ORIGINAL ABSTRACT

Environmental health should be an ethical obligation for experts in internal medicine. Besides the harmful health effects of air pollution, endocrine-disrupting chemicals and climate change, growing evidence points to glyphosate, a widely used herbicide, which generates risks to public health in terms of noncommunicable diseases and cancer. Detection of glyphosate in humans has been associated with all-cause mortality, increased frailty, insulin resistance, impaired glucose homeostasis and diabetes, increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases, fatty liver, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In addition, recent animal studies demonstrated that long-term intake of glyphosate with drinking water, even at very low levels, dose-dependently increases cancer incidence. Experts in internal medicine are called to increase awareness on the pathogenetic role of glyphosate, to amplify their function as privileged healthcare providers. The discussion about environmental hazards, as for glyphosate, could be efficiently driven by an ethical involvement of experts in internal medicine to generate significant beneficial effects. Although primary prevention is mainly a political issue, internists should act as health advocates for the community, sharing scientific evidence and expert knowledge in complexity, and encouraging them to take actions oriented at decreasing the health risk deriving from glyphosate through a one-health approach.