New evidence of Roundup dangers

https://theintercept.com/2016/05/17/new-evidence-about-the-dangers-of-monsantos-roundup/

By Sharon Lerner

Until recently, the fight over Roundup has mostly focused on its active ingredient, glyphosate. But mounting evidence, including one study published in February, shows it’s not only glyphosate that’s dangerous, but also chemicals listed as “inert ingredients” in some formulations of Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed killers. Though they have been in herbicides — and our environment — for decades, these chemicals have evaded scientific scrutiny and regulation in large part because the companies that make and use them have concealed their identity as trade secrets.

From GM Watch: More Monsanto scientific fraud in early glyphosate "safety studies”?

EXCERPT: The author's analysis of the ABC [Laboratories] study refers over and again to scientific fraud -- involving the falsification of data, unsound scientific practice, scientific misconduct and blatant cheating.
—

More Monsanto scientific fraud in early glyphosate "safety studies"

GM-Free Cymru, 9 Nov 2015
http://www.gmfreecymru.org/news/Press_Notice07Nov2015.html

Yet another peer-reviewed journal article has demonstrated the scientifically fraudulent techniques used in Monsanto-sponsored glyphosate "safety" studies in the period when the company was seeking US approval for the controversial herbicide.

Dr Marek Cuhra has conducted a careful study (1) of all of the assessments made of the toxicity of glyphosate to aquatic organisms - and in particular the water-flea Daphnia magna. He discovered that the industry sponsored study conducted by McAllister and Forbis in 1978 for ABC laboratories (which was never published) purported to show that glyphosate was about 300 times less toxic than was revealed in later studies. And yet that deeply flawed study was used for the assessment of glyphosate toxicity by the American EPA and by other regulators worldwide, on the assumption that it was completely reliable. The study purported to show that glyphosate was effectively harmless, and that was accepted as a scientific "fact".

glypho

Monsanto was aware of glypho-cancer link

Monsanto’s secret studies reveal glyphosate link to cancer →

Monsanto has known for almost four decades that glyphosate causes cancer, according to a new paper by researchers Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff.
Samsel is the first independent researcher to examineMonsanto’s secret toxicology studies on glyphosate. He obtained the studies, which have been denied to other inquirers, via a request to his senator. With his co-researcher Dr Stephanie Seneff of MIT, he reviewed Monsanto’s data.
Samsel and Seneff concluded that “significant evidence of tumours was found during these investigations”. 

From DDT to Roundup, by Evaggelos Vallianatos

Ruthless Power and Deleterious Politics: From DDT to Roundup →

Resistance is now taking a new form: the removal of global toxins, unfortunately, one at a time. In early 2015, the usually timid and agribusiness-friendly, World Health Organization, declared both glyphosate and 2,4-D probable human carcinogens. Following on this modest step, in May 14, 2015, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, based in Basel, Switzerland, issued an appeal to the European governments: “To immediately and permanently ban, with no exceptions, the production, trade and use in all the EU territory of glyphosate-based herbicides.” The UK journalist, Georgina Downs,echoes that sentiment to include all pesticides.

Humans need a pesticides-free future. We need to appeal to all politicians all over the world to ban permanently and without exception all pesticides. Glyphosate represents all pesticides. Our message and policies should be telling agribusiness companies enough is enough: no more death rain. Monsanto, on the other hand, isbuilding additional facilities to manufacture another weed killer by the name of dicamba in order to mix it up with glyphosate. That way the joint product will be more effective against the super weeds resisting glyphosate.

Pesticides are chemical weapons. They were brought to market under the cover of questionable and often fraudulent science and regulation. They are maintained in farming under the false pretense of feeding the world. They are danger itself; they are biocides. They are simply the money lubricants of giant agriculture. They serve no public purpose. We don’t need them.

What next after a ban on glyphosate?

