What’s in Our Food? Should Australian Labelling Laws Change to Include Glyphosate?
In today’s world, consumers are more conscious than ever about what they eat, where it comes from, and how it is produced. However, one crucial aspect of food safety and transparency often goes unnoticed—pesticide residues, particularly glyphosate.
Glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicides globally, applied to crops to control weeds and improve yields. While regulatory agencies like FSANZ (Food Standards Australia New Zealand) assess safety limits for pesticide residues, current Australian labelling laws do not require food manufacturers to disclose glyphosate levels on product packaging.
In some countries, the presence of glyphosate has led to stricter regulations and even bans. The European Union, for example, regularly reviews its approval, while certain regions in the U.S. have taken steps toward labelling requirements. In contrast, Australia only sets maximum residue limits (MRLs) for various foods, but there is no requirement for companies to disclose whether glyphosate is present in their products.
This raises important questions:
Proponents of mandatory glyphosate labelling argue that consumers should have access to complete information about what they eat. Transparency allows individuals to make informed choices based on their health concerns, dietary preferences, or ethical considerations.
Furthermore, recent studies have found traces of glyphosate in various food products, including grains, cereals, and processed foods. While these residues may be within legal limits, the long-term health effects of repeated low-dose exposure remain debated. Should Australians have the right to avoid these products if they choose?
On the other hand, implementing a glyphosate labelling requirement would pose challenges for food producers. Testing for residues can be costly, and given that glyphosate is widely used in agriculture, it might be difficult for some manufacturers to guarantee that their raw materials are entirely free from traces of the chemical.
Another concern is consumer perception—would a glyphosate label lead to fear-driven choices rather than science-based decision-making? If labelling were introduced, how should it be framed to provide accurate, non-misleading information?
As consumer awareness grows, discussions around food labelling regulations will continue. While Australia currently does not require glyphosate disclosure, future policy changes could be influenced by:
At IM Food, we believe in informed choices, science-based decisions, and clear labelling regulations that balance consumer
rights with industry practicality. Whether or not glyphosate should be declared on food labels in Australia is a complex debate, but it is
one worth having.