It's all about "how much?" and "over which time period?" and "where did you put it into your body?" to determine if something will kill you or cause cancer.
Also note that glyphosate is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) by the FDA, which means that it can be used in any quantity. With that designation, arguments about dosage carry less weight for me. If a regulatory agency were concerned with dosages in final food products, I'd feel a lot more comfortable.
Thusly my argument on dosages in final food products hold and I feel fairly comfortable. I suggest either petitioning the FDA to introduce food safety standards or moving to another country with food safety standards.
Most natural pesticide and herbicide show bad affect on young people brain developpement. I would be really surprised if a chemical, more potent one was harmless.
If it barely or not at all goes through then there should be less of an impact.
Indeed it's the dosage and not the substance, even if it will sound stupid when somebody on your funeral says that you were crushed by a ton of cherries.
While activists exaggerate to persuade people it's not safe because it might be carcinogenic, the author is on the other extreme: it's safe until proven otherwise.
It also sports a fair share of whataboutism: "what about bacon, that's also considered carcinogenic!?".