Everything You Need to Know About Glyphosate

Glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world, playing a pivotal role in modern agriculture. Its effectiveness in controlling a broad spectrum of weeds has made it a staple for farmers and gardeners alike. However, its widespread use has also sparked debates concerning its safety, environmental impact, and regulatory status. This comprehensive guide delves into the history, usage, controversies, and future of glyphosate, providing a balanced overview of this influential chemical.

---

What Is Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is a non-selective, systemic herbicide that targets a wide range of plants, including grasses and broadleaf weeds. It was first synthesized in 1950 by Swiss chemist Henry Martin and later independently discovered by Monsanto chemist John E. Franz in 1970. Monsanto brought glyphosate to market in 1974 under the brand name Roundup.

The herbicide works by inhibiting the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS), which is essential for the synthesis of certain amino acids in plants. This inhibition leads to the death of the plant. Because animals, including humans, do not possess this enzyme, glyphosate was initially considered safe for non-target organisms.

---

The Rise of Glyphosate in Agriculture

Glyphosate's popularity surged with the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops designed to be resistant to the herbicide. In 1996, Monsanto released Roundup Ready soybeans, followed by corn in 1998. These GM crops allowed farmers to apply glyphosate directly to fields without harming the main crop, simplifying weed management.

By 2023, approximately 91% of corn, 95% of soybeans, and 94% of cotton produced in the United States were from strains genetically modified to tolerate multiple herbicides, including glyphosate. 

---

Environmental Impact

Soil Health and Tillage Practices

Glyphosate has been credited with promoting conservation tillage practices, such as no-till farming. These practices reduce soil erosion, improve water retention, and enhance soil fertility by leaving crop residues on the field. By minimizing the need for mechanical weed control, glyphosate contributes to lower greenhouse gas emissions from farming equipment.

Persistence and Ecological Concerns

Despite its benefits, glyphosate's environmental persistence raises concerns. The herbicide and its primary metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), can remain in the soil for up to six months, depending on environmental conditions. Studies have shown that glyphosate can alter soil microbial communities, potentially leading to the proliferation of plant pathogens. Additionally, glyphosate has been found to affect the morphology and reproduction of certain soil-dwelling organisms, such as earthworms. 

In aquatic environments, glyphosate runoff can lead to contamination, affecting aquatic life. In 2017, the European Chemicals Agency classified glyphosate as toxic to aquatic life with long-lasting effects. 

---

Health and Safety Debates

Regulatory Assessments

The safety of glyphosate has been evaluated by various regulatory agencies with differing conclusions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stated that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic to humans and poses no risks of concern when used according to label instructions. 

Conversely, in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans" based on limited evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in animals.

Legal Battles and Public Perception

The classification by IARC has led to numerous lawsuits against Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer. One notable case involved Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup. In 2018, a jury awarded him $289 million, later reduced to $21 million on appeal. 

As of 2023, Bayer has faced approximately 165,000 claims alleging that Roundup caused cancer. The company has settled many of these cases, agreeing to pay billions in damages, but continues to contest others. 

---

Regulatory Landscape

United States

In the U.S., glyphosate remains approved for use at the federal level. However, some states and localities have sought to impose restrictions. For instance, California attempted to require warning labels on glyphosate products under Proposition 65, but a federal court blocked this mandate.

Bayer has actively lobbied state governments to pass legislation that would shield the company from failure-to-warn lawsuits, provided that product labels comply with EPA regulations. States like Georgia and North Dakota have already made regulatory adjustments in response to these efforts.

International Perspectives

Globally, glyphosate's regulatory status varies. The European Union renewed glyphosate's license for five years in 2017, despite opposition from several member states. Some countries, such as Sri Lanka and El Salvador, have attempted to ban glyphosate, though these bans have faced challenges and reversals.

---

The Future of Glyphosate

The ongoing debates surrounding glyphosate's safety and environmental impact suggest that its future will be shaped by evolving scientific research, regulatory decisions, agricultural practices, and public opinion. While glyphosate remains a cornerstone of conventional farming today, several trends indicate that its dominance may diminish over the next decade.

Development of Alternative Herbicides

One of the most immediate pressures facing glyphosate is the development of alternative herbicides. As weeds develop resistance to glyphosate, farmers require new tools to maintain crop yields and manage invasive plant species. Chemical manufacturers are actively researching new herbicidal compounds that can target different biochemical pathways or improve the selectivity of weed control, thus limiting unintended environmental impacts.

Additionally, several bioherbicides — herbicides derived from natural organisms such as bacteria, fungi, or plant extracts — are entering the market as potential glyphosate alternatives. While not yet widely adopted due to cost and efficacy limitations, advances in biotechnology and microbial engineering may make these options more competitive in the future.

Integrated Weed Management (IWM)

Another emerging trend is the adoption of Integrated Weed Management (IWM) strategies, which combine multiple weed control methods to reduce reliance on herbicides like glyphosate. These strategies may include:

• Crop rotation to break weed life cycles

• Mechanical weed removal such as precision cultivation

• Cover cropping to suppress weeds naturally

• Selective herbicide use in combination with biological control agents

IWM is already gaining traction among sustainable agriculture advocates and organic farmers seeking to minimize chemical inputs while maintaining crop productivity.

Advances in Genetic Engineering

Genetic engineering continues to play a role in shaping the future of weed control. New gene-editing technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas9, enable scientists to develop crops with enhanced resistance to pests and diseases or the ability to outcompete weeds without requiring intensive herbicide applications.

