History and Organization of IARC
- Founded in 1965 by a resolution of the World Health Assembly
- Initiated by Yves Poggioli's letter to Emmanuel dAstier de la Vignerie
- Supported by French president Charles de Gaulle and World Health Organization director Marcolino Gomes Candau
- Headquarters located in Lyon, France
- Past directors include John Higginson, Lorenzo Tomatis, Paul Kleihues, Peter Boyle, Christopher Wild, and Elisabete Weiderpass
- Five founding states: US, France, Italy, West Germany, and UK
- IARC collaborates with organizations like European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition
- IARC works closely with National Cancer Institute (US)
- IARC focuses on genotoxic and mutagenic substances
- China joined IARC in May 2021
IARC Monographs and Classifications
- IARC Monographs series started in 1970
- Identifies carcinogenic hazards based on qualitative assessment of animal and human evidence
- Classifies agents, mixtures, and exposures into five categories
- Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans (e.g., tobacco smoke, alcoholic beverages)
- Group 2A: Probably carcinogenic to humans (e.g., emissions from high-temperature frying of food, night shift work)
- Controversy over classification of items like mobile phones and processed meat
Controversies and Reactions
- Transparency concerns raised from 1998 to 2004
- Lorenzo Tomatis accused IARC of softpedaling risks of industrial chemicals
- Critics targeted conflicts of interest and lack of transparency
- IARC defended its procedures, highlighting limited industry involvement
- Voting details not published to protect integrity of the deliberative process
- Glyphosate Monograph controversy
- IARC classified glyphosate as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A) in 2015
- National regulatory authorities reevaluated glyphosate's risk
- Regulators in Europe, Canada, Japan, and New Zealand found no significant carcinogenic risk
- California listed glyphosate as unsafe chemical
- Industry and Congressional reactions to IARC's evaluations
Funding Controversy and Methodology Criticism
- U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a briefing on NIH's grant funding to IARC
- NIH gave IARC over $1.2 million in 2016
- Congressman Jason Chaffetz asked for details on NIH's grant standards
- Congressman Robert Aderholt questioned the funding of IARC
- IARC defends its methods and transparency
- Working Group classified red meat and processed meat as carcinogenic
- Marcel Kuntz criticized the classification for not assessing exposure risks
- Ed Yong criticized IARC's confusing category system
- IARC stated its mission is to determine the strength of carcinogenic evidence
Aspartame Classification and Miscellaneous Information
- IARC classified aspartame as possibly carcinogenic in 2023
- Lead investigator clarified the classification as a call for further research
- WHO expert committee reaffirmed the safety of consuming aspartame within recommended limits
- FDA disagreed with IARC's conclusion, citing shortcomings in the studies relied upon
- No reason to change recommended daily intake level for aspartame
- Miscellaneous information about IARC's headquarters, publication of Monographs, role in evaluating carcinogenicity, and significance of findings in shaping public health policies