Over the last thirty years, we’ve witnessed something unsettling.
Chronic diseases — from gut disorders and food allergies to autoimmune conditions and cancers — have surged at rates that can’t be ignored.
More children carry EpiPens, more adults struggle with gluten and inflammatory bowel disease, and cancers like Non-Hodgkin lymphoma touch more families. These epidemics didn’t just appear out of thin air.
In the very same period, glyphosate use exploded. Once marketed as “so safe you could drink it,” glyphosate quickly became the world’s most widely used herbicide — not only for killing weeds but also as a pre-harvest desiccant for crops like wheat, oats, and peanuts. Its rise was sold as progress. Yet, curiously, the timeline of glyphosate’s spread lines up with the steep rise of chronic illnesses that continue to weigh heavily on our health system today.
This article isn’t about proving a single chemical caused every case. It’s about asking a more uncomfortable question: when glyphosate use and chronic disease epidemics move in lockstep for decades, why are regulators still insisting there’s no link?
A Timeline of Trouble
Something curious happened in the 1990s. The world opened up — trade barriers fell, regulations loosened, and chemical companies seized their chance. Glyphosate use didn’t just increase; it shifted gears into a whole new phase. What began as a niche weedkiller quickly became the backbone of modern agriculture.
But here’s where it gets even stranger. Around the same time, rates of chronic illness began to climb. Not just one disease, but a whole catalogue: gut issues, food allergies, autoimmune disorders, and cancers like Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Conditions that once seemed rare became uncomfortably common.
Coincidence? Maybe. But let’s look closer. Glyphosate also found a new role in this era — not just killing weeds but finishing crops. Farmers were encouraged to spray wheat, oats, and even peanuts just before harvest to dry them out evenly. A handy trick for efficiency, yes, but it meant glyphosate residues were no longer accidental. They were baked into the food chain.
And as glyphosate use spread into more corners of our food chain, health problems climbed with it. The charts are hard to ignore — two steep curves rising in sync. We’re told “correlation isn’t causation.” Fair enough. But at what point do we stop brushing off the overlap as coincidence, and start asking whether there’s a deeper connection?
Gut Health, Allergies, and Autoimmunity
If there’s one place glyphosate leaves its mark, it’s the gut. We’re often told it only targets plants, because humans don’t have the “shikimate pathway” it disrupts. That’s technically true — but our gut bacteria do. And those microbes aren’t just passengers; they’re the engines of digestion, immunity, even mood regulation. So what happens when you throw a chemical designed to block their pathways into the mix?
It’s worth noting the timing. The rise in glyphosate use as a crop desiccant matches the explosion in gluten sensitivity, celiac diagnoses, and food allergies. A coincidence? Or could glyphosate residues in wheat and oats be quietly nudging the gut into dysfunction, making foods we’ve eaten for generations suddenly intolerable?
And the ripple effects don’t stop with gluten. Autoimmune conditions — from Crohn’s disease to thyroid disorders — have also multiplied in recent decades. Scientists are finding that glyphosate doesn’t just irritate the gut, it may disrupt the immune system itself, setting the stage for the body to start attacking its own tissues.
None of this proves glyphosate is the only factor, but the patterns are hard to dismiss. We’re left with an uncomfortable question: are today’s epidemics of allergies and autoimmune disorders just random bad luck — or are they the predictable outcome of saturating our food system with a chemical that was never designed to stay outside our bodies?
What the Research Actually Shows
Formulations vs. glyphosate. Independent studies confirm what regulators ignore: Roundup®-type mixtures are often more harmful than glyphosate alone, sometimes at doses below official “safe” limits. Why? The added surfactants and co-formulants boost toxicity.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26282372/
The surfactant problem. Early Roundup® products contained POEA surfactants, later phased out in some countries after being shown to be far more toxic than glyphosate itself — including on human cell systems.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30951798/
Human liver disease signal. A clinical study found people with biopsy-proven fatty liver disease excreted higher levels of glyphosate (and its metabolite AMPA). The more advanced the liver damage, the higher the glyphosate detected.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6776714/
Animal studies at low doses. Rats given ultra-low doses of Roundup® — levels regulators insist are harmless — developed liver damage and metabolic changes consistent with human fatty liver disease.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39328
Across generations. A landmark study showed transgenerational effects: rats exposed during pregnancy passed on disease risks to their grandchildren and great-grandchildren, through measurable genetic and epigenetic changes.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-42860-0
Microbiome disruption. Reviews show glyphosate shifts microbial communities in soil, plants, animals, and humans. This can weaken beneficial microbes, encourage pathogens, and contribute to antibiotic resistance.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29117584/
Carcinogenicity evidence. The Global Glyphosate Study (2025) reported increases in multiple tumor types at exposures close to official “safe” limits — reinforcing IARC’s 2015 classification of glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01187-2
Consensus warnings. A 2016 Environmental Health consensus statement concluded that glyphosate-based formulations are consistently more toxic than glyphosate alone across many species and endpoints.
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-016-0117-0
Worth noting:
Some regulators (like EFSA in 2023) still insist glyphosate is “unlikely to be carcinogenic” at approved uses, while IARC and independent researchers continue to raise red flags. The clash isn’t just scientific — it’s political. And until regulators start testing the full formulations, the public is left caught in the middle.
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/8164
Beyond the Gut: A Spectrum of Diseases
When most people think of glyphosate’s health effects, they picture stomach trouble — gluten sensitivity, gut inflammation, food allergies. But the science points to a much bigger picture. The same chemical showing up in our breakfast cereal has been linked, in studies and in courtrooms, to a long list of chronic diseases that reach far beyond the gut.
