HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » WHO cancer agency publish...

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 06:21 PM

WHO cancer agency publishes Q&A on carcinogenic glyphosate - Gag me with a GMO cocktail

Glyphosate is the poison used with over 80% of GMO crops, and manufactured by many of the most aggressive GMO corporations. By now glyphosate has infested vast parts of the industrial agriculture wasteland, and is turning up in all sorts of places where it ought not to be, such as in beer and tampons.

Ignore the relentless, insidious corporate propaganda flung hither and yon on the intertubes, and instead read the actual unbiased science in this Q & A from WHO (World Health Organization).

Stand strong for your basic human right to know what strange unnatural substances are in the food the GMO-Chemical-Pharmaceutical corporations want to continue to secretly (without labels) serve up to you and your children.

The World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC has published a Q&A on the probable carcinogen and World’s most used herbicide – glyphosate.

The Q&A makes it clear that glyphosate alone is both a probable human carcinogen and is genotoxic.

https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Q&A_Glyphosate.pdf






12 replies, 1837 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 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply WHO cancer agency publishes Q&A on carcinogenic glyphosate - Gag me with a GMO cocktail (Original post)
AxionExcel Mar 2016 OP
AxionExcel Mar 2016 #1
felix_numinous Mar 2016 #2
GliderGuider Mar 2016 #3
AxionExcel Mar 2016 #6
AxionExcel Mar 2016 #8
nationalize the fed Mar 2016 #4
ronnie624 Mar 2016 #5
Major Nikon Mar 2016 #7
ronnie624 Mar 2016 #9
Major Nikon Mar 2016 #10
ronnie624 Mar 2016 #11
Major Nikon Mar 2016 #12

Response to AxionExcel (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 06:59 PM

1. Don't want no stinkin toxic glyphosate in my family's food

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AxionExcel (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 07:25 PM

2. My kind of lymphoma is linked with Roundup

I hope I live to see Monsanto bite the big one in court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 07:42 PM

3. So is my mother's Parkinson's.

 

She was a Roundup-Ready soybean farmer for about 30 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GliderGuider (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 07:28 AM

6. Parkinson's is far more common in areas with Industrial-Chemical Ag


"Rural residents who drink water from private wells are much more likely to have Parkinson’s disease, a finding that bolsters theories that farm pesticides may be partially to blame, according to a new California study."

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/parkinsons-and-pesticides

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GliderGuider (Reply #3)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 08:28 AM

8. Industrial ag chemical soup* & Parkinson's - Scientific American

*the poisonous corporate industrial chemical brew poured out upon Farm Fields, inc. from sea to sea includes not just pesticides, but also giga-gallons of glyphosate goo.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/parkinsons-disease-and-pesticides-whats-the-connection/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AxionExcel (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 07:59 PM

4. From the Q&A

One of the key studies evaluated in the Monograph was the United States Agricultural Health Study (AHS). This study did not find an association between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and glyphosate. Can this study alone outweigh the positive associations found in other epidemiological studies?


The Agricultural Health Study (AHS) has been described as the “most powerful” study, but this is not correct. The AHS collected data on cancer and pesticide use in more than 50 000 farmers and pesticide applicators in two states in the USA. The weakness of the study is that people were followed up for a short period of time, which means fewer cases of cancer would have had time to appear. This factor can limit the ability of a study to detect an association if one truly exists. Therefore, although the AHS is a large, well-conducted study, its results on glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma risk do not outweigh those of other studies.


The IARC Working Group also conducted an objective statistical analysis of the results of all of the available studies on glyphosate and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, which included the AHS and all of the case– control studies. The data from all of the studies combined show a statistically significant association between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and exposure to glyphosate.





If your salad dressing has soybean oil and it's not labeled organic/non gmo you're eating GMO. And you will Like it. Or the Flying Monkey Brigade will call you a climate change denier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AxionExcel (Original post)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 02:39 AM

5. "Many regulatory agencies

rely primarily on industry data from toxicological studies that are not available in the public domain."

How can research that is not available to the public, be peer reviewed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AxionExcel (Original post)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 07:53 AM

7. “There’s no evidence that glyphosate is genotoxic.”

IARC said the study demonstrated that glyphosate can cause genotoxicity, or DNA damage, and cause cellular mutations that may result in cancer.

“One study (of) community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby,” the report said.

Keith Solomon, a University of Guelph professor emeritus and a globally recognized authority on pesticides, said the conclusion is “totally wrong.”

Solomon should know because he wrote the Colombian study.

“They stated there was evidence of genotoxicity and they quoted one paper to support that statement,” Solomon said.

“There’s no evidence that glyphosate is genotoxic.”

http://www.producer.com/daily/toxicologist-pans-un-glyphosate-report/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #7)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 10:11 AM

9. He was working for those who wish to continue the 'war on drugs'.

"Solomon and an international team of scientists conducted a study on glyphosate in Colombia in the early 2000s as part of a Colombian government program to destroy illegal coca fields in the countryside."

That positively reeks of bias.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #9)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 01:32 PM

10. Then why did the IARC rely on it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #10)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 05:03 PM

11. It didn't "rely on it".

"The IARC Monographs evaluation is based on the systematic assembly and review of all publicly available and pertinent studies, by independent experts, free from vested interests. It follows strict scientific criteria, and the classification system is recognized and used as a reference all around the world. This is because IARC evaluations are based on independent scientific review and rigorous criteria and procedures.
To reach these conclusions, IARC reviewed about 1000 studies. Some of the studies looked at people exposed through their jobs, such as farmers. Others were experimental studies on cancer and cancer- related effects in experimental systems."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7670342

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnie624 (Reply #11)

Thu Mar 10, 2016, 10:59 PM

12. According to the IARC, they did "rely on it"

This comes directly from the IARC:

Glyphosate also caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells, although it gave negative results in tests using bacteria. One study in community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby.

http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVolume112.pdf

They relied on one study for their conclusion regarding the genotoxicity of glyphosate. The author of that study says the IARC misinterpreted the results of that study. Without evidence of genotoxicity, the IARC's poorly derived theory on the causal mechanism for cancer is fundamentally flawed and the rest of their conclusions fall like the house of cards they always were. The vast majority of those "about 1000 studies" you mentioned support the exact opposite conclusion the IARC reached on correlation between glyphosate and cancer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread