Mosel - Glyphosate/Round Up Within The Biology of Ecosystems
See on Scoop.it - Agriculture + Lake Restoration + Awareness = Sustainability
Jack Mosel's insight:
Glysophate/Round Up: The herbicide and its causal effects are negatively deterministic within the biology of ecosystems.
In this paper I shall elucidate the known connection’s to Glysophate/”Round Up” is being known to be a toxic compound additive which has contaminated our living environment. Glyphosate / Round Up is now prevalent within our environment today, having been deployed liberally and carelessly/effortlessly for 30 years, causing what is believed is a bio-accumulating, highly damaging effect agent toward soil and water ecology and all living things therein. I will also extend this extirpation to specifically indicate and name Glyphosate / Round Up (provided by Monsanto Corporation) in being directly related to human health negative impacts, as we are ingesting and are otherwise exposed to this chemical within our collective ecosystem/environment. As importantly as this task is, is to elucidate the known damages from the effects from Glyphosate / Round Up as an applied herbicide, is that there is a clear and present high level activities within main-stream science and academia and within government purview and sanction as such as to clearly diminish and thwart these findings from becoming established and disseminated throughout the public as well as the scientific community.
Glysophate, the “active ingredient” (or more clearly, the ingredient which was tested for safety) within the compound commercial herbicide “Round Up”, is said to be non-bio accumulative within both the aquatic and terrestrial environmental ecologies and is ‘known to be generally safe with a toxicology rating of LD-50. It is now known that Glysophate & Round Up (the herbicide Glyphosate WITH adjuvants included called Round Up) is the leading indicated agent for fomenting potentially great harm to many ecologically diverse living organisms as well as to include humans and animals alike, through whom which will either incidentally come in contact with it or which have been directly consuming it.
“Glyphosate is most often applied as a spray of the isopropylamine salt and is removed from the atmosphere by gravitational settling. After glyphosate is applied to forests, fields, and other land by spraying, it is strongly adsorbed to soil, remains in the upper soil layers, and has a low propensity for leaching. Iron and aluminum clays and organic matter adsorbed more glyphosate than sodium and calcium clays and was readily bound to kaolinite, illite, bentonite, charcoal and muck but not to ethyl cellulose.” (EPA/Safe Water/ PDF. 2010.WEB. 4/2014)
Found within this same EPA document, immediately after this statement is… “Glyphosate readily and completely biodegrades in soil even under low temperature conditions. Its average half-life in soil is about 60 days. Biodegradation in foliage and litter is somewhat faster. In field studies, residues are often found the following year. Glyphosate may enter aquatic systems through accidental spraying, spray drift, or surface runoff. It dissipates rapidly from the water column as a result of adsorption and possibly biodegradation. The halflife in water is a few days. Sediment is the primary sink for glyphosate. After spraying, glyphosate levels in sediment rise and then decline to low levels in a few months. Due to its ionic state in water, glyphosate would not be expected to volatilize from water or soil.” (EPA/Safe Water/ PDF. 2010.WEB. 4/2014)
As these statements are taken from an U.S. EPA published document within a U.S. Governmental /Publically accessible database website, there is (in my opinion) ample cause for confusion had seemingly from directly conflicting information had alone from the biological impacts as these are assimilated from the conflict for Glysophate being not a stand-alone herbicide, but as a wholly derived commercial chemical product invention called Round Up, remaining within soils (clearly had within both terrestrial and aquatic environments).
The statement (s) made indicate that the chemical Glysophate will biodegrade, yet the affinity it has in concentrating chemically within soils (as accompanied with its Adjuvant–whole herbicide Round Up) and in metals and salts within the soils, to bind and hold this chemical, will foster and promote even higher accumulations (as stated) yet with no indication(s) that this may be causally related toward contamination of these soils from higher concentrations had from accumulation and with greater biological exposure in-situ.
The regulation approval process for clearing Round Up for use within safety guidelines established within the EPA and USDA were made through the corporation Monsanto to be indicative for only Glysophate (a seemingly ‘safe’ or innocuous chemical with low lethality as indicated from LD-50 stature).
