HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » EPA Raises Levels of Glyp...

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:31 PM

EPA Raises Levels of Glyphosate Residue Allowed in Food

Source: realfarmacy.com By Laura Sesana

WASHINGTON, July 5, 2013 – The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has raised the permitted tolerance levels of glyphosate residue—the controversial herbicide and active ingredient in Monsanto’s Round Up—in many of the fruits and vegetables that you eat.

Last spring, when the media was clamoring against the Senate’s passing of the so-called “Monsanto Protection Act,” the EPA quietly promoted the rule change regarding glyphosate levels without much attention from the media or public.

The new regulation raises glyphosate levels in oilseed crops, which include sesame, flax, and soybean, from 20 parts per million (ppm), to 40 ppm. It also raises the allowable glyphosate contamination level for sweet potatoes and carrots from 0.2 ppm to 3 ppm for sweet potatoes and 5ppm for carrots, that’s 15 and 25 times the previous levels.

The change in tolerance levels affects several other agricultural products, including animal feed, root crops and fruit trees. While the regulation is effective beginning May 1, 2013, there was an open comment session, closing July 1, that received over 10,800 comments against the proposed change in regulation. It is unlikely, however, that the comments will have any bearing on the decision, which is already final.

Read more: http://www.realfarmacy.com/epa-raises-levels-of-glyphosate-residue-allowed-in-food/



"... 15 and 25 times the previous levels."

67 replies, 8167 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 67 replies Author Time Post
Reply EPA Raises Levels of Glyphosate Residue Allowed in Food (Original post)
Coyotl Jul 2013 OP
another_liberal Jul 2013 #1
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #16
JoeyT Jul 2013 #39
Celefin Jul 2013 #65
drokhole Jul 2013 #53
fasttense Jul 2013 #2
nineteen50 Jul 2013 #6
Ford_Prefect Jul 2013 #25
NCarolinawoman Jul 2013 #3
forestpath Jul 2013 #4
loudsue Jul 2013 #29
MotherPetrie Jul 2013 #5
GliderGuider Jul 2013 #11
L0oniX Jul 2013 #7
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #17
Inkfreak Jul 2013 #27
roseBudd Jul 2013 #35
Berlum Jul 2013 #66
cprise Jul 2013 #8
RILib Jul 2013 #10
awoke_in_2003 Jul 2013 #32
AndyA Jul 2013 #9
truedelphi Jul 2013 #37
roody Jul 2013 #12
ctsnowman Jul 2013 #13
SamKnause Jul 2013 #14
truedelphi Jul 2013 #38
roseBudd Jul 2013 #57
truedelphi Jul 2013 #62
truedelphi Jul 2013 #63
TRoN33 Jul 2013 #15
Major Nikon Jul 2013 #18
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #20
curlyred Jul 2013 #22
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #24
Major Nikon Jul 2013 #26
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #44
roseBudd Jul 2013 #60
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #61
Coyotl Jul 2013 #49
Major Nikon Jul 2013 #50
Coyotl Jul 2013 #54
Major Nikon Jul 2013 #55
roseBudd Jul 2013 #42
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #45
roseBudd Jul 2013 #56
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #19
roseBudd Jul 2013 #43
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #46
Crow73 Jul 2013 #21
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #23
Major Nikon Jul 2013 #28
mikeypooh Jul 2013 #30
avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #33
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #40
roseBudd Jul 2013 #58
roseBudd Jul 2013 #47
awoke_in_2003 Jul 2013 #31
avaistheone1 Jul 2013 #34
DeSwiss Jul 2013 #36
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #51
blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #41
Festivito Jul 2013 #48
Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #52
roseBudd Jul 2013 #59
Celefin Jul 2013 #64
BronxBoy Jul 2013 #67

Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:40 PM

1. The cumulative build up isn't even considered, one assumes.

What will be the effects from cumulative build up of these chemical compounds? Wasn't that even mentioned?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:54 PM

16. Interesting point. How much does glyphosphate build up in the human system?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #16)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 11:09 PM

39. I don't think anyone knows yet.

Even if it doesn't build up in the human system, the damage it causes appears to increase the more you're exposed to it.

