On April 30, US EPA released a statement reaffirming exposure to “current registered uses of” glyphosate is no threat to public health. Glyphosate is the active chemical in the herbicide Roundup, which is used every day by homeowners, landscapers, groundskeepers, and, of course, the entire agricultural industry.
One hint that Roundup might not be good for us? It’s manufactured by Monsanto.
But what’s so interesting about EPA’s statement is the timing.
A month prior, on March 27, a California man was awarded over $80 million in a case in which the jury decided that the use of Roundup was a “significant factor” in his cancer.
That was not the first glyphosate case that ended with a decision for the plaintiff.
Last year, an EWG report revealed high levels of glyphosate in some children’s cereals due to the high levels at which it is applied by farmers of cereals and grains.
Reports have also linked canine cancer to glyphosate exposure.
Yet EPA has chosen to side with special interests. Again.
Late last year, state Farm Bureau presidents applauded EPA for its rollback of the “Clean Water Rule,” which would have increased protections on our nation’s vital wetlands and small tributaries. The event they attended was at EPA HQ in DC.
Earlier this year, EPA released an “interpretive statement” regarding the hydrologic connection between groundwater and major waterbodies. The agency released it after two major district courts ruled the opposite way, and as the US Supreme Court was considering whether to review those decisions.
Opponents of EPA regulations often tout government overreach. What about government underreach?
Comments on EPA’s statement regarding glyphosate will be accepted until July 5. Please click here and tell EPA that you will not allow water quality, public safety, and environmental health to be jeopardized by partisan leadership of an agency charged with protecting precisely those things.