June 30, 2015

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE Dear Friends and Colleagues The African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB), the Network for a GE Free Latin America (RALLT) and the Third World Network have today released a briefing titled, What next after a ban on glyphosate—more toxic chemicals and GM crops? Or the transformation of global food systems.? The briefing has been prompted by the recent conclusion of the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC), of the World Health Organization (WHO), that glyphosate, the world’s most-used chemical ingredient for weed control, is a “probable human carcinogen”. In recent years, the use of glyphosate has come to be associated with herbicide-tolerant (HT) genetically modified (GM) crops, with glyphosate use increasing dramatically in all major GM HT crop-producing countries. The consequences for human health and the environment have been disastrous in many communities. A number of countries have already taken action to reduce or halt the use of glyphosate in response to the IARC assessment. While glyphosate is still in use and is heavily relied upon for GM soya production in particular, Monsanto and other biotechnology and agro-chemical companies are already planning for business after glyphosate. A plethora of GM crops that are tolerant to multiple toxic herbicides – including 2,4-D and dicamba – are already approved for the market, while Monsanto has recently sought the potential acquisition of Syngenta, the world’s largest producer of herbicides. The groups are calling for a ban on glyphosate, given the evidence. However, they insist that other toxic herbicides must similarly also come under urgent review and that adequate measures must be put in place to ensure that more toxic chemicals do not replace glyphosate.   Further, they argue that it is imperative that the IARC’s findings take the debate further—into deeper conversations about the characteristics of our food and agriculture systems and how they interact with and impact upon people and the environment. A shift is urgently needed from chemical-input agriculture to agro-ecology.  The groups are also calling for appropriate international bodies to initiate programmes for the fair and equitable reparations to affected people as well as the restoration and remediation of contaminated environments. The briefing is attached below. With best wishes Third World Network 131 Jalan Macalister 10400 Penang Malaysia Email: twn@twnetwork.org Website: http://www.biosafety-info.net/ and http://www.twn.my/ To unsubscribe: reply ‘unsubscribe’ to biosafety@twnetwork.org To subscribe to other TWN information services: www.twnnews.net

Printer friendly version

Download document(s): » Glyphosate report web.pdf (English - pdf - 1109 Kb)

Argentine independent scientists support WHO on glyphosate cancer link

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2015-articles/16078-argentine-independent-scientists-support-who-on-glyphosate-cancer-link

While the rest of the world takes on board the WHO’s verdict and moves forward, the UK Science Media Centre is in denial. Claire Robinson reports

Scientist defends WHO group report linking herbicide to cancer

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/03/26/us-monsanto-herbicide-idINKBN0MM2JR20150326

By Carey Gilliam

(Reuters) - A World Health Organization group's controversial finding that the world's most popular herbicide "probably is carcinogenic to humans" was based on a thorough scientific review and is a key marker in ongoing evaluations of the product, the scientist who led the study said Thursday.

"There were several studies. There was sufficient evidence in animals, limited evidence in humans and strong supporting evidence showing DNA mutations ... and damaged chromosomes," Aaron Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute, said in an interview.

Blair chaired the 17-member working group of the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which rocked the agricultural industry on March 20 by classifying glyphosate as "probably" cancer-causing.

Want to wipe out earthworms and ruin your soil? Use glypho

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15775-
want-to-wipe-out-earthworms-and-ruin-your-soil-use-glyphosate

21 November 2014.

Using glyphosate puts worms at "risk of local extinction" – study

Using glyphosate herbicide can wipe out local earthworm populations, a new study (below) shows. Even under the regular dose for perennial weeds, the earthworm population showed negative growth rates, meaning there were not enough young worms to replace the old ones as they died out. This means the local worm population could rapidly go extinct.

Given the irreplaceable work that earthworms do to keep the soil healthy, and the negative effects of glyphosate herbicide on beneficial soil microorganisms, it's no surprise that Roundup Ready crop cultivation is associated by some farmers with poor soil quality.