The only study I could find seems to indicate that it's at least got some harmful properties, but mostly more study is needed.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1253709/

I'm not opposed to glyphosphate being used on crops. I'm opposed to it being used on crops that are immune to it. I use it in my fields. If I accidentally hit a plant, it dies horribly and doesn't get eaten. If it doesn't die it gets pulled up and replaced. They're easy to find: It bleaches watermelon vines snow white for example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #16)

Sun Jul 7, 2013, 06:05 AM

65. Probably only to a very small degree if at all

Glyphosate itself is highly soluble in water and doesn't bind well (if at all) to tissue.
Microbial degradation product: aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) - it has a very similar chemical structure to Glyphosate and exhibits the same properties
Photodgradation products: sarcosine & glycine - non-essential amino acids metabolised by the body

The ready-to-use formulation of Roundup is probably more toxic than its active ingredient.
All of this doesn't make the arguments against prolific pesticide use any less valid, mind you. But shooting at glyphosate's toxicity might be a waste of ammunition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #1)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 11:31 AM

53. Not to mention the effect it has/would have on succeeding generations...

Effect of the herbicide glyphosate on enzymatic activity in pregnant rats and their fetuses (NIH)

Lab Study Establishes Glyphosate Link to Birth Defects

Differential Effects of Glyphosate and Roundup on Human Placental Cells and Aromatase (NIH)

"Here we show that glyphosate is toxic to human placental JEG3 cells within 18 hr with concentrations lower than those found with agricultural use, and this effect increases with concentration and time or in the presence of Roundup adjuvants."

Glyphosate-Based Herbicides Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signaling (ACS)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:41 PM

2. Disgusting

What good is the increased levels except to pour more round up all over our food. I'm so glad I grow certified naturally grown. Not a bit of glyphosate on our farm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:57 PM

6. Profit is the goal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:44 PM

25. The bad news is that it can travel in the water table as well as up the food chain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:44 PM

3. Bought and paid for.

As usual.

What a sorry bunch. Guess they don't eat anything like the rest of us mere mortals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:48 PM

4. EPA just like Obama is in Monsanto's pockets.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #4)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 05:18 PM

29. Lookout. Your post is going to get deleted.

The "juries" are stacked these days. Anyone who doesn't like Obama gets their posts deleted. I've had 90% of my posts critical of Obama deleted in the past 2 months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 02:50 PM

5. Just like Bush was still in office

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #5)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:30 PM

11. Yep. The corporations don't care which pol is nominally in charge

So long as when they say "Jump!" he remembers to ask, "How high?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:03 PM

7. They are fucking killing us!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:55 PM

17. I know what you mean. Millions dead from glyphosate already, and they don't care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #17)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 05:01 PM

27. lol! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #17)

Sun Jul 7, 2013, 06:28 AM

66. You can live a long time with Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinsons & ALS.

It's misery, but you can go on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:04 PM

8. Buy organic

Its the most effective way to sidestep this dangerous trend.

If you can buy only a little organic, the best choices are: Corn, apples, rice and wheat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #8)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:20 PM

10. Amy's organic soy

 

Just learned recently that Amy's has managed to get organic soy for their foods.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #8)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 06:18 PM

32. Dont worry....

they are working on expanding the definition of organic, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:17 PM

9. It's so comforting to know that the governmental agencies taxpayers pay for are looking out for us

Oh, wait...

Guess nothing will change until millions of Americans take to the streets in protest, as has happened in other countries. That seems to be the only thing that really brings about change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 10:57 PM

37. + 1. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:38 PM

12. All those foods, when organic, are relatively affordable.

I'll be buying the organic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:49 PM

13. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:49 PM

14. Food ???

Corporations control everything in the United States.

They control our government.

They control the governmental protection agencies.

They control the military.

They control the media.

They control all commodities.

They control our finances.

They control our judicial system.

I am sick and tired of living in a country with corporate law !!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SamKnause (Reply #14)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 11:02 PM

38. And even people who are so brainwashed

That they have willingly traded freedom for security will be feeling sick and tired.

The crops that grow on RoundUp-contaiminated soil lack key and essential nutrients. And researchers in Caens, France found that the organs of rats fed the vomitoxin contaminated GM crops were disintegrating, were pre-cancerous and did not work!

Of course, that just makes it better for the Big Hospital industry, as they schedule liver transplants for people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #38)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 03:42 PM

57. "The crops that grow on RoundUp-contaiminated soil lack key and essential nutrients." False

"researchers in Caens, France found that the organs of rats fed the vomitoxin contaminated GM crops were disintegrating, were pre-cancerous and did not work! "

Seralini's research was worthless. All we learned is that Sprague-Dawley rats allowed to eat as much as they desire, don't live to be 2.