The issue(s) for contention with this procedure specifically with regard to clearance for safe use and application through the use of Glysophate did not include the adjuvants, which combined with Glysophate make up the commercially applied herbicide known as Round Up. As Glysophate is known to remain for long durations within the soils (as indicated), the product Round Up (Glysophate with adjuvants included but not tested nor cleared for safety through lethality or toxicity studies extended past 30 days) will also remain in accumulation and bio-accumulation as it turns out, within all whom come into contact with it. This is the basis for both contention and for great concern and this revelation is what the global collective concerned citizenry of the Earth is making ‘such a big deal about’ in pushing back with great collective energies, to seek for Round Up to cease and to desist within best practices management and to outright ban the use of Glyphosate/Round Up on all of Earth and for any justified use.
As Glysophate / Round Up is created by Monsanto Corporation for the expressed use in being an aggressive herbicide for use in tangent with Genetically Modified Organic Food crops, the vector(s) for bio-activity through this herbicidal mechanism is succinctly to target living organism’s at the cellular level. The mechanism through which this is accomplished is to shut down the nutrition process for cytological processes within the cell through means from blocking receptor site locations within the cell to take in nutrients (food, water or oxygen transfer). This accomplishes multiple ‘benefit’s’ for being effective. Firstly, a plant where Glyphosate / Round Up has been applied would be incapable for receiving nutrition and would die. Second, the Insect feeding on the plant would also receive similar ‘benefit’ from eating the plant and would die. Third, the logic dictates that this is not generally beneficial to agriculture, where crops are grown to earn money from yields where Glyphosate was applied. A new invention therefore was needed to operate in this toxic theater and this invention is the Genetically Modified Organism. This organism is (today) commercially beneficial crop seed such as commercially grown Corn (Maize) or Beets or Carrots or Lettuce or Tomatoes or Wheat or Grass’s or Trees or Orange’s or Pineapple’s or Avacados or Celery… (the list goes on). When the Genetically modified Organism (GMO) has entered the ‘theater’ it has been modified to withstand the cytotoxicity from the active agent Glyphosate / Round Up. It was suggested (thought) that this dual technology as applied in the field would be excluded from pest loss and disease from vegetative disease, that the plant would require less nutrient from soils and would require less irrigation water.
Irony and the invoice
After the trial and application from real world experimentation from the living environment (and our dinner tables) from the past 30 years of this ‘experiment’ where all of humanity and all creature’s on Earth have been exposed directly and indirectly to both the herbicide Glyphosate / Round Up as well as the Genetically Modified food crops, the jury has returned. The verdict which is interpreted and is read by scientists the world over has stated unequivocally, that the invention of the combined Glyphosate and the Genetically Modified counterpart is not bearing any greater yields in terms for comparison for advantage over Organically grown agricultural crops. In fact, it is now known that the GMO crop has insects (pests) which have evolved rapidly to endure the excitotoxin mechanism from this GMO seed vegetation as well as the Glyphosate/Round Up herbicide. That these insect’s have adapted and it is required to use increasingly higher dosage of Glyphosate/Round Up in order to control them.
As it is never more clear that there are multiple problems from this activity which has been allowed to pass muster for application and wide-spread use for both Glyphosate and with GMO agricultural seed stock, providing toxicity directly to our food and water supplies, that the regulation or control or testing needed to determine this as a safe practice was completely and utterly ignored and worse, it’s data was manipulated from private/public agencies to be contrived as being safe and controlled and benefitting to all agriculture commercialized processes within the world for 30 years to date and is now ready to become even more standardized (and deadly).
The awareness for what the biological and ecosystem problems are in early summaries now had from decades of data and close research, that this was possibly the worst threat scenario that could have possibly even been dreamed of within all of imagination. Today we know that the contamination of rogue GMO seed is pollinating through (wind delivery of GMO seed) all connecting acreage surrounding the Organic farm. That the potential for cros-contamination in this way will not only contaminate the vegetation of Organic crops but will also transfer the herbicide resistant insects to the organic crops, which will undoubtedly vociferously destroy these organic crops when this scenario is realized (as it is already been seen within many commercial agricultural locations).
