

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
For decades Roundup has been sold as an effective herbicide, one that was safe for humans and the environment. It isn't.
Mark Twain supposedly once said, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story," but there is a difference between a good story told in fun and a story (supposedly backed by independent scientific research) that people are led to believe because, well, science is supposed to be true. And so we come to the story of Roundup, the herbicide developed by Monsanto that swept the world because it worked and was the “safe” alternative to widely used weedkillers like Dicamba and 2,4-D,—it was said to be safer than table salt!
Roundup was developed in the 1970s as a non-selective herbicide, meaning it would kill almost any growing plant it touched. It was an effective burn-down herbicide farmers could apply prior to planting, and it assured an almost weed-free field at the beginning of the growing season. Roundup could be used in non-agricultural situations as well, to kill weeds and grass growing in sidewalk and patio cracks, around buildings, etc, but care was needed because, as noted, it was non-target and could kill whatever plant it touched.
For farmers, it worked well, except while it did kill growing weeds, buried weed seeds were not harmed, so a weed-free field at planting time did not ensure a weed-free field throughout the growing season. Weeds would continue to sprout, and more herbicide applications would be needed during the growing season.
Then Monsanto developed their big fix released in 1996, genetically engineered (GE) soybeans resistant to Roundup, followed by GE versions of other commodity crops: corn, cotton, sugar beet, and canola. Over-the-top spraying of these GE crops would kill everything but the crop, and Roundup became one of the most widely used herbicides in the world and GE crops came to dominate world commodity crop production.
Companies like Bayer have to protect their product and their profit even if they have to tell a few lies to do so.
While Monsanto sold Roundup with the slogan, “One spray is all you’ll ever need,” in time, it became clear that some weeds were developing resistance to Roundup and farmers were right back where they started, looking for herbicides that worked consistently. More genetic modifications were made to commodity crops making them resistant to other herbicides, like Dicamba and 2,4-D, the herbicides Roundup was supposed to have replaced. These multiple GE or “stacked” crops could be sprayed with a cocktail of herbicides, hopefully ensuring weed-free fields for the entire growing season.
Farmers are using more herbicide, even on the GE crops, and costs for GE seed have risen much faster than non-GE seed. Of course, the motive was never to reduce the farmer’s production costs or agricultural herbicide use but to increase it—that's where the profit is.
For farmers who didn’t jump on the GE bandwagon, finding non-GE seed is often difficult. Even more onerous, some farmers have found it necessary to plant GE seed as a preventative measure because non-GE crops can be damaged by chemical drift from neighboring GE fields.
So much for effectiveness, what about the safety of Roundup? In 2000 a study was published in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology that deemed the active ingredient in Roundup (glyphosate) was safe and not a human health risk. Since then, that study has been cited consistently as proof of Roundup’s safety. Numerous other studies have shown that glyphosate could cause cancer and that the inert ingredients that are part of the patented Roundup formulation increase the toxicity of glyphosate. Further, the practice of using Roundup as a desiccant on small grain crops (oats, wheat, and barley) prior to harvest puts Roundup directly on grain that enters the human food chain.
Since acquiring Monsanto in 2018, Bayer has paid out about $11 billion to settle almost 100,000 cancer-related lawsuits with approximately 61,000 still pending. In December of 2025 another blow to the claimed safety of Roundup came when the Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology journal withdrew the 2000 article that had touted Roundup’s safety. While the study claimed to be independent and peer reviewed, it has come to light that Monsanto's scientists played a significant role in conceiving and writing the article. Oops.
For decades Roundup has been sold as an effective herbicide, one that was safe for humans and the environment, and without which “consequences would be dire.” Companies like Bayer have to protect their product and their profit even if they have to tell a few lies to do so. They claim to produce safe products that help farmers thrive—real independent research refutes that. Bayer and the agribusiness industry may be thriving, but farmers are not and in these times, too few people seem to care that lies are accepted as truth.
"President Trump just gave Bayer a license to poison people," said one public health advocate. "Full stop.”
Less than a decade ago, US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. helped win a landmark $289 million verdict against Monsanto, which was found to have distributed a weedkiller containing the carcinogenic chemical glyphosate.
But on Wednesday the nation's top health official could only shrug after President Donald Trump issued an executive order mandating the production of the chemical, which was found in 2015 to be “probably carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer at the World Health Organization.
