A Wairarapa Times-Age opinion column defending glyphosate as harmless and “environmentally essential” has drawn criticism for ignoring scientific and legal evidence that contradicts its claims.
In the opinion piece the writer cited the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) stance that glyphosate is “not likely to be carcinogenic,” dismissing global health concerns as “hysteria”. However, experts note that the World Health Organization’s cancer agency classifies glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen,” and more than 100,000 lawsuits have been filed against Bayer over Roundup exposure.
Critics such as No More Glyphosate NZ argue the EPA relies heavily on industry-funded studies, while independent research links glyphosate-based weedkillers to cancer and ecological harm. Despite claims that glyphosate use on food crops has ended, the practice of pre-harvest desiccation remains legal in New Zealand, with residues still detected in cereals, honey, and water. Environmental groups say this controversy reflects broader weaknesses in New Zealand’s chemical oversight system and call for journalists and regulators to scrutinise, not dismiss, growing evidence of harm.
Image credit: Getty Images
Substitute glyphosate with vaccines
Safe proven effective
And how unsafe was that proven to be?
Covid all over again from a different angle
So its safe but it might cause cancer. You couldn’t make this nonsense up.
As for the MSM, only good for bird cage lining, cats litter trays or lighting wood fires in winter.