The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission released a report questioning American farmers' use of crop protection tools despite the clear science behind their safety and benefits. The report raises the possibility that the federal government could take a position to restrict farmers' access to these essential inputs, undermine existing science-based frameworks, and ultimately jeopardize the affordability and security of America's food supply.
"Farmers are already facing a host of challenges—uncertainty about their access to critical crop protection products shouldn't be added to the list," said Elizabeth Burns-Thompson, Executive Director of the Modern Ag Alliance. "Crop protection tools are not only safe, they are essential to food security, affordability, and the survival of family farms all across this country. Losing access to these critical inputs would be a devastating setback to American agriculture."
Pesticides are rigorously reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which boasts one of the most stringent review processes for these products in the world. In the case of glyphosate—one of the most thoroughly studied products of its kind—more than 1,500 studies and 50+ years of review by the EPA and other leading global health authorities have affirmed its safety when used as directed. The MAHA Commission's report, however, leans on many previously discredited studies and reports, including from the World Health Organization, from which the United States recently announced its withdrawal.
If the MAHA Commission's report drives future policy decisions that do end up restricting farmers' access to these critical tools, the consequences for American agriculture would be severe. For example, without glyphosate—the most widely used weed-fighting tool by U.S. farmers—crop yields would decline, input costs would surge by 150%, and food inflation would more than double. The Modern Ag Alliance's most recent Ag Insight Survey found that Americans are deeply concerned about these potential outcomes and overwhelmingly support science-based policies that preserve access to crop protection tools.