The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) was passed in 1996 and established new safety standards (i.e., tolerances) for pesticides. The act mandated determination of levels for “reasonable certainty of no harm,” emphasizing protection of vulnerable populations (infants and children). And as part of that process, FQPA established pesticide-specific reference doses (RfD): the level at or below which daily aggregate dietary exposure over a lifetime will not pose appreciable risks to human health.

…

Dr. Allan Felsot at Washington State University shared … his work regarding glyphosate …. He points out that under the FQPA mandate, EPA also determines risk of aggregate exposure beyond just dietary consumption. For glyphosate, that means including risk assessment for residential (e.g., treating a lawn) and incidental exposure, too.

Felsot explained that “even under worst-case assumptions, aggregate exposure to glyphosate [from all three sources] is well below the RfD.” And he aptly points out that the “presence of residues is not the same as risk.”

…

Unfortunately, the hyperbole only serves to fuel unwarranted anxiety and undermines any meaningful conversation. No wonder there’s so much confusion out there.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here