No More Glyphosate NZ is a grassroots campaign dedicated to raising awareness about the health and environmental risks of glyphosate use in New Zealand. Our mission is to empower communities to take action, advocate for safer alternatives, and challenge policies that put public safety at risk. Join us in the fight to stop the chemical creep!
When everyday exposure meets real life: one family’s fight with kidney cancer brings glyphosate’s risks into sharp focus. How safe are “safe limits” when lives are on the line?
Six months after launching to challenge MPI’s proposal to raise glyphosate residue limits, NoMoreGlyphosate.nz looks back on testing results, public pressure, and a collective effort that made a real difference — and why the next six months matter even more.
NZ Food Safety’s summary of glyphosate submissions keeps cereals at 0.1 mg/kg and bans pre-harvest use. A win worth celebrating — but with loopholes on animal feed, weak enforcement, outdated diet data, and Roundup® co-formulants, the fight for real food safety isn’t over.
Public pressure worked: glyphosate residue limits for wheat, barley, and oats will stay at 0.1mg/kg in New Zealand. Pre-harvest spraying is banned — but enforcement remains the real test.
Glyphosate-based weedkillers — best known under the brand name Roundup® — are woven into the fabric of modern agriculture.
They’re sprayed on food crops...
For two years, she lived without taste or smell. At first it seemed like an allergy to potatoes — until an organic test revealed the truth. The problem wasn’t the potato at all, but glyphosate-based sprays like Roundup. This personal story shows how hidden chemical residues can affect our health in unexpected ways.
Glyphosate is officially a hazardous substance under NZ law. Yet Roundup — more toxic than glyphosate alone — hides in plain sight with soft labels and missing warnings. Hazardous by law, invisible by label.
Some people say they feel glyphosate before they even see the yellowed grass — headaches, pain, and liver stress acting as early alarms. Science is beginning to show those “silent signals” may not be coincidence.
Does glyphosate really cause cancer? A 2023 review shows strong biological red flags, while human studies point to non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Regulators disagree, but the evidence is mounting—and the question remains: why are we still taking the risk?
When the High Court sided with the EPA over glyphosate, it wasn’t a win for science — it was a win for procedure. If regulators and courts won’t protect us, who will?
MPI claims to test food for chemical contaminants, but glyphosate — New Zealand’s most widely used pesticide — is missing. Oversight or by design? If the Minister for Food Safety isn’t monitoring glyphosate, who’s protecting our children’s food?
Glyphosate’s EU approval was rocked by revelations of ghostwritten papers, copy-paste assessments, and industry infiltration of committees. This isn’t just about the chemical — it’s about whether we can trust the process itself.
