ACADEMIC LITERATURE
Epidemiology
The weight of evidence of more than 160 epidemiology studies shows only trace levels of 2,4-D in urine of the general population, even though 2,4-D is one of the most commonly used herbicides in both the home and garden market and the commercial market (CDC, 2005; Health Canada, 2013). Evaluations of these and other exposure studies have concluded that actual exposures are well below the conservative assumptions made by policy makers for the registration process (Hays 2012; Burns and Swaen 2012; Aylward and Hays 2015).
MoreToxicology
The 2,4-D toxicology research studies required by United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) have incorporated state-of-the-art technologies. These methods of analysis are increasingly more sophisticated than earlier testing techniques, and thus permit development of an improved understanding of 2,4-D toxicology. The extensive data package of more than 121 new toxicology studies on 2,4-D provide valuable new perspectives affirming the minimal potential for the use of 2,4-D to adversely affect the environment, animal or human health.
MoreEnvironmental
Exposures of wildlife to 2,4-D, whether from direct spraying or consumption of treated vegetation, is of low toxicological significance. 2,4-D has a relatively short half-life and is rather immobile in the soil, with low potential for bioaccumulation or bioconcentration. Moreover, animal metabolism studies demonstrate that the herbicides are rapidly eliminated. As documented in the Bramble and Burns 1974 long-term study, many common game many common game species occupied the wildlife habitat created by a sprayed utility right-of-way out of an apparent preference and prospered there for many decades.
MoreREGULATORY DECISIONS
UNITED STATES
The United States Environmental Protection Agency, with 15,000 experts on staff is responsible for ensuring the health and safety of both people and the environment. It is the primary regulator of pesticides and herbicides in the US.
2017 EPA Risk Assessment
2014 USDA Enlist Environmental Impact Statement
2013 OEHHA Decision not to list under proposition 65
2009 OEHHA Drinking Water Assessment
2001 Washington State Department of Ecology Herbicide Risk Assessment
2015 EPA Endocrine Disruption Screening Program Assessment
2007 EPA Decision against special review
2005 EPA Reregistration Eligibility Decision
2005 EPA Pesticide Tolerance Docket
2004 EPA Review of Cancer Epidemiology Studies
2004 EPA Response to Public Comments
2004 EPA Overview of Risk Assessments
1997 EPA Carcinogenicity Peer Review
1996 EPA Review of Toxicity and Carcinogenicity
1994 EPA Review of Carcinogenicity Data
CANADA
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency is the division of Health Canada tasked with regulating pesticides and herbicides. It ensures that manufacturers and applicators adhere to strict safety standards to keep Canadians safe.
2017 PMRA 2,4-D Update
2013 PMRA 2,4-D Re-evaluation Update
2009 PMRA Response to Meg Sears
2009 PLRA Re-resignation announcement (CAN Gov Website)
2008 PMRA Re-evaluation Decision
2007 PMRA Re-avaluation Decision Forestry Industrial Aquatic
2005 PMRA Re-evaluation Decision Lawn and Turf
2005 Health Canada Reponse to Kazimiera Petition
1994 PMRA Label Improvement Program
GLOBAL
The World Health Organization and the European Union have multiple agencies that regulate and examine pesticides to ensure public health and safety. Other groups such as IARC form temporary panels to evaluate hazard potential.
EFSA 2023
2016 IARC Monograph 113
2015 IARC Press Release
2015 European Commission Report
2015 EFSA Assessment
2012 STSDR Biological Monitoring for Exposure to Herbicides
2009 UN FAO Pesticide Residues
2003 WHO Drinking Water
2003 ERMA New Zealand HSNO Act
2000 New Zealand Pesticides Board Report
1998 WHO Pesticide Residues in Food
1997 WHO Pesticide Residues
1996 WHO Pesticide Residues in Food
1996 WHO Assessment
1987 IARC Update Supplement 7
1986 IARC Monograph 41
1977 IARC Monograph 15
ECONOMIC BENEFITS STUDY
Benefits Study
The 2,4-D Research Task Force commissioned an update and expansion of the 1996 National Agricultural Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (NAPIAP) report “Biological and Economic Risk Assessment of Benefits Phenoxy Herbicides in the United States. Leading experts, academics, and scientists from a wide range of disciplines contributed to the 14 chapters found in this website.
Go to Economic Benefits Study pageNon-Agricultural Uses
Aquatic weed control (including irrigation ditch bank application, surface application for floating and emergent weeds, and surface application or subsurface injection for submersed weeds)
Established grass pastures, rangeland, and perennial grasslands not in agricultural production
Fallow land and crop stubble
Forestry (including forest site preparation, forest roadsides, brush control, established conifer release, Christmas trees and reforestation areas)
Grass (turf) grown for seed and sod
Non-cropland (including fencerows, hedgerows, roadsides, ditches, rights-of-way)
Ornamental turf (including golf courses, cemeteries, parks, sports fields, turfgrass, lawns and other grass areas)
Utility power lines, railroads, airports, industrial sites, and other non-crop areas
Agricultural Uses
Blueberries (including low bush and high bush)
Cereal Grains (including wheat, barley, millet, oats, rye and teff)
Citrus
Cranberries
Field corn and popcorn
Filberts
Grain or forage sorghum
Hops
Nut orchards, pistachios
Pome Fruits
Potatoes (fresh market only)
Rice
Soybeans
Stone Fruits
Strawberries
Sugarcane
Sweet corn
Wild rice
About the task force
The Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data is made up of companies holding technical registrations on the active ingredient in 2,4-D herbicides. They are Corteva Agriscience (U.S.), Nufarm, Ltd. (Australia) and Agro-Gor Corp (U.S.).