Take the liver. Both human and animal studies suggest glyphosate exposure can damage liver cells, mimic non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and even push it into more serious conditions like steatohepatitis and fibrosis. Then there’s the kidneys — another key detox organ — where long-term exposure in rats has led to structural damage.
And it doesn’t stop there. Researchers have drawn strong associations between glyphosate use and cancers such as Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, thyroid disease, and multiple reproductive disorders. Neurological conditions like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s have also appeared on the list of suspects. That’s a staggering range of illnesses for a chemical that regulators still call “safe when used as directed.”
One correlation could be coincidence. Two could be bad luck. But when more than twenty diseases track alongside the rise of glyphosate use over decades, shouldn’t we be asking tougher questions?
This isn’t about claiming glyphosate alone causes every case. Modern disease is complex, with multiple contributing factors. But here’s the uncomfortable reality: glyphosate is one factor we actually can control. So why aren’t we?
From Global Patterns to Local Realities
It’s easy to read about these studies and think, well, that’s overseas. The US sprays more, Europe has different rules, Canada sets its own residue limits. But glyphosate doesn’t respect borders, and neither do the health trends. New Zealand is part of the same global food system, importing wheat and other crops grown with pre-harvest glyphosate, while also using it widely on our own land.
And the illnesses? They’re not stopping at customs. Rising rates of autoimmune disease, gut disorders, and cancers like Non-Hodgkin lymphoma are just as real here as they are abroad. If the global evidence shows a troubling pattern, shouldn’t we be asking what that means for us, right here at home?
What It Means for New Zealand
Glyphosate isn’t just something farmers overseas are spraying. It’s here — woven into daily life in ways most of us don’t see. Councils use it along roadsides, parks, and playgrounds. Contractors spray it around schools and sports fields. Farmers rely on it not only for weed control but also as a pre-harvest desiccant in cereals and pulses. And because New Zealand imports so much wheat and processed grain from countries like Australia and North America, residues often come in through the back door of our food supply too.
At the same time, New Zealand faces its own troubling health trends. Rates of autoimmune conditions, food allergies, and gut issues have been climbing. And perhaps most alarming: this country has some of the highest rates of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the world. International courts have repeatedly linked glyphosate exposure to this very disease, yet our regulators continue to downplay the risk.
The official line here is familiar: glyphosate is “safe when used as directed.” But what does that mean when it’s used almost everywhere, in mixtures never properly tested, and showing up in foods that families eat every single day? New Zealanders aren’t living in a laboratory. We’re living in a landscape saturated with a chemical that science says may be far more dangerous than we’ve been led to believe.
Rethinking “Safe”
Glyphosate has been sold to us as a miracle tool of modern agriculture — efficient, effective, and supposedly harmless. But when you step back and trace the timeline of its rise alongside the surge in chronic disease, the cracks in that story are impossible to ignore. The science is mounting, the health patterns are clear, and the human cost is already showing up in hospitals, clinics, and households.
For New Zealand, the choice is stark. Do we keep accepting regulatory assurances built on outdated tests of glyphosate alone, while ignoring the real-world formulations people are actually exposed to? Or do we start asking harder questions, demanding stronger protections, and investing in safer alternatives?
“Safe when used as directed” sounds reassuring — until you realise it’s a phrase written to protect products, not people.
If chronic disease and glyphosate keep rising hand in hand, maybe the real epidemic isn’t just illness — it’s denial.
Related Reading on NoMoreGlyphosate.nz
Want to dig deeper into how glyphosate stretches beyond the gut? These articles explore the broader health impacts, from brain development to immunity and beyond:
Glyphosate and Gluten Sensitivity
Could glyphosate residues be the hidden driver behind the rise in gluten intolerance?
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-and-gluten-sensitivity/
Missing Microbes and Infant Gut Health
One in four U.S. babies now lack a key gut microbe. Glyphosate’s antimicrobial actions may be part of the story.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/missing-microbes-infant-gut-glyphosate/
Glyphosate and Mitochondria Damage
What happens when the body’s energy factories come under chemical attack.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-mitochondria-damage/
Prenatal Exposure and Neurodevelopment
How glyphosate exposure in the womb could be shaping developmental outcomes down the line.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/prenatal-exposure-glyphosate-neurodevelopment/
Glyphosate and Lymphoma: Unanswered Questions
Investigating the links between Roundup® exposure and blood cancers.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-lymphoma-questions/
DNA Damage and Oxidative Stress
How glyphosate can destabilize our cells at the most fundamental level.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-dna-damage-oxidative-stress/
Epigenetic Risks to Fertility
The hidden ways glyphosate may be rewriting reproductive health.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-epigenetic-fertility-risk/
Neurological Health Under Threat
Tracing the connections between glyphosate and disorders like Parkinson’s.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-neurological-health/
Hormone Disruption and Glyphosate
How “inert” co-formulants may be scrambling our hormonal signals.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-hormone-disruption/
The Microbiome Impact
Glyphosate’s overlooked effect on the microbial communities that keep us alive.
https://nomoreglyphosate.nz/glyphosate-microbiome-impact/
Each of these pieces builds on our core message: glyphosate isn’t a single-issue problem — it’s woven into multiple facets of health.
Image Source & Attribution
We’re grateful to the talented photographers and designers whose work enhances our content. The feature image on this page is by Amaviael.
