Meatpackers in Canada are raising the same question as some U.S. House Republicans: Why does our government fund the International Agency for Research on Cancer? The IARC, based in France, has riled the pesticide and meat industries with recent rulings about the cancer risk of some of their products.
Both industries defend the safety of their products and dispute the weight of evidence that figured in IARC rulings. Last Oct. 25, an IARC panel of scientists concluded that processed meat, such as hot dogs or beef jerky, is “carcinogenic to humans” – its strongest rating – and red meat, such as beef, pork or mutton, is “probably carcinogenic to humans” – its second-strongest rating. In March 2015, an IARC review rated glyphosate, the most widely used weedkiller in the world, as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
During the annual meeting of the Canadian Meat Council, Rory McAlpine of Maple Leaf Foods told the Canadian health minister that the government should push for a reform of IARC or consider shifting the money to the Codex Alimentarius Commission, “the body that has the competence, really,” reported iPolitics. Health Minister Jane Philpott told the meat council she would raise the issue with ministry officials and report back to the trade group.
Codex Alimentarius, Latin for “food code,” is a WHO-FAO agency that tries to harmonize food safety and quality standards internationally. The agribusiness sector regards Codex as a forum for bringing order to the global market; Codex’s standards are a reference in World Trade Organization cases. The IARC is part of WHO and has 25 member nations. Its objective “is to promote international collaboration in cancer research.”
“Glyphosate: How to fix IARC (stop funding it!),” tweeted Robb Fraley, Monsanto chief technology officer, with a link to the “Risk-Monger” blog of David Zaruk, a self-described EU risk and science communication expert. The blog accuses IARC of “intransigence, political bias and bad scientific methodology” and says, “[t]he only way to get IARC to behave responsibly is for its member countries to stop funding the agency; The United States looks set just to do that!”
Global use of glyphosate skyrocketed with the release, two decades ago, of crops genetically engineered to tolerate doses of the herbicide. Glyphosate is the main ingredient of Roundup, sold by Monsanto. The IARC rating inspired worldwide discussion of glyphosate and was followed by contradictory findings by other scientific bodies. An EPA review, to be assessed by a panel of experts next month, says the chemical should not be considered likely to be carcinogenic at the levels people are likely to encounter.
Early this week, House Oversight Committee chairman Jason Chaffetz wrote to the NIH director, asking about U.S. funding of IARC since 2011 and all correspondence with the agency. Chaffetz said IARC received $1.2 million in U.S. funding this year.
“IARC’s standards and determinations … appear inconsistent with other scientific research and have generated much controversy and alarm,” wrote Chaffetz, who cited the decisions on meat and glyphosate. “Moreover, IARC’s determinations influence American policymaking … ” The chairman of the House Science Committee has questioned IARC’s influence on EPA decisions.
The IARC says there is limited evidence linking glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. On meat, it pointed to associations with colorectal cancer. The individual risk of cancer from meat consumption is small, said IARC, but it support public health recommendations to limit meat intake.
When the IARC issued its rating, U.S. meat groups said there are myriad factors involved in cancer — overall diet, weight and exercise among them — so it was not valid to single out meat.
Consumption of red meat varies throughout the world. In countries like the United States, almost everyone eats meat, while in some nations only 5 percent of the people do. High consumption of red meat is more than 200 grams a day, or seven ounces, said the IARC report, which said there was less information available on processed meat. Americans are estimated to consume nearly nine ounces a day of meats of all types, roughly half of which is poultry.
Since 1971, IARC has evaluated nearly 1,000 agents, and identified 488 of them as carcinogenic in some degree, one as probably not carcinogenic and 507 as not classifiable. In June, the IARC said coffee was not classifiable — “there was inadequate evidence for the carcinogenicity of coffee drinking overall” — overturning a 1991 rating of possibly carcinogenic.