Pablo Gago
Senior Scientist at the Institute of Environmental Diagnosis and Water Studies at CSIC (IDAEA-CSIC) and visiting professor at SLU Swedish University of Agricultural Science (Sweden)
Despite mounting scientific evidence suggesting possible risks to human health and the environment associated with glyphosate, the renewal of its authorisation reflects an unwillingness to seriously address these concerns.
The controversy surrounding the renewal of glyphosate is based on solid scientific evidence that has linked glyphosate to potential health and environmental risks. Several studies suggest links between glyphosate and a long list of diseases (including various types of cancer, diabetes or effects on foetal development), as well as negative impacts on biodiversity and soil quality. The persistence of this controversy points to the need for a more rigorous and up-to-date assessment of the risks associated with the continued use of this herbicide.
Renewal of the authorisation of glyphosate has the potential to have significant and negative consequences for public health and the environment. Ignoring concerns supported by scientific evidence about the potential risks associated with glyphosate indicates a lack of commitment to safety and sustainability. This decision could expose the population and the ecosystem to unnecessary risks and underlines the importance of evidence-based decision-making to ensure the long-term protection of human health and biodiversity.