Have these test results been confirmed or dismissed by any authority in this nation that is responsible for protecting the health and lives of the American people? httpwww.momsacrossamerica.comglyphosatetestingresults

Expert response from Community Manager

Friday, 09/01/2015 12:36

The “study” you are referring to is difficult to evaluate because it is not a study at all.  As commonly understood in the scientific community, a study typically has a hypothesis, a protocol with clearly defined data collection, validated assays, a priori statistical analysis on the resulting data and conclusions based on that analysis.  Instead, this is a website that presents some data without any knowledge of what was really done.  

The website group Moms Across America was very transparent about visiting EPA to discuss their data and even posted the letter that EPA sent following their meeting.

The letter from EPA makes many valid points about the quality of the “study” including:

• It is unclear how the samples were taken
• It is unclear how the samples were shipped or stored
• It is unclear if control samples were tested
• The assay does not appear to be validated to use for breast milk.

This is the same type of letter that anyone, including those in industry, would have gotten had they done a similar “study.”  EPA also indicated that they have reviewed studies on glyphosate metabolism.  Based on those data, EPA has concluded that glyphosate “would not accumulate in fat and tissues.” 

In research studies, glyphosate has been fed in large quantities to various types of animals and about 70 percent of it just passes through the digestive tract.  The remaining 30 percent is absorbed and then rapidly excreted into the urine.  This is not surprising because glyphosate is highly water soluble and will stay with water compartments in the body.  If one assumes the values that the MAM website provided are accurate, they would be consistent with values below the acceptable daily intake (ADI) established by EPA.  For a good explanation of ADI, please check out this response already on this site.  Here is another response you might be interested in reviewing detailing the safety of glyphosate for human consumption and toxicity.

The following resources also come to the conclusion that simply detecting the presence of a compound with methods that are highly sensitive do not provide information about excessive risk or the safety of the product:

• http://blogs.nature.com/soapboxscience/2013/05/29/the-presence-of-a-chemical-is-not-the-same-as-presence-of-risk 
• http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/05/06/mass-general-pediatrics-chief-says-glyphosate-poses-no-danger-in-breast-milk/