About a month ago, I wrote a story detailing the EPA's review of glyphosate’s carcinogenicity. Glyphosate is a pesticide that was discovered and patented by Monsanto and sold under the brand name RoundUp. The report came to the conclusion that the “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” classification was the strongest descriptor for glyphosate. I ended that story with information about a review panel that would evaluate the report in October. Well it seems that the panel has been postpone.
The panel was suppose to convene last week, but the EPA postponed it for later in the year. That almost certainly means that the panel will not convene before the election. They do not give a specific reason for why they are doing this, but they do note that they will be adding new members to the current roster on the panel, particularly in the area of epidemiology. This was most likely done because of the complaints by the chemical industry.
Several days before the panel was scheduled to convene, CropLife America, a trade association that represents the manufacturers, formulators and distributors of pesticides, sent out a letter requesting that the EPA make changes to its advisory panel. Specifically they ask for the removal of Dr. Peter Infante, the only epidemiologist on the panel. The letter also ask the EPA to “take note” of Dr. Kenneth Portier to make sure he does not have any biases that may prevent him from giving an objective evaluation.
The letter claims that because of Infante’s membership in the Collegium Ramazzini, his questionable court record, and his disregard for studies conducted by industry, Dr. Infante should not be allowed on the review panel. They also want to confirm Dr.Portier’s objectivity because of the fact that his brother is an “anti-glyphosate activist.” This letter is most likely the reason why the EPA is looking for more experts for the panel.
This postponement due to industry concerns has been criticized. In an article by the Huffington Post Michael Hansen, senior staff scientist at the Consumers Union, said “This is outrageous. The industry wants to say that our own government scientists, the top ones in their fields, aren’t good enough for these panels.”
The EPA expects to convene the panel by December of this year, but that depends on the availability of the experts. Whenever they convene, I hope that they will come to whatever conclusion the science supports.