Glyphosate Sublethal Effects on the Population Dynamics of the Earthworm
Eisenia fetida (Savigny, 1826)

Marina Santadino, Carlos Coviella, Fernando Momo
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution
November 2014, 225:2207
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11270-014-2207-3

Abstract

Pesticides’ sublethal effects are not regularly taken into account when assessing agrochemical’s toxicity. With the objective of detecting chronic, sublethal effects of the widely used herbicide glyphosate, an experiment was performed using the earthworm Eisenia fetida as model organism. Earthworm adults were randomly assigned to three glyphosate treatments: control (no glyphosate), regular dose for perennial weeds, and double dose. Six E. fetida individuals were placed in each pot. Two random pots were taken weekly from each treatment and the number of adults, individual weight, number of cocoons, and presence and number of young earthworms were recorded. A matrix analysis was performed with the data. The matrix population model built showed that while the control population had a positive growth rate, both glyphosate treatments showed negative growth rates. The results suggest that under these sublethal effects, non-target populations are at risk of local extinction, underscoring the importance of th[ese] type of studies in agrochemical environmental risk assessment.

Glyphosate and the deterioration of American health

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15774-glyphosate-
and-the-deterioration-of-america-s-health

Is the rise in glyphosate use since the advent of GM crops responsible for the rapid deterioration of health in the US in the last 20 years?

A new study by former US Navy scientist Dr Nancy Swanson and co-authors asks this question. The study charts the huge increase in 22 chronic diseases in the US over the last 20 years and plots it against the rise in the use of glyphosate and the percentage of GM corn and soy plantings.

New study shows honeybees harmed by herbicide used on GMO crops

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15710-new-
study-shows-honeybees-harmed-by-herbicide-used-on-gmo-crops

21 October 2014.

Glyphosate herbicide can disrupt learning behaviour in honeybees and severely impair long-term colony performance

EXCERPT: The scientists who conducted the new study used field-realistic levels of glyphosate, similar to what honeybees may encounter on a farm growing GMOs. They found that learning behavior and short-term memory retention decreased significantly compared with the control groups.

1. New study shows honeybees harmed by herbicide used on GMO crops
2. Effects of field-realistic doses of glyphosate on honeybee appetitive behaviour

1. New study shows honeybees harmed by herbicide used on GMO crops

Judson Parker
examiner.com, 15 Oct 2014
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-shows-honeybees-harmed-
by-herbicide-used-on-gmo-crops

One of every three bites of food we eat is from a crop pollinated by honeybees.

2. Effects of field-realistic doses of glyphosate on honeybee appetitive behaviour

Herbert LT, Vázquez DE, Arenas A, Farina WM
J Exp Biol. 2014 Oct 1;217(Pt 19):3457-64. doi: 10.1242/jeb.109520. Epub 2014 Jul 25.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25063858

Abstract

Glyphosate (GLY) is a broad-spectrum herbicide used for weed control. The sub-lethal impact of GLY on non-target organisms such as insect pollinators has not yet been evaluated. Apis mellifera is the main pollinator in agricultural environments and is a well-known model for behavioural research. Honeybees are also accurate biosensors of environmental pollutants and their appetitive behavioural response is a suitable tool with which to test sub-lethal effects of agrochemicals. We studied the effects of field-realistic doses of GLY on honeybees exposed chronically or acutely to the herbicide. We focused on sucrose sensitivity, elemental and non-elemental associative olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response (PER), and foraging-related behaviour. We found a reduced sensitivity to sucrose and learning performance for the groups chronically exposed to GLY concentrations within the range of recommended doses. When olfactory PER conditioning was performed with sucrose reward with the same GLY concentrations (acute exposure), elemental learning and short-term memory retention decreased significantly compared with controls. Non-elemental associative learning was also impaired by an acute exposure to GLY traces. Altogether, these results imply that GLY at concentrations found in agro-ecosystems as a result of standard spraying can reduce sensitivity to nectar reward and impair associative learning in honeybees. However, no effect on foraging-related behaviour was found. Therefore, we speculate that successful forager bees could become a source of constant inflow of nectar with GLY traces that could then be distributed among nestmates, stored in the hive and have long-term negative consequences on colony performance.

Nature magazine op-ed on weeds

http://www.nature.com/news/a-growing-problem-1.15382?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20140612

NATURE | EDITORIAL, 11 June 2014  

A growing problem

Without careful stewardship, genetically engineered crops will do little to stop the spread of herbicide-resistant weeds.


