Tag: pesticides

Study: Glyphosate Disrupts Gut Microbiome, May Have Generational Effects

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is the most widely used herbicide globally, according to regulatory and industry data.

Beyond Pesticides, a nonprofit watchdog organization, estimates that 300 million pounds of glyphosate are applied annually to U.S. crops, according to NaturalNews.com [2]. Roughly 90% of soy, corn, beets and canola grown in the United States are farmed using glyphosate-resistant crops, meaning the herbicide is sprayed directly on fields where food is grown, according to a recent analysis.

A growing body of research indicates that glyphosate can act as an antimicrobial, disrupting beneficial bacteria in the human gut microbiome. The chemical is designed to block a biochemical pathway in plants, but that same pathway is also present in many gut bacteria, researchers said. “Glyphosate, an antimicrobial chemical used in agriculture, also destroys soil and plant microbes before affecting animals and humans directly or through food consumption,” according to a report from Mercola.com evaluating the microbiome’s role in immune health [3].

Mechanism and Antimicrobial Patent

Glyphosate kills weeds by blocking the shikimate pathway, a biochemical process plants use to synthesize certain essential amino acids. According to Stephanie Seneff’s book “Toxic Legacy,” glyphosate’s mechanism targets the enzyme EPSPS, which is also found in many species of gut bacteria [5]. This blind spot means that while human cells do not use the shikimate pathway, a wide range of beneficial microbes do, including species critical for digestion and immune regulation.

In 2010, Monsanto (now owned by Bayer) was granted a patent for glyphosate as an antimicrobial agent, according to NaturalNews.com [1]. The patent submission, first filed in 2003, describes the compound as a “parasitic control-type antimicrobial agent.” This official classification as an antibiotic means that, like other antimicrobials, glyphosate does not discriminate between harmful microorganisms and the beneficial bacteria the human body depends on, according to the report.

Animal Studies and Systematic Review

Multiple animal studies have demonstrated glyphosate’s ability to alter gut microbiota composition. A mouse study exposed to low doses of glyphosate over 90 days found significant shifts in gut bacteria, with beneficial populations such as Bifidobacterium and butyrate-producing species reduced and bacteria linked to gut dysbiosis and inflammation increased, according to a report on BrightVideos.com [10]. The same report states that glyphosate “disrupts the gut microbiome by killing beneficial bacteria, leading to leaky gut syndrome,” and notes that this disruption increases the risk of autoimmune disorders and endocrine disruption at low doses [10].

A systematic review in the journal Food & Function, analyzing research across multiple animal models, concluded that glyphosate can increase gut permeability (commonly called “leaky gut”), damage the intestinal wall, and disrupt the mucus layer that protects the gut lining, according to researchers cited in the literature. Seneff’s book “Toxic Legacy” also documents extensive evidence linking glyphosate exposure to intestinal inflammation and impairment of the gut barrier in animal models, referencing studies on both rodents and livestock [5].

Prenatal Exposure and Generational Effects

Research on prenatal glyphosate exposure in mice has found disruptions in metabolic, immune, and behavioral markers that persist into the second generation of offspring, according to findings described in the book “The Glyphosate Deception” [8]. The study, published via ScienceDirect, examined doses as low as 0.01 mg/kg/day—more than 100 times below the EPA’s acceptable daily intake. It reported goblet cell depletion, reduced mucin-2 expression (a key component of the gut’s protective mucus layer), and decreased levels of Akkermansia muciniphila, a bacterium closely linked to gut barrier integrity, according to the research.

Additional mouse model research discussed in literature from GreenMedInfo.com found that offspring of exposed mouse dams displayed a striking 45-fold increase in serum levels of 4-ethylphenyl sulfate (4EPS), a metabolite linked to autistic-like behaviors [4]. Probiotic treatment with the species Bacteroides fragilis was shown to ameliorate some of these symptoms, suggesting the gut microbiome plays a central role in mediating the neurological effects of early-life glyphosate exposure, according to the report.

