Glyphosate doesn't cause Celiac disease or alter gluten structure
Glyphosate doesn't cause Celiac disease or alter gluten structure
Trace levels in food products like Banza pasta don't pose a risk to your health
I can’t wait for the day when anti-science activists decide to cling to an entirely different pesticide to fixate on (kidding, sorta). In reality, I can’t wait for the day when people are no longer afraid of things that don’t actually pose risks to them.
Unfortunately, glyphosate fear and misinformation continues to persist, elevated by organizations like Moms Across America.
Moms Across America is a notorious anti-science activist organization.
Moms Across America (MAA) is notorious for spreading disinformation and fear about agriculture, food supply, pesticides, and genetic technology. More concerning, they undermine scientific progress by tainting public opinion and causing unfounded fears about safe and beneficial scientific technologies. Just like other anti-science activist organizations like the EWG, they routinely cherry-pick data and exaggerate toxicological risks, routinely citing animal data over robust and relevant human data.
Their primary targets? The herbicide glyphosate and genetic engineering technology more broadly. Moms Across America claims that they are to blame for a myriad of health issues, from cancer, to autism, to Celiac disease.
Moms Across America has spent decades trying to get glyphosate and GE technologies banned, even though:
glyphosate and GE tech are not one and the same.
scientific data from dozens of expert agencies around the world have concluded the exact opposite of what MAA claims.
Because of public attention, glyphosate is one of the most studied and has one of the safest toxicological profiles of numerous pesticides used in conventional and organic farming. (Yes, organic farming uses lots of pesticides, more per area than conventional farming, on average).
If you haven’t read my other piece on glyphosate, read it here first.
Moms Across America are now circulating a “study” where they claim high levels of glyphosate in foods like Banza pasta are putting Celiac patients at risk. Their “study” is being amplified by influencers like “Glyphosate Girl” and “The Food Babe.”
First: this is NOT a peer-reviewed scientific study.
This is Moms Across America trying to stir up problems where there aren’t any. They bought some commercial food products and sent them to a laboratory, the Health Research Institute, which specializes in exacerbating the risk perception gap by claiming food supplies are laden with toxic chemicals.
MAA claims that Banza Chickpea pasta, in particular, is overflowing with glyphosate contamination, at a whopping 2,963 ppb. They emphasize that was the highest amount their specialty HRI lab has recorded, just to scare you extra.
In case it wasn’t clear from my sarcasm: these trace levels of glyphosate that MAA are reporting are not anything of concern.
MAA is doing what they do best: manipulating information to scare consumers. Their statements fall short on multiple levels, so let’s dig into the immunology, molecular biology, and genetic technology of the topic.
(As a note: Kevin Folta, myself, and Nicole Keller have discussed Moms Across America previously and have an upcoming article that discusses more examples of their disinformation in the near future, so stay tuned!)
Glyphosate is not causing Celiac disease
Moms Across America has persisted for years with a trope that “the increase in Celiac disease” correlates with the increased use of glyphosate and that therefore, glyphosate must be the culprit. However, they fail to note that the keyword there is correlation.
So let’s take a look at some other correlative data:
By this same logic, can we conclude that organic food is causing autism?
Because the data in the above show a pretty tight correlation between those things…
See how this logic is flawed?
When looking at data that actually aims to assess potential causality between glyphosate exposure and Celiac disease, there is no relationship between the two.
This myth started with a 2013 paper that made a variety of unsubstantiated hypotheses that went viral, thanks in part to social media. The authors claim that glyphosate was "the most important causal factor" in the Celiac disease "epidemic," yet there was zero scientific evidence to support any of claims made by the authors.
The paper has been debunked several times over, yet these harmful myths persist. Most of the claims use animal models or in vitro studies that are not representative of humans and do not factor in realistic potential exposures to glyphosate.
Large-scale epidemiological studies among people have not shown any relationship between Celiac disease and higher glyphosate use or exposure. That is why dozens of expert scientific agencies globally have concluded it is safe for use as indicated. The National Celiac Association also concludes that there is no credible evidence supporting glyphosate as a significant factor in the rise of Celiac disease.
While Celiac prevalence has gradually increased over the last several decades, this is due to improved symptom recognition, better diagnostic methods, and increased awareness. Current evidence supports that Celiac disease is primarily due to genetics and other autoimmune contributions, with no credible link to glyphosate exposure, especially through trace dietary residues.
Glyphosate is not altering the structure of gluten
Another related myth: that glyphosate applied to wheat alters the structure of gluten proteins which causes digestive issues when we consume it.
90% of glyphosate use in agriculture is on glyphosate-tolerant crops: corn, sugar beets, soybean, canola, alfalfa, and cotton - none of which are gluten-containing crops. The remaining minority of glyphosate is applied on other crop fields pre- or post-harvest for specific uses. Glyphosate may be applied to crops like wheat and barley for pre-harvest desiccation or to accelerate crop maturity and dry down before harvesting.
Is glyphosate altering gluten in wheat and barley? No.
Gluten is a structural protein found in cereal grains including wheat, barley, rye, and some oats. Gluten is produced when gliadin and glutenin proteins are hydrated.
Glyphosate interferes with the 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) enzyme, which is required by plants to synthesize the amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine, and tryptophan. Because, like every protein, gluten is made of amino acids, people claim that blocking synthesis of these amino acids (found in high levels in gluten proteins) alters the structure of gluten. People claim that glyphosate diminishes gluten quality, which causes people to have adverse symptoms when eating gluten-containing products grown conventionally.