EXCERPTS:

Palmer pigweed (Amaranthus palmeri) is not a weed to trifle with. It can reach more than 2.5 metres tall, grow more than 6 centi­metres a day, produce 600,000 seeds and has a tough, woody stem that can wreck farm equipment that tries to uproot it.

It is also becoming more and more resistant to the popular herbicide glyphosate.

The first such resistant population was confirmed in 2005 in a cotton field in Georgia, and the plant now plagues farmers in at least 23 US states. 

There is broad agreement that the spread of these resistant plants has its roots in the widespread adoption of crops engineered to be resistant to glyphosate.

By 2012, glyphosate-resistant weeds had infested 25 million hectares of US cropland. They have also appeared in other countries that have embraced glyphosate-tolerant crops, including Australia, Brazil and Argentina. Blanketing crops year after year in the same herbicide is the perfect way to foster resistant weeds.

Chemical companies have come up with a solution: crops engineered to tolerate multiple herbicides. The likelihood of a weed becoming resistant to more than one chemical, they claim, is very small. And, in an eerie echo of the 1990s discussion around glyphosate tolerance, some even point out that one of the other herbicides being targeted — the choline salt of an old chemical called 2,4-D — has been used for decades with little sign of resistance.

It is a flawed argument. Stacking up tolerance traits may delay the appearance of resistant weeds, but probably not for long. Weeds are wily: farmers have already reported some plants that are resistant to more than five herbicides. And with glyphosate-resistant weeds already in many fields, the chances of preventing resistance to another are dropping.

“Extreme levels” of Roundup in GM soybeans

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1064

Publication date: April 22, 2014  

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE   

Levels of Roundup so high that even Monsanto calls them “extreme” now appear to be the norm for GM soybeans, recent research shows. Residues of glyphosate (and its breakdown product AMPA) were found in high concentrations in GM soybeans resistant to the herbicide Roundup, but not in conventional or organic soybeans. (See BIS 21 March 2014, High Residues of Glyphosate Accumulate in Roundup Ready Soybeans). 

All of the individual samples of GM soybean were found to contain residues of both glyphosate and AMPA, on average 9.0 mg/kg. Monsanto had previously claimed that residue levels of up to 5.6 mg/kg in GM soybeans represent “extreme levels, and far higher than those typically found”. Seven out of the 10 GM soybean samples tested surpassed this “extreme level” (of glyphosate + AMPA), indicating a trend towards higher residue levels. 

An article by the authors is reproduced below. They point to a worrisome outlook for health and the environment, found in the combination of (i) the vast increase in use of glyphosate-based herbicides, in particular due to glyphosate-resistant GM plants, and (ii) new findings of higher toxicity of both glyphosate as an active and increased toxicity due to contributions from chemical adjuvants in commercial formulations. 

The full research paper (Bøhn et al. 2014) is available (open access) at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201 

High residues of glyphosate accumulate in Roundup Ready soybeans

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1063

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE  


Dear friends and colleagues, 

Re: High residues of glyphosate accumulate in Roundup Ready soybeans 

Research published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Chemistry has found residues of glyphosate (and its breakdown product AMPA) in high concentrations in GM soybeans, but not in conventional or organic soybeans. The study examined 31 samples of soybeans grown within a defined area within the state of Iowa, USA.  

GM soy engineered to be glyphosate resistant is the number one GM crop plant. The herbicide glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide globally. For herbicide-resistant GM plants, herbicide co-technology is an integral part of the production system and will always be used by the farmer.  

However, little attention has been given to the residues of herbicides and their metabolites that can potentially accumulate in the final product. Chemical residues, if present, are important because they are clearly a part of a plant’s composition, and they may add toxic properties to the final plant product either by itself or by affecting the plant metabolism. (There has been increasing research demonstrating the potential health impacts of glyphosate.) 

The authors suggest that the increased use of glyphosate on Roundup Ready soybeans in the US, which has contributed to the selection of glyphosate-tolerant weeds, and resulted in a response of increased doses and/or more applications used per season, may explain the plant tissue accumulation of glyphosate.  

