GBHs, and preharvest uses of GBHs as desiccants. Current safety assessments rely heavily on studies conducted over 30 years ago. We have considered information on GBH use, exposures, mechanisms of action, toxicity and epidemiology. Human exposures to glyphosate are rising, and a number of in vitro and in vivo studies challenge the basis for the current safety assessment of glyphosate and GBHs. We conclude that current safety standards for GBHs are outdated and may fail to protect public health or the environment. To improve safety standards, the following are urgently needed: (1) human biomonitoring for glyphosate and its metabolites; (2) prioritisation of glyphosate and GBHs for hazard assessments, including toxicological studies that use state-of-the-art approaches; (3) epidemiological studies, especially of occupationally exposed agricultural workers, pregnant women and their children and (4) evaluations of GBHs in commercially used formulations, recognising that herbicide mixtures likely have effects that are not predicted by studying glyphosate alone.  FULL TEXT