In 2013 the Obama Administration signed into law the Monsanto Protection Act. This on the heels and amidst a global ‘pandemic outbreak’ for globally organized protest to ban GMO and Glysophate/Round Up. The Bill holds harmless Specifically The Monsanto Corporation from any legal jurist prudence or any oversight nor any liability for the damages done to anyone, anywhere and from any time. This is through definition exhibit A) for being prima facie, a Fascistic adjoining of the Corporation and The Government. The People’s business was not accomplished through this Act nor on this day…
As the article cited above is taken from The U.S.EPA.Gov repository for safe handling and incidental contact and/or occupational handling, this particular segment was taken from within a particular section from the document referred to as “Environmental Fate”. I shall explore more into the subject relating to Glysophate/Round Up on the subject of “environmental fate”.
In conceptualizing connected thinking with studies and subject matter from this term in our course Biology of the Ecosystem and in work I do within professional lake restoration services, as well as with Organic Soil agronomy and with permaculture design for creating Aquaponic food systems, I will be exploring the effects of Glyphosate/Round Up (an herbicide) from its commercial application to various biological organisms affected from Glyphosate/Round Up. I shall seek to connect cause and effect for accelerated eutrophication to fresh water body lakes and the indications had from research, which indicates human health concerns are warranted from Glysophate/Round Up within the environment. This exploration therefore is endemic of Round Up’s environmental fate along with our own collective fate and ecosystem’s collectively.
Natural systems within greater ecology as a whole as being affected from Glysophate/Round Up’s usage and application is therefore thematic for relating its cause and effect. I will relate this thematic effect in terms through which is from an entirely subjective stance. I am clearly making a statement for negative causally related effects had from Round Up within the environment and I will be providing through discovery, the means through which a statement of great confidence can be made for indicating that the continued use of this cytotoxic substance Glysophate/Round Up (the herbicide) must be stopped at all costs and with great prejudice, as if time in this case is of the essence.
“In France, in 2000, Professor Robert Bellé decided to study the health effects of pesticides, and in particular, the effects of glyphosate on the cell cycle, using the protocol known as the “sea urchin model”. The “sea urchin model” proved to be a prime method for understanding the early stages of carcinogenicity. It won the Nobel prize for Physiology and Medicine in 2001 for the British scientists T Hunt and P Nurse and the American L Hartwell, for having demonstrated that the effects measured on a sea urchin cell are exactly transferable to man. Professor Bellé discovered that Roundup affects the mechanisms that control cellular division. To précis, in the presence of Roundup cells continue to divide, but the mechanism affected is the natural process which aims to control and destroy cells in which DNA has mutated, something which occurs often during cell reproduction. It is for this reason that Roundup can induce the first stages of a cancer, because if it is not dealt with by the repair mechanism, the cell affected by a mutation can perpetuate itself and be the cause of a cancer thirty or forty years later.” (combat-monsanto.co.uk.Web. 4/2014)
The cause for Academic Integrity and concern
Many of today’s academic institutions are under great stress and strain to remain objective and independent. An academic institution is therefore within the purview of remaining purely ethical and unabridged (as an institution)in assuage to sway for accommodating opinionated or politically minded or motivated opinions as being the directive for applying purely honest and objective scientific studies. In the pursuit for advancing purely ethical science for peer review and publication of works to be cited and to build upon vetted and trusted – truly empirically derived scientific observations and revelations, a trend in observation for this tenet in a time honored tradition may be seemingly under duress for being under-mined today.
It is not conjecture or un-ethical to be suspect of empirical thought as being offered to the collective world intelligence and powers that be, that facts are powerful and to wield or manipulate scientific facts, is to undermine the entire existence and progress of human-kind and including all of mankind’s scientific progress and its collective history. Statements made of fact within science can be made with great confidence therefore and have added and aided greatly in contributions to benefit all of mankind.
