93% of Americans have glyphosate in their bodies - UC Cal

[womanofthehills]

children have the most (could be the ADD and ADHD problem - ya think?)

Nine Out of 10 Americans Tested Positive for Monsanto's Cancer-Linked Weedkiller Glyphosate
A probable human carcinogen is found in far too many foods

What makes that figure even more alarming is that many of you who sent in urine samples for testing probably eat more organic than non-organic food. Which suggests that either your organic food has been contaminated and/or you’re being exposed to glyphosate via unknown sources.

Worse yet? Children had the highest levels.

The testing, carried out by a laboratory at UC San Francisco, was the first-ever comprehensive and validated LC/MS/MS testing project to be carried out across America. According to the results, people who live in the west and mid-west tested higher than those living in other regions of the country.

http://www.alternet.org/food/nine-out-10-americans-tested-positive-glyphosate

[womanofthehills]

1. Increased risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder associated with exposure to pesticide

Increased risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder associated with exposure to organophosphate pesticide in Taiwanese children.

We report a dose-response relationship between child DMP levels and ADHD. Organophosphate pesticide exposure may have deleterious effects on children's neurodevelopment, particularly the development of ADHD.

www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/pubmed/27070915

[momto3]

18. That pubmed link does not work.

Just because your source looks official does not make it so. Plus "Organophosphate pesticide exposure may have deleterious effects on children's neurodevelopment, particularly the development of ADHD" is not convincing either.

Please provide a link to an actual controlled scientific study, that has been peer reviewed, linking this to the development of ADHD.

[hunter]

23. Link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27070915

[momto3]

32. Thank you.

I will read it tomorrow when I am able to access the full text from work.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

176. Here is a good link, showing Trump's obvious willingness to support ANY anti-environmental issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027870954

[womanofthehills]

24. Sorry - here is correct link & another link from Journal of American Med Ass.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27070915

Here are some other links: this one from JAMA http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=186163

Increased Risk of ADHD Associated With Early Exposure to Pesticides, PCBs

Individuals who are exposed early in life to organophosphates or organochlorine compounds, widely used as pesticides or for industrial applications, are at greater risk of developing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), according to recent studies.

Previous studies had linked ADHD with very high levels of childhood exposure to organophosphate pesticides, such as levels experienced by children living in farming communities that used these chemicals. But a recent study using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) found that even children who experience more typical levels of pesticide exposure, such as from eating pesticide-treated fruits and vegetables, have a higher risk of developing the disorder.

There are so many studies linking pesticides to ADHD on the web. Here is one from Cincinatti Children's Hospital and Pyrethroids.

Study Links Exposure to Common Pesticide With ADHD in Boys

Monday, June 01, 2015

A new study links a commonly used household pesticide with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and young teens.

The study found an association between pyrethroid pesticide exposure and ADHD, particularly in terms of hyperactivity and impulsivity, rather than inattentiveness. The association was stronger in boys than in girls.

The study, led by researchers at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, is published online in the journal Environmental Health.

“Given the growing use of pyrethroid pesticides and the perception that they may represent a safe alternative, our findings may be of considerable public health importance,” says Tanya Froehlich, MD, a developmental pediatrician at Cincinnati Children’s and the study’s corresponding author.
Monday, June 01, 2015

[Marrah_G]

48. Back in the 70's they used something called the Feingold Diet

It was to treat what was then called "Hyperactivity". It cut out artificial colors and preservatives from the diet. I hated it because it made me even more "different" but my mother swears that it did help during the time I was on it.

[Major Nikon]

59. I guess the fact that glyphosate isn't an organophosphate pesticide is completely irrelevant to you

[womanofthehills]

69. Glyphosate is a member of the organophosphate family

"Glyphosate is a member of the organophosphate family because its chemical makeup includes carbon and phosphorous. However, according to conventional scientific literature it acts a little differently from most organophosphates because glyphosate is not an organophosphate ester but a phosphanoglycine."



http://www.safesayswho.com/no-cumulative-testing-for-roundup-at-all/

[Major Nikon]

70. Even your own source disagrees with you

Through being a phosphanoglycine glyphosate, and hence Roundup, is excused from inclusion as an organophosphate pesticide (which contain organophosphate esters).

[womanofthehills]

74. However, many of the "inert" ingredients make pesticides behave in different ways

"Numerous studies indicate that inert ingredients may enhance the toxicity of pesticide formulations to the nervous system, the cardiovascular system, mitochondria, genetic material, and hormone systems.

Inert ingredients may enhance the reproductive toxicity of active ingredients. Both the herbicide glyphosate and a glyphosate formulation were toxic to human placenta cell cultures (Richard et al. 2005). However, the formulation was significantly more toxic than glyphosate alone; the median lethal dose for the formulation was half that of the active ingredient.

Inert ingredients can increase the ability of pesticide formulations to affect significant toxicologic end points, including developmental neurotoxicity, genotoxicity, and disruption of hormone function. They can also increase exposure by increasing dermal absorption, decreasing the efficacy of protective clothing, and increasing environmental mobility and persistence. Inert ingredients can increase the phytotoxicity of pesticide formulations as well as the toxicity to fish, amphibians, and microorganisms."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764160/

[Major Nikon]

77. Does this mean you are acknowledging that glyphosate isn't an organophosphate pesticide?

Or do you still want to repeat that nonsense?

[Loudestlib]

82. It is an organophosphorus compound, specifically a phosphonate.

It has been shown to inhibit cholinesterase activity even at low doses.

Effect of glyphosate herbicide on acetylcholinesterase activity and metabolic and hematological parameters in piava

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651305001879

Glyphosate as an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor in Cnesterodon decemmaculatus.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22002176

[Major Nikon]

83. It is NOT a organophosphate ester, which is what was being alleged

So I'm not really sure how you think any of this is relevant.

[womanofthehills]

84. But in many ways it acts like an organophosphate pesticide

[Major Nikon]

86. You could say the same about DNA

...and it wouldn't be anymore relevant.

[Loudestlib]

115. Can you link the paper showing that esterification doesn't happen in vivo or the environment?

[Major Nikon]

134. You seriously expect me to disprove something that was never proven to begin with?

[Loudestlib]

139. it's your claim so......Yes.

[Major Nikon]

145. No, that wasn't my claim

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7869241

Not playing. I suggest you try this type of strawman nonsense on someone else.

[womanofthehills]

138. Do you know Roundup is only 40% glyphosate

It's 15 % POEA and other toxins

ROUNDUP IS MORE TOXIC THAN GLYPHOSATE -you never get pure glyphosate -

New Evidence About the Dangers of Monsanto’s Roundup -

Naming the Toxins

Some European governments have already begun taking action against one of these co-formulants, a chemical known as polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, which is used in Monsanto’s Roundup Classic and Roundup Original formulations, among other weed killers, to aid in penetrating the waxy surface of plants.

Germany removed all herbicides containing POEA from the market in 2014, after a forestry worker who had been exposed to it developed toxic inflammation of the lungs. In early April, the French national health and safety agency known as ANSES took the first step toward banning products that combine glyphosate and POEA. A draft of the European Commission’s reregistration report on glyphosate proposed banning POEA. In April, the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution that supported the POEA ban and also suggested requiring member states to compile a list of other co-formulants to be banned from herbicides. The European Commission’s final vote on glyphosate’s reregistration is expected later this month.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-evidence-about-the-dangers-of-monsantos-roundup/5525895?print=1

For the lawyers litigating the cases against Monsanto, the idea that POEA and the other ingredients contribute to the toxicity of Roundup is critical. “That’s one of the central theories of our case,” said David Wool, an attorney at Andrus Wagstaff, who is working on suits against Monsanto on behalf of four people who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after years of regularly using Roundup. “It’s not only that glyphosate is carcinogenic and dangerous,” said Wool. “Monsanto had every reason to know that, by including POEA, it increased the danger of all of these products.”

[Major Nikon]

141. Did you know vaccines in Kenya have been laced with sterility compounds by the WHO and UNICEF?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-world-health-organization-who-and-unicef-tetanus-vaccination-campaign-is-a-well-coordinated-forceful-population-control-mass-sterilization-exercise-kenya-catholic-doctors-association/5413360

[Gomez163]

151. OK. WHO DO I SUE???

[spanone]

2. K&R...

[Scientific]

3. Next thing you know, Monsanto will be suing 93% of Americans

...for patent infringement - unknowingly sucking up their ubiquitous toxins without paying the corporation a licensing fee.

[Enthusiast]

7. Don't give them any ideas.

[PatSeg]

15. Seriously

I wouldn't put it past them!

[valerief]

22. They will in a way. Via more massive tax breaks. nt

[HuckleB]

143. Your user name is rather ironic, since you believe in ludicrous fictions.

[Scientific]

147. Are you attacking the results of the study cited in the OP?

Or just attacking me because you have no facts?

That's not ironic, it's moronic.

[HuckleB]

149. It's not a study. There is no peer review.

It has no actual context, and it's really just pro-organic corporation propaganda.

It's time for you to realize that you've been conned. Science does not work the way you think it does.

Finally, your comment appear to show that you believe that Monsanto sues people for reasons it does not sue people, thus you have lost all credibility from the get go. Are you going to admit that? If so, then you can try to show that the OP has some purpose other than baseless fear mongering.

You are new around here. Guess what? Around here, sometimes you have to prove that things actually matter. And you have to show that you understand how science works. An ironic moniker does not do that.

[womanofthehills]

158. No one ever said it was a study - individuals paid to get their urine tested for glyphosate

It's a project run thru the labs at UCSF.

[HuckleB]

160. Your friend did above.

Last edited Wed Jun 1, 2016, 12:45 AM - Edit history (1)

The con artists simply paid the lab. It has nothing to do with UCSF.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

4. K & F'ing ARRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!

[MelissaB]

5. OMG! Your Prince gif is amazing!

[ChisolmTrailDem]

6. I love it too but I can't take credit for it, that goes to Unknown. You're welcome to save/use it :)

[appalachiablue]

11. Been admiring it for a while too. Great image of Prince, what a creative artist and

exceptional human who I luckily saw perform once. Such a loss, same birth year as my little brother who went too young.
.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

21. Too young, indeed. Prince was part of the soundtrack of my life and it's not very often I go beyond

a simple acknowledgement/condolence upon the news of the death of a celebrity/famous person. When I do, like I have with Prince, you know that person was important to me personally. Unfortunately, I never got to see him perform in person. There was supposed to be more time to make that happen.

[appalachiablue]

166. Last year I followed Prince's Peace Concert in Balto. that he set up to honor

Freddie Gray whose family members were especially brought in and welcomed along with Beyoncé and other friends. That event and his concern impressed me greatly and I understand Prince was a generous person in life. ~ Carry on in our memories and in the ages dear Prince. Sorry you weren't able to see him perform; but even your gif image brings a smile keeps his spirit alive. Thanks for that.

[Fast Walker 52]

8. yet so many scientists and farmers swear that it is safe.... or have no problem with this

[womanofthehills]

9. World’s Number 1 Herbicide Discovered in U.S. Mothers’ Breast Milk

In the first ever testing on glyphosate herbicide in the breast milk of American women, Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse have found ‘high’ levels in 3 out of the 10 samples tested. The shocking results point to glyphosate levels building up in women’s bodies over a period of time, which has until now been refuted by both global regulatory authorities and the biotech industry.

The levels found in the breast milk testing of 76 ug/l to 166 ug/l are 760 to 1600 times higher than the European Drinking Water Directive allows for individual pesticides (Glyphosate is both a pesticide and herbicide). They are however less than the 700 ug/l maximum contaminant level (MCL) for glyphosate in the U.S., which was decided upon by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on the now seemingly false premise that glyphosate was not bio-accumulative.

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/glyphosate_testing_results

[Major Nikon]

173. Woo

http://academicsreview.org/2014/04/debunking-pseudo-science-lab-testing-health-risk-claims-about-glyphosate-roundup/

[LiberalEsto]

10. No wonder TRump is doing so well in polls nt

[appalachiablue]

12. K & R. Monsatan. When will this end.

[EndElectoral]

13. Their lobby is like the NRA and perhaps just as deadly in the long run

[PatSeg]

16. And they have paid trolls

all over the Internet ridiculing our concern. I'm surprised they haven't hijacked this thread yet.

[Scientific]

28. + 1

Corporate trolls and their misinformation are everywhere. They want people to believe chemical contamination is good.

[PatSeg]

30. Yep

It is a replay of the Lead industry in the 1920s and 1930s, as well as the tobacco industry for many decades. Corporations hired "experts" to claim their product was harmless or perhaps even good for you. Now they can hire smucks to troll the Internet and reach more people. Unfortunately there are too many people who believe whatever they read without doing any independent research, which is sad being we live in the so-called "Information Age".

[bkkyosemite]

14. I paid for the test and never sent it in. I'm in kidney failure and this crap can cause that.

(Kidney problems are not caused by usual issues, a mystery unless you look at stuff like this. Many have kidney failure working in the fields because of Monsanto's greed).

