Why Are We Paying China to Poison Us?

Twelve of the fourteen companies that produce glyphosate—one of the most widely used and controversial agricultural chemicals on the planet—are based in China. They manufacture about 580,000 tons of it each year, but only use 10 percent of that supply domestically. The rest? They export it—mostly to us. The United States, Brazil, and Argentina are among their top customers.

And now, thanks to our own Congress, it just got a whole lot harder to do anything about it.

Tucked deep inside the latest federal appropriations bill was a quiet little provision called Section 453. Most people didn’t see it. Most members of Congress either didn’t understand the long-term consequences—or they did and wanted plausible deniability. No roll call vote was requested. That means no one’s name is tied to it. It passed with a whisper. It felt like a piece of theater, as if the outcome was pre-decided.

Section 453 gives chemical companies legal immunity. Even if their products are linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, infertility, or neurological disease, those companies cannot be held liable in court unless the Environmental Protection Agency changes the label on their product—something that can take years, even decades. And while we wait, people get sick. Children suffer. Families are left without recourse.

That quote hits me hard, because I lived it.

I spent 12 years living inside Knollwood Golf Course in Granada Hills, California. It looked pristine and peaceful, with green grass and quiet views. But what I didn’t know at the time was that I was living in the middle of a toxic storm. Those manicured fairways are routinely and heavily sprayed with chemicals. For more than a decade, my family breathed them in. I raised my children there. I now wonder: what price did we pay for that view?

Now, thanks to Section 453, if someone develops Parkinson’s or another serious illness from those exposures, they may have no legal path forward. The door to justice just slammed shut.

This provision was framed as a “labeling reform,” but let’s be clear: it was written to shield pesticide companies from lawsuits, not to help consumers. Legal experts and public health organizations have raised the alarm. Some are even calling it the “Cancer Gag Act” because it effectively gags states from warning the public about carcinogenic chemicals unless federal agencies act first.

This is the same tactic used decades ago to shield pharmaceutical companies from liability. Once vaccines were placed on the childhood schedule, manufacturers became immune to lawsuits—and the vaccine schedule exploded. That wasn’t science. That was profit without consequence. And now the same pattern is unfolding with pesticides. Only this time, it’s not a single shot—our air, water, soil, and food are being saturated.

These chemicals are also water-soluble. That means they’re not just on our crops—they’re in our beer, our bread, our baby food, our rivers, and our rain. And with Section 453 in place, those who suffer the consequences may never be able to seek justice.

And I can’t stop thinking about the fact that most of these chemicals are manufactured overseas, largely in China—a country that doesn’t use them the way we do. Why are we importing toxins that its own population is largely protected from? Why are we allowing U.S. lawmakers to grant legal immunity to foreign-backed chemical companies?

This isn’t just bad policy. It’s a violation of every mammalian instinct we should have—to protect our children, to safeguard our water, to preserve our land. Even wild animals have enough sense to keep their young away from poison. What are we doing?

Even though Section 453 has passed, the story isn’t over. Laws can be repealed. Public pressure can reverse policy. But we have to pay attention. We have to talk about it. We must stop allowing Congress to hide behind closed-door deals and vague language, and start holding lawmakers accountable for the outcomes that hurt real people.

Share this. Quote Ms. Munoz. Tell your story. Call your representatives. Because if we don’t speak now, we are signing the check for our own destruction—and handing it to the very companies that are profiting from our decline.

We are paying China to poison us. And now our own government has made it harder to say no.