When the left becomes as bad as climate change deniers, we have a problem.

science not BS activism confirmation bias, which I am confident you won't read

a SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS of the rat study conducted by
Gilles-Eric Séralini et al.

http://www.vib.be/en/news/Documents/20121008_EN_Analyse%20rattenstudie%20S%C3%A9ralini%20et%20al.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #57)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 05:04 PM

62. Your disputing the Caens researchers may or may not be valid.

i know there are literally hundreds of ways that any one research study can be set up, so whether the Caens team did or didn't do their work properly I don't know.

But please explain ths one point to me, and a valid point it is: as long as I have been looking into the world of Big Pesticides, and GM foods and seeds, any time any researcher points out that there is a problem, with an independent study, you don't see monsanto, with all its billions of dollars of profit saying, "We are not totally satisfied with the way the test and research was done, but the concerns are legit that we so far have not looked into any long term testing to see how animals fare years down the line. Since we have the money to do this, we will undertake a more proper test ourselves."

Why is it the case that the Major Companies do slipshod tests and studies of their products? Vaccines are tested six months, if that. Pesticides tested even less.

Not once in my 40 years of investigating these matters did I ever ever discover any large corporation doing this. A test sample is too small, a Big Firm will announce, and so the research is given the gong. Thousands of times this "gonging" of studies has been done, and none of these companies ever ever take it upon themselves to do a proper test. How does that make sense? Why would you even trust these companies? We are the only developed nation on earth that does not have gas spectrography analysis of the components of a product asking for EPA approval. We let the companies tell us what is in the product.

For instance, Do you know that when you use "Simple Green" with it s environmentally charming assertions about how it doesn't affect streams or waterways, you are inhaling ether, and absorbing i through your skin if you don't use gloves? ! Bet you didn't know that. Ether was banned on account of how it builds up in our bodies, so that the lives of anesthesiologists would be spared, bu there are no laws prohibiting ether being in cleaning products! (By the way the initial, Roundup Test that supposed showed it was safe involved Monsanto researchers feeding it to dogs, which is a crap research test, because when glyphosate is ingested, it performs differently and involves different immune pathways than when it is inhaled. Since RoundUp is inhaled, then the whole test was pointless, but it was this initial test that allowed Monsanto to get the EPA to sign off on licensing the product for sale to the general public. (Monsanto also lied about the fact their product contained formaldehyde, as without an aldehyde the stuff would be in cake-like form and not sprayable.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #57)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 07:41 PM

63. BTW, i would love to know if you ahe seen this article, or ones similar,

And what your reaction is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 03:50 PM

15. The head of EPA used to work for...

No surprise here, Monsanto. Fucking EPA. Fucking Monsanto. Fucking Senate and House for sold us out. Fucking carcinogenic agents in the foods!

Wondering why the corn allergen are the fastest growing in America at this very moment? Both of my children have it. When we went to Europe, they can eat any of their foods and when we came back and attempt to feed them the same foods they ate at Europe, they got sick and had a lot of reactions all over their bodies.

Fuck you, Monsanto for being a threat to my children and children across the world who are suffering a lot from corn allergens. Monsanto is a biggest threat to this world than any kinds of terrorists because they can control the seeds.

One woman, let say I called her Dora, she said this certain words, "Forget the bullets and bombs. Seeds are now the newest and greatest warfare weapons."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TRoN33 (Reply #15)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:00 PM

18. The last EPA administrator was a career civil servant

She is a chemical engineer and most of her experience is in environmental protection. She was a very competent and experienced administrator. The current acting administrator also has a very long tenure with environmental protection and never worked for Monsanto. He was COO of the National Audubon Society at one time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #18)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:06 PM

20. Facts don't matter with this crowd.

Fingers in the ears. Never read a scientific article. Running on pure emotion.

It's sad this is what parades as environmentalism these days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #20)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:37 PM

22. The poster has 110 posts and so is hardly "this crowd"

Broad brush characterization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to curlyred (Reply #22)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:42 PM

24. Please feel free to scan this thread for some nuggets of scientific truth.

Then get back to me about my "this crowd" comment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #20)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:57 PM

26. Peer reviewed study published in 2000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #26)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:40 AM