Scientific method dictates simply that a hypothesis statement of belief can be validated through careful experimentation with controls and protocols in effect, in order to carry out science as a methodical and predictable / testable process. This process can provide for experimentation with control(s) as such as to replicate findings from predetermined experimentation on a regular and repeated/predictable basis and that control mechanisms are put in place as benchmarks for unaffected variables for the same conditions to be carried out within an experiment but without manipulation or any changes being made to them as a control.
This protocol can be expected to be reproduced by other scientists in different locations and they can replicate and confirm theoretical findings as being factual and true. When scientists who carry out such experimentation within these lab controlled conditions, such as those which are carried out in the case for research into carcinogenicity and lethality had from Glysophate/Round Up and their scientific method protocol’s as being classically adhered to from experienced research scientists, when there results indicate and/suggest or prove carcinogenicity and/or lethality had from Glysophate/Round Up as being clearly evident, this is cause for both alarm and causation for being well established for opening for even greater scope in experimentation in carrying out far larger and more enlightening research into the subject matter.
When in the case for this particular subject matter, that the research and the science that is being castigated as being incendiary and inciting retraction and redaction toward those which as indicated as being “controversial” findings, that indicate human safety is imminently at risk or even threatened, then why is it so difficult to accept these scientific findings and to confirm these findings and to accept and publish and distribute these findings throughout all the world (as scientists have been doing now for centuries)?
I think the acceptance for science as being under the aegis for being under current threat from corruption and fraud (by definition)must be taken into account. There is no other way to express this as being factual in light of seemingly endless procession’s of demotion’s, firing’s and funding loss and the redaction as well as the regulatory political bodies within government today are rife with improprieties as well as conflicts of interests leading to what is known as “Revolving Door’s” within the highest offices of public trust which include time honored and highly esteemed institutions of academia today.
“The approval system of the US Environmental Protection Agency was partially discredited at the end of the 1980s after a series of affairs involving fraudulent research provided by private laboratories, in particular some concerning approvals for pesticides, one of which was Roundup. Despite this European systems for approval are very similar to that of the EPA, especially the French one. In fact, all the EU states leave it to the care of the manufacturers to carry out the toxicological research on their pesticide and to submit the results to the authorities, in order to gain approval for their product. Such results are then looked at by the experts of the body responsible for approvals who publish their decision on the product, although often the research studies are not re-run and the “experts” confine themselves just to looking at resumes of the results, a weakness in the system which leaves it open to fraud.
The weakness of the system is shown up even more in the case of Roundup, because the toxicology tests done by Monsanto included only the herbicide’s principle active ingredient, i.e. glyphosate, and not at the overall chemical composition of the product. But every pesticide is made up of an “active ingredient” - in the case of Roundup, this is glyphosate – and numerous adjuvants, still called “inert substances”, like solvents, dispersants, emulators and surfactants, whose purpose is to enhance the physico-chemical properties and biological effectiveness of the active ingredients, but have no pesticide activity as such. So it turns out that the different products under the brand name Roundup are constituted with between 14.5% to 75% glyphosate salts, the rest of the formulation being made up of a dozen main adjuvants whose composition is often kept secret. The role of these adjuvants is to allow the glyphosate to penetrate the plant - like polyoxyethylene (POEA), a detergent that facilitates the spread of the droplets of spray over the leaves. Roundup then is not just glyphosate but a more complex chemical cocktail, whose toxicity has not been evaluated or harmlessness proven.” (combat-monsanto.co.uk.Web. 4/2014)
Clearly there are improprieties afoot among sacred trust(s) and within academia and also within sensible fiduciary, regulatory and/or other agencies of public trust and professionalism, for holding sacrosanct the honor for factual science as being incorruptible is clearly open and fertile ground for significantly further consideration.
Water bodies are our most precious asset on Earth. We take for granted their worth and their immense value for what they provide for all life on Earth. The Anthropocene is the term coined for the geologic Period for which mankind has contributed much to have ‘his’ hand be very much a ‘force of nature’. As a result, mankind (the Anthropogenic) is causally related to the Period of time from which only the past 100 years of human commercialized activities have caused great and irreversible harm(s) done to Earth. One such ecological casualty has been in the degrading and degradation of varying levels ranging from both mild to extreme is the environment of fresh water bodies.