Keep reading

Five things to know about pesticides, cancer and a pending Supreme Court ruling

After years of lawsuits against agrichemical companies and battles over environmental regulations, the nation’s highest court is expected to rule this summer on a case that could significantly alter the pesticide industry.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule next month on whether lawsuits can be brought against pesticide and herbicide makers over claims their products have caused cancer. 

The court heard arguments in the case in April, and the justices appeared split.

With a ruling weeks away, here are five things to know about the topic of pesticide use and cancer.

1. Geographic correlation between heavy pesticide use and high cancer rates

Numerous studies and an analysis of federal data have shown a potential correlation between pesticide use and cancer. Out of the 500 U.S. counties with the highest pesticide use per square mile (largely concentrated in corn, soybean and fruit-producing states like Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, California and Florida), 60% have cancer rates higher than the national average of 460 cases per 100,000 people. A 2024 study in Frontiers in Cancer Control and Society suggests the impact of pesticide use on cancer incidence may rival that of smoking.

2. Thousands of lawsuits have been won against agrichemical companies

State courts have also found that correlation credible, as Bayer, the maker of the herbicide Roundup, has lost thousands of cases and agreed to pay more than $12 billion in settlements, including individual jury verdicts such as an initial $2 billion award in California and a recent $1.25 million verdict in Missouri. According to the company, more than 65,000 lawsuits have been filed by farmers, gardeners and other users alleging the chemical caused their cancer.

3. Companies push for ‘liability shields‘

In response to these lawsuits, agrichemical companies have aggressively lobbied for state-level bans on this type of litigation. Often referred to as “liability shield” laws, they would essentially say that because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not warned of a link to cancer, state-level claims would be void. Georgia and North Dakota are the only two states that have passed these liability shield laws. 

4. The Trump administration has largely sided with pesticide makers

The push for stricter pesticide regulation has created unusual alliances between left-leaning environmentalists and conservative health advocates under the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) banner. 

After an initial Health and Human Services report linked pesticide overuse to childhood health issues, the agency’s final report last year walked back all regulatory calls and instead pivoted to promote public confidence in current EPA standards. President Trump also signed an executive order this year declaring glyphosate critical to national security, and his administration actively sided with Bayer during oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

In April, MAHA activists celebrated a win after the House voted to remove a pesticide industry-backed provision from its farm bill. The debate is expected to continue as the Senate drafts its own version of the farm bill. 

5. Supreme Court hears arguments on national ‘liability shield’ ban

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell, in which Monsanto (owned by Bayer) argued that because the EPA has ruled glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic, federal law preempts states from requiring cancer warning labels or awarding damages through state juries. A decision is expected in July.

Keep reading

Legal Notice Filed to Force EPA to Set Water Standards for Atrazine, a Pesticide Linked to Cancer

Conservation and public health groups filed a formal notice on Thursday, May 28, with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to force the agency to develop water-quality standards for atrazine, a pesticide linked to cancer, according to the groups.

According to the notice, atrazine has been found at dangerous levels in thousands of U.S. waterways and in drinking-water supplies. The filing is a required step before the groups can sue the EPA under the Clean Water Act. [1][2]

Atrazine is the second most widely used pesticide in the United States, with tens of millions of pounds applied annually on corn and other crops. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2025 classified atrazine as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” according to a report from NaturalNews.com. [2] Since 1999, cancer has been the leading cause of premature death in the United States for those under age 85, according to the book “Taking Action, Saving Lives” by Kristin Shrader-Frechette. [3]

The herbicide is banned in more than 60 countries due to links to birth defects, cancers and fertility problems, reported Children’s Health Defense. [4] Atrazine has been shown to disrupt endocrine systems and cause reproductive abnormalities in wildlife, including turning male frogs into hermaphrodites, according to a 2007 report from NaturalNews.com. [5]

The 1972 Clean Water Act regulates discharges into U.S. waterways, but toxic runoff from agriculture continues to pollute, according to a Frontline report cited by Mercola.com. [6] The act requires the EPA to develop water-quality criteria for pollutants; the agency initiated that step in 1999 but never completed it, according to the groups.

Keep reading

300 Studies Link This Neurotoxic Pesticide to Multi-Organ Damage, Chronic Disease

For decades, regulators viewed chlorpyrifos — a pesticide widely used in the U.S. and around the world — primarily as a neurotoxin that disrupts signaling in the brain and nervous system.