[womanofthehills]

25. One womens fight against Glyphosate in Argentina - baby died kidney failure

These poor people live near the soybean fields and are getting pesticide drift sometimes daily. Huge health problems in Argentina from glyphosate.

Following the death of her child, Gatica began going door to door, talking to her neighbors about illnesses in their families. She mapped out her findings, and was astonished at what she saw: the cancer rate in her community was 41 times the national average. This led to a subsequent investigation by the federal government, which confirmed that low concentrations of glyphosate were causing birth defects. The findings meant that the chemical cannot legally be sprayed within 2,500 meters from homes. In addition, a 2010 ruling from the Supreme Court has not only banned agrochemical spraying near populated areas, but it also reversed the burden of proof: Residents no longer need to prove that spraying causes harm but instead, the government and soy producers must now prove the chemicals are safe.

http://www.goldmanprize.org/blog/one-womans-fight-against-glyphosate/

[Major Nikon]

136. A guide to detecting bogus scientific journals

http://www.sci-phy.com/detecting-bogus-scientific-journals/

[libodem]

17. Capitalism Trumps Life

What'er you, new?

[stevenleser]

19. I read the studies. Much more data is needed before anyone should be worried. In particular...

... the rate it was detected in urine is on average 3 parts per billion (see the study results here: https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/ucsf-presentation-reveals-glyphosate-contamination-people-across-america ). I am not sure people understand how small of a quantity that is. Here is some perspective:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts-per_notation#Parts-per_expressions

One part per billion (ppb) denotes one part per 1,000,000,000 parts, one part in 10^9, 1?1,000,000,000 × 100% = 0.0000001% (or 1% = 10,000,000 ppb) and a value of 1 × 10?9. This is equivalent to one drop of water diluted into 250 chemical drums (50 m3), or about three seconds out of a century.

For some comparison, Hydrogen Cyanide, a very toxic substance, requires an air concentration of around 3,000,000 parts per billion (3,000 parts per million) to be lethal.

Obviously there is some difference between air concentration, blood or tissue concentration and urine concentration, but its still an infinitesimally small quantity. There are a lot of toxic substances that are in the environment and make it into our tissues, but at concentrations so low it does not matter. I would need to see some evidence that at 3 parts per billion, glyphosate/roundup is dangerous or even somewhat worrisome.

[PasadenaTrudy]

20. +1 n/t

[womanofthehills]

26. Not all pesticide is excreted - it's also in bone and fat and can be for yrs

I was poisoned with Malathion in the 1990's for mosquito spraying and still have issues. So do many of the people in my old neighborhood who were poisoned with me.

ABSORPTION, DISTRIBUTION AND FATE
Once a chemical enters the body, it is often absorbed into the bloodstream and can move throughout the body. The amount absorbed and the rate of absorption depend on the chemical and the route of exposure. This movement of the substance through the bloodstream is called distribution. Through distribution a chemical can come into contact with all parts of the body, not only the original site of entry. In some cases, such contact, distant from the site of entry, can lead to adverse health effects. For example, ingestion of the pesticide parathion into the stomach can lead to damage to the lungs.

Once a chemical is absorbed into the bloodstream, it can have several different fates. In many cases, it is rapidly removed from the body through the urine or feces. In other situations, it may be stored in various parts of the body, such as fat or bone, and remain in the individual for many years. A compound may also lead to a toxic effect through interaction with certain organs or tissues in the individual or with other compounds in the body.

http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/TIB/entry.html

[Scientific]

31. An important point - lots of corporate poisons stay embedded in human tissue

Trolls may poo poo toxic realities, but the rates of chronic diseases give the lie to their dangerous BS.

[stevenleser]

46. No question. But it's still incumbent on those raising the alarm to state what acceptable

and what dangerous levels are. I mentioned in my response the difference between airborn, tissue and urine parts per million/billion.

The only stat we have been given is the average 3 parts per billion in urine. We don't know what that corresponds to in terms of what is in the body, nor do we know whether that as yet unmeasured amount should be worrisome. I'm guessing not, but there are no facts.

[bvar22]

47. No. It is NOT incumbent on the citizens to prove that Monsanto products are safe.

THAT is the responsibility of Monsanto and the FDA.
Unfortunately, the FDA is a revolving door for Monsanto execs and lobbyists.
Obama appointed Mr. Monsanto/Factory farms (Tom Vilsack) as Head of the USDA in his cabinet,
and Monsanto Exec Micheal Taylor to head up the FDA.

Obama selects former Monsanto lobbyist to be his TPP chief agriculture negotiator
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023662210

.
.
.
.
.
.
Gee, ya think there might be some bias here?

[LeftyMom]

53. Glyphosphate is water soluble, not fat soluble.

Thus it can't be stored in fat, and there's no mechanism to cause it to accumulate in bone as some compounds that resemble or bond to bone components can do.

Also it breaks down rapidly. You can test this for yourself: get a cheap potted plant you don't care about. Kill it with Roundup. Wait as long as the package suggests (for regular Roundup it's less than six weeks, some versions are designed to persist longer) and plant another identical plant in the same soil. It'll live.

Basic science aside, I'm starting to wonder if anybody on DU ever dealt with their own landscaping. This isn't exactly obscure knowledge.

I do hope you get your real health problem figured out. Malathion is nasty stuff, provided you're a med fly or a mosquito. A local politician 'round these parts drank a glass of it and promptly died of a heart attack twelve years later.

There's actually no record at all of it harming anybody, let alone an entire community, has the career-making paper on this event been trapped in peer review for two decades? There's not even a newspaper article about it...

[womanofthehills]

60. you are so so so wrong about Malathion - look up side effects of organophosphate pesticides

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/mosquito/documents/citizensHealthEffectsMosqP.pdf

Journal of Pesticide Reform
, Winter 1992, vol.12, no.9, p.29 (9).
This article examines the health effects of Malathion in human and
animal studies. Malathion is detrimental because it effects the
nervous system
by inhibiting the enzyme, acetylcholinesterase
(AchE), that breaks down acetylcholine, a chemical essential in
transmitting nerve impulses across junctions between nerves. Without functioning AchE,
acetylcholine accumulates to produce rapid twitching of voluntary muscles,
incoordination, convulsions, paralysis, and ultim
ately death. Acute toxicity reactions in
humans include headaches, nausea...blurred vision and pupil constriction, slowed
heartbeat, respiratory depression, paralysis, coma, as well as muscular damage (after
inhalation). Birth defects, reproductive problems, and genetic damage have been
associated with alathion exposure in humans and animals. Furthermore, Malathion has the
potential to contaminate ground and surface water. In California, five of twenty-eight
county water systems tested were contaminated with malathion¹ and storm drains in Santa
Clara County (where aerial sprays of malathion had been used for eradication programs)
concentrated Malathion and malaoxon, eventually draining into San Francisco Bay.² Drift
and aerial spray mosquito control programs can expose people to levels of Malathion that
can cause the aforementioned health effects.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/MMG/MMG.asp?id=517&tid=92
Health Effects

Systemic malathion toxicity due to excess cholinergic stimulation may result from all routes of exposure. Symptoms include abdominal cramps, vomiting, diarrhea, pinpoint pupils and blurred vision, excessive sweating, salivation and lacrimation, wheezing, excessive tracheobronchial secretions, agitation, seizures, bradycardia or tachycardia, muscle twitching and weakness, and urinary and fecal incontinence. Seizures are much more common in children than in adults.
Death results from loss of consciousness, coma, excessive bronchial secretions, respiratory depression and cardiac irregularity.
Commercial malathion products often contain impurities and hydrocarbon solvents, such as xylene or toluene, which themselves can cause toxicity.
Toxicity of malathion depends on metabolic activation; thus, symptoms may appear from a few minutes to a few hours after exposure.

Respiratory

Malathion, like all organophosphate pesticides, inhibits acetylcholinesterase and alters cholinergic synaptic transmission at neuroeffector junctions (muscarinic effects), at skeletal myoneural junctions and autonomic ganglia (nicotinic effects), and in the central nervous system. Inhibition occurs when malaoxon, a metabolite of malathion, binds to acetylcholinesterase; thus, symptoms may be delayed after exposure. Signs and symptoms of poisoning vary according to age, dose, and concentration. Most systemic effects are secondary to inhibition of acetylcholinesterase.

Muscarinic effects include pinpoint pupils; blurred vision; hypersecretion by salivary, lacrimal, sweat, and bronchial glands; narrowing of the bronchi; nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and crampy abdominal pains; urinary and fecal incontinence; and slow heart rate.

Nicotinic effects include muscle twitching, cramping, and weakness. Nicotinic stimulation can obscure certain muscarinic effects and produce rapid heart rate and high blood pressure.
CNS

CNS effects are often the earliest manifestations of poisoning in adults and constitute the major signs and symptoms in children. CNS effects include irritability, nervousness, giddiness, fatigue, lethargy, impairment of memory, confusion, slurred speech, visual disturbance, depression, impaired gait, convulsions, loss of consciousness, coma, and respiratory depression.
Peripheral Neurologic

Peripheral neurologic effects include muscle twitching and weakness due to inhibition of acetylcholinesterase at neuromuscular junctions.
Respiratory

Respiratory failure is the most common cause of death due to malathion poisoning. Narrowing of the bronchi and markedly increased bronchial secretions can occur. Respiratory failure results from respiratory depression coupled with paralysis of the respiratory muscles and progressive airway obstruction from bronchorrhea. In addition, pulmonary aspiration of the hydrocarbon solvents found in many commercial preparations can cause inflammation of the lungs.

Children may be more vulnerable because of relatively higher minute ventilation per kg and failure to evacuate an area promptly when exposed.
Cardiovascular

Most exposure victims experience bradycardia, but pulse rate may be increased initially and tachycardia is more common in very severe poisoning. Irregular heartbeat may occur.
Gastrointestinal

Nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, diarrhea, and fecal incontinence are common manifestations, regardless of the exposure route. These are generally the earliest symptoms to occur.
Dermal

Malathion is has been reported to cause skin irritation and sensitization. Because it is readily absorbed through the skin, skin contact can result in systemic poisoning.

Because of their relatively larger surface area:body weight ratio, children are more vulnerable to toxicants absorbed through the skin.
Ocular/Ophthalmic

Systemic poisoning typically causes pinpoint pupils and spasm of the muscle of visual accommodation (i.e., ciliary muscle) leading to blurred vision and aching pain in the eye. However, organophosphate poisoning may still be present without pinpoint pupils, and dilation of the pupils may even be noted occasionally. Eye irritation, if it occurs, is most likely caused by the hydrocarbon solvents used in commercial pesticide preparations.
Potential Sequelae

Complete recovery generally occurs within 10 days unless severe lack of oxygen has caused residual brain damage. CNS effects such as confusion, fatigue, irritability, nervousness, and impairment of memory can occasionally last for several weeks. There is no evidence that malathion induces delayed neurotoxicity.
Chronic Exposure

Persistent weakness and impaired memory have been reported to occur from low-level exposures to some organophosphates in the absence of acute cholinergic effects, but there is no reliable information on adverse health effects of chronic exposure to malathion.
Carcinogenicity

The International Agency for Research on Cancer has determined that malathion is unclassifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans. In animals, malathion induced liver carcinogenicity at doses that were considered excessive.
Reproductive and Developmental Effects

Studies have been reported in which malathion induced transient testicular effects in rodents. Results from studies addressing reproductive or developmental effects in humans are inconclusive. Malathion is not included in Reproductive and Developmental Toxicants, a 1991 report published by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) that lists 30 other chemicals of concern because of widely acknowledged reproductive and developmental consequences.
top

[Major Nikon]

65. "Journal of Pesticide Reform"

One can only imagine what their peer review must be like.

The CDC page you referenced is talking about occupational exposure to the chemical, and has zero to do with environmental exposure.

[womanofthehills]

140. Actually our neighborhood was sprayed 4 days in a row with 4 yr old Malathion

that workers found in a shed when they ran out of the pyrethroids they had been spraying on us for years from trucks in the middle of the night. You can bet I got me a toxic tort lawyer!

Malathion Becomes More Toxic When Stored for 3 months
or When Temperature Increases
SOURCE: Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry, 25(4) 46-953, 1977

The technical grade malathion (the type we are exposed to) contains approximately 11 impurities. It is these impurities which scientists state are the main poisoning ingredients in malathion. One impurity has been shown to be approximately 500 times more toxic than purified malathion (based on the amount needed to kill test animals - LD-50 is 20 mg/kg compared to 10,000 mg/kg for purified malathion). It is called - O,S,S-trimethyl phosphorodithioate (OSS-TMP for short). Researchers state this, and other malathion impurities, actually increase in amounts during simple storage (especially 3-6 months after manufacture), making malathion far more toxic than when it was first manufactured. OSS-TMP and other impurities have also been shown to increase even more rapidly when exposed to temperatures around 100 degrees. How high do the temperatures become for the drums sitting in direct sunlight or at the Tampa Airport in the non-air conditioned rooms?
Effect of Impurities on the Mammalian Toxicity of Technical Malathion and Acephate.

http://www.chem-tox.com/malathion/research/

Immune System Weakens after Malathion Exposure
SOURCE: The Journal of Immunology, 140(2):564-570

immune cells attack cancerTechnical grade malathion contains chemical impurities which have been found to weaken immune system function, including a weakening of a type of white blood cell called "cytotoxic lymphocytes" (which attack cancer cells and virus infected cells). The picture at right shows six of these white cytotoxic lymphocytes (let's call them CTL's for short) successfully attacking a cancer cell (National Geographic). These lymphocytes can also attack viruses in the body. Malathion has now been shown to significantly weaken the CTL's ability to perform their job effectively.