44. Excellent post. Highlights:

Experimental evidence has shown that neither glyphosate nor AMPA bioaccumulates in any animal tissue. No significant toxicity occurred in acute, subchronic, and chronic studies. Direct ocular exposure to the concentrated Roundup formulation can result in transient irritation, while normal spray dilutions cause, at most, only minimal effects. The genotoxicity data for glyphosate and Roundup were assessed using a weight-of-evidence approach and standard evaluation criteria. There was no convincing evidence for direct DNA damage in vitro or in vivo, and it was concluded that Roundup and its components do not pose a risk for the production of heritable/somatic mutations in humans. Multiple lifetime feeding studies have failed to demonstrate any tumorigenic potential for glyphosate.


etc etc etc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #44)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 04:02 PM

60. Does no one care about the suffering of the weeds? Weeds deserve to live

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #60)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 04:33 PM

61. ..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #26)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 10:18 AM

49. human poisoning with this herbicide is not with the active ingredient alone but with complex and var

"human poisoning with this herbicide is not with the active ingredient alone but with complex and variable mixtures. "

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862083

"...There is a reasonable correlation between the amount ingested and the likelihood of serious systemic sequelae or death. Advancing age is also associated with a less favourable prognosis. Ingestion of >85 mL of the concentrated formulation is likely to cause significant toxicity in adults. Gastrointestinal corrosive effects, with mouth, throat and epigastric pain and dysphagia are common. Renal and hepatic impairment are also frequent and usually reflect reduced organ perfusion. Respiratory distress, impaired consciousness, pulmonary oedema, infiltration on chest x-ray, shock, arrythmias, renal failure requiring haemodialysis, metabolic acidosis and hyperkalaemia may supervene in severe cases. Bradycardia and ventricular arrhythmias are often present pre-terminally. Dermal exposure to ready-to-use glyphosate formulations can cause irritation and photo-contact dermatitis has been reported occasionally; these effects are probably due to the preservative Proxel (benzisothiazolin-3-one). Severe skin burns are very rare. Inhalation is a minor route of exposure but spray mist may cause oral or nasal discomfort, an unpleasant taste in the mouth, tingling and throat irritation. Eye exposure may lead to mild conjunctivitis, and superficial corneal injury is possible if irrigation is delayed or inadequate. Management is symptomatic and supportive, and skin decontamination with soap and water after removal of contaminated clothing should be undertaken in cases of dermal exposure."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #49)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 11:06 AM

50. I'm not sure you fully understand what you just posted

You do realize the authors are talking about intentional or accidental ingestion of relatively large amounts of Roundup, and not exposure due to pesticide residue, yes?

>85 ml is more than 1/3rd of a cup in imperial or US measure. So there's a good reason for placing Roundup out of the reach of children, just like lots of other household chemicals. There's also recorded instances of some ingesting >500ml (more than 2 cups) with mild to moderate effects.

Between 1 January 1980, and 30 September 1989, 93 cases of exposure to herbicides containing glyphosphate and surfactant ('Roundup') were treated at Changhua Christian Hospital. The average amount of the 41% solution of glyphosate herbicide ingested by non-survivors was 184 +/- 70 ml (range 85-200 ml), but much larger amounts (500 ml) were reported to have been ingested by some patients and only resulted in mild to moderate symptomatology.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1673618

So basically if you ingest >85 ml of roundup you might die, or you might just get a mild case of the shits. Also keep in mind that ingestion via pesticide exposure to produce is measured in parts per million and roundup doesn't bioaccumulate in the body.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #50)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:28 PM

54. I can read, trust me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #54)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 03:29 PM

55. OK, just not sure how this is relevant to "Glyphosate Residue Allowed in Food"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #20)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:38 AM

42. What is sad is there are real issues, time wasted on BS hysteria...

hurts the real issues. Like climate. Goes to credibility. The OMG GMO causes every illness known to man and will cause extinction of the human race, shows the left is just as capable of stupid as the climate change deniers on the right.

Round Up has been around for decades. Bt effects alkaline insect guts, not acidic mammalian guts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #42)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:42 AM

45. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

A breath of fresh air in an otherwise toxic environment of emotionalism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #45)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 03:37 PM

56. I don't jump on band wagons. I do research by seeking uunbiased sources...

And I Fucking Love Science.