Trump invoked the Defense Production Act, which has historically been used to spur production of supplies needed for national security, to guarantee the supply of herbicides containing glyphosate, claiming a lack of such weedkillers would "critically jeopardize agricultural productivity, adding pressure to the domestic food system."
Kennedy, who like Trump promised on the campaign trail to confront dangerous pesticides and chemicals, said in a statement that the executive order "puts America first where it matters most—our defense readiness and our food supply." He also hinted during his confirmation hearing last year that the administration would treat glyphosate as a critical supply for farmers.
Ken Cook, president and co-founder of the Environmental Working Group, which supported some aspects of Kennedy's "Make America Healthy Again" agenda, said he couldn't "envision a bigger middle finger to every MAHA mom than this."
“If anyone still wondered whether ‘Make America Healthy Again’ was a genuine commitment to protecting public health or a scam concocted by President Trump and RFK Jr. to rally health-conscious voters in 2024, today’s decision answers that question,” said Cook. “It’s a shocking betrayal to all of us but especially the people who live and work near farm fields where glyphosate is used."
In addition to being linked to cancer, glyphosate has also been found to cause reproductive harms in some studies.
Zen Honeycutt, founder of the pro-MAHA group Moms Across America, said she was "disgusted" by the executive order.
The use of the Defense Production Act could provide Bayer, the pharmaceutical company that acquired herbicide maker Monsanto in 2018, with legal immunity if it is challenged in court again in public health lawsuits.
The executive order is "clearly designed to offer a broad immunity,” Brett Hartl, director of government affairs for the Center for Biological Diversity, told the New York Times.
The order comes months after a major study that had determined glyphosate was safe for humans was retracted by Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, the scientific journal that had published it. It was found that scientists at Monsanto had participated in gathering data for, writing, and reviewing the paper, and that other authors had received compensation from the company for their work. The journal cited “serious ethical concerns regarding the independence and accountability of the authors" when it retracted the article.
The executive order was also announced a year after Bayer donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural committee.
During Trump's first term in 2017, two years after the WHO cancer agency determined glyphosate was likely carcinogenic, the US Environmental Protection Agency issued a finding that the chemical—which is used widely on soybeans, corn, and wheat and in home gardens—was safe.
This week, Bayer announced it had reached a deal to pay $7.25 billion to settle tens of thousands of health lawsuits regarding Roundup, the product that includes glyphosate as its active ingredient. The company continues to claim the herbicide is safe.
“By granting immunity to the makers of the nation's most widely used pesticide, President Trump just gave Bayer a license to poison people," said Cook. "Full stop.”
This article has been updated to note that International Agency for Research on Cancer, a committee of the World Health Organization, found glyphosate to likely be carcinogenic to humans in 2015.
"This incident cannot be viewed in isolation from the scorched-earth policy pursued by the Israeli army," said watchdog Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.
The Lebanese president has accused the Israeli government of committing "a crime against the environment and health" for allegedly spraying the herbicide glyphosate on agricultural lands in Lebanon and Syria.
As reported by Naharnet on Wednesday, Lebanon's agriculture and environmental ministries recently conducted analysis of soil near the site where Israel had sprayed a chemical substance and found glyphosate "20 to 30 times higher than the average" in the area.
The ministries said that this level of glyphosate in the soil could cause "damage to agricultural production," while also harming soil fertility.
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun denounced the spraying as a "flagrant violation of Lebanese sovereignty," and called on the United Nations (UN) and the international community at large to take action to stop future attacks.
Al-Jazeera reported on Tuesday that the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) was warned by the Israel military on Monday to stay away from the border area because it planned to deploy a "nontoxic chemical substance" there, forcing the peacekeeping forces to cancel over a dozen planned activities.
Stephane Dujarric, a spokesperson for UN Secretary-General António Guterres, condemned Israel for preventing UNIFIL from conducting operations, emphasizing that "any activity that may put peacekeepers and civilians at risk is of serious concern."
Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said on Wednesday that it has detected "Israeli aircraft spraying pesticides of unknown composition over farmland in the countryside of Quneitra in southern Syria" on January 26 and 27.
"This incident cannot be viewed in isolation from the scorched-earth policy pursued by the Israeli army," the human rights watchdog said. "It forms part of a pattern of systematic destruction of agricultural land, including the burning of approximately 9,000 hectares during recent military operations using white phosphorus and incendiary munitions."