Lack of data on pesticide residues in major crop plants is a serious gap of knowledge with potential consequences for human and animal health. The authors therefore recommend the following:

(i)                 increased effort on sampling and testing crop material from the market;

(ii)   testing for possible dose-response effects of chemical residues in long-term feeding studies;

(iii) inclusion of pesticide residue measurements and safety testing in the regulatory system for risk assessment of GM crops; and

(iv) further research on the indirect ecological effects of herbicides and pesticides.  

The study also showed that different agricultural practices may result in a markedly different nutritional composition of soybeans, with organic soybeans having the healthiest nutritional profile compared to GM and conventional soybeans.  

In sum, the data demonstrated that different agricultural practices lead to markedly different end products, i.e. there is no substantial equivalence between the three management systems of herbicide resistant GM, conventional and organic agriculture.  

Organic Consumers Association Comments on New Study Showing Glyphosate Found in Mothers' Breast Milk

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_29697.cfm

Calls on U.S. Regulatory Agencies to Ban Monsanto's Roundup
Organic Consumers Association, April 7, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 7, 2014
 
CONTACT: Organic Consumers Association, Katherine Paul, 207.653.3090

FINLAND, Minn. – The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) today called on U.S. regulatory agencies, including the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ban the use of glyphosate based on a new pilot study showing that the toxic herbicide was found in the breast milk of American women. This finding contradicts industry claims that glyphosate is does not accumulate in human tissue.

“For years Monsanto has claimed that glyphosate, the key active ingredient in its Roundup-brand herbicide is ‘safe’ because the human body excretes it,” said Ronnie Cummins, national director of the OCA. “This pilot study is the first of its kind to prove that Monsanto is wrong. In fact, this preliminary study shows that glyphosate accumulates in our bodies, and mothers are now passing the toxin on to their infants via breast milk.”

Results of the pilot study, conducted by Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse, with support from Environmental Arts & Research, were released today. While the numbers are small, they are alarming. The study  revealed that the levels found in the breast milk of American women were found to be 760 to 1600 times higher than the European Drinking Water Directive allows for individual pesticides (Glyphosate is both a pesticide and herbicide), but less than the 700 ug/l maximum contaminant level (MCL) for glyphosate in the U.S.

The EPA, arguing that glyphosate is not bio-accumulative, recently raised the limits for the amount of glyphosate residue allowed on human food.

The study also analysed 35 urine samples and 21 drinking water samples from across the U.S. and found levels in urine that were over 10 times higher than those found in a similar survey done in the EU by Friends of the Earth Europe in 2013.

According to Sustainable Pulse, glyphosate-containing herbicides are the top-selling herbicides in the world and are sold under trademarks such as Monsanto’s ‘Roundup’. Monsanto’s sales of Roundup jumped 73 percent to $371 million in 2013 because of its increasing use on genetically engineered crops (GE Crops). Glyphosate has also been found to be a powerful pesticide.

“This is another in a long line of studies showing the many ways in which glyphosate poses a real danger to human health,” Cummins said. “It’s time for Americans to demand that the FDA, USDA and EPA ban this toxin for good. Until then, at the very least, the FDA must require labels on foods that contain this dangerous toxin. And the best way to do that is to require mandatory labelling of foods that contain genetically modified organisms, most of which derive from crops that require massive amounts of Monsanto’s Roundup.

We must also stop retailers from selling Roundup to consumers, for use on their lawns and gardens. And we need to put an end to the use of Roundup by municipalities to control weeds in parks and roadways. The best way to accomplish all of this is to ban Roundup and other glyphosate-containing herbicides and pesticides for good.” Cummins said.

The study will be used to launch a country-wide plan for a follow-up study on blood, urine and breast milk with a significant number of samples carried out using the best testing equipment available and overlooked by expert scientists, according to the authors who have already secured funding for more extensive tests.