The issue? There is no conclusive evidence to suggest glyphosate is altering gluten structure or quality.
There is no molecular or biochemistry evidence to suggest that gluten composition is altered in crops grown in the presence of glyphosate. Just as the case with Celiac and glyphosate, there is no epidemiological evidence of an impact among people after gluten consumption.
Protein synthesis - where amino acids are synthesized and linked to each other - occurs as cells grow and divide, a process which stops occurring once you cut a plant (during harvest). Glyphosate is not applied to gluten-containing crops as they’re growing, so glyphosate is unlikely to impact EPSPS-dependent synthesis of proteins in wheat or barley plants.
Do you need to worry about 2,963 ppb of glyphosate detected in Banza chickpea pasta? No.
Glyphosate is permitted for use on non-wheat crops like peas, lentils, or chickpeas BEFORE planting or AFTER harvest to control non-crop weeds (not when the crops are growing in the field). Glyphosate is also used in non-commercial settings by people in everyday settings to control weeds on their properties. As such, detecting glyphosate in miniscule quantities because of the ubiquitous nature of it is not alarming or unusual.
MAA “tested” 46 different commercial products with, from what I gather, a sample size of 1 per product. So…that doesn’t seem very scientific to start.
Then their blog links to an Excel spreadsheet that seems incomplete and doesn’t even have a column for detected glyphosate levels (please, send me the corrected data file if you can track it down).
But let’s assume that the value is what they’re saying it is in their blog post “study” and this Banza chickpea pasta did have 2,963 ppb of glyphosate detected in it.
2,963 parts per billion is the same as 2.963 parts per million.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has defined limits for glyphosate residues on food crops. The maximum residue levels are based on decades of scientific study and evidence and are orders of magnitude lower than levels that would theoretically pose any potential risk to people; usually between 100 and 10,000-fold more conservative than levels that have any safety signals. Depending on the crop type, those levels range from 0.1 to 400 parts per million (ppm). For chickpeas, that threshold is 5.0 ppm.
That means the levels “detected” in that single Banza chickpea pasta sample tested by MAA are well below the threshold set by EPA, which are well below levels that would pose a concern to you. You’d have to eat pounds upon pounds of this pasta on a daily basis to hit the threshold, not to mention the fact that humans rapidly excrete glyphosate in our urine so none of it is accumulating in your body.
MAA is continuing their tactic of chemophobia and exacerbating health anxiety among consumers, when in reality, Banza pasta is a perfectly safe and acceptable food option for those that enjoy it (as are ALL the other foods tested).
Moms Across America then states that 21% of the samples had levels higher than 10 ppb, the EU threshold for acceptable glyphosate residues. This is also false.
The EU maximum residue threshold for glyphosate on chickpeas, which are classified as pulses in the EU, is 10 mg/kg or 10 ppm, which equals 10,000 parts per billion, not 10 parts per billion. So, none of the levels in their study exceeded the EU threshold, either. More fearmongering from Moms Across America.
Remember: detection does not equal relevance. These types of messages aim to instill fear and lack context. But just because we have phenomenally sensitive chemistry instruments to detect miniscule quantities of substances does not mean that you need to be concerned or that those quantities pose a risk.
Your foods are perfectly safe to eat.
Moms Across America lies about scientific data and safety of our foods to undermine regulatory agencies
Moms Across America, along with other organizations that target glyphosate, omit the fact that while glyphosate use as an herbicide has increased over time, that is matched by a decreased use of other herbicides with higher toxicity including alachlor, cyanazine, and fluazifop.
MAA makes broad statements suggesting that scientists would align with their assessments, and they claim that the EPA maximum residue levels are based on “industry requests” and not health and safety standards, which is patently false.
In fact, the EPA thresholds are pretty well aligned with nearly every other country in the world, including the just renewed policies for the EU, Japan, Canada, Australia, and many other countries. In fact, nearly every scientific expert agency asserts that glyphosate is safe for use and trace levels are not posing health risks to individuals, cancer, Celiac, autism, or otherwise.
These include the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), another subdivision of WHO, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The National Academies of Sciences (NAS), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Chemicals Agency, & Health Canada.
These agencies evaluated hundreds of studies, thousands of pages, and decades of data to conclude:
There is no evidence of glyphosate causing adverse health effects in humans.
This includes individuals with higher occupational exposures (i.e. farm workers or chemical manufacturers) and those who may encounter trace dietary levels. EFSA even stated that the IARC classification was inappropriate based on the body of data. The European Commission also just reapproved glyphosate as a pesticide for use for another 10 years.
Fearmongering about chemicals causes harm on multiple levels.
This type of messaging that is taken as fact from people who are unqualified to speak on scientific topics causes immense harm on an individual and societal level.
It undermines credible science and the ability of our regulatory agencies to do their jobs, misleads people, scares individuals from perfectly safe and nutritious foods, and cements these lies as “fact,” when they are nothing more than fabrications. More than that, these types of messages end up impacting our policies and laws when they are not based in reality. This is another example of the harms of the risk perception gap.
Unfortunately, many of these consequences are borne out of media outcry, false messaging propagated by bad actors, and the exploitation of low science literacy. We need to stop conflating sensationalism with credibility. It is causing so much harm.
Thanks for joining in the fight for science!
Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.
Stay skeptical,
Andrea
“ImmunoLogic” is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Feel free to follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below: