About Wheat
Glyphosate & Wheat
Are Farm Chemical Safe for my Family?
Across America, many families are asking important questions about how food is grown and how farming practices affect human health. It’s only natural to want transparency and confidence in the food we eat. Wheat farmers share those same goals. The food we grow is the food we feed our own families, and protecting health is a responsibility we take personally.
We understand that hearing about any pesticide can be concerning. That’s why decisions about products like glyphosate are not made casually. Farmers rely on decades of independent scientific research and on the evaluations of public health agencies whose mission is to protect consumers. Regulatory reviews consider thousands of studies on human health, the environment, and food safety before any product is approved for use. Those reviews are updated regularly as new science becomes available.
At the same time, farmers are constantly looking for ways to use fewer inputs and farm more sustainably. And many growers have adopted soil-protecting practices like no-till farming, crop rotations, and precision application technologies that reduce the need for chemical treatments overall. When glyphosate is used, it is applied carefully and sparingly, under strict federal guidelines designed to keep residues far below established human safety thresholds. To put this in perspective, the amount of glyphosate used to kill weeds before planting wheat, is approximately .75 pounds per acre… or roughly two cans of soda for a plot of land the size of a football field.
We view healthy food, healthy people, and a healthy environment as shared priorities – not competing ones. We welcome thoughtful questions and ongoing research, and we support efforts to improve transparency so consumers can feel confident in how their food is grown. By working together with scientists, doctors, regulators, and consumers, farmers remain committed to producing safe, wholesome wheat while stewarding the land and communities we all depend on.
Understanding Food Safety and Trace Residues – Why tiny amounts can be found
Modern farming – and modern food testing – are both very precise. Laboratory equipment today can detect substances at incredibly small levels, sometimes as low as parts per billion. To put his in perspective, one part per billion Is like a single drop of water in a 10,000-gallon swimming pool, or one penny out of ten million dollars. Finding a trace amount of glyphosate does not mean food is unsafe. It simply means our ability to measure is extremely sensitive and precise.
When very small amounts of products like glyphosate are occasionally detected in grains, they are typically the result of normal, legal agricultural use. Farmers may apply herbicides before planting to control weeds, or in very limited situations to help manage difficult weeds before harvest. Any product used on a crop breaks down over time, and only small traces can remain by the time grain is harvested, transported, milled, and baked into food.
Detection is Not the Same as Danger
It’s important to separate two different ideas:
- Legal tolerances
- Actual human health risk
Legal tolerance – Government agencies set maximum residue limits (MRLs) for crop protection products. These limits are not safety thresholds. Instead, they are conservative legal standards that define the highest amount that could ever remain after approved use.
Health risk – Actual safety limits are far higher than legal tolerances. Regulators build in large margins of protection – often 100 times or more below the level that could have any health effect. In other words, a residue could be well below the legal tolerance and still be many times lower than any level of health concern.
So, when tests shows a trace amount far beneath the allowable limit, it does not indicate a problem. It confirms that the system of regulation and responsible use is working as intended.
Putting everyday food risks in perspective
For perspective, consider everyday items we rarely worry about. A typical smartphone can carry thousands of times more bacteria and viruses than are found on most kitchen surfaces or packaged foods. Those microbes pose a far more realistic and immediate health risk than the extremely small, regulated chemical residues that may be detected in packaged foods.
The comparison isn’t meant to alarm anyone – only to illustrate that “trace presence” does not equal “unsafe.” Our daily lives include many exposures, and food safety regulations are designed specifically to keep what we eat well within healthy, protective boundaries.
A shared commitment to safe food
Farmers, millers, bakers, regulators, and food companies all share the same goal: providing wholesome, nutritious food that families can trust. Continuous testing, transparent standards, and decades of scientific research work together to ensure that bread and other wheat products remain a safe, healthy part of the American diet.
Glyphosate & Wheat Farming: How It’s Used and Why Safety Matters
Wheat farmers across the United States work every day to grow safe, nutritious food for families here and around the world. Part of that work includes managing weeds and other stresses that can threaten crop health, yield and quality. One tool that many farmers – though not all – use in this effort is glyphosate, a widely studied weed-control product.
What Glyphosate Is and Why Farmers Use It
Glyphosate is the active ingredient in many non-selective herbicides used to control weeds. It helps farmers clear fields of competing plants before planting, after harvest, or when a field is left fallow between crops. It can also help manage stubborn weeds that reduce soil moisture and compete with young wheat plants.
Farmers make careful decisions about when and how to use glyphosate – if at all – as part of a broader weed management approach that includes crop rotation, soil conservation techniques, and other tools tailored to their local conditions.
Not all wheat acres are treated with glyphosate. About 30–33% of U.S. wheat acres receive glyphosate applications to clear fields from weeds for planting. A small portion – less than 3% – may receive glyphosate applications after the wheat plant is fully grown in situations where persistent weeds are a problem. Even then, the wheat crop has completed kernel development, and the grain does not absorb the herbicide. Within a few days of application, glyphosate begins breaking down naturally into carbon dioxide, water, nitrogen and phosphate with no harmful impact on human health, soil health, or water quality.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data shows that glyphosate use has increased in recent years in part because more growers are adopting no-till and conservation tillage systems – regenerative practices that reduce soil erosion, conserve water, and help build healthier soils. Glyphosate is one tool that makes these soil-friendly systems workable for farmers. It is, however, an added cost to farmers. So, any use of glyphosate is done judiciously and sparingly. Since farming runs on tight margins there is a financial disincentive to use any amount of glyphosate more than necessary.
Committed to Safe, Sustainable Food Production
Wheat growers are deeply committed to the health and safety of their families, neighbors, and customers. They follow label instructions and federal regulations for all crop protection materials, including glyphosate, and they rely on scientific evidence and regulatory guidance when making decisions about its use.
Farmers care about the long-term health of the land, and many regenerative agricultural practices that benefit soil health and enhance biodiversity – such as cover crops, crop rotation, conservation tillage, and no-till planting – also require applications of products like glyphosate to ensure weeds don’t compete with wheat plants (or other farm crops) for water and soil nutrients. Glyphosate plays a role in helping farmers grow abundant, high-quality wheat while protecting our natural resources.
But Can I Trust the US Federal Government?
How Extensively Glyphosate Has Been Studied?
Farmers and consumers alike benefit when agricultural practices are grounded in solid scientific research. Glyphosate – like all pesticides used in food production – has been extensively studied and evaluated by regulatory agencies around the world to assess its effects on human health and the environment.
Glyphosate is among the most widely studied herbicides in the world, with thousands of scientific studies spanning more than 50 years of research on its properties, how it breaks down in the environment, and its effects on people and ecosystems. This research includes government-funded studies and independent academic investigations.
Isn’t Glyphosate Banned in the EU and many other Countries?
In regulatory assessments in the United States and Europe, scientists evaluate evidence from hundreds to thousands of studies before making decisions about safety. For example, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and EU member states reviewed a dossier of over 2,400 studies as part of the most recent EU assessment process, along with extensive public consultation. As recently as November 2023, the EU has re-approved glyphosate’s use.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed glyphosate data repeatedly since its first registration in 1974, including a comprehensive reassessment in 2020. After considering all available data, the EPA concluded that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans and that current uses do not pose risks of concern when used according to label directions.
Similar evaluations have been conducted by other national authorities – including Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Australia’s Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, Japan’s Food Safety Commission, and Korea’s regulatory agency – which have reaffirmed that glyphosate-based products can be used safely when directions are followed.
It’s true, Glyphosate is approved for use in more than 100 countries worldwide, including the European Union, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Korea and the United Kingdom. Each country has their own regulatory review and authorization processes that assess human health and environmental impacts.