Climate change guarantees we will need biotechnology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TRoN33 (Reply #15)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:04 PM

19. Fucking EPA! Fucking Monsanto! Bob Perciasepe used to work for .... what?



No, he never worked for Monsanto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #19)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:40 AM

43. Is this Glenn Beck's blackboard?

Because you know George Soros provided some funding for the Tides Foundation, which was a good enough reason for a Tea bagger to go on a road trip to assassinate people at Tides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #43)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:44 AM

46. ..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:10 PM

21. Round-Up Causes Birth Defects

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crow73 (Reply #21)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 04:41 PM

23. You believe the science is even close to settled on that issue?

It is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #23)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 05:04 PM

28. The issue raised contained no new research

It was simply an analysis of existing research and as far as I can tell was not peer reviewed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #23)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 05:30 PM

30. Yeah

It's a great idea to spray food crops with poison. And then ingest that poison in ever greater amounts. I'm sure that's fine.

I'm off to do some shots of Roundup since, you know, the science isn't settled about exactly how bad it is for lifeforms to ingest it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #23)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 08:29 PM

33. By the same token you could say science isn't close to settled that humans are the cause of

global warming. But then you would be wrong.

I think there is enough good science on both of these subjects for reasonable people to agree: Roundup is bad for humans and most other living things, and that global warming is caused by human activity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to avaistheone1 (Reply #33)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 11:20 PM

40. If someone said the science isn't settled on global warming,...

... it would be because they know nothing of the science.

Likewise, anyone who makes the specious claim that Roundup is linked to a myriad of human diseases is unfamiliar with the science.

In both cases, there is no shortage of internet-based misinformation available to support those wrong-headed claims.

By the way, I would never argue against "Roundup is bad for humans", but there is a huge chasm between discouraging people from drinking the concentrate and worrying about getting cancer or whatever from Roundup treated plants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #40)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 03:53 PM

58. I smell a rat. As in shiny objects divert attention.

I suspect climate change deniers are behind the Monsanto fear mongering, as in a shiny object meant to send the left down a rabbit hole.

The first signatory on one of those "800 Scientists BLAH BLAH HATE GMOs" add your name here via the internet, is a climate change denier.

http://www.desmogblog.com/david-bellamy

"Bellamy's signature is displayed alongside a full-page ad funded by the CATO institute that appeared in numerous newspapers including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune in 2009.

The advertisement criticizes President Obama's declaration that "few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change," claiming that "with all due respect Mr. President, that is not true."

The ad claims "there has been no net global warming for over a decade," and that the dangers associated with global warming are "grossly overstated."

Institute OF Science in Society

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/list.php

And the name is a clever attempt to confuse, because it sounds so much like the respectable institution.

Institute FOR Science in Society

http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/iss/index.aspx

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crow73 (Reply #21)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 09:45 AM

47. No, really

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10854122

Safety evaluation and risk assessment of the herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, for humans.
Williams GM, Kroes R, Munro IC.
Source
Department of Pathology, New York Medical College, Valhalla 10595, USA.
Abstract
Reviews on the safety of glyphosate and Roundup herbicide that have been conducted by several regulatory agencies and scientific institutions worldwide have concluded that there is no indication of any human health concern. Nevertheless, questions regarding their safety are periodically raised. This review was undertaken to produce a current and comprehensive safety evaluation and risk assessment for humans. It includes assessments of glyphosate, its major breakdown product , its Roundup formulations, and the predominant surfactant used in Roundup formulations worldwide. The studies evaluated in this review included those performed for regulatory purposes as well as published research reports. The oral absorption of glyphosate and AMPA is low, and both materials are eliminated essentially unmetabolized. Dermal penetration studies with Roundup showed very low absorption. Experimental evidence has shown that neither glyphosate nor AMPA bioaccumulates in any animal tissue. No significant toxicity occurred in acute, subchronic, and chronic studies. Direct ocular exposure to the concentrated Roundup formulation can result in transient irritation, while normal spray dilutions cause, at most, only minimal effects. The genotoxicity data for glyphosate and Roundup were assessed using a weight-of-evidence approach and standard evaluation criteria. There was no convincing evidence for direct DNA damage in vitro or in vivo, and it was concluded that Roundup and its components do not pose a risk for the production of heritable/somatic mutations in humans. Multiple lifetime feeding studies have failed to demonstrate any tumorigenic potential for glyphosate. Accordingly, it was concluded that glyphosate is noncarcinogenic. Glyphosate, AMPA, and POEA were not teratogenic or developmentally toxic. There were no effects on fertility or reproductive parameters in two multigeneration reproduction studies with glyphosate. Likewise there were no adverse effects in reproductive tissues from animals treated with glyphosate, AMPA, or POEA in chronic and/or subchronic studies. Results from standard studies with these materials also failed to show any effects indicative of endocrine modulation. Therefore, it is concluded that the use of Roundup herbicide does not result in adverse effects on development, reproduction, or endocrine systems in humans and other mammals. For purposes of risk assessment, no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) were identified for all subchronic, chronic, developmental, and reproduction studies with glyphosate, AMPA, and POEA. Margins-of-exposure for chronic risk were calculated for each compound by dividing the lowest applicable NOAEL by worst-case estimates of chronic exposure. Acute risks were assessed by comparison of oral LD50 values to estimated maximum acute human exposure. It was concluded that, under present and expected conditions of use, Roundup herbicide does not pose a health risk to humans.
PMID: 10854122

