Health Canada Wants to Increase Glyphosate in Food
Have your say by July 20th!
Issue
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) is proposing to increase the amount of glyphosate (Roundup®) permitted in Canadian food. Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) may be doubled, tripled or almost quadrupled for oats and bran, lentils, peas and 25 types of beans such as chickpeas, kidney beans and pinto beans, as well as nuts (almonds, pecans and walnuts, mostly coming from the US).
Crop
Current MRL
(ppm)
Proposed MRL
(ppm)
Proposed Increase
Oats and bran
15
35
2.3 fold
Lentils
4
10
2.5 fold
Peas
5
10
2.0 fold
Beans
4
15
3.75 fold
Nuts
0.4 ppm
1
2.5 fold
Why? Farmers are using more glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs). This amounts to regulation of the status quo.
As weeds become resistant, higher herbicide doses affect the environment, contaminate our food and risk our health. This model threatens Organic Agriculture, and does not optimize carbon capture in soil, support biodiversity, nor build resilience to face the climate crisis.
Whose food will be most affected?
Canadian children. Glyphosate in childrens’ cereals (in oats and bran) are already …Read More
DELAY, DELAY … by the PMRA
PMRA delays deciding on chlorpyrifos, then delays ban for 3 years. Safe Food Matters and Prevent Cancer Now bring Court challenge.
A Health Canada agency is delaying the cancellation of the dangerous chemical, thereby exposing Canadians to continued harm. Chlorpyrifos is a hazardous neurotoxic pesticide, known for permanently damaging the brains of developing children.
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) didn’t cancel the chemical back in 2007 when it learned of the dangerous health risks, and it issued a cancellation statement only in May, 2021 – which allows continued “phase-out” use for another 3 years. The sales of this pesticide are consistently in the top 10 in Canada, so the quantities are significant.
Between 2007 and 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published several human health risk assessments, linking chlorpyrifos to adverse neurodevelopmental effects. The PMRA said it would follow the EPA documents “in detail” and reassess them in the Canadian context. …Read More
Why is Glyphosate Still Allowed In Canada?
Because PMRA says it’s OK
You may have heard that glyphosate probably causes cancer, that it is being banned across the globe, and that Bayer, the maker of Roundup, is considering withdrawing this chemical from the retail market.
Yet Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency in 2017 issued a Re-evaluation Decision that allowed for continued use in Canada of this chemical until at least the 2030s.
Safe Food Matters says it’s not OK
We are Safe Food Matters Inc., and we have been using all legal avenues to object to and challenging this re-registration decision. We are the only Canadian group that directly issued a court challenge to the decision, and we are happy that other groups are now intervening.
Problems with PMRA’s Decision
Here is a presentation we recently issued that shows some flaws in PMRA’s 2017 Decision. This presentation does not speak specifically to issues arising in our Court case, for legal reasons. We …Read More
Health Canada bans #Chlorpyrifos
MEDIA STATEMENT: After Green-lighting Chlorpyrifos in December, Health Canada Finally Plans to Put Brain-Wasting Pesticide Out to Pasture (delaying action for years, following rulings in EU, and US Federal Court of Appeals)
TORONTO/OTTAWA – A network of health and environmental groups applaud Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) for finally moving to ban the toxic insecticide Chlorpyrifos, 53 years after it was first approved for use in Canada. The Agency quietly issued a three-year plan to ban late last week.
In December 2020, the PMRA extended some uses for several years, following its first full environmental review since entering the Canadian marketplace in 1969. Absent, however, was the mandatory health impact assessment. The PMRA finally issued a staged ban—allowing for use in three more growing seasons—when it became clear that registrant-company health data was not forthcoming.
Canada’s slow phase-out risks ongoing harm as well as dumping of Chlorpyrifos. In April 2019, the …Read More
Notice of Objection: Chlorpyrifos (Environment)
Notice of Objection Chlorpyrifos (Environment)
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (“PMRA”) of Health Canada recently re-registered chlorpyrifos for spraying on mosquitos, in buildings, around structures, on trees (mountain pines and elm) and on outdoor and greenhouse ornamental plants. This chemical is highly neurotoxic, banned in Europe, and has been proposed for addition to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.
How did PMRA do this? By not conducting a valid evaluation of the chemical. It separated out the assessment of risks to the environment from the risks to human health, which is not a justified approach. Then in its environmental risk assessment, it did not assess the extent of exposure in terms of concentrations in the environment as it was required to do. It used inaccurate information and faulty assumptions, it did not examine certain environmental harms, it made completely wrong extrapolations of the science from one species to another, and it …Read More
La salubrité des aliments est importante, mais pas pour Santé Canada?