Chem-Tox Comments: This research addresses the paradox regarding the New York City malathion spraying.
As encephalitis has been shown to only affect people with a weakened immune system who are unable to efficiently combat the disease (i.e. elderly and immune compromised individuals) it must be considered that malathion has the potential in itself to increase encephalitis cases as the spraying of the pesticide can weaken a person's immune system, thereby, making them more vulnerable to the disease.
University of Virginia
Inhibition of Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte and Natural Killer Cell Mediated Lysis by OSS-Trimethyl Phosphorodithioate is at an Early

MALATHION UNDERGOES DANGEROUS REACTION IN SUNLIGHT
Malathion undergoes a chemical reaction in sunlight called "photolysis" which results in increasing the formation of the highly toxic trimethyl impurities. -
Journal of Agricultural Food & Chemistry, 27(6):1423

Malathion Breaks Down into even More Toxic - Malaoxon
SOURCE: Bulletin of Environmental Contamination Toxicology, 57 05-712, 1996

In trying to calm the fears of Tampa residents, representatives for the Florida Department of Agriculture have made public statements that after application, malathion "breaks-down" in a matter of hours. What they don't tell you is that malathion can actually break-down into compounds which are more poisonous than the malathion itself. This is, in fact, the conclusion of research from a graduate project by researcher N. E. Barlas at the Department of Biology, Hacetepe University, Turkey. Barlas went on to say, "The disappearance of pesticide residues at a given location does not mean the end of the problem. Pesticides can be translocated, bioconcentrated or converted into more dangerous chemicals." The breakdown fate of malathion was studied by adding malathion to soil samples containing 6 species of soil bacteria known to breakdown the pesticide. After 10 days the samples were analyzed. Malathion content had reduced from 100 down to 25 micrograms, so therefore, the Florida Department of Agriculture spokes people are correct when they say it "breaks down" relatively quickly (although in this case not in a matter of hours). However, even more important, Barlas found that new chemicals were formed in this breakdown process including 14 micrograms of monocarboxylic acid and about 8 micrograms of the highly toxic malaoxon. Barlas then exposed mice to the technical grade malathion and another group to the breakdown products just mentioned. Results showed even the mice exposed to the break-down products of malathion showed significant decreases in spleen weights and significant changes in liver blood tests which were suggestive of liver damage. Barlas summarized by stating, "It may be concluded that commercial malathion and it's degradation products together have detrimental effects on mice over a period of 15 weeks of treatment."
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, Turkey

[Major Nikon]

144. No doubt "toxic tort lawyers" have killed thousands

Cool story bro.

[Octafish]

27. What did your readings tell you about ENDOCRINE DISRUPTION?

Did they mention how little glysophate is required to mess up a child's life, stevenleser?

Toxicology. 2009 Aug 21;262(3):184-91. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2009.06.006. Epub 2009 Jun 17.

[font size="4"][font color="green"]Glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines.[/font color][/font size]

Gasnier C1, Dumont C, Benachour N, Clair E, Chagnon MC, Séralini GE.

Abstract

Glyphosate-based herbicides are the most widely used across the world; they are commercialized in different formulations. Their residues are frequent pollutants in the environment. In addition, these herbicides are spread on most eaten transgenic plants, modified to tolerate high levels of these compounds in their cells. Up to 400 ppm of their residues are accepted in some feed. We exposed human liver HepG2 cells, a well-known model to study xenobiotic toxicity, to four different formulations and to glyphosate, which is usually tested alone in chronic in vivo regulatory studies. We measured cytotoxicity with three assays (Alamar Blue, MTT, ToxiLight), plus genotoxicity (comet assay), anti-estrogenic (on ERalpha, ERbeta) and anti-androgenic effects (on AR) using gene reporter tests. We also checked androgen to estrogen conversion by aromatase activity and mRNA. All parameters were disrupted at sub-agricultural doses with all formulations within 24h. These effects were more dependent on the formulation than on the glyphosate concentration. First, we observed a human cell endocrine disruption from 0.5 ppm on the androgen receptor in MDA-MB453-kb2 cells for the most active formulation (R400), then from 2 ppm the transcriptional activities on both estrogen receptors were also inhibited on HepG2. Aromatase transcription and activity were disrupted from 10 ppm. Cytotoxic effects started at 10 ppm with Alamar Blue assay (the most sensitive), and DNA damages at 5 ppm. A real cell impact of glyphosate-based herbicides residues in food, feed or in the environment has thus to be considered, and their classifications as carcinogens/mutagens/reprotoxics is discussed.
PMID: 19539684 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

SOURCE: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19539684

You should do a review of the science.

[PatSeg]

29. Thank you

[Octafish]

37. Amazing alacrity when it comes to defending the indefensible.

Last edited Tue May 31, 2016, 07:47 AM - Edit history (1)

More on glyphosate and its link to breast cancer:

Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors.

Thongprakaisang S1, Thiantanawat A, Rangkadilok N, Suriyo T, Satayavivad J.

Food Chem Toxicol. 2013 Sep;59:129-36. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2013.05.057. Epub 2013 Jun 10.

Abstract

Glyphosate is an active ingredient of the most widely used herbicide and it is believed to be less toxic than other pesticides. However, several recent studies showed its potential adverse health effects to humans as it may be an endocrine disruptor. This study focuses on the effects of pure glyphosate on estrogen receptors (ERs) mediated transcriptional activity and their expressions. Glyphosate exerted proliferative effects only in human hormone-dependent breast cancer, T47D cells, but not in hormone-independent breast cancer, MDA-MB231 cells, at 10⁻¹² to 10⁻⁶M in estrogen withdrawal condition. The proliferative concentrations of glyphosate that induced the activation of estrogen response element (ERE) transcription activity were 5-13 fold of control in T47D-KBluc cells and this activation was inhibited by an estrogen antagonist, ICI 182780, indicating that the estrogenic activity of glyphosate was mediated via ERs. Furthermore, glyphosate also altered both ER? and ? expression. These results indicated that low and environmentally relevant concentrations of glyphosate possessed estrogenic activity. Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

KEYWORDS:
Estrogenic effect; Genistein; Glyphosate; Human breast cancer; T47D; T47D-KBluc

ETA link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19539684

PS: You are most welcome, PatSeg! Better to err on the side of caution, no offense to Fox News or Monsanto.

[Major Nikon]

89. Glyphosate is also linked with protecting your body from cancer

Glyphosate and AMPA inhibit cancer cell growth through inhibiting intracellular glycine synthesis

Glycine is a nonessential amino acid that is reversibly converted from serine intracellularly by serine hydroxymethyltransferase. Glyphosate and its degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), are analogs to glycine, thus they may inhibit serine hydroxymethyltransferase to decrease intracellular glycine synthesis. In this study, we found that glyphosate and AMPA inhibited cell growth in eight human cancer cell lines but not in two immortalized human normal prostatic epithelial cell lines. AMPA arrested C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cells in the G1/G0 phase and inhibited entry into the S phase of the cell cycle. AMPA also promoted apoptosis in C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cell lines. AMPA upregulated p53 and p21 protein levels as well as procaspase 9 protein levels in C4-2B cells, whereas it downregulated cyclin D3 protein levels. AMPA also activated caspase 3 and induced cleavage of poly (adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase. This study provides the first evidence that glyphosate and AMPA can inhibit proliferation and promote apoptosis of cancer cells but not normal cells, suggesting that they have potentials to be developed into a new anticancer therapy.

Not to mention that the study you mentioned was done in a petri dish. Meanwhile in world most call reality, which some seem to be wholly unfamiliar with, soy consumption by women diagnosed with breast cancer has a positive, rather than a negative correlation.

Soy food intake after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: an in-depth analysis of combined evidence from cohort studies of US and Chinese women

CONCLUSION:

In this large study of combined data on US and Chinese women, postdiagnosis soy food consumption of ?10 mg isoflavones/d was associated with a nonsignificant reduced risk of breast cancer-specific mortality and a statistically significant reduced risk of recurrence.

[Octafish]

93. Glyphosate has been linked with BREAST CANCER

Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors.

Thongprakaisang S1, Thiantanawat A, Rangkadilok N, Suriyo T, Satayavivad J.

Food Chem Toxicol. 2013 Sep;59:129-36. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2013.05.057. Epub 2013 Jun 10.

Abstract

Glyphosate is an active ingredient of the most widely used herbicide and it is believed to be less toxic than other pesticides. However, several recent studies showed its potential adverse health effects to humans as it may be an endocrine disruptor. This study focuses on the effects of pure glyphosate on estrogen receptors (ERs) mediated transcriptional activity and their expressions. Glyphosate exerted proliferative effects only in human hormone-dependent breast cancer, T47D cells, but not in hormone-independent breast cancer, MDA-MB231 cells, at 10⁻¹² to 10⁻⁶M in estrogen withdrawal condition. The proliferative concentrations of glyphosate that induced the activation of estrogen response element (ERE) transcription activity were 5-13 fold of control in T47D-KBluc cells and this activation was inhibited by an estrogen antagonist, ICI 182780, indicating that the estrogenic activity of glyphosate was mediated via ERs. Furthermore, glyphosate also altered both ER? and ? expression. These results indicated that low and environmentally relevant concentrations of glyphosate possessed estrogenic activity. Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PMID: 23756170

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23756170

[Major Nikon]

96. Reposting something again makes it just that much better

Glyphosate is also linked with protecting your body from cancer

Glyphosate and AMPA inhibit cancer cell growth through inhibiting intracellular glycine synthesis

Glycine is a nonessential amino acid that is reversibly converted from serine intracellularly by serine hydroxymethyltransferase. Glyphosate and its degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), are analogs to glycine, thus they may inhibit serine hydroxymethyltransferase to decrease intracellular glycine synthesis. In this study, we found that glyphosate and AMPA inhibited cell growth in eight human cancer cell lines but not in two immortalized human normal prostatic epithelial cell lines. AMPA arrested C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cells in the G1/G0 phase and inhibited entry into the S phase of the cell cycle. AMPA also promoted apoptosis in C4-2B and PC-3 cancer cell lines. AMPA upregulated p53 and p21 protein levels as well as procaspase 9 protein levels in C4-2B cells, whereas it downregulated cyclin D3 protein levels. AMPA also activated caspase 3 and induced cleavage of poly (adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase. This study provides the first evidence that glyphosate and AMPA can inhibit proliferation and promote apoptosis of cancer cells but not normal cells, suggesting that they have potentials to be developed into a new anticancer therapy.

Not to mention that the study you mentioned was done in a petri dish. Meanwhile in world most call reality, which some seem to be wholly unfamiliar with, soy consumption by women diagnosed with breast cancer has a positive, rather than a negative correlation.

Soy food intake after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: an in-depth analysis of combined evidence from cohort studies of US and Chinese women

CONCLUSION:

In this large study of combined data on US and Chinese women, postdiagnosis soy food consumption of ?10 mg isoflavones/d was associated with a nonsignificant reduced risk of breast cancer-specific mortality and a statistically significant reduced risk of recurrence.

[Octafish]

98. You sound like an authority, a major!

Where's your link, dude?

[Major Nikon]

100. You forgot to post yours the first time around also, no?

Which is kinda your MO. Can't have people actually fact checking your bullshit now can we?

If I actually thought you'd read it, I'd be glad to post the links.

Instead you prefer to whine about character assassination while making a baseless character assassination. I'm sure the irony is lost on you.

[Octafish]

102. That's why the links, time waster.

As for what you write, you are consistently on the side of power. Your words remind me of a corporal who's rank has gone to his head.

[Major Nikon]

104. Nah, just consistently against nutty bullshit

Not that a Lyndon LaRouche fan could grasp such a concept.

[Octafish]

106. What a douche!

Nothing there shows I support him. I said to use his work to sink Bush. You see, that is the opposite of defending Bush.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027005752

[Major Nikon]

109. Not ever defending Bush is the opposite of defending Bush, namecaller.

You just keep repeatedly parroting out LaRouche and his buddies for shits and giggles I'm sure. No reason to suspect you're a LaRouche fan after parroting out garbage published by the LaRouche dozens of times.

