“Even Water Can Be Toxic”: Why These Arguments Miss the Point on Glyphosate
Some arguments come up over and over when glyphosate is challenged — not because they’re especially solid, but because they’ve been repeated so often they sound like common sense.
“Everything is toxic at the right dose — even water.”
“You can just wash it off.”
“The EU approved it, so it must be safe.”
“Hot water kills plants too — should we ban that?”
At first glance, these kinds of comments seem clever. They aim to shut down concern with a wave of the hand — no need to think deeper, just roll your eyes and move on. But when you scratch the surface, most of these talking points fall apart.
Let’s take a closer look at what these arguments are really saying — and why they distract from the conversation we should be having.
Myth 1: “Everything is toxic, even water.”
This line is so common it’s practically become internet wallpaper. It’s true that almost any substance can be toxic in a high enough dose — that’s how toxicology works. But when it comes to glyphosate, this argument is a red herring.
Why it misses the point:
- The danger with glyphosate isn’t about a single large dose.
It’s about chronic, low-level exposure through food, water, and the environment — day after day, year after year. - Water is essential for life. Glyphosate is designed to kill life.
It works by disrupting a biological pathway in plants — and emerging science suggests it may also disrupt gut bacteria, hormones, and DNA in animals and humans. - This isn’t theoretical.
Studies have linked glyphosate exposure to endocrine disruption, oxidative stress, and altered reproductive development — especially in early life stages when we’re most vulnerable.
So yes — dose matters. But so does the type of chemical, how it’s used, how often we’re exposed, and whether it’s meant to nourish or destroy.
Myth 2: “You can just wash it off.”
This one seems reasonable — after all, we wash fruit and veg all the time, right? But here’s the problem: glyphosate is systemic. It’s absorbed by the plant itself.
When glyphosate is sprayed pre-harvest (as it is on wheat, oats, potatoes, and legumes), it travels through the plant’s tissues and ends up in the final food product — well below the surface.
You can wash your apples or rinse your salad greens — but with glyphosate, that won’t help. When it’s sprayed on crops like wheat, oats, or potatoes before harvest, it’s absorbed into the plant.
So whether you’re peeling your spuds, baking your bread, or pouring cereal into a bowl, the residue is already inside the food — not something you can scrub or rinse away.
This myth also assumes the only thing we should worry about is surface-level dirt or bacteria. But what if the real concern is invisible, odourless, and embedded deep in our food system?
Myth 3: “The EU reapproved it — case closed.”
This is a classic example of oversimplifying a highly contested regulatory process. It’s true that glyphosate was reapproved in the EU for another 10 years in late 2023 — but that renewal was not the vote of confidence some claim it to be.
Here’s what actually happened:
- The vote failed to reach a qualified majority — meaning 15 of 27 EU countries didn’t vote in favour.
- The European Commission renewed glyphosate’s approval by default — not through clear consensus.
- Several countries, including France and Germany, had already begun phasing out glyphosate or limiting its use, and many citizen-led campaigns are still calling for bans.
- Meanwhile, the European Food Safety Authority admitted that data gaps remain, especially around long-term endocrine effects and environmental impact.
So no — the EU didn’t “reverse a ban.” There wasn’t a full ban to reverse. What we saw was regulatory stagnation, not scientific certainty.
And let’s not forget: many countries and regions have banned or restricted glyphosate, including Mexico, Austria, Sri Lanka, parts of Canada, and dozens of cities and districts across the world.
Myth 4: “Hot water kills weeds too — should we ban that?”
This one gets points for creativity — but loses them for logic.
Yes, hot water can kill weeds. So can sheep. So can salt, vinegar, and good old-fashioned elbow grease.
But none of those come with toxic residues in food, a growing body of scientific concern, or multi-billion-dollar lawsuits linking them to cancer.
What this argument really reveals is that glyphosate isn’t the only way to control weeds. Even boiling water gets mentioned as an alternative — so why are we clinging so tightly to a chemical that’s under global scrutiny?
Myth 5: “Glyphosate only affects a plant pathway — humans don’t have it.”
This one is a favourite on social media: the idea that glyphosate is safe for humans because it only targets the shikimate pathway — a metabolic route found in plants, not people.
But that’s only part of the story.
Why it misses the point:
- It’s true that human cells don’t have the shikimate pathway — but our gut bacteria do.
- The gut microbiome plays a critical role in digestion, immunity, brain function, and hormone regulation.
- Disrupting this microbial system — even slightly — can affect everything from inflammation to mental health to metabolic disease.
Studies have shown that glyphosate can alter the balance of gut bacteria, favouring potentially harmful strains over beneficial ones. In animals, this has been linked to liver damage, fertility issues, and behavioural changes.
And while more human studies are still emerging, the precautionary principle should apply. If a chemical interferes with a core system shared by plants, animals, and microbes, we should think twice before normalising its presence in our food.
Where This Leaves Us
These deflections may sound smart, but they sidestep the real issue:
Do we want a food system that relies on a probable carcinogen, endocrine disruptor, and weedkiller — especially when safer alternatives exist?
Saying “even water is toxic” is like saying “even planes crash” to justify poor airline safety.
It misses the point.
New Zealanders deserve honest, transparent discussions about chemical use — not hollow one-liners meant to silence debate.
And with the proposed Gene Technology Bill poised to make it easier to approve genetically engineered crops designed to survive even more glyphosate, this conversation is more urgent than ever.
The real question isn’t whether glyphosate can kill weeds.
It’s whether we’re willing to tolerate everything else that comes with it.
Resources & References
It’s easy to repeat a claim. Harder to back it with evidence.
The claims we’ve unpacked in this article — from “even water is toxic” to “the EU says it’s safe” — may sound convincing at first, but they don’t hold up under scrutiny. The references below highlight just a few of the facts, reports, and regulatory decisions that challenge these assumptions.
Glyphosate Fact Check: Safer Than Salt or Daily Risk?
Our earlier article exploring why salt and caffeine comparisons ignore the bigger picture of chronic glyphosate exposure and food residues.
EFSA (2023): Glyphosate peer review summary – data gaps remain
EFSA’s summary of its latest glyphosate risk assessment. While no “critical areas of concern” were identified, the report highlights significant data gaps — especially around long-term health and environmental impacts.
IARC (2015): Glyphosate classified as probably carcinogenic
The World Health Organization’s cancer research agency classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen — sparking global debate.
PAN International: Countries banning or restricting glyphosate
A regularly updated global list of national and regional glyphosate bans, restrictions, and legal actions — far beyond just the EU.
France bans glyphosate-based weedkillers in home gardens (France24, 2019)
As of January 2019, France prohibited the sale and use of glyphosate-based weedkillers in private home gardens. While not a full agricultural ban, this move reflected growing public and regulatory concern over household exposure.
Germany’s cabinet approves restricted glyphosate use (Reuters, April 2024)
In April 2024, the German government passed legislation banning glyphosate in protected water areas, domestic gardens, and allotments; some restrictions remain in arable farming.
This list is far from comprehensive — it’s just the tip of the iceberg. Use it as a starting point for your own personal journey of discovery.
Looking Ahead
We’re not here to win arguments — we’re here to raise the standard of public understanding. That starts with curiosity, facts, and a willingness to question easy answers.
Because if glyphosate is truly as safe as some claim…
why is there so much global concern, emerging science, and unfinished business?
Image Source & Attribution
A big thank you to the creators at Unsplash for making their images freely available for projects like ours. The image featured on this page is by engin akyurt. You can explore more of their work here: https://unsplash.com/@enginakyurt.