The trophic index or ‘food web’ for indicator species being prevalent within a freshwater body is largely the indicator through which Bio-Indicator speciation is relied upon for determining the overall health and quality or the vibrancy for the fresh water body. When taken into consideration in deeper perspective, the amount of pelagic and benthic flora and fauna communities are considered or categorized for population densities, that it is these life forms that will be counted as being indicators for over all well-being and water body “health”. It is therefore indicative of trophism that food web hierarchies are balanced that there is diversity in and among these populations, that optimum water body living communities will ‘regulate’ the water quality via trophism and competition. Stasis and entropy are dynamics in a living environment in this way, that will determine the limitations from within this ecosystem and this will be regulated through balance from where the watershed will provide to the aquatic realm.
An Ode to Dissolved Oxygen
Wherein the design of mother nature, is implicitly elegant and maddening in her design, she has the secret to life and all living things bound up in a treatise and a living formula which has seemingly endless facets and valves, gates and pits, feasts and famine’s, high times and low times, life and death. All this is designed through nature to take into consideration every living thing to be provided for from within a connected system which has its origin deep within the void of the vacuum of space, which provides for the fuel to build a star, which has the power to create and energize a planet, which has the raw materials and supplies the physical dynamics for facilitating living creatures, which support one another in ways they have no idea are supporting one other. In some ways, I believe this is where we have the immense role for ethos and for obliging the force of Nature, to acknowledge that we understand her and that we interact with her, knowing all that she has given to all that we can see, know and experience. It is the gas Oxygen within our environment combined with Nitrogen and other trace gasses, that we have come to know is the essential gas we need to provide for our cellular respiration. Water is as important and food from the Earth is also as important. Within a water body there are populations of creature’s that require minimum amounts Dissolved atmospheric Oxygen in order to exist. These are called Anaerobes. There are other organisms within aquatic environment’s that require abundant Dissolved atmospheric Oxygen, these are called Aerobes. Aerobic Bacteria specifically, are responsible for aggressively decomposing organic detritus within aquatic environments. Without these bacteria being in abundance, there would be a cascading effect for accumulations of organic biomass from all living things that fall or die off and end up within a lake or a pond.
Nature has a plan in place that provides for these organisms to have the respiratory gas they need to survive. This is provided through mechanical means from wind and also from chemical life processes from respiration from vegetative plants as photosynthesis provider’s oxygen from aquatic plants. There is another animal however that provides dissolved oxygen to the equation within the aquatic environment. This is from the Siliceous Diatom. The Diatom in this case is the base of the food or trophic web, from it there are cascading orders of trophic benefactor’s which remain satisfied from its being plentiful. In fact the Siliceous Diatom is responsible for 30% of the climate regulation within Earth from carbon sequestration capabilities and up to 40% of the Oxygen we breathe within our atmosphere. It is therefore fair to say that the aquatic environment’s trophic status is more realistically directly linked to human beings as a result as well as the aquatic inhabitants who live directly within the aquatic realm.
It is clear then that the support for the aerobe within a water body is essential and when there is lack for Dissolved Oxygen within the water body, then there is a crashing of the foundational support mechanism for having balance within the water body and therefore the result is seen in accumulation of organic detritus (muck), increase in acidity, chemical forcing for thrusting other living organisms out of the environment, from there not being capable for surviving in this inhospitable place and then fish die off and ultimately the lake or pond will produce toxic algae and eventually fill in while it accelerates in a putrid and dying state as it turns into a bog and into a meadow. This is the Eutrophication process and then the hyper eutrophication process of a dying lake.