Compositional differences in soybeans on the market: glyphosate accumulates in Roundup Ready GM soybeans

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1053

Bøhn, T.^1,2, Cuhra, M.^1,2, Traavik, T.^1,2, Sanden, M.³, Fagan, J.⁴ and Primicerio, R.²  

¹ GenØk, Centre for Biosafety, P.O. Box 6418, 9294 Tromsø, Norway

² Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Tromsø, 9019 Tromsø, Norway

³ National Institute of Nutrition and Seafood Research, NIFES, P.O. Box 2029, 5817 Bergen, Norway

⁴ Earth Open Source, 2nd Floor 145-157, St. John Street, London EC1V 4PY, United Kingdom  

Corresponding author: Thomas Bøhn, GenØk, Centre for Biosafety, P.O. Box 6418, 9294 Tromsø, Norway. Email: thomas.bohn@genok.no. Phone: +4777644541  

ABSTRACT  

This article describes the nutrient and elemental composition, including residues of 21 herbicides and pesticides, of 31 soybean batches from Iowa, USA. The soy samples were grouped into three different categories: i) genetically modified, glyphosate-tolerant soy (GM-soy); ii) unmodified soy cultivated using a conventional “chemical” cultivation regime; and iii) unmodified soy cultivated using an organic cultivation regime. Organic soybeans showed the healthiest nutritional profile with more sugars, such as glucose, fructose, sucrose and maltose, significantly more total protein, zinc and less fibre than both conventional and GM-soy. Organic soybeans also contained less total saturated fat and total omega-6 fatty acids than both conventional and GM-soy. GM-soy contained high residues of glyphosate and AMPA (mean 3.3 and 5.7 mg/kg, respectively). Conventional and organic soybean batches contained none of these agrochemicals. Using 35 different nutritional and elemental variables to characterise each soy sample, we were able to discriminate GM, conventional and organic soybeans without exception, demonstrating “substantial non-equivalence” in compositional characteristics for ‘ready-to-market’ soybeans.  

High residues of glyphosate accumulate in Roundup Ready soybeans

http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=1053

Publication date: March 21, 2014  

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE  

 Dear friends and colleagues, 

Research published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Chemistry has found residues of glyphosate (and its breakdown product AMPA) in high concentrations in GM soybeans, but not in conventional or organic soybeans. The study examined 31 samples of soybeans grown within a defined area within the state of Iowa, USA.  

GM soy engineered to be glyphosate resistant is the number one GM crop plant. The herbicide glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide globally. For herbicide-resistant GM plants, herbicide co-technology is an integral part of the production system and will always be used by the farmer.  

However, little attention has been given to the residues of herbicides and their metabolites that can potentially accumulate in the final product. Chemical residues, if present, are important because they are clearly a part of a plant’s composition, and they may add toxic properties to the final plant product either by itself or by affecting the plant metabolism. (There has been increasing research demonstrating the potential health impacts of glyphosate.) 

The authors suggest that the increased use of glyphosate on Roundup Ready soybeans in the US, which has contributed to the selection of glyphosate-tolerant weeds, and resulted in a response of increased doses and/or more applications used per season, may explain the plant tissue accumulation of glyphosate.  

Lack of data on pesticide residues in major crop plants is a serious gap of knowledge with potential consequences for human and animal health. The authors therefore recommend the following:

(i)                 increased effort on sampling and testing crop material from the market;

(ii)   testing for possible dose-response effects of chemical residues in long-term feeding studies;

(iii)  inclusion of pesticide residue measurements and safety testing in the regulatory system for risk assessment of GM crops; and

(iv)  further research on the indirect ecological effects of herbicides and pesticides.  

The study also showed that different agricultural practices may result in a markedly different nutritional composition of soybeans, with organic soybeans having the healthiest nutritional profile compared to GM and conventional soybeans.  

In sum, the data demonstrated that different agricultural practices lead to markedly different end products, i.e. there is no substantial equivalence between the three management systems of herbicide resistant GM, conventional and organic agriculture.  