La salubrité des aliments est importante pour vous et moi, mais est-ce important pour Santé Canada? Nous ne sommes pas convaincus. Pourquoi pas? Nous avons été dans une bataille David contre Goliath avec eux depuis 2017 en ce qui concerne leur approche réglementaire vers la salubrité des aliments,, et avons deux observations de base. Premièrement, à notre avis, Santé Canada n’a pas respecté l’intention ou la lettre de la loi. Deuxièmement, la conduite du régulateur a posé problème.
Cet article fournit des détails sur ces deux points. En ce qui concerne le premier point, il explique comment, dans notre dossier, Santé Canada n’a pas effectué une solide évaluation des risques, n’a pas été transparent et a retardé le dossier de plus d’une décennie.
Sur le deuxième point, cela montre que le régulateur: n’a pas été franc sur le processus, n’a pas fourni les documents pertinents, n’a pas fourni les qualifications des …Read More
Backgrounder to Glyphosate Appeal/ document d’information sur l’appel
Who We Are
Canadian non-profit, founded in 2016, dedicated to protecting health and protecting the environment, with a focus on the safety of food production technologies.
Campaigns have included GE foods and synthetic biology.
Taking Health Canada to the Federal Court of Appeal over its risk assessment of glyphosate.
Context
Glyphosate (Roundup) was registered for use in Canada in 1976 as a weed killer.
In the 2000s farmers started to spray it right onto growing crops to kill them.
The goal was to “dry-down” or “desiccate” the crops for efficiency purposes: (1) the timing of harvest could be scheduled, and (2) crops wouldn’t be wet so easier to harvest in one pass with big machines. This is “pre-harvest treatment” or “desiccation.”
Problem
When glyphosate is sprayed on crops that are growing, it moves through the roots into the plant’s circulation system and then binds to and moves with the nutrients right into the priority growing locations: the seeds, beans …Read More
SAFE FOOD MATTERS, BUT NOT TO HEALTH CANADA ?
BUT NOT TO HEALTH CANADA ?
Safe food matters to you and me, but does it matter to Health Canada? We aren’t convinced. Why not? We have been in a David vs. Goliath battle with them since 2017 regarding their regulatory approach to safe food, and have two basic observations. First, in our view, Health Canada hasn’t followed the intent or the letter of the law. Second, the conduct of the regulator has been problematic.
This article provides detail on these two points. With respect to the first point, it explains how on our file Health Canada did not conduct a strong risk assessment, was not transparent, and delayed the file by more than a decade.
On the second point, it shows that the regulator: was not upfront about the process, did not provide relevant documents, did not provide the qualifications of reviewing scientists, and worked to counter rather than properly consider the …Read More
safe food matters appeals decision
Safe Food Matters Inc. is appealing the Federal Court judgement that allows the decision of Health Canada to renew glyphosate to stand. The appeal was filed on March 13 at the Federal Court of Appeal.
“We think the wrong legal test was applied in the case, and that the decision-making of Health Canada on the file was not reasonable,” said Mary Lou McDonald, President of Safe Food Matters.
The case goes back to 2017, when Health Canada re-registered glyphosate for use in Canada. Eight groups objected and asked for an independent review panel, and in 2019 Health Canada responded with no. SFM then applied in Federal Court for judicial review and asked again for the Minister of Health to consider establishing a review panel. The Federal Court on February 13 dismissed the application.
The appeal process has been initiated, and Safe Food Matters has again retained Andrea Gonsalves of Stockwoods LLP as …Read More
Federal Court releases its decision
Safe Food Matters (SFM) has received notice that the Federal Court will not direct that an independent review panel be struck to review glyphosate.
The Court was of the view that SFM needed to “challenge the science relied on by the PMRA in the Evaluations”. We respectfully disagree, and believe that our job was to raise a scientific doubt about the validity of the evaluations Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) conducted. A “valid evaluation” is one that is complete, transparent, current and free from bias and the appearance of conflict of interest.
We believe we did that, by showing that PMRA did not examine the mechanism in plants that allows higher levels of glyphosate to accumulate in the seeds of legumes and cereals when they are desiccated. As such, the evaluation was not complete, and Health Canada cannot with complete impunity say there is no “unacceptable risk” to human health.
The process has …Read More
