Helena Bottemiller Evich

And this is really a big point of conflict.

So there is a really active debate in this space.

The EPA has long maintained that glyphosate doesn't present a public health risk.

EPA has ruled that glyphosate is not likely to be a carcinogen.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is more commonly known as IARC, that's part of the World Health Organization,

They ruled that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic.

That was mainly looking at animal studies.

One of the key studies that everyone has long pointed to to sort of back up the safety of glyphosate, however, was recently retracted.

And that has thrown up this red flag and I think really...

fueled even more Maha concern that there are reasons to think that glyphosate might be contributing to cancer.

Juries in the U.S.

have awarded billions of dollars to individuals who believe their cancer cases were caused by glyphosate, and Bayer, which makes glyphosate, is now under tremendous pressure in the courts.

So what Kennedy has said publicly is that he personally believes that glyphosate does cause cancer.

That is not the Trump administration's official position, to be very clear.

He has backed the president's executive order here, basically saying,

look, we are currently dependent on glyphosate.

The US agricultural system currently relies on this and we can't just walk away from it.

It would be disastrous.

He backs up the idea that we need to produce more domestically for national security reasons.

This, however, has made, I mean, the Maha moms, the Maha advocates are absolutely furious over his defense of this executive order.