Govind Tekale
In a significant ruling, the Federal Court of Canada has found Health Canada’s 2022 approval of Mad Dog Plus, a glyphosate-based herbicide, to be unreasonable. The court determined that the federal regulatory agency failed to conduct an updated scientific assessment before renewing the product’s approval.
The case, brought forward by Friends of the Earth Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation, Safe Food Matters, and Environmental Defence Canada, highlighted Health Canada’s lack of transparency in its renewal process. These environmental and health groups argued that the agency ignored new scientific evidence linking glyphosate to serious health and environmental risks.
“This decision from the Federal Court confirms that Health Canada must keep the science on pesticide risks up to date in order to protect human health and the environment from harm,” said Laura Bowman, lawyer at Ecojustice, which represented the groups in court.
Key Findings and Implications
Justice Russel Zinn’s ruling revealed that Health Canada renewed the pesticide without substantiating its claims that glyphosate products continue to pose acceptable risks. When asked to produce documents explaining its approval decision, the agency could not provide any materials that addressed the 61 new scientific studies submitted by the environmental groups.
These studies, published after Health Canada’s 2017 assessment of glyphosate, pointed to increased toxicity when glyphosate is mixed with other products, potential hazards to humans, evidence of neurodegenerative and reproductive toxicity, risks to freshwater habitats, indications that glyphosate worsens wildfire risks, and additional ecological risks to wild pollinators.
Mary Lou McDonald, President of Safe Food Matters, noted the significance of the ruling: “When renewing a product, Health Canada can no longer rely on old assessments or make the assurance ‘trust us, we got it right’. Blind deference to Health Canada at any stage of a pesticide’s life-cycle is no longer warranted.”
Growing Concerns About Pesticide Use
The court’s decision comes amid alarming trends in pesticide use across Canada. According to a recent Ecojustice report, Canada has become the fifth largest user of pesticides globally, with sales increasing by 47 percent in just one decade. The amount of active ingredients sold in pesticides has soared from 26 million kilograms in 2005 to 130 million kilograms in recent years.
Similar Posts
Glyphosate itself accounts for about 50 million kilograms sprayed annually on foods and forests in Canada, raising significant concerns about its widespread environmental impact.
“Science shows that pesticides are bad news for people, pollinators, soil and water,” said Cassie Barker, Senior Program Manager for Toxics at Environmental Defence. “For far too long our federal government has been drinking the agtech kool-aid and approving and renewing pesticides with harmful consequences.”
International Context
Canada’s approach to glyphosate regulation differs significantly from other jurisdictions. In 2015, the World Health Organization classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic,” prompting regulatory changes in many countries.
The European Union has taken stronger precautionary measures, banning certain formulations of glyphosate products and prohibiting pre-harvest use. In contrast, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency initially reported no risks to human health from current uses of glyphosate, but this assessment was later overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Next Steps
The court has set aside the renewal of Mad Dog Plus and given Health Canada six months to make a new decision that transparently addresses the new science on glyphosate risks. The regulatory agency must explain how it assessed the 61 scientific studies and confirm whether it still considers the pesticide to pose an acceptable risk.
Health Canada spokesperson Mark Johnson stated that the department is reviewing the decision and “considering next steps,” while continuing to monitor new information surrounding glyphosate.
Lisa Gue from the David Suzuki Foundation emphasized the broader implications: “We have every reason to believe the same flawed process underlies the registration of all glyphosate. This decision confirmed our concerns.”
The ruling represents a significant shift in how pesticides are regulated in Canada, potentially forcing greater transparency and more frequent reassessments based on current scientific evidence rather than outdated data.
