It is a new, decisive and explosive element in the controversy over the dangers of glyphosate. The world, With many European media including Defender, Glass, Standard Or German public television, was able to consult first Evaluation It is independent of the 53 secret regulatory genotoxicity studies that led to the re-recognition of the controversial herbicide in Europe in 2017. Until now, independent scientists have been able to consult the details of these studies and comment publicly without legal action. Appointed by a voluntary organization called Samaafu from two Austrian scientists and released on Friday, July 2, this analysis highlights differences in views on the properties of the world’s best-selling herbicide DNA toxicity (a key stage in cancer).
The two authors of this assessment are Siegfried Nasmல்லller and Armen Nersen, researchers at the Cancer Research Institute of the Vienna University Hospital Center (Austria) and internationally recognized experts in genetic toxicology. According to them, most of the 53 regulatory studies based on the opinion of European health officials on the genetic toxicity of glyphosate did not meet the expected quality criteria. “Of these studies, a few are plausible, but most are catastrophic.”, Said the author Seekbright Nasmல்லller, Editor-in-Chief of the magazine Mutation research / genetic toxicology and environmental mutation. “I wonder how they would have been perceived by health officials.”, He adds.
To understand, it is important to remember that glyphosate has been and is a “potential cancer” since 2015 by the International Research Institute for Cancer (IARC), the world’s leading taxonomic authority for cancer. “Strong Evidence” Of its genetic toxicity. On the contrary, regulatory agencies in Europe and the United States believe that there is no such evidence.
One reason for this difference is the nature of the work that both parties consider. On the one hand, IARC based its research on studies published by academic researchers in intellectual journals. The joint expertise of the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), which was unveiled on June 30, has done just that “Many studies show genetic damage (DNA breaks down or changes in its structure)” Glyphosate is induced. With regard to healthcare organizations, the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (PFR) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), in particular, considered the scientific literature in this case to be unreliable and based their expertise on the confidential research provided by the institutions. . These regulatory tests are subject to strict specifications (known as “good laboratory practices” or GLPs), which are defined by a series of “guidelines” specifically established by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
You have 67.52% of this article. The rest is for subscribers only.