Meanwhile I've repeatedly asked you exactly how I've ever "defended Bush" and even offered to kiss your ass and give you till noon to draw a crowd if you cold prove it. So far crickets on that one.

I guess anyone who dares call bullshit on your obvious bullshit MUST be part of the conspiracy. Very telling that.

[Octafish]

114. When do I promote the douche?

You seem to be obsessed about my using him in a post from 12 years ago.

Show where I "parrot" LaRouche.

[Major Nikon]

118. No problem

I'm sure there's more, but this should give anyone who cares I pretty good list of examples, all garbage published by the anti-Semite Larouche Executive Intelligence Review, if not directly from LaRouche's website.

Not that I've proved your perchance for parroting out LaRouche fantasies, don't you think it's time you put up or shut up about your baseless accusation of "defending Bush". I mean if you can't even come up with one example, it leads one to believe this is just another one of your fantasies. You know, like crop circles and aliens shooting down airplanes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1452030

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1455374

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1891941&mesg_id=1891941

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Octafish/136

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5256538

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5256538

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5256538

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4376743

[Octafish]

119. Like you said, you haven't proven that I parrot anybody.

Those posts show how Bush and his father, sons, and cronies are crooks, however.

Keep on smearing, Major Nikon. It shows what you're all about.

[Major Nikon]

131. ...

[womanofthehills]

125. China - cancer rates exploding

Expected Cancer Incidence in 2015

It is predicted that there will be about 4292,000 newly diagnosed invasive cancer cases in 2015 in China, corresponding to almost 12,000 new cancer diagnoses on average each day. The 5 most commonly diagnosed cancers among men, in descending order, are: cancers of the lung and bronchus, stomach, esophagus, liver, and colorectum, accounting for about two-thirds of all cancer cases. The corresponding cancers among women are breast, lung and bronchus, stomach, colorectum, and esophagus, accounting for nearly 60% of all cases. Breast cancer alone is expected to account for 15% of all new cancers in women (Table 2).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21338/full

[Major Nikon]

130. The decline in the pirate population is linked to global warming

[womanofthehills]

33. endrocrine disruptor pesticides

The US Government Is Pressuring Europe to Dial Back Its Pesticide Rules

Pesticides used most on these crops include glyphosate (the active ingredient in "Roundup&quot , atrazine, chlorpyrifos, 2,4-D, and two less well-known pesticides called metolachlor and acetochlor. All of these have been identified in various scientific studies as having adverse effects on the endocrine system.

At the same time, exposure to endocrine disruptors appear to be costing Europeans an enormous amount of money. According to several studies published earlier this month, the estimated annual healthcare costs associated with exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in pesticides was $126 billion.

This is the estimated annual cost of several neurological disorders linked to these chemical exposures, including lowered IQ and behavioral disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The studies' authors say this is likely an under-estimation and suggest that exposure and costs in the US are comparable or greater.

Gore also says she feels "strongly" that the EPA's endocrine disruptor screening test methods are out-of-date and "do not include state-of-the-art approaches to identifying estrogenic chemicals," a view shared by other scientists working in this field. These test methods, she adds, don't address "the most relevant issues to endocrine disruption, such as critical development periods of life when even very low-dose exposures can have permanent and often adverse effects later in life.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/03/europe-pesticides-endocrine-disruptors

[Octafish]

39. Europe is spending $126 billion per year in healthcare costs due to endocrine disruptors?

Have not seen that on Fox News. Who gets paid these days? Those who tell the truth or those who spin it?

Corporate McPravda seem to have no one writing these days who remember how PCB exposure rang the alarms for many: http://enhs.umn.edu/current/5103/endocrine/harmful.html

Thank you for caring and sharing, womanofthehills!

[womanofthehills]

35. Exposure to Pesticides Increases Risk of Endometriosis

These horrible chemicals are making everyone sick while Monsanto and Dow,etc, get rich. It is beyond disgusting.

We found it interesting that despite organochlorine pesticides being restricted in use or banned in the US for the past several decades, these chemicals were detectable in the blood samples of women in our study and were associated with increased endometriosis risk," said the lead and corresponding author Kristen Upson, PhD, in a news release. "The take-home message from our study is that persistent environmental chemicals, even those used in the past, may affect the health of the current generation of reproductive-age women with regard to a hormonally driven disease." - See more at: http://www.obgyn.net/endometriosis/exposure-pesticides-increases-risk-endometriosis#sthash.xRQYvT9i.dpuf

http://www.obgyn.net/endometriosis/exposure-pesticides-increases-risk-endometriosis

[Octafish]

40. Most Americans have no clue.

How can something you can't see hurt you?

http://endocrinedisruption.org/

Perhaps some good can come of the poisoning of Flint:

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in Drinking Water: Risks to Human Health and the Environment

Statement by
Linda S. Birnbaum, Ph.D., DABT, ATS
Director
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
National Institutes of Health
Director, National Toxicology Program
Department of Health and Human Services
on
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in Drinking Water: Risks to Human Health and the Environment
before
Committee on Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
United States House of Representatives

Thursday February 25, 2010

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee—I am pleased to appear before you today to present testimony on current understanding and ongoing research on endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). I am Linda Birnbaum, the Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), as well as of the National Toxicology Program (NTP). NIH and NTP are entities of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Endocrine disruptors are naturally occurring or man-made substances that may mimic or interfere with the function of hormones in the body. Endocrine disruptors may turn on, shut off, or modify signals that hormones carry and thus affect the normal functions of tissues and organs. NIEHS has had a longstanding interest in these chemicals with its support for research dating back to the beginning of the Institute in the 1960s.

Over the past fifty years, researchers observed increases in endocrine-sensitive health outcomes. Breast and prostatic cancer incidence increased between 1969 and 1986 ; there was a four-fold increase in ectopic pregnancies (development of the fertilized egg outside of the uterus) in the U.S. between 1970 and 1987 ; the incidence of cryptorchidism (undescended testicles) doubled in the U.K. between 1960 and the mid 1980s ; and there was an approximately 42% decrease in sperm count worldwide between 1940 and 1990 .

These observations, set against the numerous observations of abnormalities of sexual development in amphibians and fish and the widespread detection of chemicals with endocrine disrupting properties in our bodies , have led NIEHS to increase its support for research on the effects of chemical exposures on the various endocrine systems. The detection of numerous pharmaceutical agents and chemicals with endocrine disrupting potential in surface waters around the country has raised concern about drinking water as a significant route of exposure.

There are four aspects of exposure to endocrine disruption which I want to emphasize:

• First, the effect of low doses. Normal endocrine signaling involves very small changes in hormone levels, yet these changes can have significant biological effects. That means subtle disruptions of endocrine signaling is a plausible mechanism by which chemical exposures at low doses can have effects on the body.

• Second, the wide range of effects. Endocrine signals govern virtually every organ and process in the body. That means that when outside chemicals interfere with those systems, the effects can be seen in many different diseases and conditions – some of which we are just learning to recognize as the result of endocrine disruption.

• Third, the persistence of effects. We are finding that the effects of exposure to endocrine disruptors can be observed long after the actual exposure has ceased. This is especially true for growth and development, processes that are very sensitive to endocrine regulation. The question of how these kinds of latent effects occur is an active area of investigation.

• Fourth, the ubiquity of exposure. Both naturally occurring and manmade substances can be endocrine disruptors. Some, e.g., arsenic and agricultural chemicals, are ubiquitous in the environment. In addition to the growing use of hormonally-active pharmaceuticals that pass through the bodies of those taking them and end up in water treatment systems and surface waters, many of the chemicals that are being found to have endocrine effects are components of a wide range of consumer products, including some water bottles, cosmetics, sunscreens, and other personal care products. Substances applied to the skin can be directly absorbed but also end up getting washed off our bodies and into our water systems. As a result, chemicals with endocrine disrupting activity are widely dispersed in our environment, often at levels plausibly associated with biological effects; exposure to humans is widespread.

Looking at these four points together, it is apparent that endocrine disruption is an important emerging public health concern. NIEHS is responding to the importance of this concern through our research investments, and we are starting to understand these health risks better, but there are still many gaps in our understanding. We are therefore gathering more information to help assess and manage EDCs appropriately.

Here are some examples to illustrate the first three of the take-home messages about endocrine disruption that I listed above. As for the fourth, I would point you to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Exposure Report for evidence of the widespread exposure to these chemicals.

Regarding low dose: Early studies of EDCs in sensitive animal models established examples in which no threshold dose could be detected; that is, effects were already apparent at the lowest doses tested. Moreover, there are some endocrine disrupting chemicals whose effects can be seen at low doses but not at high doses, in opposition to the usual dose-response curve familiar to toxicologists, which shows continually increasing responses with increases in dose. A 2007 NIEHS-sponsored review of studies of in vivo effects of Bisphenol A (BPA), for example, identified evidence for effects of low dose exposure during development on subsequent brain structure, function and behavior in rats and mice.

An NIEHS-funded group at the Dartmouth College Superfund Research Program discovered that arsenic can act as a potent endocrine disruptor. They have shown that arsenic profoundly affects the function of five steroid hormone receptors (the receptors for glucocorticoid, androgen, progesterone, mineralocorticoid, and estrogen hormones) as well as the function of related nuclear receptors for thyroid hormone and retinoic acid. These effects were observed at levels of 0.01 to 2.0 micromolars in cell culture and at or below 10 ppb in several animal models. They have also shown that arsenic has a significant effect on the ability of an activated hormone receptor to regulate gene expression, and that low level drinking water arsenic has strong, tissue-specific effects on expression of genes and proteins involved in the innate immune response in mouse lung. They found that mice that were exposed to 100 ppb arsenic in drinking water had a significantly compromised response to H1N1 influenza infection.

Regarding the broad range of effects: As our understanding of mechanisms has grown, so has our recognition of the many ways these compounds interact with the body and the many health outcomes that are influenced. The early work on endocrine disruption started out focusing mostly on outcomes that were known to be sensitive to the effects of steroid hormones, such as cancers of the reproductive system, and on mechanisms that involved hormonal receptors located in the cells’ nuclei. However, in addition to working through normal nuclear hormone receptors such as estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and retinoid receptors, we find that these molecules interact with many other kinds of receptors, such as membrane (non-nuclear) receptors, neurotransmitter receptors, enzymatic pathways involved in steroid biosynthesis and metabolism, and all the other mechanisms that enable hormone systems to do the work they need to do, which in turn enables the organism to function normally and react to changes. So the universe of potential health effects has grown commensurately to include non-reproductive cancers, immune effects, metabolic effects, and brain development and behavior, in addition to non-cancer abnormalities of the reproductive system, such as reproductive tract abnormalities, precocious puberty, disorders of fertility and fecundity, and endometriosis. For example, endocrine control of glucose homeostasis can impact development of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Researchers have now identified model systems and mechanisms by which developmental exposure to EDCs such as tributyltin , genistein and diethylstilbestrol may potentially cause weight gain in animals later in life. NIEHS-funded researchers are working on understanding biochemical and physiological aspects of environmental contributions to obesity, and we expect this work to have an impact on the development of interventions and preventive strategies to deal with this huge public health issue.

There are concerns about multiple possible health effects of BPA exposure. BPA is a selective endocrine modulator with widespread human exposure. The Department’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that it has some concern about the potential effects of BPA, partly based on the conclusions of the NTP-CERHR Monograph on Potential Human Reproductive and Developmental Effects of Bisphenol A (see summary ), which in turn built on the earlier consensus statement report from the expert panel workshop convened by the NIEHS . While much of the exposure to BPA in humans occurs through the diet, other sources of exposure include air, dust, and water. NIEHS invested approximately $20M in FY2009 to study health effects of BPA exposure, including $10.7M from ARRA funding. We have developed a program to assess differences in routes of exposure and metabolism across species, as well as the replication and expansion of experiments that linked BPA exposure to disease endpoints such as cancers, ADHD, obesity/diabetes/metabolic syndrome, immune dysfunction, reproductive diseases and dyfunctions, and cardiovascular disease. In addition, an NTP study is being conducted with FDA measuring the effects of long term exposures to a wide dose range of BPA in rats.

Regarding persistence of biological effects: Because of the existence of special windows of susceptibility in developmental processes, we know that exposure to EDCs at very sensitive stages of development can result in profound changes in physiology and function that may not emerge clinically until much later in life. The exposure itself may cease, but the developmental impact and the subsequent adverse effect have already been set in motion. NIEHS leads the cross-NIH effort to understand how exposure-related changes in an individual’s epigenetic status in one stage of their life can affect the health of the individual in later stages of their lifespan. Epigenetics is one recently discovered mechanism by which EDCs can produce these latent effects by altering the three dimensional structure of the chromosomes. The addition of methyl groups to DNA and changes to the histone proteins in chromosomes alter gene expression, leading to effects that can persist not just through one lifetime, but potentially for generations.

