Cargando…

Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide worldwide. It is a broad spectrum herbicide and its agricultural uses increased considerably after the development of glyphosate-resistant genetically modified (GM) varieties. Since glyphosate was introduced in 1974, all regulatory assessments have establ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tarazona, Jose V., Court-Marques, Daniele, Tiramani, Manuela, Reich, Hermine, Pfeil, Rudolf, Istace, Frederique, Crivellente, Federica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5515989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28374158
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5
_version_ 1783251074598043648
author Tarazona, Jose V.
Court-Marques, Daniele
Tiramani, Manuela
Reich, Hermine
Pfeil, Rudolf
Istace, Frederique
Crivellente, Federica
author_facet Tarazona, Jose V.
Court-Marques, Daniele
Tiramani, Manuela
Reich, Hermine
Pfeil, Rudolf
Istace, Frederique
Crivellente, Federica
author_sort Tarazona, Jose V.
collection PubMed
description Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide worldwide. It is a broad spectrum herbicide and its agricultural uses increased considerably after the development of glyphosate-resistant genetically modified (GM) varieties. Since glyphosate was introduced in 1974, all regulatory assessments have established that glyphosate has low hazard potential to mammals, however, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in March 2015 that it is probably carcinogenic. The IARC conclusion was not confirmed by the EU assessment or the recent joint WHO/FAO evaluation, both using additional evidence. Glyphosate is not the first topic of disagreement between IARC and regulatory evaluations, but has received greater attention. This review presents the scientific basis of the glyphosate health assessment conducted within the European Union (EU) renewal process, and explains the differences in the carcinogenicity assessment with IARC. Use of different data sets, particularly on long-term toxicity/carcinogenicity in rodents, could partially explain the divergent views; but methodological differences in the evaluation of the available evidence have been identified. The EU assessment did not identify a carcinogenicity hazard, revised the toxicological profile proposing new toxicological reference values, and conducted a risk assessment for some representatives uses. Two complementary exposure assessments, human-biomonitoring and food-residues-monitoring, suggests that actual exposure levels are below these reference values and do not represent a public concern. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5515989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55159892017-08-02 Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC Tarazona, Jose V. Court-Marques, Daniele Tiramani, Manuela Reich, Hermine Pfeil, Rudolf Istace, Frederique Crivellente, Federica Arch Toxicol Review Article Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide worldwide. It is a broad spectrum herbicide and its agricultural uses increased considerably after the development of glyphosate-resistant genetically modified (GM) varieties. Since glyphosate was introduced in 1974, all regulatory assessments have established that glyphosate has low hazard potential to mammals, however, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in March 2015 that it is probably carcinogenic. The IARC conclusion was not confirmed by the EU assessment or the recent joint WHO/FAO evaluation, both using additional evidence. Glyphosate is not the first topic of disagreement between IARC and regulatory evaluations, but has received greater attention. This review presents the scientific basis of the glyphosate health assessment conducted within the European Union (EU) renewal process, and explains the differences in the carcinogenicity assessment with IARC. Use of different data sets, particularly on long-term toxicity/carcinogenicity in rodents, could partially explain the divergent views; but methodological differences in the evaluation of the available evidence have been identified. The EU assessment did not identify a carcinogenicity hazard, revised the toxicological profile proposing new toxicological reference values, and conducted a risk assessment for some representatives uses. Two complementary exposure assessments, human-biomonitoring and food-residues-monitoring, suggests that actual exposure levels are below these reference values and do not represent a public concern. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-04-03 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5515989/ /pubmed/28374158 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review Article
Tarazona, Jose V.
Court-Marques, Daniele
Tiramani, Manuela
Reich, Hermine
Pfeil, Rudolf
Istace, Frederique
Crivellente, Federica
Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title_full Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title_fullStr Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title_full_unstemmed Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title_short Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC
title_sort glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the european union assessment and its differences with iarc
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5515989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28374158
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-017-1962-5
work_keys_str_mv AT tarazonajosev glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT courtmarquesdaniele glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT tiramanimanuela glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT reichhermine glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT pfeilrudolf glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT istacefrederique glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc
AT crivellentefederica glyphosatetoxicityandcarcinogenicityareviewofthescientificbasisoftheeuropeanunionassessmentanditsdifferenceswithiarc