Opinion
What should one do when scientists differ on safety of glyphosate?
by Chandre Dharmawardana,
chandre.dharma@yahoo.ca
Ravindra Jayananda (RJ), has written to The Island (18-10-2022) expressing concern on my article (14-10-22, The Island) entitled “Toxin gonibillas cry wolf again, wanting agrochemical ban”. I thank him for raising these concerns, although I myself, and previous writers like Dr. Waidyanatha, Dr. Illeperuma, Dr. C. S. Weeraratne, Dr. Buddhi Marambe and many others have also addressed them from time to time, in previous newspaper articles.For instance, Jayananda (who I believe is an engineering academic), has raises the following issues.
(a) He (i.e., Professor Dharmawardana) claims that Glyphosate is not a toxin and goes to say that, even 300 mg of vitamin A is a toxin…(then)…everything is toxic depending on the dose.
Exactly. This was stated six centuries ago by Paracelsus, the father of toxicology, with his famous dictum, “What is there that is not poison? All things are poison and nothing is without poison. Solely the dose determines that a thing is not a poison.”
There are basically two extremes of toxicity, known as “acute toxicity” and “chronic toxicity”. The relevant dosages are quite different, and it is very important to distinguish between them. Acute toxicity is the immediate toxicity if you ingest a large amount of the substance at once, either orally, via the skin, or by inhalation. The lethal dose for oral, dermal, or inhalation toxicity are widely different even for once substance. For oral acute toxicity to kill 50% of the rats in a sample, approximately 4-5 grams of glyphosate per kilo of body weight are needed. Animal and human data suggest that a 60 kg human would be at extreme risk if he/she were to drink a cup (200 ml) of full-strength glyphosate. So, it is much safer than many common pharmaceuticals and household cleaners as far as acute toxicity is concerned. A safety factor of 100 is applied to results based on animal experiments in extrapolating to humans.
However, what is important is the chronic toxicity of any substance. This results from prolonged intake of very small quantities over a long time. The Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) is an expert ad hoc body of the FAO and WHO for the purpose of risk assessments of pesticide residues and their long-term effects. A press statement by the JMPR, May 16th 2016 in Geneva, states that no significant chronic toxicity has been found for glyphosate. This is definitely the case for all higher animals. This assessment was re-confirmed by the “Giant Study” published in 2018 on glyphoaste toxicity to humans conducted by the US government Dept. of health using some 54,000 farmers and their families (amounting to over 90,000 people) who regularly used commercial glyphosate formulations (containing adjuvants), over a period of 23 years (see: http://www.dailynews.lk/2018/04/19/features/148615/glyphosate-ban-has-gmoa-studied-research/ ) . No unusual increased risk of cancer among them was found, when compared to the general population that does NOT use agrochemicals.
However, a controversy has been launched, mainly by the opponents of Genetically Modified (GM) Foods who also oppose glyphosate for its key role in GM agriculture, based on the fact that glyphosate is toxic to some micro-organisms and hence they argue, invoking the so-called “precautionary principle” that the glyphosate should be banned. Furthermore, based on such observations, the International Agency for Research into Cancer (IARC) ruled in 2014 that glyphosate may probably be carcinogenic to humans although not established to be so. This was prior to the 2018 Giant Study by the US Dept. of health. Hence at that time it was classified as a class-II carcinogen, unlike tobacco, wine or red meat which are established carcinogens and hence classified as class-I.
The anti-Glyhosate and anti-GM lobby continue to quote the IARC classification of 2018, while ignoring the JMPR press release of 2016, or the Giant US Dept. study released in 2018. When litigation is made against glyphosate, the jurors selected from the general public are already frightened by the fear-mongering that has gone on for decades against glyphosate, and court verdicts are invariably against the use of glyphosate.
Environmental organisations like the so-called “Friends of the earth”, Greenpeace, etc were warned by a joint press statement signed by 107 Nobel laureates (carried by, e.g., The Washington Post, July 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/29/more-than-100-nobel-laureates-take-on-greenpeace-over-gmo-stance/ ), inviting those “environmental organizations” to not to propagate false information or back so-called “research” which is “setup” to give results against agrochemicals and GM foods.