These delayed effects are the subject of a number of human studies funded by NIEHS. A group of researchers at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine recently reported that adverse behaviors of children aged 4-9 years (conduct or ADHD disorders) were associated with prenatal exposure to low molecular weight phthalates. Other scientists at Columbia University’s Center for Children’s Environmental Health (co-funded by NIEHS and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)) examined cord blood exposure to polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), which are ubiquitous flame retardants, and associations with neurodevelopment at ages 1-4 and 6 years. Children with higher concentrations of specific PBDEs while in utero scored lower on tests of mental and physical development. Previous data linking these compounds to altered thyroid hormones and thyroid function might provide a plausible mechanism for these effects.

The NIEHS Breast Cancer and Environment Research Program (co-funded with the NIH’s National Cancer Institute) is investigating whether periods of susceptibility exist in the development of the mammary gland, when exposures to environmental agents may impact the breast and endocrine systems that can influence breast cancer risk in adulthood. It is examining the determinants of puberty in girls, integrating environmental, genetic, biologic, lifestyle, and socioeconomic factors, in recognition of the epidemiology linking breast cancer risk to pubertal maturation. A major area of study is the role of exposures to EDCs. Center scientists have measured 51 environmental agents and their metabolites in biospecimens from approximately 1,190 girls. The data include the first report in children of high levels of a number of hormonally active chemicals such as enterolactone, benzophenone-3, and monoethyl-phthalate.

A separate follow-up study is now in progress in response to observations of high perfluoroalkyl compound (PFC) levels measured in a geographically distinct subset of the Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Center cohort. PFCs such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) are of concern because of their presence in air, food, drinking water and human tissues, their persistence and long half-life, and their adverse effects on development in animal models. NIEHS is supporting numerous studies on these compounds. One of our intramural investigators is following up previous observations of an association between PFOS and PFOA and increased time-to-pregnancy (a measure of decreased fecundability). At the request of the EPA, the NTP initiated a large research program on this class of compounds that includes PFOS, PFOA and shorter and longer chain perfluoroalkyl compounds. These studies include an evaluation of multiple aspects of post-natal development following exposure in utero and will provide a sound basis for assessing cumulative human health risks for these ubiquitous contaminants.

New science to promote new understanding: Given our growing understanding of the myriad of cellular hormonal targets of EDCs, new approaches have to be developed in order to characterize the potential for environmental agents to perturb endocrine function. NTP’s high throughput screening initiative (HTS) and Tox21 partnership, in collaboration with EPA and the NIH Chemical Genomics Center, include multiple assays designed to assess activity of chemicals at hormonal targets. Initial results have shown that among the most active of hundreds of chemicals tested so far in these assay systems is BPA. Triclosan, an antimicrobial in hand soaps, toothpaste, cosmetics, and many other products, and one of the most frequently detected water contaminants, also exhibits endocrine activity in these tests and is one of the most active compounds across multiple assays.

By linking pre-existing and newly developed information on toxicological activity in whole animal studies of compounds registering as positive in these endocrine-relevant assays, we are able to explore the in vivo significance of signals picked up in HTS. As we move forward and develop and include additional assays for endocrine activity, HTS will help us decide which chemicals need further investigation.

The NTP is employing in vitro and short term animal models to detect perturbations in endocrine function that can be used as a basis for deciding whether to conduct more rigorous long-term studies. Short term models are also being used to address questions of cumulative risk, that is, whether exposure to mixtures of similar compounds causes additive or synergistic (whole greater than the sum of the parts) effects. For example, through a collaborative arrangement with EPA’s Office of Research and Development, the NTP is conducting studies to evaluate effects on male reproductive endpoints for many combinations of phthalates to allow more precise comparisons of potency and a better understanding of cumulative risk for this class of compounds found in many plastics.

The NTP is also planning new research relevant specifically to EDCs in drinking water. One set of studies will investigate the potential for mixtures of chemicals known to occur in drinking water to impact pre- and early post-natal development. These studies will focus on structurally dissimilar drugs and other industrial chemicals that perturb a common biological pathway, e.g. cholesterol and lipid metabolism.

New information on endocrine activity has led the NTP to develop toxicological research programs on additional compounds such as bisphenol AF, used to make certain industrial polymers; butylparaben, a preservative used in cosmetics; oxybenzone, a sunscreen ingredient; and triclosan. The relevance of cosmetics, sunscreens and other personal care products to drinking water exposures has previously been highlighted. Endocrine activity is also of potential concern for herbal products taken as dietary supplements. NTP research programs on several of these, such as gum guggul, Dong quai, and valerian, includes evaluations of hormonal activity.

In addition to generating new knowledge, we also need to make sure our science is shared with those who need to use it. This includes other Federal, state and local agencies as well as communities and individuals. Many of our research efforts are done in partnership with the agencies who will be the consumers of the research. We have also supported some excellent scientific forums for sharing this information with government and non-government scientists. For example, the NIEHS/NTP, along with other NIH components, FDA, CDC, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, EPA, the Society of Toxicology, the World Health Organization, and the European Environment Agency, recently sponsored a workshop on prenatal programming and toxicology entitled, “PPTOXII: Role of environmental stressors in the developmental origins of disease.” The meeting, attended by 280 scientists, focused on the developmental origins of disease with the goal of stimulating collaborations in the area of effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals on developmental toxicity. We are also mindful of the need to keep dialog open with affected communities. In our Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Program, researchers have created public messages to convey information about endocrine disrupting chemicals and their potential role in the prevention and understanding of breast cancer, including fact sheets for clinicians and the public on likely sources of exposures.

In conclusion, let me stress that I believe this area of environmental health sciences to be of the utmost importance. Our endocrine systems keep our bodies in balance, maintaining homeostasis and guiding proper growth and development. With NIEHS’s leadership, we are learning more and more about how these finely tuned systems are sensitive to unanticipated effects from chemical exposures. This information is critically important for creating effective strategies to prevent disease and promote better health, as well as to ensure safe drinking water.

Thank you for the opportunity to present information on this important topic. I would be happy to answer your questions.

Last revised: June 18, 2013

http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/2010/02/t20100225a.html

Bill Moyers has picked up on the chemical burden for PBS. National Geographic published an excellent report. I hope the rest of the pack wakes up.

[Major Nikon]

66. Seralini

[Octafish]

94. Character Assassin?

Does he make Monsanto sad?

[Major Nikon]

97. You'd think you'd be used to being so easily debunked by now

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gilles-Eric_S%C3%A9ralini

[Octafish]

101. Not by you. And why do you care, Major Nikon?

Nothing you post that I've read addresses the crimes of Wall Street or the national security state. Instead, you consistently protect Wall Street, the Pentagon and the Bush family.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10141448713#post120

[Major Nikon]

103. You protect Lyndon Larouche

Very telling that.

[Octafish]

107. Nice smear.

One thing to use the facts:

Bush's Energy Pirates
Are In Global Power Grab

It's another to smear a fellow DUer.

So why defend Bush and his energy pirates, Major Nikon? Is it your hobby?

[Major Nikon]

110. So pointing out you parrot out LaRouche is a smear, but pretending I defend Bush isn't

[Octafish]

120. Smear artist.

Here you imply anyone who appeared on RT was with Alex Jones:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027005752#post251

Top shelf artiste.

[Major Nikon]

132. ...

[alarimer]

34. Good luck educating this anti-science crowd.

I don't blame them, but I do blame the media for breathlessly reporting this kind of thing.

[Octafish]

36. Especially with all the apologists and shills protecting Industry online.

They pump the disinformation 24/7/366 -- the extra day being, as Ivan Denisovich noted, for leap year.

[Scientific]

49. You want a news blackout on toxins in our food and bodies?

Sounds like a plank from the Republican party platform.

The report in the OP is in no way "breathless." It's just a statement of fact: 93% of us have this corporate toxin in our bodies.

If you can't handle facts, you should stop reading the news.

[stevenleser]

50. No, that is a straw man. That person wants responsible reporting.

As I said upthread, there are minute levels of all kinds of toxins that make it from the environment into our tissues. That is how that should be reported.

Sure, there is probably a few parts per billion of arsenic in all of us. It doesnt affect us at all because any kind of harmful effects would need to have concentrations on the order of a million times that level.

Thats how you report that stuff.

[skepticscott]

95. Exactly...the dose is the poison...period

Anyone who doesn't understand that as the fundamental principle of all toxicological studies can be dismissed as an agenda-driven moron. Anyone who clings to the notion that there is "no safe amount" of certain materials doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

[Major Nikon]

99. “There is just no acceptable level of any chemical to ingest, ever”

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2015/02/12/the-food-babe-there-is-just-no-acceptable-level-of-any-chemical-to-ingest-ever/

[Octafish]

108. Toxic Sludge Is Good For You

[skepticscott]

112. QED in spades

With a healthy dose of straw man thrown in.

Thanks for being a poster child.

[Octafish]

113. Toxic Sludge Is Good For You is about PR

The title refers to the PR industry-created word, "Bio-Solids."

Sorry, I don't need to read "People" to develop a personality.

[skepticscott]

111. QED nt

[womanofthehills]

124. When you have nothing ,you always put down the Food Babe

Obviously you find a woman fighting to get toxic chemicals reduced in our food supply a threat. The Food Babe sure looks GREAT - I definitely want to eat what she eats.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

137. Food Babe is a fucking idiot.

Same with her followers. She know NOTHING of science or nutrition.

[womanofthehills]

45. However, the levels of glyphosate on soy are now "extreme" & I would worry

Who says when Roundup contamination can be considered “extreme?” Monsanto itself.

In 1999, the chemical giant defined an “extreme level” of the herbicide as 5.6 milligrams per kilogram of plant weight.

Astonishingly, the Norwegian scientists found a whopping 9 milligrams of Roundup per kilogram, on average. What it boils down to is this: every time we eat GE soy we are taking a dose of Roundup with it. This is alarming, because Roundup has been found to be hazardous to human health and sometimes kills human cells.

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2014/04/extreme-levels-herbicide-roundup-found-food

[Major Nikon]

85. Shit source referencing shit researchers like Seralini and pretending it's not shit evidence

[stevenleser]

152. "Extreme" what? "Extreme" is not a medical or scientific measurement.

The "extreme" level you are talking about is 5.6 parts per million. That is what 5.6 milligrams per kilogram of plant weight equates to. That is a little less than 1000 times the measurement in urine that we are talking about.

"Sometimes kills human cells" is another gem. You know that water "sometimes kills human cells" too right.

I am all too happy to fight for an FDA or other responsible agency doing an investigation into whether Roundup is toxic and if so at what levels, but you don't have any of that here. You have irresponsible fear mongering based on zero science.

[womanofthehills]

159. Extreme means way over the US allowable limits for glyphosate in food

(which by the way, they never measure) they just bought the equipment to measure glyphosate , so maybe one day soon .......

[Major Nikon]

165. Complete nonsense

All pesticide residue must be measured at the maximum allowable application before any synthetic pesticide may be certified.

You've already been shown how your statement is false, which you even admitted, yet still you persist on repeating it.

Nothing demonstrated in this thread comes within a cab ride of the "US allowable limits for glyphosate in food" which I'm pretty sure you don't even know and even more sure you don't understand.

Soybeans are covered by group 20:
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/05/01/2013-10316/glyphosate-pesticide-tolerances#h-27

[womanofthehills]

167. I'm not talking about measuring before application - here is the EPA chart

I'm talking about the pesticide residue allowed on the food for sale. Check out how high animal feed is and soybean.

EPA Glyphosate List: Allowable Levels on our FOOD

FROM EPA WEBSITE

Allowable levels of glyphosate on food and feeds crops in the United State of America. Brought to you by the Environmental Protection Agency: ( Keep in mind that 0.1ppb was shown to destroy gut bacteria in chickens. -Carrusco study ( see Data page)


e-CFR Data is current as of October 15, 2014


Title 40: Protection of Environment
PART 180—TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD
Subpart C—Specific Tolerances

§180.364 Glyphosate; tolerances for residues.

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of glyphosate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities listed below resulting from the application of glyphosate, the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, the dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the potassium salt of glyphosate. Compliance with the following tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine).