“Argentina is the second largest world producer of soybeans (after the USA) and along with the increase in planted surface and production in the country, glyphosate consumption has grown in the same way. We investigated the effects of Roundup (glyphosate formulation) on the periphyton colonization. The experiment was carried out over 42 days in ten outdoor mesocosms of different typology: “clear” waters with aquatic macrophytes and/or metaphyton and “turbid” waters with great occurrence of phytoplankton or suspended inorganic matter. The herbicide was added at 8 mg L(-1) of the active ingredient (glyphosate) in five mesocosms while five were left as controls (without Roundup addition). The estimate of the dissipation rate (k) of glyphosate showed a half-life value of 4.2 days. Total phosphorus significantly increased in treated mesocosms due to Roundup degradation what favored eutrophication process. Roundup produced a clear delay in periphytic colonization in treated mesocosms and values of the periphytic mass variables (dry weight, ash-free dry weight and chlorophyll a) were always higher in control mesocosms. Despite the mortality of algae, mainly diatoms, cyanobacteria was favored in treated mesocosms. It was observed that glyphosate produced a long term shift in the typology of mesocosms, “clear” turning to “turbid”, which is consistent with the regional trend in shallow lakes in the Pampa plain of Argentina. Based on our findings it is clear that agricultural practices that involve the use of herbicides such as Roundup affect non-target organisms and the water quality, modifying the structure and functionality of freshwater ecosystems.” ( ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.web.2014)
Within this citation, a clear indication for selecting for Cyano Bacteria was observed. The Cyano bacterium are Diatom’s. It is in the Algae family but it is not the Siliceous Diatom that I have made reference to in terms of being beneficial to a healthy aquatic ecology.
What was referenced however was the Periphyton community had been thwarted as observed directly when introduced or exposed to Round Up. Periphyton Algal communities include the Siliceous Diatom and this is a good bio-indication that there is health and vibrancy in water quality and over all found within the water body.
Zooplankton feed on diatoms, Fish feed on periphyton as well as zooplankton and diatoms as well as cellulosic alga which form as mucigenic algae within periphyton communities’. When Round Up is introduced into fresh water bodies, I too have seen Cyano bacteria thrive and remain in bloom. When I introduce an inert biogenic silica formulated with trace micronutrients in nano-molecular / bioavailable form to water bodies which are selected for restoration through our services, I see a diminishing of the cyano bacteria colonies and a vibrant return of zooplankton and a spike in Dissolved Oxygen, this is caused by the purposeful and sustained blooming on demand for the Siliceous Diatom from the non-toxic additive we have pioneered in using within our lake restoration services. It is therefore critical; to have the ability to facilitate restoration as such, through human aided design in this way, to counter-effect the contraindicative damaging and highly limiting effects to water bodies as these disastrous effects are caused by mankind himself. Round Up is largely to blame for a great deal of this conundrum. Fertilzer’s and run off from poorly designed watersheds where mankind has altered the earth too is to blame for abundance in nutrients being introduced to water bodies. This cannot be easily reversed. The thinking for limiting the watershed terrestrial environment to provide fewer nutrients from surface and groundwater runoff is essential. More-over is it essential to treat the accumulated Biomass that has accumulated within the lake itself. This is called the internal loading of the dynamic which recycles the Phosphorus and other limiting nutrients such as Nitrogen within lakes. Without a biological solution to bio-degrade in-lake for removing these accumulated nutrients, there will be neither restoration nor any reversal for a eutrophic condition. The lake will continue to die.
Round Up is more than limiting in its inconvenience for promoting blue green algae and for starving lakes of dissolved oxygen. It is an endocrine disruptor. This is where the pharmacokinetics of the toxicology for the “adjuvants” had from within the lesser known aspect of Glysophate/Round Up are realized in both animals such as fish and in the human beings (who both created it and who dosed their own environment and their food with it).
Toxicity of Glyphosate/Round up via cytotoxicity
From ELSEVIER Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal article (now Retracted) titled Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modiﬁed maize. This article is highly contested as being globally redacted, retracted and being held to unparalleled incendiary practices for academic and scientific unprofessionalism as the scientific team (it’s author’s) have been held to unremitting scrutiny for their audacity to incite causality and correlation to assuage that Glyphosate/Round Up is causally related to carcinogenic tumor and pre-cancerous tumor’s being formed as a direct result of Round Up within living tissue assay in-vitro and within rat studies in-vitro .
