Trump’s EPA has approved several new pesticides and expanded the use of another, despite warnings from scientists and environmental groups about potential cancer, reproductive, and ecological risks.

The central event is supported by reporting published in July 2026. The Environmental Protection Agency approved several new pesticide products and authorized additional agricultural uses for chlormequat chloride. Reports identify the new approvals as including fluoxapiprolin, epyrifenacil and trifludimoxazin, although other accounts name a partly different set of products. That variation means the supplied sources do not establish one definitive list, but they consistently support the broader claim that multiple new pesticides were approved and another received expanded uses.thehill.comthehill.comTrump administration approves controversial pesticidescnn.comcnn.comPFAS pesticides approved after EPA changes definition of toxicity+3 more

Environmental and watchdog groups warned that some of the pesticides may contain PFAS or otherwise pose potential health and environmental risks, including cancer and reproductive concerns. CNN and Newsweek also reported scientific or expert discussion of toxicity and pesticide risks. The wording of the claim is appropriately qualified as “potential” risks and as warnings from critics, rather than asserting that the approvals caused confirmed illness or environmental damage.newsweek.comnewsweek.comTrump Embraces Pesticides After Previously Promising Crackdownibtimes.co.ukibtimes.co.ukTrump Approves Toxic Cancer-Linked Forever Chemical Pesticides On Major Food...+3 more

The EPA presents a competing assessment. In a November 2025 fact check, the agency said its evaluations found no human-health risks of concern when the pesticides were used according to their approved labels. The agency also said its approvals included restrictions intended to protect human health, the environment and endangered species. Those statements do not negate the fact that outside scientists and environmental groups raised concerns, but they do mean the claim should not be read as establishing that the pesticides are proven carcinogens, reproductive hazards or ecological threats.epa.govepa.govFACT CHECK: EPA Debunks False Claims that Agency Recently Approved "Forever...epa.govepa.govEPA is Racking Up Massive Environmental Accomplishments Under the Trump...

The claim is therefore substantially accurate about the approvals and the existence of warnings, but it omits the EPA’s contrary safety assessment and leaves some uncertainty about the exact products involved. The evidence supports “Mostly True” rather than a stronger rating because the risk language concerns allegations and potential hazards, not confirmed harms, and the supplied search extracts do not provide the underlying EPA registration documents or complete scientific evaluations.