Commodity Parts per million
Acerola 0.2
Alfalfa, seed 0.5
Almond, hulls 25
Aloe vera 0.5
Ambarella 0.2
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18 400
Artichoke, globe 0.2
Asparagus 0.5
Atemoya 0.2
Avocado 0.2
Bamboo, shoots 0.2
Banana 0.2
Barley, bran 30
Beet, sugar, dried pulp 25
Beet, sugar, roots 10
Beet, sugar, tops 10
Berry and small fruit, group 13-07 0.20
Betelnut 1.0
Biriba 0.2
Blimbe 0.2
Breadfruit 0.2
Cacao bean, bean 0.2
Cactus, fruit 0.5
Cactus, pads 0.5
Canistel 0.2
Carrot 5.0
Chaya 1.0
Cherimoya 0.2
Citrus, dried pulp 1.5
Coconut 0.1
Coffee, bean, green 1.0
Corn, pop, grain 0.1
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husk removed 3.5
Cotton, gin byproducts 210
Custard apple 0.2
Date, dried fruit 0.2
Dokudami 2.0
Durian 0.2
Epazote 1.3
Feijoa 0.2
Fig 0.2
Fish 0.25
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 0.50
Fruit, pome, group 11-10 0.20
Fruit, stone, group 12 0.2
Galangal, roots 0.2
Ginger, white, flower 0.2
Gourd, buffalo, seed 0.1
Governor's plum 0.2
Gow kee, leaves 0.2
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except field corn, forage and field corn, stover 100
Grain, cereal, group 15 except field corn, popcorn, rice, sweet corn, and wild rice 30
Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17 300
Guava 0.2
Herbs subgroup 19A 0.2
Hop, dried cones 7.0
Ilama 0.2
Imbe 0.2
Imbu 0.2
Jaboticaba 0.2
Jackfruit 0.2
Kava, roots 0.2
Kenaf, forage 200
Leucaena, forage 200
Longan 0.2
Lychee 0.2
Mamey apple 0.2
Mango 0.2
Mangosteen 0.2
Marmaladebox 0.2
Mioga, flower 0.2
Noni 0.20
Nut, pine 1.0
Nut, tree, group 14 1.0
Oilseeds, group 20, except canola 40
Okra 0.5
Olive 0.2
Oregano, Mexican, leaves 2.0
Palm heart 0.2
Palm heart, leaves 0.2
Palm, oil 0.1
Papaya 0.2
Papaya, mountain 0.2
Passionfruit 0.2
Pawpaw 0.2
Pea, dry 8.0
Peanut 0.1
Peanut, hay 0.5
Pepper leaf, fresh leaves 0.2
Peppermint, tops 200
Perilla, tops 1.8
Persimmon 0.2
Pineapple 0.1
Pistachio 1.0
Pomegranate 0.2
Pulasan 0.2
Quinoa, grain 5.0
Rambutan 0.2
Rice, grain 0.1
Rice, wild, grain 0.1

Rose apple 0.2
Sapodilla 0.2
Sapote, black 0.2
Sapote, mamey 0.2
Sapote, white 0.2
Shellfish 3.0
Soursop 0.2
Spanish lime 0.2
Spearmint, tops 200
Spice subgroup 19B 7.0
Star apple 0.2
Starfruit 0.2
Stevia, dried leaves 1.0
Sugar apple 0.2
Sugarcane, cane 2.0
Sugarcane, molasses 30
Surinam cherry 0.2
Sweet potato 3.0
Tamarind 0.2
Tea, dried 1.0
Tea, instant 7.0
Teff, forage 100
Teff, grain 5.0
Teff, hay 100
Ti, leaves 0.2
Ti, roots 0.2
Ugli fruit 0.5
Vegetable, bulb, group 3-07 0.20
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 0.5
Vegetable, foliage of legume, subgroup 7A, except soybean 0.2
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 (except okra) 0.10
Vegetable, leafy, brassica, group 5 0.2
Vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4 0.2
Vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, group 2, except sugar beet tops 0.2
Vegetable, legume, group 6 except soybean and dry pea 5.0
Vegetables, root and tuber, group 1, except carrot, sweet potato, and sugar beet 0.20
Wasabi, roots 0.2
Water spinach, tops 0.2
Watercress, upland 0.2
Wax jambu 0.2
Yacon, tuber 0.2
0.2

(2) Tolerances are established for residues of glyphosate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities listed below resulting from the application of glyphosate, the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, the dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the potassium salt of glyphosate. Compliance with the following tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) and its metabolite N-acetyl-glyphosate (N-acetyl-N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine; calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of glyphosate).
Commodity Parts per Million
Canola, seed 20
Cattle, meat byproducts 5.0
Corn, field, forage 13
Corn, field, grain 5.0
Corn, field, stover 100
Egg 0.05
Goat, meat byproducts 5.0
Grain aspirated fractions 310.0
Hog, meat byproducts 5.0
Horse, meat byproducts 5.0
Poultry, meat 0.10
Poultry, meat byproducts 1.0
Sheep, meat byproducts 5.0
Soybean, forage 100.0
Soybean, hay 200.0
Soybean, hulls 120.0
Soybean, seed 20.0

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]

(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

[45 FR 64911, Oct. 1, 1980]

Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting §180.364, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at www.fdsys.gov.
glyphosate allowable levels EPA list

http://www.momsacrossamerica.com/epa_glyphosate_list_allowable_levels_on_our_food or you can go to EPA website

FDA to Start Testing Monsanto's Glyphosate in Food - EcoWatch

Feb 18, 2016 - The FDA will begin testing food for glyphosate, the world's most ... This marks the first time that a U.S. agency will routinely test for glyphosate residue in food. .


http://ecowatch.com/2016/02/18/fda-test-food-glyphosate/

[Major Nikon]

170. You just repeated the exact same thing I gave you

And you have no clue what you are talking about, and I'm pretty sure you have no idea what the actual levels are for soybeans used for human consumption even though I already gave to a breadcrumb trail to figure it out.

Meanwhile all of the levels listed are in parts per million when it's a demonstrable fact that glyphosate is less toxic than salt.

[stevenleser]

175. Link to that pronouncement by any government agency please. nt

[RKP5637]

51. +1, n/t

[lakeguy]

90. size doesn't always matter, unless you're trump maybe

and the amount is very large compared to what should be there. small amounts of many things can cause damage, especially when they are there for long periods of time. if 9 out of 10 people have this in their systems, then we are all being exposed to this substance much longer relative to results based on any testing that was done.

since you like to make meaningless comparisons with numbers, a few ppb of phosphorus can turn a pristine lake into a nasty green one with blooms of algae that can create lethal toxins. but it's just a few drops of water in a bunch of drums, or 3 seconds in a century, right? wikipedia told me so.

[stevenleser]

92. Quantity of a toxin always matters. Disregarding that paints you as not serious.

As soon as you are ready to have a serious discussion about this, let me know.

[womanofthehills]

38. Even more scary than the glyphosate - the inert secret ingredients

Different companies selling glyphosate have different formulations - some of these adjuvants make the glyphosate 1000 times more toxic so just testing glyphosate and not the complete formulation makes no sense.

Pyrethroids and pyrethrins usually have PBO (piperonyl butoxide) - (organic regulations only call for the use of pyrethrins without PBO). Try to buy pyrethrins in a store without PBO - almost impossible. Anyway, pests might be able to detoxify pyrethrins and pyrethroids but--- the PBO destroys the pest's liver so the bug cannot detoxify the pesticide- and guess what - PBO is not good for your liver either. So, the adjuvant can be worse than the pesticide.

Major Pesticides Are More Toxic to Human Cells Than Their Declared Active Principles

Pesticides are used throughout the world as mixtures called formulations. They contain adjuvants, which are often kept confidential and are called inerts by the manufacturing companies, plus a declared active principle, which is usually tested alone. We tested the toxicity of 9 pesticides, comparing active principles and their formulations, on three human cell lines (HepG2, HEK293, and JEG3). Glyphosate, isoproturon, fluroxypyr, pirimicarb, imidacloprid, acetamiprid, tebuconazole, epoxiconazole, and prochloraz constitute, respectively, the active principles of 3 major herbicides, 3 insecticides, and 3 fungicides. We measured mitochondrial activities, membrane degradations, and caspases 3/7 activities. Fungicides were the most toxic from concentrations 300–600 times lower than agricultural dilutions, followed by herbicides and then insecticides, with very similar profiles in all cell types. Despite its relatively benign reputation, Roundup was among the most toxic herbicides and insecticides tested. Most importantly, 8 formulations out of 9 were up to one thousand times more toxic than their active principles. Our results challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake for pesticides because this norm is calculated from the toxicity of the active principle alone. Chronic tests on pesticides may not reflect relevant environmental exposures if only one ingredient of these mixtures is tested alone

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666/

[Major Nikon]

88. Seralini

[womanofthehills]

41. ONLY ONE MORE DAY TO COMMENT TO EPA - on Monsanto's Dicamba

Act Now to Stop Approval of Latest Toxic Monsanto Herbicide - glyphosate plus Dicumba -

Glyphosate alone not working so they are adding a 2nd herbicide to their new GMO soybeans and cotton. Dicumba is a cousin of 2,4-d.

http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/dicamba-NCAP.pdf


Comment to EPA at:
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0187

[womanofthehills]

42. Warning to farmers - you may have nowhere to sell Dicamba tolerant soybeans

(except in the US - the US loves herbicide food )

Be Cautious About Planting Dicamba-Tolerant Soybeans

“We have received several reports from farmers saying their elevators and processors have said they will not accept dicamba-tolerant soybeans,” Freeman says. “While these traits are for sale in Minnesota, growers of the dicamba-tolerant soybeans may have nowhere to sell these beans come fall. We encourage any farmer considering planting these traits in 2016 to fully consider the risks involved.”

http://www.agriculture.com/content/be-cautious-about-planting-dicamba-tolerant-soybeans

[womanofthehills]

43. National Geographic - photos - living near GMO soybean fields

A Town Demands Protection from Pesticides -

A powerful photograph changes a girl’s life and improves conditions in a rural farm town in Argentina. But problems persist.

Almost a year ago, National Geographic told the story of Aixa, now eight years old, who lives in Avia Terai, a town in Argentina surrounded by soybeans and other crops treated with pesticides. Included was a photograph by Marco Vernaschi that showed tumors and blotches covering Aixa’s face and body.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/02/160223-photograph-aixa-argentina-avia-terai-pesticides-glyphosate/

[thereismore]

44. I am sure that's 93% of the 99%. nt

[LeftyMom]

52. There is no "UC Cal"

The closest thing would be UC Berkeley, aka University of California or just Cal, but later on you're saying it was UCSF.

I'm guessing the rest of the story is equally shoddy since the most basic detail involved- who did the research- isn't even reported upon consistently?

[womanofthehills]

54. Sorry - it's UC San Francisco - I was shortening it in my mind

The testing, carried out by a laboratory at UC San Francisco, was the first-ever comprehensive and validated LC/MS/MS testing project to be carried out across America. According to the results, people who live in the west and mid-west tested higher than those living in other regions of the country.

[womanofthehills]

56. The public sent in their urine samples and you can too!!

I signed up for the next test - summer 2016 - it's called the Detox Project at UCSF . I am definitely getting my grandkids tested.



click on link to sign up:
http://detoxproject.org/glyphosate-testing-test-yourself/

The validated glyphosate testing method developed thanks to The Detox Project’s sponsorship is one of the first ever environmental chemical tests to be made available to the general public.

The testing method has very low minimum detection levels, which means that the public will be given an accurate and clear idea as to the level of glyphosate found in their body fluids and in their water.
What method is being used for this glyphosate testing?

Glyphosate (N-(phosphomethyl)glycine ) is directly analyzed using liquid chromatography- tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Water and urine samples are prepared for analysis by solid phase extraction using an ion exchange column. Extracted samples are injected to the LC-MS/MS and the analyte is separated using an Obelisc N column (SIELC Technologies, Prospect Heights, IL) through isocratic elution. Ionization of glyphosate is achieved using an electrospray ionization source operated in negative polarity. The analyte is detected by multiple reaction monitoring using a 13C-labelled glyphosate as internal standard. Quantification of the analyte is done by isotope dilution method using an eight-point calibration curve.

The assay has a limit of quantification of 0.5 ng/mL. The intra- and inter-day precision observed are 6-15% in concentrations that range 0.5-80 ng/mL. Recoveries for glyphosate range 70-80% at concentrations within the assay’s linear dynamic range.

[Person 2713]

162. Thanks for the info

[womanofthehills]

55. Taiwan recalls Quaker Oats imported from US - glyphosate levels too high

https://ecowatch.com/2016/05/27/taiwan-quaker-oats-glyphosate/

[womanofthehills]

80. Food brands to avoid

An Alarming New Study Shows That Glyphosate Has Infiltrated Breakfast Cereal, Soy Milk And More

And here are a few brands to avoid, all of which tested at between 100 and 500 ppb, include Thomas’ Whole Wheat bagels, Rudio Multibagels, Pepperidge Farm Whole Grain bread, and Dave’s Killer Whole Wheat Bread, Silk Soy Creamer non-GMO, and Cream of Wheat Hot Cereal whole grain.

You might do well to start by throwing out any Quaker Instant Oatmeal you have laying around. A recent study discovered that the company’s Strawberries and Cream breakfast cereal contained over 1,300 parts per billion of glyphosate weed killer, the chemical widely used as an herbicide on genetically-modified crops. The study was conducted at Microbe Inotech Laboratories in St. Louis, using the latest methodology, an “enzyme linked immuno-absorbent assay.

But here are some alarming facts about the Microbe Inotech study: for one thing, at over 1300 ppb, the level of glyphosate found in the oatmeal is off the charts. Of the other items that tested positive for the chemical the highest were in the 400-500 ppb range, and certainly well above the 75 ppb threshold of detection.

