Border batch-by-batch sampling data on imported soybeans that the Food and Drug Administration once provided to legislators (provided by Guo Huaren)
Scholar: The U.S. Congress has proposed a bill requiring stricter standards; our relaxation is an unwise move Guo Huaren reiterated the contradictions in setting residue tolerance levels, "Why do the standards for edamame and soybeans differ so much?" Edamame is grown domestically, and its glyphosate tolerance is 0.2 ppm, while soybeans mainly rely on imports, and their tolerance is 10 ppm, a 50-fold difference. Yet we eat far more soybeans than edamame. If judged by the edamame standard, more than 80 percent of these imported soybeans would exceed the limit.
Guo Huaren pointed out that U.S. congressmen only last month proposed the draft "2019 Keep Food Safe from Glyphosate Act," requiring a lowering of the glyphosate residue tolerance for oats. In the past two years, new research reports on the health risks of glyphosate have continued to appear, at least 13 of them, which were not taken into account when countries set glyphosate residue tolerance values. Therefore, the Food and Drug Administration's pre-announcement of relaxation this time at Monsanto's request is truly an unwise move.
"The government is not considering consumer safety at all, but rather the convenience of traders," Guo Huaren stressed. In addition to human health, domestic agriculture must also be considered. If Taiwanese importers could achieve such low tolerance values in the past, why relax them? Moreover, the government now wants to promote the revival of domestic miscellaneous grain cultivation. "Wouldn't maintaining the original standards be more beneficial to our agriculture?"
The Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine explained the method for setting pesticide residue tolerances. It is not based solely on food intake, but also takes cultivation methods into account. Therefore, it adopts total quantity control, rather than setting standards according to whether the intake of an individual crop is high or low.
Although officials say the crops being relaxed this time are mostly imported grains and have little impact on domestic farmers, domestically wheat and oats have just begun to be replanted, and officials have not opened glyphosate for use on these grains at all, creating the paradoxical situation of "being lenient toward others and strict with oneself."
Civic groups: In the past oatmeal could achieve no detectable residue, so why expose the public to higher risk? Chen Ruwei, co-founder of the Campus Lunch Non-GMO Action, has followed glyphosate information at home and abroad for many years. Regarding the government's addition of 10 crops at once this time, he believes the government must explain clearly: Where is the necessity of opening this up? Or is it simply that Monsanto applied, so we approve it according to procedure? Wouldn't that mean serving only manufacturers? Why should the public need to expose themselves to higher risk?
Chen Ruwei pointed out, "Although Monsanto applied through normal channels, over the past six months, whether it is the judgments in overseas cancer risk lawsuits or the fact that Monsanto once concealed experimental data, these should be taken into account in the Food and Drug Administration's review process, because the government can only rely on research reports provided by Monsanto for its review."
Chen Ruwei took the earlier case of glyphosate residue detected in commercially sold Quaker oats as an example, "What was detected with residue was parallel imports; Quaker oats from Taiwanese manufacturers were not found to have residue." At the time there were two voices in the discussion. Some said Taiwan's regulations were too outdated, that other countries all had glyphosate standards for oats, and Taiwan should establish them. "But on the other hand, Taiwanese companies can achieve no detectable residue. Since someone can achieve no residue, the Taiwanese government should not give in."
Vietnam, Thailand, Malawi and others will ban imports of glyphosate; the government should regulate more rigorously The Homemakers United Foundation Environmental Protection Fund firmly opposes the government's addition of new glyphosate residue tolerances this time. Executive director Zhang Yuling pointed out that Vietnam has already announced a halt to glyphosate imports, and Malawi has announced it will follow suit. The Thai government has also announced that it will ban glyphosate, paraquat and chlorpyrifos in 2020, first halving import volumes. With international controversy so intense now, our country not only lacks stricter control measures, but instead adds 10 crops, which is simply a threat to consumer health. She stressed, "The government should discuss this more rigorously and cannot merely accommodate the applicant Monsanto."
The review process for pesticide residue tolerances has always lacked room for the general public to have a say, and the meeting reports made public by the Food and Drug Administration contain only a few brief words. The public has no way at all to know why the government made this decision.
Civic groups hope the government can take the standpoint of the precautionary principle. This addition of tolerance standards has little impact on Taiwanese farmers, but a great impact on consumers. Although pesticide companies and the government have always believed that glyphosate has low toxicity and low risk, in recent years international research has suggested that glyphosate at low concentrations may also cause genetic changes, and in mouse experiments it can affect the second and even third generation. "So of course the less consumers ingest, the better. If this is also allowed and that is also allowed, adding it all up, the more openings there are, the more exposure the public has," Chen Ruwei said.
To avoid undue public panic, officials must first make pesticide review public In the past, whenever pesticide opening issues arose, public opposition was often regarded by the government as populism, not scientific or rational enough, and not professional enough. But if officials cannot clearly explain the reasons for opening and there is no open and transparent review process, drawing questions in a democratic society is an inevitable result.
Moreover, the international glyphosate controversy in recent years has further revealed that the banner of scientific rationality may also be manipulated. Even scientists are divided into camps of supporters and opponents, and pesticide experimental reports that appear detached and follow "Good Laboratory Practice" (GLP) standards are not unshakable either. In addition to passively accepting pesticide company data, the Taiwanese government should more actively establish an independent assessment model, scrutinize controversial pesticides more strictly, and conduct investigations on its own initiative. The public also needs to cherish the last opportunity to express opinions and respond online within the 60-day period of the Food and Drug Administration's pre-announcement.
Note: Pan Zhikuan, director of the Food Division of the Food and Drug Administration, said that before this revision of residue tolerances, glyphosate's "ADI CUP" was 7.9%, and after the revision it will only increase to 12.6%, still far from the upper limit of the safe range of 80%, leaving considerable room for further increase.
(For glyphosate-related news, please click here) Is the pesticide review agency just a mouthpiece for pesticide companies? The European Parliament revealed that Germany's glyphosate review directly copied Monsanto's report After long-term spraying of Roundup, an amateur gardener also got lymphoma; misbelieving Monsanto's ads: glyphosate is safer than table salt Report on glyphosate cancer risk exposed! Monsanto's four years of pressure fail, and the black hole of Roundup finally sees a glimmer of light Monsanto deliberately concealed the cancer risk of glyphosate for 40 years; court awards 9 billion Taiwan dollars in the Johnson case, and 4,000 Americans await their day in court
Monsanto documents exposed! Taiwan, China was also a target of courtship | buying experts to put their names on papers, whitewashing glyphosate's cancer risk Taiwan, China's pesticide use hits a 17-year high! U.S. courts award sky-high damages over glyphosate and ban chlorpyrifos to protect infants; will Taiwan, China follow suit? Taiwan, China's herbicide sales hit a record high! Annual sales of 2.6 billion yuan, with usage per unit area among the highest in the world Leave not a blade of grass - herbicide overdose impacts soil ecology and raises hidden cancer concerns