“The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modiﬁed maize (from 11% in the diet), cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone (from 0.1 ppb in water), were studied 2 years in rats. In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. All results were hormone and sex dependent, and the pathological pro-ﬁles were comparable. Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modiﬁed by GMO and Roundup treatments. In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5–5.5 times higher. This pathology was conﬁrmed by optic and transmission electron microscopy. Marked and severe kidney nephropathies were also generally 1.3–2.3 greater. Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier.
Biochemistry data conﬁrmed very signiﬁcant kidney chronic deﬁciencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by the nonlinear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup, but also by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences. 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.” (wikispooks.web.2014)
This article is telling and as I mentioned, is highly controverted as being incendiary and fraudulent. In fact it is being vilified throughout the world (at present 2014) as this article is not yet 3 months old within it being peer reviewed accepted and published, only to be read by the world and then instantly to be rejected wholsale as being the most vile and contentious article ever written (in terms of global outcry for redaction and retraction). Who are these gatekeepers? Who are these scientists that are more so activist in their demand for censorship? Why the outcry so unified and what is really behind this motivation? Cui Bono? (who is to benefit).
“An increase in the incidence of Type 2 diabetes, obesity and autism has been reported in Scotland. Similar increases have been seen globally. The herbicide glyphosate was introduced in 1974 and its use is accelerating. The manufacturers claim it to be safe, but none of the Regulatory Agencies are monitoring glyphosate levels in groundwater. By courtesy of independent researchers around the world we present evidence that glyphosate interferes with many metabolic processes in plants, animals and humans, and glyphosate residues have been found in all three.
Glyphosate is an endocrine-disruptor (as are many herbicides) it damages DNA and it is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer. We present graphs from the US which correlate glyphosate application and the percentage of GE soy and corn crops to the incidence and prevalence of various diseases in those on a Western diet. The Pearson’s correlation coefficients are very strong and highly significant for obesity, diabetes, autism, thyroid cancer, liver cancer, deaths from Parkinson’s, Senile Dementia and Alzheimer’s, inflammatory bowel disease and acute kidney failure.
We present Cancer Research UK graphs of upward trends in cancer incidences between 1975 and 2009, which are in line with the US graphs. Other consequences are gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, depression, infertility, birth defect s and other cancers. The data for the amount of non-agricultural use of glyphosate in the UK appear to be confidential. Parts of South Wales, in former mining areas, Japanese knotweed and Himalayan Balsam abound.
The local Council does not hold glyphosate records. Instead it contracts out to a commercial organization to supply industry approved vegetation management techniques. A quote from the contractor: “The glyphosate we use called round up has a hazard free label.” The level of glyphosate in a river draining from areas of Japanese knotweed was 190 parts per trillion (ppt) and local tap water was 30 ppt. These were of the order of concentrations found in a study in 2013 which showed that breast cancer cell proliferation is accelerated by glyphosate in extremely low concentrations: “potential biological levels at part per trillion (ppt) to part per billion (ppb).” (http://www.gmoevidence.com.web.2014)
Clearly in Europe, there are identical claims for governmental oversight and regulation(s) not being met. From the short list of known grievance(s) known, there are also similar non-responses and thwarting attempts at shutting down the contentious protest for addressing or even acknowledging these facts pouring out from science and from medical professionals. It is beyond credulity or even audacity, for this lack for address from official governmental agencies to accept this data and to shut down this toxic practice of food poisoning through agro-chemical and biological warfare. If this were a nation state performing this on another it would be known as a siege, an act of war and it should in my opinion be no less received as such today.
