Glyphosate Fear-Mongering

Despite recent court cases, glyphosate is not recognized as a carcinogen or toxin as these terms are normally understood in environmental toxicology.  Yes, there is some research linking glyphosate with increased cancer risk, but that is not the scientific consensus.

I don't think this blog post on glyphosate can be counted as scientifically accurate, even though it does cite scientific research. Websites that sell fear based on a few studies while ignoring the body of scientific literature are not reliable sources for decision-making. 

I am writing as a concerned science-lover. For me (and I could be wrong), I see glyphosate fear-mongering as no different from conspiracy theories about vaccine harms or global warming.  Yes, there are scientific papers showing that vaccines cause autism and that global warming is not happening, but any article that only cites those papers without weighing (or at least mentioning!) the current scientific consensus would be misleading at best.

Focusing on glyphosate seems especially misguided given the other chemicals used in agriculture and commonly found in our food supply (e.g. chlorpyrifos).  While glyphosate may be the popular boogeyman of the year, science-based reporting should at least acknowledge that it is probably the least toxic of any chemical pesticides currently being used. 

A better approach than just selling fear:  promote solutions, such as better testing of all chemicals in our food supply.