New info on glyphosate

TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE:
http://www.biosafety-info.net/article.php?aid=994

August 22, 2013

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE Dear Friends and Colleagues  Re: New Evidence on the Health Impacts of Glyphosate  Glyphosate is the world’s most popular herbicide, applied not only on farms but also in forests, parks, public spaces and gardens. It is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s ‘Roundup’ and is regularly used in the widespread cultivation of the company’s Roundup Ready crops genetically engineered to be resistant to glyphosate. For years, industry has claimed that glyphosate is minimally toxic to humans but new studies indicate otherwise.  A new Thai in-vitro study on human cells (Item 1) shows that glyphosate induces the growth of human breast cancer cells via estrogen receptors. Even low, environmentally relevant doses were found to stimulate estrogenic activity. In addition, the study found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. This is worrying as glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used in soybean cultivation.  Another study found that acute Roundup exposure at low doses for 30 minutes disrupts male reproductive functions by triggering calcium-mediated cell death in rat testis and Sertoli cells (Item 2). Sertoli cells play an important role in sperm cell production and hence male fertility.  Glyphosate residues have been found in the main foods of the Western diet, comprised primarily of sugar, corn, soy and wheat. New research by Friends of the Earth detected glyphosate residues in the urine of 44 per cent of people tested from 18 different European countries (Item 3).  Another study (Item 4) presents evidence that glyphosate could disrupt gut bacteria, suppress the CYP enzyme class, and likely impair suphate transport, thereby inducing disease. One of the roles of CYP enzymes is to detoxify xenobiotics (foreign chemicals found in a living organism). This means that glyphosate could effectively enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and environmental toxins. According to the authors, the medical conditions to which glyphosate could plausibly contribute to include inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, depression, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis, cancer, cachexia, infertility, and developmental malformations. The researchers call for more independent research to validate the findings presented and if verified, to take immediate action to drastically curtail the use of glyphosate in agriculture.

EPA to raise allowable limit of glyphosate residue in produce

http://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/ob384.html

Subscribe & Read Past Issues | OCA Homepage | Donate  ESSAY OF THE WEEK Another Monsanto Handout: EPA Set to Raise Limits on Glyphosate In another glaring example of how Monsanto has the U.S. government in the palm of its Roundup Ready-covered hands, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is poised to raise – yes, raise – the limits for glyphosate residue allowed on fruits and vegetables sold in the U.S. stores. Glyphosate is the key ingredient in Roundup, Monsanto’s widely used broad-spectrum herbicide. The deadline to tell the EPA what you think of its new ruling is July 1. The new EPA ruling is incomprehensible in light of the barrage of new studies revealing how much more dangerous glyphosate is than we originally thought. Monsanto’s story has always been that Roundup is harmless to animals and humans. Not so, say scientists who point out the many ways in which glyphosate causes widespread systemic damage to human health. One recent study found traces of the poison in the bodies of people in 18 European countries. And far more glyphosate is used in the U.S. than in Europe. Unless the EPA changes its mind, and decides to protect us rather than Monsanto, flax oil, canola oil, soybean oil and olive oil will be allowed to contain glyphosate residues of over 100,000 times the concentration known to cause cancer. And that’s just the half of it. Read the essay View the EPA Regulation TAKE ACTION BY JULY 1: Tell the EPA to Lower the Allowed Limits for Monsanto’s Roundup!

Ban Roundup

http://www.capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=58917511&type=ML

Ban Monsanto's Birth-Defect-&-Cancer-Causing RoundUp! Tell the EPA to Ban Glyphosate

Take Action Now!

The EPA is currently conducting a "Registration Review" of glyphosate. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto's herbicide RoundUp. The EPA will be making a final decision no earlier than 2015.

 

The EPA has the power to ban glyphosate, and it should, given glyphosate is:

• linked to cancer
• causing birth defects
• worse than DDT
• spawning super-weeds that reduce yields, and
• responsible for a deadly new pathogen that is plaguing plants with new diseases and animals (including humans) with infertility.

A new peer-reviewed research paper by the French group of Gilles-Eric Seralini reveals devastating effects on rats fed diets containing genetically modified corn, with and without the herbicide Roundup, as well as Roundup alone. Rats that spent their lives drinking water contaminated with RoundUp (at levels allowed in U.S. drinking water) developed enormous cancerous tumors and died prematurely. Seralini's study extends the work of others which have demonstrated the toxicity and/or endocrine-based impacts of Roundup. This peer-reviewed study has been criticized by scientists with ties to the biotech industry whose views have been widely reported in the popular press, but independent scientists back the study.