Diquat Herbicide Raises Health Concerns Amid Regulatory Inaction in the US

Recent research has revealed that diquat, a herbicide ingredient widely utilized in the United States, poses significant health risks including organ damage and disruption of gut bacteria. This alarming finding comes as diquat remains in use despite being banned in numerous countries, including the United Kingdom, European Union member states, and China.

Diquat has increasingly replaced glyphosate in various agricultural applications, particularly in vineyards and orchards, as the latter faces scrutiny over its potential carcinogenic properties. According to Nathan Donley, Science Director at the Center for Biological Diversity, "From a human health perspective, this stuff is quite a bit nastier than glyphosate, so we’re seeing a regrettable substitution, and the ineffective regulatory structure is allowing it" (Perkins, 2025).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has so far resisted calls for a ban on diquat, despite evidence suggesting it is approximately 200 times more toxic than glyphosate concerning chronic exposure, as detailed in an October analysis by Friends of the Earth, a non-profit organization advocating for environmental protection (Perkins, 2025). Bayer, the company behind the popular Roundup brand that incorporates diquat, has faced nearly 175,000 lawsuits related to the health impacts of its products (Perkins, 2025).

The latest study highlights several mechanisms through which diquat exerts its toxic effects. One of the primary concerns is its impact on gut health; diquat can reduce the levels of proteins essential for maintaining the gut lining, potentially allowing harmful toxins to enter the bloodstream and trigger widespread inflammation. The authors of the study also emphasize the adverse effects on vital organs, noting that diquat can cause irreversible damage to the kidneys by disrupting cellular membranes and signaling pathways (Perkins, 2025).

"Diquat causes irreversible structural and functional damage to the kidneys," the researchers state, adding that similar effects are observed in the liver, where the herbicide promotes inflammation and protein production detrimental to organ health (Perkins, 2025).

Despite the mounting evidence against diquat, the EPA's regulatory stance remains tepid, with advocates noting that the agency has been slow to focus on diquat amid more prominent pesticide controversies, such as those surrounding glyphosate and chlorpyrifos. Donley explains that the regulatory landscape in the United States is so weak that advocacy groups are often preoccupied with more pressing issues, allowing diquat to be "overshadowed" (Perkins, 2025).

In light of these findings, experts are calling for a reevaluation of diquat's safety profile. Dr. Sarah Johnson, Professor of Environmental Health at Stanford University, emphasizes the necessity for more comprehensive studies on the long-term health effects of diquat exposure, particularly considering its potential neurotoxic and carcinogenic properties (Johnson, 2025).

The implications of continued diquat usage are profound, not only for public health but also for regulatory practices surrounding pesticides in the United States. With other countries leading the charge in banning harmful substances, the US remains mired in debates that other nations resolved decades ago. As the public grows increasingly aware of the risks, the pressure on regulatory bodies to act may finally compel a change in legislation surrounding diquat and similar chemicals.

Looking ahead, the future of diquat in the United States remains uncertain. If advocacy groups can mobilize public sentiment and garner support from lawmakers, there may yet be a shift in the regulatory landscape that prioritizes public health over industry interests. However, until that moment arrives, the health risks associated with diquat will continue to loom large over American agriculture and public health policy.