logoalt Hacker News

cmiles8yesterday at 6:46 PM2 repliesview on HN

The evidence on glyphosphate causing cancer isn’t particularly strong.

I wouldn’t bathe in the stuff, but the data strongly indicates it’s one of the more benign compounds used in agriculture and landscaping.


Replies

ceejayoztoday at 12:31 PM

> The evidence on glyphosphate causing cancer isn’t particularly strong.

This may be the case.

But I remember tobacco execs testifying under oath in the mid 90s that nicotine wasn't addictive and that there wasn't strong evidence smoking directly caused cancer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Berkshire

https://senate.ucsf.edu/tobacco-ceo-statement-to-congress

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/15/us/tobacco-chiefs-say-cig...

> The executives also made a number of other notable admissions, including these:

> * Cigarettes may cause lung cancer, heart disease and other health problems, but the evidence is not conclusive.

> * Despite earlier denials, a Philip Morris study that suggested that animals could become addicted to nicotine was suppressed in 1983 and 1985.

perrygeoyesterday at 7:48 PM

WHO classifies it as "Probably carcinogenic to humans". But it's important to talk about the exposure model.

Glyphosate in our food supply - almost no evidence of cancer risk. (The gut microbiome is affected though).

Direct and sustained contact to glyphosate as an agricultural worker - potentially very severe risks, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The data is strong but epidemiological.

So yeah, I think your conclusion is roughly correct. Don't bathe in it. Probably avoid using it at home or work. But otherwise, its not a serious risk to consumers.

show 1 reply