Secondly, and what should really have us all screaming and heading toward the Monsanto headquarters with torches and pitchforks–next stop, Congress–is the fact that oats aren’t even a GMO crop. So, whereas one might expect to find some traces of glyphosate in foods containing corn or soy or in products containing cotton, non-GMO crops like oats are an unlikely source.

http://www.opensourcetruth.com/2016/05/25/an-alarming/

[Major Nikon]

87. Very telling when someone has to cite anti-vax sources

[JohnyCanuck]

57. German Medical Assembly says glyphosate should not be re-authorized

The 119th German Medical Assembly in Hamburg has asked the German government and the EU Commission not to re-approve glyphosate, in accordance with the precautionary principle.

The Assembly said in a statement that its request was prompted by the finding of the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency IARC that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen and poses a genotoxic (damaging to DNA) risk.

The Assembly said that for genotoxic effects, there is no safe threshold of exposure. Therefore the prerequisite for any further long-term authorization would be independent studies showing that the levels of glyphosate herbicides that humans are exposed to cannot cause these effects.

http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/16982-german-medical-assembly-says-glyphosate-should-not-be-re-authorized

[NNadir]

58. As a scientist, I find this "alarming" post to border on absurd.

A modern LC/MS/MS can find nanogram quantities of pretty much everything common in the environment.

There is a difference between a detection limit and a toxicological limit. One can usually detect things like arsenic in most human tissues, but obviously everyone doesn't die of arsenic poisoning.

In fact, if one opens scientific papers frequently, and obviously the hysterics here don't engage in this practice very often, one can find all kinds of things in breast milk that are of far more concern.

For example: Perfluorinated carboxylic acids in human breast milk from Spain and estimation of infant's daily intake (Science of The Total Environment Volume 544, 15 February 2016, Pages 595–600.)

PFOS, perfluorooctanoic sulfonate is a decomposition product from things like Teflon, the now banned furniture product Scotchguard, and a number of similar products.

It is a far greater risk than glyphosate will ever be; and is of wide concern among environmental scientists because of its well known persistence, something glyphosate doesn't share.

Glyphosate is a very powerful tool in fighting climate change, which in general, people who despise science don't know very much about and about which they couldn't care less, at least if such concern extends beyond issuing mindless platitudes. Without glyphosphate one of the most important avenues for soil preservation and the elimination of fuel requirements for agriculture, no till farming, becomes impossible.

The longer I live, the more I learn how fear and ignorance are allowed to prevail at great harm to the environment and to humanity. This is just one more such case.

It's awful. Terrible really. A real tragedy.

Have a wonderful week.

[Major Nikon]

62. There you go injecting facts and reality into the conversation

To many, words like "toxic" and "dose" have no correlation.

[womanofthehills]

63. As a women poisoned by pesticides, I find your post alarming

[NNadir]

127. Your evidence that you were "poisoned by pesticides" is what?

Are you a pathologist, a toxicologist, or an epidemiologist?

My son was born with a potentially catastrophic birth defect that had obvious cosmetic manifestations. Happily the only manifestation was just that, cosmetic, but it could have been much worse. (My son is now 21 and has just been admitted as a transfer student to a fairly prestigious school associated with his career choice.)

When he was an infant and a toddler, often people - rude people - would approach my wife and I in public settings to ask "What's that?" or "What caused that?" or "What did you do to cause that?"

Even ruder people would offer us their own speculations about what "caused that." These people, of course, were the most rude. In general my impression was that the that the people offering these unsolicited speculations were clearly the most ignorant and the least likely to have any kind of scientific knowledge. The less science they knew, the louder their mouths.

To avoid my son making negative associations with his appearance, we bit our tongues and answered, correctly, but politely and firmly, this answer, "we don't know."

As it happens, the cause of my son's condition was discovered, and published in 2013 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

It involved a clearly random genetic (somatic) event, and I'm quite sure now that all the people shooting off their mouths on subjects they know nothing about - "what caused that?" - were clueless.

From your tenor here, I'm sure you have no idea about what caused whatever symptoms you may have, but are merely speculating wildly. While I regret it if you are ill, I assure you that your loud assertions of this type will surely impact other human beings in a way that is decidedly not positive. As far as I'm concerned, you are doing monstrous harm to other people.

Despite the effects of your pernicious rhetoric, I certainly hope you will recover from whatever ails you and that you will have a pleasant week.

[womanofthehills]

142. My allergy doctor made the diagnosis & I was given disability at the time & settled a lawsuit

extreme salivation, mouth would not stop moving from side to side like I was chewing gum but I wasn't; loss of balance, trembling esp at night while lying in bed; could not lie down without the room spinning; trouble swallowing food - lost 25 lbs in one month, definite cognitive problems but the absolute worse was bronchospasm because it's really scary when you can't breathe. I would say I am 90 per cent better as I moved to the middle of nowhere. Actually, our grocery store closed and I now officially live in a "FOOD DESERT" - 90 miles round trip to the nearest grocery store but it's 180 miles for me as I only eat organic. However, we do have a farmers market in the summer and I have chickens.

Anyway, when I was well enough to leave my house, my daughter and I went down to the Environmental Dept to check their pesticide spraying records and everytime they sprayed corresponded with me going to the emergency room. My street dead ended up against the ditch and river which is why the mosquito spraying was so heavy.

I got myself a toxic tort lawyer and the City of Albuquerque settled with me. First case of it's kind in Albuquerque.

[NNadir]

146. Oh, I see. Your lawyer gave you your scientific training.

This qualifies you to speak, I would guess, on a matter involving the availability of food for billions of people on the planet.

My guess is that there were zero scientists on your jury.

I would also guess that your allergist is a world class expert whose experience and training certainly outweigh the thinking of tens of thousands of scientists working at, for one example, the World Health Organization.

Frankly, you remind me a lot of the people who used to come up to me and speculate on "what caused that" when my son was an infant.

When one pushes against these sort of things, one is amazed to discover exactly how much cheering can go on for thinking that is not only bad, but is in fact, disastrous.

Have a nice evening.

[cleanhippie]

129. I promise you, you were not poisoned by pesticides.

It was the chemtrails! They make you THINK it was the pesticides!

[Major Nikon]

154. You're discounting the effect of electromagnetic hypersensitivity and gov sponsored mind control

[cleanhippie]

156. Oh, right! I always forget that!

[womanofthehills]

64. 38 countries do not feel the same as you - i guess they despise science!

GM Crops Now Banned in 38 Countries Worldwide – Sustainable Pulse Research


Thirty eight (38) countries worldwide have officially banned the cultivation of GM crops and only 28 actually grow GM crops (most of which grow under 500 thousand hectares). The picture painted by the Biotech industry and the U.S. government that GM crops have been accepted by the majority of countries worldwide is therefore quite obviously wrong.

Algeria (since 2000)

Madagascar (since 2002)

Asia (4)

Turkey,

Kyrgyzstan

Bhutan

Saudi Arabia

Americas (4)

Belize

Peru

Ecuador

Venezuela

Europe (28)

Scotland

Wales

Northern Ireland

Germany

France

The Netherlands

Malta

Cyprus

Greece

Bulgaria

Russia

Serbia

Croatia

Italy

Denmark

Hungary

Moldova

Latvia

Lithuania

Austria

Poland

Slovenia

Azerbaijan

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Luxembourg

Ukraine (although there is massive GM contamination in the country)

Norway

Switzerland




http://sustainablepulse.com/2015/10/22/gm-crops-now-banned-in-36-countries-worldwide-sustainable-pulse-research/#.V00JZmbXh-I

[NNadir]

116. Political organizations often respond to ignorance. This is well known in history and often...

...often observed. The logical fallacy - and let's be clear that very few anti-GMO types are clear thinkers - to which you appeal is the "bandwagon fallacy."

Bad Thinking: Bandwagon Fallacy

Many countries fight wars, but the fact that they do so does not make war a wonderful or wise thing in which to participate.

The anti-GMO industry is an appeal to fear and ignorance that cause great human suffering.

The most prominent example of this ignorance is the blinding of children - none of whom are bourgeois scientific illiterates living in the first world - by denying access to "Golden Rice.

Scientists who are, unlike scare mongers, decent human beings are fighting back.

Golden Rice Project

Nevertheless the disrespect for science in cultures around the world are a formidable drain on what we can do for humanity.

This is the face of the effects of anti-GMO ignorance:




http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xdxuxFx3024/T2nAjOIEPgI/AAAAAAAAHlI/lwxlA3F_6ic/s320/Boy+with+VAD+blindness.jpg

?h=188&w=250

Congratulations. I'm sure you're very proud of yourself for never having opened a science book in your life.

Unfortunately, the effects of your failure to do so aren't visited on you, but on those whose ability to afford such a luxury as deliberate ignorance is severely limited by poverty.

Have a nice week.

[Major Nikon]

61. Average level was 3 parts per BILLION

So how much is one part per BILLION? It's one drop of water in an Olympic sized swimming pool.

Then again, if one subscribes to homeoquackery, I guess the less concentration found in urine, the more powerful it is.

Edit: The results may be found here

[JohnyCanuck]

67. Glyphosate degrades soil microbial life

Poisoned Fields - Glyphosate, the underrated risk?

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used weed killer. Some claim it is completely harmless, others say it is a serious health hazard for man and animals. A topical investigation into a controversial substance.

Agronomist John Kempf explains why glyphosate (which Monsanto has patented as an anti-biotic) harms the microbial life in the soil and leads to mineral deficiencies in the soil. Consequently plants are less resistant to disease and nutritionally deficient for the humans and animals that eat those plants.

John Kempf is the founder and CEO of Advancing Eco Agriculture (AEA), a leading crop nutrition consulting company. A top expert in the field of biological and regenerative farming, John founded AEA in 2006 to help fellow farmers by providing the education, tools and strategies that will have a global effect on the food supply and those who are growing that supply.

As a farmer who grew up in and remains a part of the Amish community, John has a very special understanding of plants’ functional immunity. He sought out alternative approaches to prevent damage to his crops once they stopped responding to conventional pesticide treatments. To enhance plants’ natural immunity, thereby making them less susceptible to pests and disease, he developed a comprehensive, systems-based methodology founded on plant physiology, mineral nutrition and soil microbiology. With results proven on his own farm, John went on to found AEA to share his success and insight that healthy crops do not require chemical treatments or genetic modifications.

John is an internationally recognized lecturer on the topic of biological agriculture and plant immunity. He lives in Middlefield, Ohio.

[Major Nikon]

68. Seralini Rule

If you favorably cite the 2012 Séralini rats fed on Roundup ready maize study, you just lost the argument.

http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2013/06/the-seralini-rule-gmo-bogus-study.html

[womanofthehills]

71. Actually, the WHO and many scientists are taking a new look at the Seralini study

Ten things you need to know about the Séralini study

1. Most criticisms of Séralini’s study wrongly assume it was a badly designed cancer study. It wasn’t. It was a chronic toxicity study – and a well-designed and well-conducted one.

2. Séralini’s study is the only long-term study on the commercialized GM maize NK603 and the pesticide (Roundup) it is designed to be grown with. See here: Why is this study important?

3. Séralini used the same strain of rat (Sprague-Dawley, SD) that Monsanto used in its 90-day studies on GM foods and its long-term studies on glyphosate, the chemical ingredient of Roundup, conducted for regulatory approval.

4. The SD rat is about as prone to tumours as humans are. As with humans, the SD rat’s tendency to cancer increases with age.

5.Compared with industry tests on GM foods, Séralini’s study analyzed the same number of rats but over a longer period (two years instead of 90 days), measured more effects more often, and was uniquely able to distinguish the effects of the GM food from the pesticide it is grown with.

6. If we argue that Séralini’s study does not prove that the GM food tested is dangerous, then we must also accept that industry studies on GM foods cannot prove they are safe.

7. Séralini’s study showed that 90-day tests commonly done on GM foods are not long enough to see long-term effects like cancer, organ damage, and premature death. The first tumours only appeared 4-7 months into the study.

8. Séralini’s study showed that industry and regulators are wrong to dismiss toxic effects seen in 90-day studies on GM foods as “not biologically meaningful”. Signs of toxicity found in Monsanto’s 90-day studies were found to develop into organ damage, cancer, and premature death in Séralini’s two-year study.

9. Long-term tests on GM foods are not required by regulators anywhere in the world.

10. GM foods have been found to have toxic effects on laboratory and farm animals in a number of studies.

http://www.gmoseralini.org/ten-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-seralini-study/

[Major Nikon]

72. According to Seralini himself!

Meanwhile...

The journal Food and Chemical Toxicology retracts the article “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize,” which was published in this journal in November 2012. This retraction comes after a thorough and time-consuming analysis of the published article and the data it reports, along with an investigation into the peer-review behind the article. The Editor in-Chief deferred making any public statements regarding this article until this investigation was complete, and the authors were notified of the findings.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

[womanofthehills]

75. Not www.sciencedirect.com again!

[Major Nikon]

78. Let me see if I have this straight

When Elsevier published the now discredited Seralini study, evidently they were the gold standard of evidence.