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 06:16 PM

31. Change. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 08:30 PM

34. Monsanto sucks.

K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2013, 09:41 PM

36. Time to die.

- They don't give a shit.

K&R

GMO's FROM MONSANTO HAVE NEVER MET MINIMUM SCIENTIFIC TESTING PROTOCOLS AND STANDARDS

"Our study contradicts Monsanto conclusions because Monsanto systematically neglects significant health effects in mammals that are different in males and females eating GMO's, or not proportional to the dose. This is a very serious mistake, dramatic for public health. This is the major conclusion revealed by our work, the only careful reanalysis of Monsanto crude statistical data."

Other Problems With Monsanto's Conclusions

When testing for drug or pesticide safety, the standard protocol is to use three mammalian species. The subject studies only used rats, yet won GMO approval in more than a dozen nations.

Chronic problems are rarely discovered in 90 days; most often such tests run for up to two years. Tests "lasting longer than three months give more chances to reveal metabolic, nervous, immune, hormonal or cancer diseases," wrote Seralini, et al, in their Doull rebuttal.

Further, Monsanto's analysis compared unrelated feeding groups, muddying the results. The June 2009 rebuttal explains, "In order to isolate the effect of the GM transformation process from other variables, it is only valid to compare the GMO … with its isogenic non-GM equivalent."

The researchers conclude that the raw data from all three GMO studies reveal novel pesticide residues will be present in food and feed and may pose grave health risks to those consuming them.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeSwiss (Reply #36)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 11:11 AM

51. You do realize that this is about Roundup and not GMOs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:04 AM

41. POISON

And you can wash it down with your fracked water, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 10:07 AM

48. I guess the effects will be none of our beeswax. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Festivito (Reply #48)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 11:12 AM

52. Actually the effects of Roundup on humans have been published in the scientific literature...

... and discussed on this thread!

(all disguised in words)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #52)

Sat Jul 6, 2013, 04:01 PM

59. Perhaps the Round Up haters all live in condos & are thus blissfully unaware...

that the landscaping work they don't do, employs the use of chemicals that kill certain plants.

Without Round Up, I would not have a yard. I would live in a briar of unwanted invasive Japanese honeysuckle, invasive European buckthorn, & more Mulberry, Hackberry, Black Walnut trees and Rose of Sharon bushes, than any one property could hope to accommodate.

I have more Rose of Sharon, Buckthorn, Mulberry and Honeysuckle to cut and spray. It is encroaching on my Crepe Myrtles, Blackberries and Raspberries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jul 7, 2013, 05:35 AM

64. There are a multitude of reasons to limit glyphosate use...

but toxicity of glyphosate or its microbial and photo-degradation products -aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA); sarcosine and glycine- does not seem to be one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Original post)

Sun Jul 7, 2013, 12:36 PM

67. This is where I often feel that well meaning folks....

go astray. Shallo and misplaced analysis does no one any good.

The issue right now is not what the effects of Roundup is on human health. I think that is a longer term issue that is worthy of discussion. I think the immediate concern is why the acceptable levels had to be raised at this point in time. If Roundup is doing its job as its supposed to do, why the need for a dramatic increase in allowable usage?

Well I'm just a farmer and not a scientist but I think the answer has to do in large part with the increasing prevalence of Roundup resistant weeds. Here in Georgia, Glyphosate resistant weeds, especially pigweed. is becoming an ever increasing problem. Could this be why the acceptable levels were increased? The weeds have more immunity so we need to dump more roundup on the weeds? And if that's the case, at some point wouldn't there be valid concerns about the effects on human health now or should we wait until peer reviewed studies are conducted down the road when acceptable application levels are 50 or 100 % of what the original standards were?

So while potential effects on human health is definitely an important issue in this discussion, I believe the immediate issue is why Roundup appears to be losing its arms race against the world of weeds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread