Target: Lee Zeldin, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
Goal: Stop the widespread use of glyphosate, a chemical allegedly linked to cancer and environmental harm.
Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, has been at the center of a contentious debate surrounding its alleged links to cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma, leading to over 100,000 lawsuits against Bayer, the company that produces it. While studies suggest glyphosate may increase cancer risk, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has historically defended its safety. Glyphosate is predominantly used not for human food crops but rather to support industrial animal agriculture. This deep reliance on glyphosate for animal feed not only impacts human beings but also poses significant risks to wildlife, with even the EPA recognizing glyphosate as a hazard that may endanger 93% of species under the Endangered Species Act.
The situation is compounded by legislative actions, notably under the Trump administration, which has supported glyphosate’s use, framing it as vital to food security. With such high stakes involved, it appears that the health risks associated with glyphosate and its environmental impacts are being overlooked in favor of agricultural economics. From the disturbing evidence pointing to glyphosate’s alleged carcinogenic properties to its concerning usage in industrial livestock farming, the time has come for accountability and regulatory reform regarding this controversial herbicide. Immediate action is necessary to investigate and impose stricter regulations on glyphosate use, especially in contexts that endanger both human health and the environment.
PETITION LETTER:
Dear Administrator Zeldin,
The time has come to address the troubling reliance on glyphosate within animal agriculture, as its widespread use is purportedly linked to serious health risks, including an increased likelihood of developing cancer. With over 100,000 lawsuits filed against Bayer regarding Roundup, and evidence suggesting that glyphosate might be carcinogenic, it is imperative that regulatory bodies take this issue seriously. Furthermore, the fact that 101 million pounds of glyphosate are used annually to produce feed for livestock, rather than food for humans, necessitates immediate scrutiny.
Moreover, the EPA’s previous conclusions regarding glyphosate’s safety stand in stark contrast to findings from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which classified glyphosate as probably carcinogenic to humans. The ongoing debate about its safety should be met with increased caution and a reevaluation of its use, particularly in animal feed crops. The potential damage to wildlife—93% of species under the Endangered Species Act may be adversely affected by glyphosate—should also call into question its application in agriculture.
We urge you to take decisive action to hold accountable those participating in the proliferation of glyphosate. It is time for a comprehensive reevaluation of its regulation, with a view toward protecting public health and safeguarding our environment against these alarming risks.
Sincerely,
[Your Name Here]
Photo credit: Pixabay
