ORIGINAL ABSTRACT

The acceptable daily intake (ADI) is an estimate of the amount of a substance in food or beverages that can be consumed daily over a lifetime without presenting an appreciable risk to health. To assess the risk of ingesting glyphosate, regulatory agencies compare glyphosate daily intake to ADI. Based on published data on urine glyphosate levels measured according to known quantities of ingested glyphosate, our objectives were to test the robustness of the mathematical model currently used to calculate glyphosate daily intake, and to propose alternative models based on urinary excretion kinetics. Our results support that the quantity of ingested glyphosate is systematically underestimated by the model currently used by regulatory agencies, whereas the other models evaluated showed better estimations, with differences according to gender. Our results also show a great variability between individuals, leading to some uncertainties notably with regards to the ADI, and further support that glyphosate excretion varies significantly among individuals who follow a similar dosing regimen. In conclusion, our study highlights the lack of reliability of assessment processes carried out by regulatory agencies for glyphosate in particular, and pesticides in general, and questions the relevance of such processes supposed to safeguard human health and the environment.