WASHINGTON, D.C. – CropLife America (CLA) has issued the following statement from Dr. Janet E. Collins, senior vice president of science and regulatory affairs:
“We are disappointed that the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has continued its hazard-based approach to the assessment of crop protection chemicals. Over the past 18 months, the IARC approach to the assessment of the hazard of specific cancers from chemical substances has been decried by a number of governments and as well as by industry associations.
“When communicating with the general public about any potential health concerns in its environment, it is important that organizations characterize hazard with perspective regarding actual exposure and real human health risk, which IARC’s communication in Lancet fails to do. Further, the communication from IARC adds uncertainty as it is posted in Lancet without the benefit of the Monograph, preventing qualified scientists from simultaneously viewing the conclusions alongside the scientific support for such conclusions.
“CLA supports the risk-based system of human health risk assessment used in the U.S. regulatory system and, in particular, the work of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, which assesses potential risk to human health. The assessment of risk rather than hazard is key as crop protection materials are regulated based on exposure measures in the U.S. The crop protection industry continues to work with the EPA to ensure each and every product goes through their rigorous testing procedures and only enters the market if it can be used safely. CLA welcomes the interests of a variety of Congressional committees that may provide oversight on all manner of pesticide policy matters ─ including the interest shown about IARC funding.”