But as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reconsiders whether to continue to allow its use on foods like apples and soybeans, a new review indicates other insidious harms.

Published in April in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences, the review synthesizes findings from nearly 300 studies worldwide published up to this year. These include laboratory experiments, animal studies, epidemiological research, regulatory documents and risk assessments.

Growing evidence suggests chlorpyrifos may damage the brain, hormones, liver, gut microbiome, muscles, reproductive organs and bones. Studies also link the pesticide to DNA damage and lasting changes in gene activity that may increase the risk of chronic disease.

Together, the findings portray chlorpyrifos as what the reviewers call a “multi-system toxicant” that poses a more significant threat to public health than previously understood.

It suggests the pesticide acts on the body in ways far beyond disrupted nerve signaling or obvious poisoning. Pregnancy and early childhood are especially sensitive periods for chemical exposure.

“What has genuinely evolved over time is our understanding that chlorpyrifos causes harm in ways that go beyond its effects on the nervous system including damage to DNA, changes in how genes are switched on or off, interference with hormones, and disruption of the healthy bacteria that live in the gut,” said Dana Boyd Barr, Ph.D., a professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health and past president of the International Society of Exposure Science.

The authors warn that current regulatory systems may not fully capture the complexity of chlorpyrifos’ dangers to the body. Many occur at levels too low to be detected by current safety testing, which looks for the disruption of an enzyme involved in nerve cell communication.

The review links chlorpyrifos exposure to:

  • Biological changes associated with inflammation, chronic disease and cancer.
  • Brain and nervous system damage, including lower IQ and developmental harms in children, neurodegenerative disease, and disrupted cell growth, survival and communication.
  • DNA damage and altered gene regulation that hinders normal cell repair and changes how genes are switched on and off during development (epigenetics).
  • Hormone disruption involving thyroid, estrogen and testosterone pathways.
  • Liver injury, gut bacteria disruption and metabolic dysfunction are linked to obesity and Type 2 diabetes.
  • Reproductive, muscular and skeletal harm, including reduced sperm quality and bone loss.

Industry pushback despite reported harms

The review comes as the EPA reassesses whether the pesticide’s remaining uses meet the statutory standard of “no unreasonable adverse effects.” The action follows years of official stalling, prior bans, policy reversals and legal challenges.

Meanwhile, agrichemical companies are lobbying federal and state lawmakers to shield pesticide manufacturers, including Bayer and its subsidiary Monsanto, from some lawsuits involving Roundup weedkiller. The suits allege their products cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma, among other cancers.

In February 2020, Corteva Agriscience — then the world’s largest producer of chlorpyrifos — announced it would stop production, citing declining demand.

But existing stocks continued to be used. The chemical remains approved for several major crops in the U.S., including apples, strawberries, soybeans, citrus, wheat and peaches.

Keep reading

‘Major Win’: House Strips Pesticide Liability Shield From Farm Bill in Bipartisan Vote

The U.S. House of Representatives voted today to strip controversial pro-pesticide provisions from the Farm Bill and adopt a bipartisan amendment that removes liability protections for chemical manufacturers, The Hill reported.

Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Elijah Crane (R-Ariz.) co-authored the amendment that removed language that would have shielded companies like Monsanto from certain state-level failure-to-warn lawsuits. The amendment, which passed in a 280-142 vote, preserves states’ authority over pesticide labeling and safety standards.

“I do not support giving blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families,” Luna wrote on X.

“Today we secured a major win,” said Children’s Health Defense Senior Advocacy Manager Stephanie Locricchio. “It proves that when people unite around a common goal, change is possible. But the fight isn’t over. We must stay vigilant, push our government to prioritize public health — especially our children — over corporate profits, and continue to hold industry accountable.”

Support for the amendment crossed party lines. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), who has long opposed similar provisions, emphasized the breadth of that coalition.

“Democrats, Republicans, and citizens across this country agree: Keep the pesticide liability shield language OUT of the Farm Bill!” Pingree posted on X.

