A detailed feature by Elizabeth Grossman on the website civileats.com offers the best perspective we’ve seen on the “study vs. study” controversy over glyphosate residues in mothers’ breast milk.
You’ve probably seen the report last week from Washington State University assistant professor Michelle McGuire stating that no detectable glyphosate was found in 41 samples of women’s breast milk. Thus, last spring’s pilot study by Moms Across America “flat out got it wrong” when Microbe Inotech Labs of St. Louis detected glyphosate in those samples.
What we’re suggesting is that Ms. Grossman’s coverage of this controversy offers a thoughtful explanation of the issue, and of the interests of the proponents who supported the studies.
And the bottom line is that very little is known about levels of glyphosate in either foods or the people who consume our food supply. The presumption has been that it doesn’t matter; nothing to see here, folks, move along.
In the months ahead, you can expect to see several studies on glyphosate residues in humans, as this concern rises. The presumption that glyphosate does not “bioaccumulate” will, finally, accumulate evidence from a wide array of people who now understand that they’re the experimental subjects with a compound that’s designated by the World Health Organization as a “probable human carcinogen.”