Some biotech firms are exploring crops that can fix their own nitrogen or exhibit allelopathic properties — releasing natural chemicals that suppress surrounding weeds. If successful, such innovations could dramatically reduce the need for herbicides in conventional farming systems.

Regulatory and Legal Challenges

Legal and regulatory pressures also shape glyphosate’s trajectory. In the U.S., Bayer has faced tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging that exposure to glyphosate-based products caused cancer. While many of these cases have been settled, new lawsuits continue to emerge, and several states have introduced legislation to restrict glyphosate use in public spaces such as parks and school grounds.

Internationally, several countries have announced future bans or restrictions on glyphosate. For example:

• Mexico plans to phase out glyphosate by 2025, citing environmental and health concerns.

• Austria passed legislation to ban glyphosate in 2019, though implementation has been delayed due to legal and political complications.

• Vietnam and Thailand have announced bans on glyphosate imports and use in agriculture.

These regulatory shifts indicate a global reevaluation of glyphosate's role in modern agriculture, with growing interest in alternatives and stricter oversight.

---

Glyphosate and Human Health

While regulatory agencies continue to review glyphosate's safety profile, conflicting scientific findings have fueled public concern. Understanding the nuances of these health discussions requires examining the available evidence and the limitations of current research.

Carcinogenicity Debate

The most prominent health controversy surrounds glyphosate’s potential to cause cancer. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A) based on limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals.

However, regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and Health Canada have concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a cancer risk when used according to label instructions. These agencies argue that available human epidemiological studies have not established a consistent or causal association between glyphosate exposure and cancer.

Part of the challenge lies in the complexity of assessing risk. Epidemiological studies often rely on self-reported herbicide use, which can introduce inaccuracies. Additionally, most studies investigate occupational exposure among farmers and applicators, limiting insights into potential risks for the general population.

Other Potential Health Effects

Beyond cancer, researchers have investigated glyphosate’s potential role in a variety of other health conditions, including:

• Endocrine disruption: Some laboratory studies have suggested that glyphosate may interfere with hormonal systems in animals at high exposure levels. However, regulatory reviews have found no conclusive evidence of endocrine-disrupting effects in humans.

• Reproductive toxicity: Animal studies have produced mixed results, with some indicating potential reproductive effects at high doses and others showing no significant impact.

• Neurotoxicity: Emerging research has explored the potential link between glyphosate and neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease. While some preliminary findings warrant further study, current evidence remains inconclusive.

Overall, while glyphosate is considered relatively safe when used properly, ongoing research continues to examine its long-term health effects, particularly at low, chronic exposure levels.

---

Glyphosate in the Food Supply

Because glyphosate is used extensively on food crops, concerns about its presence in the food supply have grown in recent years. Regulatory agencies set Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) for glyphosate on various food items to ensure that dietary exposure remains within safe limits.

Residue Testing and Exposure

Government agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), regularly test food products for pesticide residues. While most samples remain below established safety thresholds, trace amounts of glyphosate have been detected in popular products, including cereals, grains, fruits, and vegetables.

Consumer advocacy groups have criticized these findings, calling for stricter residue limits and increased transparency. In response, some food companies have begun offering glyphosate-free or organic alternatives to appeal to health-conscious consumers.

Organic Standards

Certified organic farming prohibits the use of synthetic herbicides, including glyphosate. As a result, organic products typically contain no detectable glyphosate residues. However, environmental contamination from nearby conventional farms remains a potential risk, and occasional trace amounts have been found in organic samples due to drift or water contamination.

---

Public Perception and Cultural Influence

Public attitudes toward glyphosate have shifted considerably in recent years. What was once a relatively obscure agricultural chemical has become a symbol of broader concerns about industrial farming, corporate influence, and environmental degradation.

Documentaries, books, and media coverage have amplified awareness of glyphosate’s potential risks, contributing to increased demand for organic produce and pesticide-free public spaces. In response, many municipalities and school districts have banned or restricted glyphosate use on public lands, parks, and playgrounds.

Furthermore, consumer-driven campaigns have pressured retailers to discontinue glyphosate-based products. In 2019, major chains like Costco stopped selling Roundup, and several grocery chains began sourcing produce from farms that limit herbicide use.

---

Conclusion: The Complex Legacy of Glyphosate

Glyphosate's story is one of innovation, controversy, and profound influence on modern agriculture. As one of the most effective and widely used herbicides in history, it revolutionized weed management and enabled the rise of conservation tillage and genetically modified crops.

However, its widespread use has also led to serious environmental, health, and legal challenges. Questions about glyphosate’s safety, ecological impact, and long-term sustainability continue to divide experts, regulators, and the public.

The future of glyphosate will likely involve a gradual transition toward integrated weed management, alternative herbicides, and precision farming technologies. At the same time, ongoing research and regulatory oversight will be essential to ensuring that agricultural practices balance productivity with public health and environmental stewardship.

For now, glyphosate remains a fixture in conventional farming, but its status is increasingly subject to legal battles, regulatory changes, and evolving public expectations. As consumers grow more aware of the chemicals used in food production, the push for transparency, safer alternatives, and sustainable farming practices will undoubtedly shape the agricultural landscape of the future.

Lateef Warnick is the founder of Onassis Krown. He currently serves as a Senior Healthcare Consultant in the Jacksonville FL area and is a Certified Life Coach, Marriage Counselor, Keynote Speaker and Author of "Know Thyself," "The Golden Egg" and "Wear Your Krown." He is also a former Naval Officer, Licensed Financial Advisor, Insurance Agent, Realtor, Serial Entrepreneur and musical artist A.L.I.A.S.