Keep reading

MAHA Advocates Rally Against Pesticide Makers, Question Federal Agriculture Policies

As the Supreme Court heard opening arguments on Monsanto v. Darnell, a case which could prevent people harmed by pesticides from suing manufacturers, hundreds of Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) proponents, farmers, and environmental activists gathered near the steps of the building outside for the People Vs. Poison rally on April 27.

The event cut across traditional political party lines and highlighted tensions surrounding federal agriculture policies. Speakers expressed frustration with what they deem inconsistencies in federal approaches to “real food” and chemical company protections.

Kelly Ryerson, known as the Glyphosate Girl, is cofounder of American Regeneration and an outspoken critic of Monsanto, which is now a subsidiary of Bayer. Her comments reflected the sentiments of many attendees.

“If your product is safe, then you don’t need immunity. And if your business depends on immunity, the problem is not the lawsuits. The problem is the product,” Ryerson said.

Glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, is manufactured by Bayer. It is the main ingredient in RoundUp, which is produced by the company.

In February, President Donald Trump surprised some MAHA movement leaders when he issued an executive order invoking the Defense Production Act.

Keep reading

Americans Support Legalizing Marijuana Home Cultivation Amid Concerns About Pesticide-Tainted Products, Poll Shows

Three out of five Americans say it should be legal for people to grow their own marijuana plants at home, according to a new poll that also shows cannabis consumers are broadly concerned about harmful pesticides in the products they consume.

The survey, which was conducted by The Harris Poll on behalf of Royal Queen Seeds (RQS), found that 61 percent of U.S. adults back legalizing marijuana home cultivation, which the company points out is greater than 43 percent of Americans who say they have consumed cannabis—showing that support for the freedom extends beyond those who want to exercise it for themselves.

At the same time, however, 72 percent of consumers are very concerned about pesticides in their cannabis products, while 65 percent say that media coverage of tainted marijuana has made them more likely to want to grow their own instead of buying it.

The poll also found that two-thirds of cannabis consumers (67 percent) would choose cannabis grown without pesticides even if it had lower THC than products that did use agrochemicals.

“Consumers today are more informed and more intentional about what they put into their bodies,” Shai Ramsahai, president of RQS, said in a press release. “Blindly buying products just because of a high THC percentage is a fading trend. People want cannabis they can trust, and many are turning to home cultivation to take control over quality and safety.”

Other findings of the new poll include:

  • More than 3 in 4 cannabis consumers (76 percent) say they prefer the “high” of marijuana over the “buzz” of alcohol.
  • 39 percent of Americans (and 68 percent of cannabis users) would be more impressed if someone brought home-grown marijuana to a dinner party than a bottle of expensive wine.
  • 80 percent of cannabis consumers say their use of marijuana has a broader wellness connection in their habits.

The poll involved interviews from March 17-19 with 2,017 U.S. adults aged 21 and older, among whom 851 have consumed cannabis, and has a margin of error of +/- 2.7 percentage points.

The survey is the latest in a series of polls commissioned by RQS.

Last year, the company found that half of U.S. marijuana consumers said they expected to consume more cannabis under the Trump administration than they have before.

Keep reading

MAHA Leaders Demand EPA Protect Americans From Toxic Chemicals

Leaders, farmers and organizations aligned with the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, movement are calling on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to protect the health of the American public from pesticides, plastics and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, chemicals that are contributing to infertility, cancer and other chronic diseases.

The 36 MAHA organizations and leaders sent a letter urging the EPA to walk their talk in the forthcoming “Make America Healthy Again” agenda — which may be released any day — with concrete actions that will reduce Americans’ exposure to toxic chemicals, curb the influence of corporations over the agency and address rising rates of chronic disease.

“The American people were promised a Make America Healthy Again agenda that would finally confront the root causes of chronic disease in this country. That must include tackling the toxic chemicals Americans are exposed to every day through pesticides, PFAS, and plastics,” said Vani Hari, Author & Food Activist.

“We desperately need the EPA to put the health of families and children ahead of the interests of chemical companies.”

The letter demands, among other actions, that EPA initiate an emergency review of pesticides that are allowed in the U.S. but banned in the European Union — a policy supported by 87% of Americans.

