The National Commission on Ethics and Alerts in Public Health and Environment believes that citizens’ confidence in the current process of reinforcement of the controversial herbicide is not guaranteed.
by
The glyphosate saga is never short of new twists. In a statement made public Monday, January 10, this time, it is, this time, the National Commission on Ethics and Alerts on Public Health and Environment (CNDASP), which is positioned in the debate on the dangerousness of the famous herbicide, most used phytosanitary product in France and around the world. Created in 2013 to ensure the ethics of expertise in the health and environmental fields, the CNDASP, whose opinions are advisory, recommend, in a way, that “appraised” the European expertise on glyphosate, in the process of Finalization.
Conclusions of the latter will result in the decision, by the Member States, to re-allow the controversial pesticide in Europe. The deadline is set at December 2022. In June 2021, a voluminous prerapport, written by the experts of regulatory agencies of four countries (France, Hungary, the Netherlands and Sweden) has already been made public: it concludes that glyphosate Fills no prohibition criteria (carcinogenic, mutagenic, toxic for endocrine reproduction or disruptive) and thus opens the way to its saddle in the Union. However, the conclusions of this prerequisher oppose those of other institutions.
The International Cancer Research Center (IARC) has indeed classified in 2015 glyphosate as “probable carcinogen”. The National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), in its Collective expertise of June 2021 , has, for its part, concluded to “an average presumption of an increased risk of non-Hodgkinic lymphoma”, in connection with exposure to glyphosate.
“Unfortunate experience”
The CNDASP Collège – About twenty academics, researchers, elected officials and lawyers – requests two panels of international independent personalities. The first group would be composed of “specialists in the ethics of scientific expertise” with the mission “to examine the interests of each of the members of the committees who participated in the evaluation preheal of the rapporteur states on glyphosate , made public in June 2021 “. It should also consider the interests of the experts who will participate in the coming months in the European regulatory agencies at the critical assessment of the famous pre-report.
The CNDASP calls for this panel to retrospect the same work for the previous European expertise, which led to the rehlooding of Glyphosate, in 2017. “We obviously do not pronounce the question of whether or not reauthorizing this product, explains Denis Zmirou-Navier, an honorary public health professor at the University of Lorraine, former director of the Health-Environment Department-Labor of the Ecole des Hautes Studies in Public Health and President of the CNDASP. The unanimity of its members, the College [of the Commission] has autosished this issue, because our mission is to propose the framework that will restore the confidence of citizens in the process of expertise. However, it is undeniable. that the previous exercise has been an unfortunate experience. “
You still have 31.34% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.