But when Elsevier announces the now discredited Seralini study has been retracted, they are complete shit.

[JohnyCanuck]

79. See video of interview with John Kempf

No one breathes a word about Seralini in that video which explains how applying an antibiotic and mineral chelator in the form of glyphosate/Roundup degrades the soil microbial life and with its chelating properties makes essential minerals unavailable for use by plants and people.

[Major Nikon]

81. See 25:22 in the video you posted, produced by Putin's mouthpiece, RT

If you want to parrot out Seralini nonsense, you should at least acknowledge that Seralini is part and parcel to it. So regardless of whether or not you know John Kempf is on the payroll of more than one highly biased anti-GMO groups, which is very telling in and of itself, the fact that he associates with the likes of Seralini and RT tells you all you really need to know.

[womanofthehills]

76. I have been following your posts on building up the soil

great information!

[Silver_Witch]

73. Not banned for the same reason ALL other countries banned Lead and US did not.

Lobbyist pure and simple. Money buys power in this country,

Google it...most countries banned lead paint in the 20's - In the United States of America it was well into the 50's before it was banned.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/04/why-it-took-decades-of-blaming-parents-before-we-banned-lead-paint/275169/

The rich and the powerful don't care if our children die or are ill.

[mdbl]

91. And the chemical industry wins another round

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/36229-congress-bows-to-the-chemical-lobby-on-toxics-regulation

[Octafish]

105. EPA USED MONSANTO’S RESEARCH TO GIVE ROUNDUP A PASS

Sharon Lerner
The Intercept, Nov. 3 2015, 3:32 p.m.

EXCERPT...

But the EPA’s exoneration — which means that the agency will not require additional tests of the chemical’s effects on the hormonal system — is undercut by the fact that the decision was based almost entirely on pesticide industry studies. Only five independently funded studies were considered in the review of whether glyphosate interferes with the endocrine system. Twenty-seven out of 32 studies that looked at glyphosate’s effect on hormones and were cited in the June review — most of which are not publicly available and were obtained by The Intercept through a Freedom of Information Act request — were either conducted or funded by industry. Most of the studies were sponsored by Monsanto or an industry group called the Joint Glyphosate Task Force. One study was by Syngenta, which sells its own glyphosate-containing herbicide, Touchdown.

Findings of Harm Were Dismissed

Who pays for studies matters, according to The Intercept’s review of the evidence used in the EPA’s decision. Of the small minority of independently funded studies that the agency considered in determining whether the chemical poses a danger to the endocrine system, three of five found that it did. One, for instance, found that exposure to glyphosate-Roundup “may induce significant adverse effects on the reproductive system of male Wistar rats at puberty and during adulthood.” Another concluded that “low and environmentally relevant concentrations of glyphosate possessed estrogenic activity.” And a review of the literature turns up many more peer-reviewed studies finding glyphosate can interfere with hormones, affecting such things as hormonal activity in human liver cells, functioning of rat sperm, and the sex ratio of exposed tadpoles.

Yet, of the 27 industry studies, none concluded that glyphosate caused harm. Only one admitted that the pesticide might have had a role in causing the health problems observed in lab animals exposed to it. Some rats that consumed it were more likely to have to have soft stools, reduced body weight, and smaller litters. But because that evidence didn’t meet a test of statistical significance, the authors of the Monsanto study deemed it “equivocal.”

SNIP...

While recent research has shown that very low doses of endocrine disruptors can not only have health effects but effects that are more dramatic than those caused by higher doses, some of the studies dismiss clear examples of harm because they occur in animals given relatively low doses of the substance. A study prepared by Monsanto in 1990, for instance, noted a statistically significant increase in pancreatic cancers among rats exposed to a relatively low dose of Roundup. The rats had a 14 percent chance of cancer, compared to a 2 percent chance in the control group. But since some rats exposed to higher amounts of the chemical had lower cancer rates, the scientists concluded the elevation was “unrelated to glyphosate administration.”

A Flawed System

Independent scientists may come up with different results than industry-funded ones for a variety of reasons, including how a study is designed or carried out. But Michelle Boone, a biologist who served on an EPA panel that evaluated the safety of atrazine, another pesticide, told The Intercept that analysis of those results is an area particularly ripe for bias. “Once you have industry intimately involved in interpreting the data and how it’s written up, it’s problematic.”

Having companies fund and perform studies that affect them financially would seem to be an obvious conflict of interest, but that’s the standard practice at EPA. The glyphosate review, which was completed in June, was one of 52 reporting on the endocrine disrupting potential of pesticides, all of which relied heavily on industry-funded research and most of which concluded, as the one of glyphosate did, that there was no cause for further testing. (Though marketed as a weed killer, or herbicide, glyphosate is considered to be a pesticide by the EPA.)

CONTINUED...

https://theintercept.com/2015/11/03/epa-used-monsanto-funded-research/

[J_J_]

117. They are spraying our wheat with roundup

You’re going to want to sit down for this one. I’ve had some folks burst into tears in horror when I passed along this information before.
Common wheat harvest protocol in the United States is to drench the wheat fields with Roundup several days before the combine harvesters work through the fields as the practice allows for an earlier, easier and bigger harvest

Pre-harvest application of the herbicide Roundup or other herbicides containing the deadly active ingredient glyphosate to wheat and barley as a desiccant was suggested as early as 1980. It has since become routine over the past 15 years and is used as a drying agent 7-10 days before harvest within the conventional farming community.

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its-not-gluten/

[womanofthehills]

150. No more sandwiches - Organic is getting contamined with glyphosate

ALERT: Certified Organic Food Grown in U.S. Found Contaminated with Glyphosate Herbicide - See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/alert-certified-organic-food-grown-in-u-s-found-contaminated-with-glyphosate-herbicide/#sthash.J0IUT3V3.dpuf

With over 80% of the U.S. food supply now reportedly contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate, many people are turning to USDA certified organic products to avoid this toxic chemical. Current USDA NOP (National Organic Program) standards do not allow the use of the herbicide glyphosate on organic crops.

However, a new investigation by Tropical Traditions has revealed that the U.S. organic grain market is contaminated with glyphosate.

Tropical Traditions has sold organic grains for years. After reading new research about the issue of “crop desiccation” done by using glyphosate on wheat and other grains just prior to harvest, Tropical Traditions decided to first test some commercial wheat products with wheat grown in Montana, North Dakota, and Canada. They sent the commercial samples to a well-known and respected laboratory to test for glyphosate.

All tested positive for glyphosate residue. The range was from 0.07 mg/kg to 0.09 mg/kg. Keep in mind this is glyphosate found in non-GMO crops. For a GMO crop such as GMO soybeans, which are sprayed heavily with glyphosate, the range is typically between 3.3 and 5.7 mg/kg.


Next, Tropical Traditions tested the USDA certified organic grains from suppliers they had been using, sourced mainly from western states such as Montana and Idaho. Sadly, the presence of glyphosate residue was found in organic wheat and other organic grains, including organic barley, oats, spelt, and einkorn. The range was from 0.03 to 0.06 mg/kg, just slightly lower than the conventional grains that were tested.

The only organic grains that tested clean were organic rye and organic millet. There was also one variety of organic wheat from small-scale farmers in Wisconsin that tested clean from glyphosate.
Why Should We be Concerned about Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is in 80% of our food supply in the U.S., and some scientists believe it may well be the most toxic chemical ever approved for commercial use. Glyphosate is now linked to kidney disease, antibiotic resistant bacteria, inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, depression, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis, cancer, cachexia, infertility, and developmental malformations. It destroys the microbiome of humans and plants, which is the root cause of many modern diseases.
- See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/alert-certified-organic-food-grown-in-u-s-found-contaminated-with-glyphosate-herbicide/#sthash.J0IUT3V3.dpuf

[Major Nikon]

155. This is the 3rd anti-vax nutbag site you've sourced in this thread alone

Very telling where you choose to get your information, no?

[womanofthehills]

161. Actually, the post was for people who are interested in glyphosate free organic wheat

Obviously, that is not you.

It is sad that our government has levels for glyphosate but has never tested for glyphosate - actually you brought up in the past - they did test for one day yrs ago.

Update. Tropical Traditions finally found some organic wheat berries and wheat flour that tested free of glyphosate. Most of the North Dakota & South Dakota wheat is sprayed with glyphosate right before harvest because of their short growing season and the organic farms in that area are obviously contaminated by glyphosate from non organic farms. Tropical Traditions found some organic glyphosate free wheat in small farms in Texas and rural western Wisconsin. I am going to order some to bake my own bread for my family. It's probably not the gluten folks but the glyphosate.

http://www.tropicaltraditions.com/glyphosate-tested-wheat.htm

[Major Nikon]

164. Actually, the post was for those who prefer to get their information from this side of crazyland

Obviously, that is not you.

[Person 2713]

163. My organic bread comes from Wisc . I will have to check the source now. Hopefully

it is the one in Wisc that tested clean

[Dr Hobbitstein]

121. Alarmist, pseudoscientific woo bullshit.

The anti-science crowd on DU just gets bigger and bigger.

[jomin41]

123. Thanks for the scientific information.

[FlaGranny]

128. I'm certainly not antiscience

but I can use some common sense. The toxic soups, which we all consume to some degree, cannot be health promoting. Taken one by one in small amounts chemicals may not show any immediate or relative short term harm. After all, our livers are pretty good with detoxifying the toxins we ingest. Long term, what happens to the liver - one of the most important organs in our bodies? Why expose our bodies to toxins at any level if it can be avoided? Why do we wash our vegetables and fruit? If a large dose of something is toxic, many small doses over many years may not kill us, but still cannot promote a healthy body. Everyone knows, or should know, that toxins in children and babies are much more damaging than they are in adults. It is only common sense to want to feed your children completely toxin-free foods and to want to eat them yourself. Any normal person, in a market, if presented with identical fruits at an identical price, but one sprayed with pesticides and one organic, which would they choose?

[Major Nikon]

135. "Why expose our bodies to toxins at any level if it can be avoided?"

Virtually everything is toxic at some level, even water, thus the sig line.

[FlaGranny]

169. Yes, I agree,

BUT I don't see why we should purposefully add more of them, do you? I should have put the word "extra" in front of the word "toxins".

P.S. I am not a fanatic about it, but I try to eat as cleanly as I can most of the time.

[Major Nikon]

171. There's all sorts of very good reasons why we should purposely add more of them

Salt is more toxic than Round-up, yet I routinely add it to my food.

[FlaGranny]

174. Food should be food -

it doesn't need any additives - unless you really want to eat food that is not really food any more, packaged up and ready to go. Then you'll need all that junk to keep the food from spoiling and to make it smell, look, and taste like real food. I'll keep on making most of my own food from ingredients that are as close to fresh and the way nature grew them as they can be. Besides, fresh real food tastes better.

[Bonx]

148. The OP is anti-science

[NoMoreRepugs]

122. If all Democrats shared the passion that some here do in arguing about

who is right and who is wrong and who is a douche and who isn't I think we would NEVER lose an election........

[Botany]

126. Monsanto is not the only company that makes glyphosate now

Monsanto lost its patent on glyphosate years ago now many companies make it.

BTW the environmental damade done to the ecosystem by non native invasive plants
is far greater then the damage done by glyphosate. I have one project that now supports
many different native plants which in turn supports humming birds, monarchs, hawks,
snakes, songbirds, native pollinators, foxes, owls, and voles and I used small amounts of
glyphosates in order to control honeysuckle, buckthorn, callery pears, thistle, and other
non native invasives. The project also helps to fix carbon, slow water run off, and provides
esthic beauty too.

[womanofthehills]

168. Every company that makes glyphosate has a different formula

usually the glyphosate is about 40% of the formula (the rest are the secret ingredients that intensity the toxicity of the glyphosate - some are more toxic than others - Roundup being one of the more toxic as it has Polyoxyethylene alkylamine (CAS #61791-2)

David H. Monroe, an Industrial and Environmental Toxicologist, stated in an October 16, 1989 letter to the National Campaign Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NCAMP) that most polyalkoxylated surfactants such as the polyoxyethylene alkylamine in RoundUp are contaminated with 1,4-dioxane.

A study done by Monroe on Vision, a glyphosate product by Monsanto, revealed that it contained 1,4-dioxane at a level of 350 ppm.

(Monroe D, 1989. Letter to NCAMP.)

1,4-dioxane is carcinogenic, and is known to damage the liver, kidney, brain and lungs.”

http://farmwars.info/?p=5943

[Major Nikon]

172. Why Cliven Bundy Isn’t WRONG

http://farmwars.info/?p=14849

[Person 2713]

133. Wonder why the regional difference ...guess I will have to read the link later .....

[Dont call me Shirley]

153. Give Monsanto the corporate death penalty before they kill you!

[Humanist_Activist]

157. Do you still think that air pollution causes AIDS? Belief in nonsense leads to belief in more...

nonsense.