The groups are also calling for tighter scrutiny of persistent, toxic PFAS “forever chemicals” and better monitoring of microplastics in drinking water.

The MAHA leaders point to industry influence at the EPA as the heart of the failure to protect the public from harmful chemicals.

They noted that revolving-door appointments, industry-funded science and regulatory loopholes have become the norm at the agency. EPA needs to chart a new course, they said, and that means prioritizing human health over the interests of chemical corporations.

“The EPA’s public support for glyphosate and pesticide liability protections in the face of growing evidence of scientific harm by independent scientists is a major betrayal of MAHA’s mission and President Trump’s campaign promise to RFK, Jr. [Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] to reign in toxic chemicals in our food system,” said David Murphy, the founder of United We Eat and a longtime advocate for food and agricultural reforms.

Keep reading

Kentucky Legislature Forces Through Bill Giving Pesticide Makers Immunity After Governor’s Veto

Kentucky lawmakers have approved a bill that grants pesticide manufacturers immunity, overriding a veto from Gov. Andy Beshear.

The Kentucky Senate, in a 24–12 vote on March 31, overrode Beshear’s veto on Senate Bill 199, following an earlier House of Representatives override. All override votes came from Republicans.

The bill says that pesticides approved by federal officials and displaying approved labeling from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) containing health assessments “shall be deemed a sufficient warning label” under state law.

Plaintiffs across the country have been suing Monsanto, which makes the pesticide glyphosate, for failing to warn of cancer risks. Juries have ruled for the plaintiffs in some of the cases.

With backing from the Trump administration, Bayer—Monsanto’s parent company—has asked the Supreme Court to rule that labeling with federally approved language is sufficient.

The Kentucky Medical Freedom Coalition, some other organizations, and certain state lawmakers opposed Senate Bill 199 because of the protection it would grant.

Keep reading

EPA Failed to Warn Public of Pesticide Cancer Risks Even When Agency Found High Risk

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has routinely failed to put cancer warnings on pesticide products even when its own assessments have found a high risk of those products causing cancer, according to two new analyses released today by the Center for Food Safety and the Center for Biological Diversity.

The Center for Food Safety analyzed the level of risk the EPA permitted for both currently approved and legacy pesticide active ingredients.

The analysis found that pesticides have been allowed on the market with a cancer risk as high as 1 in every 100 people exposed, a far greater level than the EPA’s benchmark of a 1 in a million chance of developing cancer.

Over the last 40 years, the EPA has approved 200 active ingredients that are “likely” or “possible” carcinogens.

The Center for Biological Diversity analysis examined pesticide product labels for all currently approved pesticide products. The EPA has instituted cancer warnings on only 69 of 4,919 pesticide labels (1.4%) containing an active ingredient that the agency has designated a “likely” human carcinogen.

And the agency has instituted cancer warnings on just 242 of the 22,147 pesticide labels (1.1%) that contain an ingredient the agency has designated as a “possible” human carcinogen.

“It’s bad enough that the EPA approves cancer-causing pesticides,” said Bill Freese, science director at the Center for Food Safety.

“But if the agency is going to allow such chemicals to be freely sold at Home Depot, Wal-Mart and farm-supply stores, the very least the EPA must do is require a clear cancer warning on the label. Warnings save lives by incentivizing users to wear protective equipment that reduces risk.”

“It’s dumbfounding that the EPA has failed to require any cancer warning on thousands of pesticide products sold to the public that the agency itself has linked to cancer,” said Lori Ann Burd, environmental health program director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“Why should anyone have confidence in the EPA’s ability to keep tabs on the pesticide industry and protect us all from harmful poisons when it won’t even compel companies to put long-term health warnings on pesticides it knows are really dangerous?”

These new analyses come before the April 27 oral arguments in the Supreme Court case Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell.

Monsanto, since acquired by Bayer, is seeking substantial immunity from future lawsuits brought by Americans who used glyphosate-based products like Roundup and contracted rare cancers that numerous studies have linked to the pesticide.

The case hinges on whether the EPA has sole authority to implement pesticide label warnings.

Keep reading