Glypho cancer claims a wake-up call

27 Mar, 2015 01:00 AM
We need farmers to carry on farming, not to be killed off

A VETERINARY pathologist has warned the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) findings on glyphosate should serve as a wake-up call for Australian agriculture.

Matt Landos, who currently works in the aquaculture industry in Port Lincoln, South Australia, says he believes the IARC findings that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic should spark a review of the pesticides approval process in Australia.

“Glyphosate is the biggest product in the market, its use is so widespread, yet there is more and more evidence of the dangers of the organophosphate pesticides, which includes glyphosate.

“I think we need to be looking at the APVMA (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority) and its procedures in terms of determining the safety of products.”

“This is just another example of the need for change in terms of the way the APVMA makes its decisions.”

Dr Landos acknowledged there had been massive productivity gains by using glyphosate, but said this may prove to be false economy on an overall level.

“If we begin to see increasing rates of cancer and the cost that puts on our health system then that could cost much more.”

However, Adam Blight, corporate affairs manager for Monsanto Australia, which produces the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup, said Australians could rest assured products used here were safe.

“The APVMA conducts rigorous testing on all pesticides.

“It is technically competent and globally recognised, it is regarded as a world class regulator, so Australians can be confident the food they eat is produced in a safe way.”

However, Dr Landos said reports such as that from the IARC showed residue levels previously considered to be safe could be harmful.

“Australians need protection, and with the APVMA we have one of the slowest regulators to change in the world. With something like the insecticide endosulfan, we were the 80th country in the world to ban it.”

Dr Landos said although there was farmer outcry at the prospect of changing glyphosate regulations, he was not anti-agriculture.

“I believe we need farmers to carry on farming, not to be killed off, and the evidence is there to suggest farmers have higher rates of cancer than the general population.”

Mr Blight countered, saying he had research suggesting the opposite.

Dr Landos acknowledged changes to pesticide use would be difficult, particularly in industries dealing with bulk commodities such as grains, where premiums for low residue or organic products are less or where glyphosate boosted productivity by big margins, but said it needed to be looked at.

“We need the research and development to be looking beyond the narrow sphere of herbicides for productivity gains.”

“There’s non-chemical technologies for weed control such as microwave energy or steam application showing some promise, so we need to ensure work continues on these types of research.”

Gregor Heard

Gregor Heard

is the national grains writer for Fairfax Agricultural Media
Date: Newest first | Oldest first


Professor Ivan Kennedy University of Sydney
27/03/2015 4:41:23 AM

The International Agency for Research into Cancer has tarnished its reputation and is causing unnecessary angst and waste of resources by ruling that the world’s most popular herbicide, glyphosate, is "probably carcinogenic in humans". It defies reason that this small chemical consisting of phosphorus, nitrogen and carbon groups frequently found combined in living cells in similar forms should be carcinogenic. Glyphosate has neither cancer-active moieties nor structural mechanisms needed to form tumours. With no evidence of carcinogencity for humans, IARC should withdraw its biased ruling.
27/03/2015 5:34:21 AM

Prof Kennedy, are u trained in medicine?, what field of science?
27/03/2015 6:27:54 AM

It is incredible! The most widely used herbicide in the world, for the past several decades, and there is no factual evidence of any relationship between glyphosate and any form of cancer. Then out of the blue IARC coughs up this "view". Cough up the science that has had rigourous review and then, maybe, some interest will be taken.
27/03/2015 6:53:42 AM

Where is the science re concerns about Glysophate ??
27/03/2015 6:55:26 AM

And what about your training WTF? If you want to know about roundup would you ask your GP? The fact is that drug and chemical tests are not done by medical doctors, but people with other experimental skills and these people have indeed looked at round up, tomato sauce, tea, etc.
Professor Russ Hovey, Univ. California Davis
27/03/2015 7:09:18 AM

Give some thought to a carcinogen that surrounds us as a "known" carcinogen for humans (IARC classification, much worse than the classification given to glyphosate), which many of us voluntarily enjoy. What would that be? Try alcohol/ethanol…. And don't forget the benzene in your petrol tank…. Time for a beer.
Pete Rothwell
27/03/2015 7:12:12 AM

Isn't there a lot more proof that the sun causes cancer? maybe we should ban that first.
27/03/2015 7:13:09 AM

The prof of plant & food science WTF .How about your good self ?
27/03/2015 7:30:31 AM

oh well looks like the world is going to starve to death in the next few years because all the farmers are going to die from cancer because we all use the stuff.
Over the Hill
27/03/2015 7:35:58 AM

Ban Glyph and most likely starve to death instead...
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  |  next >


Screen name *
Email address *
Remember me?
Comment *


light grey arrow
I'm one of the people who want marijuana to be legalized, some city have been approved it but
light grey arrow
#blueysmegacarshowandcruise2019 10 years on Daniels Ute will be apart of another massive cause.
light grey arrow
Australia's live animal trade is nothing but a blood stained industry that suits those who