On 19 June, we wrote to the Minister of Health with a simple question:
Why is there no public pathway in New Zealand for people who want to test their urine for glyphosate?
The response arrived today, and it confirmed exactly what we suspected. There is currently no way for New Zealanders to access a glyphosate urine test — and the Ministry has no plans to create one.
“The urine test is not readily available in New Zealand… The Ministry of Health does not routinely undertake population-level biomarker surveys and is not currently exploring options to review public access to glyphosate testing.”
In other words: no testing, no monitoring, and no intention to change that.
This is despite the fact that glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the country. It’s sprayed on food crops, on road verges, around schools, in playgrounds, and across vast areas of council-managed land. It has already been detected in honey, in cereal products, and possibly even in breast milk. Yet there remains no national effort to track human exposure — and no way for individuals to check their own levels even if they want to.
A recent case involving Auckland Council highlighted just how exposed the public can be to unmonitored spraying, and how few protections exist when exposure actually occurs.
The Half-Life Defence:
Why It Still Doesn’t Explain the Lack of Testing
The Ministry relies heavily on one explanation: glyphosate has a short half-life in urine (around nine hours), so testing only shows recent exposure.
But that is not a reason to avoid testing. It’s a reason to begin.
A short half-life simply means that if people are exposed regularly — through food, water, or environmental spraying — glyphosate will continue appearing in their urine. That’s exactly what international studies have shown. Many overseas monitoring programmes, including those in the U.S. and Europe, routinely detect glyphosate in the vast majority of people tested, including those living in cities.
New Zealand has already appeared in this type of research. A 2022 study measured glyphosate in pooled urine samples from the Australian population and from a group of New Zealand farmers. It detected glyphosate in:
- 8% of general-population samples
- 96% of New Zealand farmer samples
The method used was the same LC-MS/MS approach the Ministry has dismissed as “not useful.” It clearly worked.
So when officials lean on half-life as a justification for not providing testing, it begins to sound less like a scientific limitation and more like a reluctance to look.
The Testing Gap:
No Glyphosate Monitoring and No Options for NZ Citizens
The Ministry also stated that it does not conduct population-level biomarker surveys — something many countries use to monitor exposure to pesticides and other chemicals. That is concerning on its own, but the deeper issue is that there is no alternative.
There is no way to request a glyphosate urine test through a GP.
No public lab offers one.
No regional health provider can order one.
There isn’t even a private avenue for people willing to pay out of pocket.
In our separate article on the lack of glyphosate urine testing in New Zealand, we explored the reasons in detail. The short version: the tests exist, but no authority appears willing to offer them.
A Familiar Pattern:
Downplaying Risk Instead of Offering Testing
The Ministry’s letter follows a now-familiar pattern:
- The test exists, but it’s not useful.
- Other regulators say glyphosate is safe, so we’re not concerned.
- Please refer to the EPA website.
It shifts responsibility without engaging with the core issue — that widespread use of a chemical should logically be paired with some form of monitoring. We have already begun testing food products ourselves, and every new result raises more questions. If glyphosate is appearing in honey, cereal, and other everyday items, why are we so uninterested in what might be appearing in our bodies?
The Path Forward:
Transparency, Testing, and Public Right to Know
If the government won’t look, we will. If the system won’t provide testing, we’ll work to create alternatives. And if officials won’t ask the difficult questions, we will continue to ask them — publicly, persistently, and based on evidence.
“No evidence of harm” is not the same as evidence of no harm.
And you cannot find what you refuse to measure.
For those already affected by unmonitored spraying, the situation is even harder. Many have been left without answers or support. You can read more about these cases — the workers, contractors, and everyday New Zealanders still seeking recognition — in our article on glyphosate exposure and the people caught in the middle.
FAQ: Glyphosate Testing in New Zealand
Can I get a glyphosate urine test in New Zealand?
At the moment, no. Neither public nor private laboratories in New Zealand offer glyphosate urine testing, and the Ministry of Health has confirmed it has no plans to make it available.
Is there a glyphosate blood test available?
No. Blood testing for glyphosate is not offered anywhere in New Zealand.
Can my GP order glyphosate testing?
Unfortunately not. Even supportive GPs cannot order glyphosate tests because no laboratory in the country provides them.
Can I send a urine sample overseas for glyphosate testing?
Some overseas laboratories do accept international samples, but New Zealanders must handle the logistics themselves — shipping, customs, and cost. There is no guidance from the Ministry of Health on how to do this safely or legally.
Why doesn’t New Zealand offer glyphosate testing?
The Ministry argues that the short half-life of glyphosate makes urine testing “not useful.” This position is out of step with international practice and does not explain why individuals are prevented from accessing testing at their own request.
Does New Zealand monitor glyphosate exposure at all?
No. There are no population biomonitoring programmes, no routine testing, and no alternative pathways for people who want to understand their personal exposure.
Resources & References
We’re told there’s no need to test — but other countries are doing it, and the data is clear. So what exactly is New Zealand afraid to find?
Human Biomonitoring for Glyphosate – Global Studies
Examples of peer-reviewed studies detecting glyphosate in population samples, including urban dwellers:
US CDC NHANES Biomonitoring Program
A large-scale government study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found glyphosate in 80% of urine samples collected from adults and children across the country — including people with no occupational exposure.
CDC Feature: Diet Is a Factor in Glyphosate Exposure
The CDC explains how diet plays a key role in glyphosate detection, reinforcing that exposure is not limited to agricultural workers.
European Human Biomonitoring Initiative (HBM4EU)
The EU-wide HBM4EU project tested urine from adults and children in several countries. While median detections were low, the 95th percentile values ranged from 0.18 to 1.03 μg/L, confirming widespread exposure
Australia/New Zealand Urine Study (2022)
A study analyzing pooled urine samples from the Australian general population (covering over 1,875 people) detected glyphosate in 8% of pools, with notably higher detection rates (96%) among New Zealand farmers.
Related articles on NoMoreGlyphosate.nz
Glyphosate in NZ Honey: Our First Test Results
Our independent testing found glyphosate in multiple retail honey samples, raising serious questions about environmental contamination.
Glyphosate in Breakfast Cereal: What We Found
One of the most popular cereal brands in NZ tested positive for glyphosate — despite no label warnings and a “natural” marketing image.
Glyphosate in Breast Milk? Why It Matters
With no testing system in place, we’re left guessing whether glyphosate is entering the bodies of our most vulnerable.
Final Reflection:
When other countries are finding glyphosate in urine samples from ordinary citizens — and we’re not even looking — that’s not just a gap in data. It’s a gap in leadership.
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 anyaivanova@gmail.com.