“Glyphosate (G) is the largest selling herbicide worldwide; the most common formulations (Roundup, R) contain polyoxyethyleneamine as main surfactant. Recent findings indicate that G exposure may cause DNA damage and cancer in humans. Aim of this investigation was to study the cytotoxic and genotoxic properties of G and R (UltraMax) in a buccal epithelial cell line (TR146), as workers are exposed via inhalation to the herbicide. R induced acute cytotoxic effects at concentrations > 40 mg/l after 20 min, which were due to membrane damage and impairment of mitochondrial functions. With G, increased release of extracellular lactate dehydrogenase indicative for membrane damage was observed at doses > 80 mg/l. Both G and R induced DNA migration in single-cell gel electrophoresis assays at doses > 20 mg/l. Furthermore, an increase of nuclear aberrations that reflect DNA damage was observed. The frequencies of micronuclei and nuclear buds were elevated after 20-min exposure to 10-20 mg/l, while nucleoplasmatic bridges were only enhanced by R at the highest dose (20 mg/l). R was under all conditions more active than its active principle (G). Comparisons with results of earlier studies with lymphocytes and cells from internal organs indicate that epithelial cells are more susceptible to the cytotoxic and DNA-damaging properties of the herbicide and its formulation. Since we found genotoxic effects after short exposure to concentrations that correspond to a 450-fold dilution of spraying used in agriculture, our findings indicate that inhalation may cause DNA damage in exposed individuals.” ( ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.web.2014)
Contrary to “popular” belief among much of accepted peer review (within the U.S.) there are many concerned scientists and medical doctors and practitioner’s and activists alike that have no alignment with any organization, which would be benefitting monetarily for the promotion nor the antagonistic stance’s upheld to be motivated in either way to gain anything other than satisfaction for honesty and integrity as being upheld for the facts being made clear about Glysophate/Round Up. The materials I have presented herein as being selected for partial evidence for establishing the facts for understanding Glysophate/Round Up are unclear at best only in the sense that these facts are not presented anywhere near the ‘mainstream’ for public and scientific and medical nor regulatory consumption. This being clearly established from asking any random person one might encounter and asking what their thoughts are on Glysophate. Chances are fairly good that they either have no clue or they may have vitriol for associating GMO’s (which also many don’t even know what G – M – O means). Or that the scientific and academic community may vilify you and pigeon hole you as “A Kook” or a “Conspiracy Theorist”. When in the course for trying to find a way to overcome all these highly detrimental, toxic, destructive and lethal chemicals from destroying lakes, our freshwater and our food resources (our bodies…), I personally find myself amazed quite frankly by the level of un-informed citizenry and also quite shockingly within educational institutions from which I am one among many in teaching Earth and Living Environment Biology and Marine Biology (with an actual informed opinion which DOES NOT support a “go along to get along” point of view.
It is vastly my ‘duty’ today and frankly my pleasure to be among those which seek to educate and are actively engaged in practicing authentic physical / environmental science in the area of water restoration and in sustainable food supply modalities for a new Agronomy. I will teach with facts from which I personally have my own words and with hands on expertise and/or from facts from which I have personally researched and have validated through my own internal processes for determining (concluding) what is valid and factual and what is not. Today, this is the pathway I suggest we all must follow. Our news isn’t necessarily news anymore; our journalism of the mainstream kind on TV and Print and Radio is politicized and tainted with opinions and very little objectivity in many of the cases as these are related to Environmental Issues. I have found I have needed to go to ‘alternative’ web resources and to utilize varying forms of ‘filtering’ I’ve created within myself to separate wheat from chaff. I do not appreciate this on one hand but on the other hand, I’m finding information I would not have had access to as much of this information is seemingly ‘uncensored’ and frankly quite revealing and bordering on shocking in some cases.
It is with this revelation therefore, that I will continue to dig and to seek and to teach and to learn and to cause restoration from within my own capabilities within the areas of science through which I have dedication to. In terms of food and agronomy and the subject matter from this paper with regard to Glyphosate/Round Up, I too will be ceaseless in my reproach for any support whatsoever.
I have seen enough authenticated research (and concomitantly its cover up) to convince me that this chemical is toxic and deadly and should be removed and our environment (our farmland our water bodies and our biological bodies) needs to be bio-remediated in any way possible (immediately). I fear for our sustainability and our future-sake if this effort if fruitless.