(b) The ban of Glyphosate by advanced countries is a strong indication that there is a problem with the use of Glyphosate.
This shows the political power of fear mongering against agrochemicals that started in the advanced countries. The legitimate cry of warning against the misuse of agrochemicals initiated in the 1970s by writers like Rachel Carson was used by Richard Nixon, a cunning US politician to win the Green vote in California by banning DDT, and imposing punitive sanctions on countries that use DDT. However, in 2006 the Pasteur Institute in France showed that the domestic use of DDT for the control of mosquitoes was completely safe, while its use in agriculture is not. The US still prevents the export of DDT to African countries where it is badly needed.
Most bans of glyphosate are “paper legislation”. Various politicians campaign to ban glyphosate, and even pass legislation, but remain without being gazetted or applied in practice, or the ban is lifted when farm incomes collapse, as in Sri Lanka. In Lichtenstein, the legislation contravenes EU rules and is under a Court Injunction. In France, President Macron promised to ban Gylphosate, but delayed its application indefinitely. In Macron’s new second term too, practical reality has displaced electoral polemics (see the review in the French newspaper Le Mond, 19-Oct-2022). Health Canada, US Dept. of Health, and similar agencies in the UK, Japan, China, India, and News Zealand have upheld the safety of glyphosate.
(c) There are numerous research articles by scientists on this topic… and that they emphasize the negative effects of the use of Glyphosate.
Indeed, when scientists differ, the public (as well as scientists who are not directly in research on the topic) should follow the mainstream point of view. Google, Scopus etc., should be used for an initial search and only peer-reviewed publications or symposia sponsored by learned societies should be used. The WHO, FAO and their offshoots like IARC, JMPR etc., provide the main-stream scientific view on pesticide usage.
The “numerous research articles” against glyphosate may quote reviews articles, e.g., by Mayers et al (2016, Environmental Health, DOI 10.1186/s12940-016-0117-0) or that by Vandenberg (2017), “Is it time to assess current safety standards for glyphosate-based herbicides? However, such reassessments, even those published since the 2018 completely and conveniently ignore the Giant Study by the US Dept. of health and similar studies in their so-called “reassessments! The EU will make a new official reassessment in December 2022, and most probably re-affirm its usage for another four years.
(d) We should not forget that the multinationals are famous for influencing even the scientific researchers by providing grants for research and PhD degrees. So, if such contrary results can be found … the scientific community has not conclusively given their verdict on this issue
This is precisely why we should follow the UN-based international organisations like the WHO, FAO etc. rather than individual Ph.D studies. The influence-peddling multinationals are not just agrochemical companies, but also foreign-funded NGOs and political operators and organic-food lobby group wanting to capture a larger share of the food market. At present they cater merely to the elite strata, and provide less than 2% of the world’s food needs. In spite of their efforts, many large chains of organic food in Europe have filed bankruptcy in the inflationary aftermath of Covid.
An Engineer launching a building project follows the accepted Building code rather than the ancient “Mayaamatha” building manual based on astrology used medieval ancient Sri Lanka.
The views on agriculture expressed by “Friends of the Earth” groups, self-styled “Environmental Justice” activists, the likes of Vanadana Shiva in India, Ven Ratana, or Ven SamanthaBadhra of the Umandawa project, (or the views of Prof. Nalin de Silva who rejects modern science as a fallacious Western tool for domination), or those who push the teachings of “traditional hela agriculture”, are inconsistent with main-stream science.
While Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore and many other countries that lagged behind Sri Lanka in the 1960s are now advanced countries with high standards of living, Sri Lanka has failed due to continued experiments with its destiny by implementing ideology-based developmental policies inspired by jingoism and “revolution”, rather than depending on evidence-based technology-inspired policies.
Opinion
The policy of Sinhala Only and downgrading of English
In 1956 a Sri Lankan politician riding a great surge of populism, made a move that, at a stroke, disabled a functioning civil society operating in the English language medium in Sri Lanka. He had thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
It was done to huge, ecstatic public joy and applause at the time but in truth, this action had serious ramifications for the country, the effects have, no doubt, been endlessly mulled over ever since.
However, there is one effect/ aspect that cannot be easily dismissed – the use of legal English of an exact technical quality used for dispensing Jurisprudence (certainty and rational thought). These court certified decisions engendered confidence in law, investment and business not only here but most importantly, among the international business community.
Well qualified, rational men, Judges, thought rationally and impartially through all the aspects of a case in Law brought before them. They were expert in the use of this specialised English, with all its meanings and technicalities – but now, a type of concise English hardly understandable to the casual layman who may casually look through some court proceedings of yesteryear.
They made clear and precise rulings on matters of Sri Lankan Law. These were guiding principles for administrative practice. This body of case law knowledge has been built up over the years before Independence. This was in fact, something extremely valuable for business and everyday life. It brought confidence and trust – essential for conducting business.
English had been developed into a precise tool for analysing and understanding a problem, a matter, or a transaction. Words can have specific meanings, they were not, merely, the play- thing of those producing “fake news”. English words as used at that time, had meaning – they carried weight and meaning – the weight of the law!
Now many progressive countries around the world are embracing English for good economic and cultural reasons, but in complete contrast little Sri Lanka has gone into reverse!
A minority of the Sinhalese population, (the educated ones!) could immediately see at the time the problems that could arise by this move to down-grade English including its high-quality legal determinations. Unfortunately, seemingly, with the downgrading of English came a downgrading of the quality of inter- personal transactions.
A second failure was the failure to improve the “have nots” of the villagers by education. Knowledge and information can be considered a universal right. Leonard Woolf’s book “A village in the Jungle” makes use of this difference in education to prove a point. It makes infinitely good politics to reduce this education gap by education policies that rectify this important disadvantage normal people of Sri Lanka have.
But the yearning of educators to upgrade the education system as a whole, still remains a distant goal. Advanced English spoken language is encouraged individually but not at a state level. It has become an orphaned child. It is the elites that can read the standard classics such as Treasure Island or Sherlock Holmes and enjoy them.
But, perhaps now, with the country in the doldrums, more people will come to reflect on these failures of foresight and policy implementation. Isn’t the doldrums all the proof you need?
by Priyantha Hettige
Opinion
GOODBYE, DEAR SIR
It is with deep gratitude and profound sorrow that we remember Mr. K. L. F. Wijedasa, remarkable athletics coach whose influence reached far beyond the track. He passed away on November 4, exactly six months after his 93rd birthday, having led an exemplary and disciplined life that enabled him to enjoy such a long and meaningful innings. To those he trained, he was not only a masterful coach but a mentor, a friend, a steady father figure, and an enduring source of inspiration. His wisdom, kindness, and unwavering belief in every young athlete shaped countless lives, leaving a legacy that will continue to echo in the hearts of all who were fortunate enough to be guided by him.
I was privileged to be one of the many athletes who trained under his watchful eye from the time Mr. Wijedasa began his close association with Royal College in 1974. He was largely responsible for the golden era of athletics at Royal College from 1973 to 1980. In all but one of those years, Royal swept the board at all the leading Track & Field Championships — from the Senior and Junior Tarbat Shields to the Daily News Trophy Relay Carnival. Not only did the school dominate competitions, but it also produced star-class athletes such as sprinter Royce Koelmeyer; sprint and long & triple jump champions Godfrey Fernando and Ravi Waidyalankara; high jumper and pole vaulter Cletus Dep; Olympic 400m runner Chrisantha Ferdinando; sprinters Roshan Fernando and the Indraratne twins, Asela and Athula; and record-breaking high jumper Dr. Dharshana Wijegunasinghe, to name just a few.
Royal had won the Senior & Junior Tarbats as well as the Relay Carnival in 1973 by a whisker and was looking for a top-class coach to mould an exceptionally talented group of athletes for 1974 and beyond. This was when Mr. Wijedasa entered the scene, beginning a lifelong relationship with the athletes of Royal College from 1974 to 1987. He received excellent support from the then Principal, late Mr. L. D. H. Pieris; Vice Principal, late Mr. E. C. Gunesekera; and Masters-in-Charge Mr. Dharmasena, Mr. M. D. R. Senanayake, and Mr. V. A. B. Samarakone, with whom he maintained a strong and respectful rapport throughout his tenure.
An old boy of several schools — beginning at Kandegoda Sinhala Mixed School in his hometown, moving on to Dharmasoka Vidyalaya, Ambalangoda, Moratu Vidyalaya, and finally Ananda College — he excelled in both sports and studies. He later graduated in Geography, from the University of Peradeniya. During his undergraduate days, he distinguished himself as a sprinter, establishing a new National Record in the 100 metres in 1955. Beyond academics and sports, Mr. Wijedasa also demonstrated remarkable talent in drama.
Though proudly an Anandian, he became equally a Royalist through his deep association with Royal’s athletics from the 1970s. So strong was this bond that he eventually admitted his only son, Duminda, to Royal College. The hallmark of Mr. Wijedasa was his tireless dedication and immense patience as a mentor. Endurance and power training were among his strengths —disciplines that stood many of us in good stead long after we left school.
More than champions on the track, it is the individuals we became in later life that bear true testimony to his loving guidance. Such was his simplicity and warmth that we could visit him and his beloved wife, Ransiri, without appointment. Even long after our school days, we remained in close touch. Those living overseas never failed to visit him whenever they returned to Sri Lanka. These visits were filled with fond reminiscences of our sporting days, discussions on world affairs, and joyful moments of singing old Sinhala songs that he treasured.
It was only fitting, therefore, that on his last birthday on May 4 this year, the Old Royalists’ Athletic Club (ORAC) honoured him with a biography highlighting his immense contribution to athletics at Royal. I was deeply privileged to co-author this book together with Asoka Rodrigo, another old boy of the school.
Royal, however, was not the first school he coached. After joining the tutorial staff of his alma mater following graduation, he naturally coached Ananda College before moving on to Holy Family Convent, Bambalapitiya — where he first met the “love of his life,” Ransiri, a gifted and versatile sportswoman. She was not only a national champion in athletics but also a top netballer and basketball player in the 1960s. After his long and illustrious stint at Royal College, he went on to coach at schools such as Visakha Vidyalaya and Belvoir International.
The school arena was not his only forte. Mr. Wijedasa also produced several top national athletes, including D. K. Podimahattaya, Vijitha Wijesekera, Lionel Karunasena, Ransiri Serasinghe, Kosala Sahabandu, Gregory de Silva, Sunil Gunawardena, Prasad Perera, K. G. Badra, Surangani de Silva, Nandika de Silva, Chrisantha Ferdinando, Tamara Padmini, and Anula Costa. Apart from coaching, he was an efficient administrator as Director of Physical Education at the University of Colombo and held several senior positions in national sporting bodies. He served as President of the Amateur Athletic Association of Sri Lanka in 1994 and was also a founder and later President of the Ceylonese Track & Field Club. He served with distinction as a national selector, starter, judge, and highly qualified timekeeper.
The crowning joy of his life was seeing his legacy continue through his children and grandchildren. His son, Duminda, was a prominent athlete at Royal and later a National Squash player in the 1990s. In his later years, Mr. Wijedasa took great pride in seeing his granddaughter, Tejani, become a reputed throwing champion at Bishop’s College, where she currently serves as Games Captain. Her younger brother, too, is a promising athlete.
He is survived by his beloved wife, Ransiri, with whom he shared 57 years of a happy and devoted marriage, and by their two children, Duminda and Puranya. Duminda, married to Debbie, resides in Brisbane, Australia, with their two daughters, Deandra and Tennille. Puranya, married to Ruvindu, is blessed with three children — Madhuke, Tejani, and Dharishta.
Though he has left this world, the values he instilled, the lives he shaped, and the spirit he ignited on countless tracks and fields will live on forever — etched in the hearts of generations who were privileged to call him Sir (Coach).
NIRAJ DE MEL, Athletics Captain of Royal College 1976
Deputy Chairman, Old Royalists’ Athletics Club (ORAC)
Opinion
Why Sri Lanka needs a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Sri Lanka is now grappling with the aftermath of the one of the gravest natural disasters in recent memory, as Cyclone Ditwah and the associated weather system continue to bring relentless rain, flash floods, and landslides across the country.
In view of the severe disaster situation, Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne had to amend the schedule for the Committee Stage debates on Budget 2026, which was subsequently passed by Parliament. There have been various interpretations of Budget 2026 by economists, the business community, academics, and civil society. Some analyses draw on economic expertise, others reflect social understanding, while certain groups read the budget through political ideology. But with the country now trying to manage a humanitarian and economic emergency, it is clear that fragmented interpretations will not suffice. This is a moment when Sri Lanka needs a unified, responsible, and collective “national reading” of the budget—one that rises above personal or political positions and focuses on safeguarding citizens, restoring stability, and guiding the nation toward recovery.
Budget 2026 is unique for several reasons. To understand it properly, we must “read” it through the lens of Sri Lanka’s current economic realities as well as the fiscal consolidation pathway outlined under the International Monetary Fund programme. Some argue that this Budget reflects a liberal policy orientation, citing several key allocations that support this view: strong investment in human capital, an infrastructure-led growth strategy, targeted support for private enterprise and MSMEs, and an emphasis on fiscal discipline and transparency.
Anyway, it can be argued that it is still too early to categorise the 2026 budget as a fully liberal budget approach, especially when considering the structural realities that continue to shape Sri Lanka’s economy. Still some sectors in Sri Lanka restricted private-sector space, with state dominance. And also, we can witness a weak performance-based management system with no strong KPI-linked monitoring or institutional performance cells. Moreover, the country still maintains a broad subsidy orientation, where extensive welfare transfers may constrain productivity unless they shift toward targeted and time-bound mechanisms. Even though we can see improved tax administration in the recent past, there is a need to have proper tax rationalisation, requiring significant simplification to become broad-based and globally competitive. These factors collectively indicate that, despite certain reform signals, it may be premature to label Budget 2026 as fully liberal in nature.
Overall, Sri Lanka needs to have proper monitoring mechanisms for the budget. Even if it is a liberal type, development, or any type of budget, we need to see how we can have a budget monitoring system.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office
Whatever the budgets presented during the last seven decades, the implementation of budget proposals can always be mostly considered as around 30-50 %. Sri Lanka needs to have proper budget monitoring mechanisms. This is not only important for the budget but also for all other activities in Sri Lanka. Most of the countries in the world have this, and we can learn many best practices from them.
Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is essential for strengthening Sri Lanka’s fiscal governance and ensuring that public spending delivers measurable value. Such an office would provide an independent, data-driven mechanism to track budget implementation, monitor programme outcomes, and evaluate whether ministries achieve their intended results. Drawing from global best practices—including India’s PFMS-enabled monitoring and OECD programme-based budgeting frameworks—the office would develop clear KPIs, performance scorecards, and annual evaluation reports linked to national priorities. By integrating financial data, output metrics, and policy outcomes, this institution would enable evidence-based decision-making, improve budget credibility, reduce wastage, and foster greater transparency and accountability across the public sector. Ultimately, this would help shift Sri Lanka’s budgeting process from input-focused allocations toward performance-oriented results.
There is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in Sri Lanka’s economy, where export diversification, strengthened governance, and institutional efficiency become essential pillars of reform. Establishing a National Budget Performance and Evaluation Office is a critical step that can help the country address many long-standing challenges related to governance, fiscal discipline, and evidence-based decision-making. Such an institution would create the mechanisms required for transparency, accountability, and performance-focused budgeting. Ultimately, for Sri Lanka to gain greater global recognition and move toward a more stable, credible economic future, every stakeholder must be equipped with the right knowledge, tools, and systems that support disciplined financial management and a respected national identity.
by Prof. Nalin Abeysekera ✍️
-
Features5 days agoFinally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight
-
News7 days agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
News6 days agoCyclone Ditwah leaves Sri Lanka’s biodiversity in ruins: Top scientist warns of unseen ecological disaster
-
News7 days agoRising water level in Malwathu Oya triggers alert in Thanthirimale
-
Features5 days agoHandunnetti and Colonial Shackles of English in Sri Lanka
-
Business3 days agoCabinet approves establishment of two 50 MW wind power stations in Mullikulum, Mannar region
-
Business7 days agoSri Lanka betting its tourism future on cold, hard numbers
-
News6 days agoJetstar to launch Australia’s only low-cost direct flights to Sri Lanka, with fares from just $315^
