It is all playing with the statistics. How the risk of getting cancer grows if one eats glyphosate? How does it compare to other factors, like pollution, obesity, etc.
We used to have a similar discussion about contraceptive pills, at some point there was research that they increase probability of getting cancer by 30%. Holy crap, 30%!!!
Sounds horrible, right? Some political groups that call themselves "right wing" pick this subject up immediately.
The point is that you calculate this 30% out of a very small probability value and, as a result, it is negligible if you look on other factors like smoking, bad food, pollution, alcohol or drugs usage or genetic factors. They increase getting cancer by thousands percent, so, in practice, contraceptives influence is not practically important, as it might affect just a few cases out of millions.
Same with herbicides. What if we stop using them, are we able to stop the biggest killer from old times, various fungus, that grow on plant, are not visible but very toxic. Does the risk of consuming glyphosates is that big so we can drop it and risk something else?
How about prices, food will be more expensive, people in Europe will perceive themselves poorer and will riot. Bollocks! What an absurd claim, you say, Europeans are rich as they've never been!
Objectively this is true, the point is people are not objective - see what happens in Germany, one of the richest countries on our planet. People got more expensive gas & oil and what happens? See how much popularity gets NSDAP reconstruction group, called AfD (in the polls they have 20% and still growing).
Is the cancer risk enough to justify a risk of getting us into political rumbles Western Europe hasn't seen since 1939?
And so on, this is not simple if you deal with something that might affect millions.