A recent study confirming glyphosate herbicide’s carcinogenic potential has been the subject of fierce criticism. However, this criticism is based on flawed scientific grounds, Le Monde reports. The recent publication of a study indicating an increased risk of various tumours in laboratory rats exposed to glyphosate has sparked numerous comments on social media and in the press, aimed at downplaying or denigrating this research. These results, published on June 10 in the journal Environmental Health, only confirm the conclusions of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which estimated in 2015 that the studies available at the time provided “sufficient evidence” of glyphosate’s carcinogenicity in animals. The attacks on this study, led by the Ramazzini Institute in Bologna, Italy, offer an exemplary array of the sleight of hand of “doubt manufacturing,” a rhetoric aimed at undermining confidence in scientific results, often used to delay or fight regulatory decisions, writes Stéphane Foucart. Foucart, with the help of experts, takes apart the criticisms and exposes them as baseless. English translation of Le Monde article by Sustainable Pulse via GMWatch

 

 

Canadian organic pork producer duBreton called for mandatory labelling of gene-edited pork products following the recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of genetically modified pigs resistant to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS). On April 30, the FDA approved the commercial distribution of pigs altered using CRISPR technology to resist PRRS, with products expected to enter the US market in 2026. While supporters argued the technology could reduce animal suffering and antibiotic use, duBreton disputed those claims and alleged a lack of transparency and long-term safety data. “We’ve achieved the same outcomes for decades — without genetic modification,” said Vincent Breton, president of duBreton. “Through natural husbandry, selective breeding, and strict biosecurity, we’ve raised healthy pigs without antibiotics while upholding the integrity of organic farming.” Meatingplace.com (members only)

 

 

The knives are out for Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). Trump’s $500 million political machine has Kentucky’s 4th District in its crosshairs, and the establishment media is already writing the congressman’s obituary. But they’re missing the real story here. This isn’t about one maverick politician bucking the system. This is about the soul of the Republican Party, and whether it still has one. Massie stands alone. While his colleagues genuflect before Trump’s Truth Social tantrums, Massie asks the hard questions. When the president bypasses Congress to strike Iran, Massie calls it unconstitutional. When Trump demands Republicans rubber-stamp another bloated spending bill, Massie votes no. When the party leadership demands lockstep loyalty, Massie chooses principle. For this, he’s branded a “grandstander” and “Little Boy” by a man who turned the presidency into performance art. What makes Massie unique in the age of MAGA isn’t just that he dissents; it’s that he can’t be bought. [GMW: Massie bravely made a stand against US government funding of GM edible vaccines in lettuce and spinach, but his bill attempting to end such funding was defeated by the political machinery.] The Hill

 

We hope you’ve found this newsletter interesting. It was made possible by GMWatch supporters. To become one, please support our work with a one-off or regular donation. Thank you!