Tag

pesticide toxicity

Browsing

Monsanto continues to insist that glyphosate, the active ingredient in their best-selling RoundUp pesticide, poses no risk to human health. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to believe their claims, however, and many experts believe it’s only a matter of time before glyphosate goes the way of Monsanto’s past creations (saccharine, PCBs, and Zyklon-B, just to name a few).

If you’ve been reading our articles for long, you’re probably no stranger to the case against glyphosate. This globally prevalent pesticide stands at the center of a sprawling and complex debate. The ethics of genetic modification, the disadvantages of monocrop agriculture, the politics of patenting and owning seeds (and the debt slavery that ensues for farmers in developing nations), the worldwide collapse of bee colonies, the precipitous rise in chronic and degenerative disease—all of these talking points lead inevitably back to Monsanto and their beloved glyphosate.

And yet even if we leave aside all of these hotly debated questions, there are two simple ones that still remain—questions that should be easy enough to answer. First question…

Does glyphosate pose risks to human health?

Unsurprisingly, Monsanto’s answer is no. Representatives from the company claim that the safety profile of glyphosate is assured by “decades of comprehensive safety reviews by the leading regulatory authorities around the world.”

This statement was issued, by the way, in response to the World Health Organization’s classification of glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen.” Needless to say, when the WHO issues a proclamation about the toxicity of a substance, you can bet that it’s substantiated—and yet Monsanto has continued to fight, calling the classification a mere “allegation.”

Their case became even harder to trust in February of 2017, when a United States District Court judge ordered Monsanto to unseal a cache of incriminating documents. And incriminating is an understatement. Remember those “comprehensive safety reviews”? The unsealed documents revealed that Monsanto wrote its own research papers, then forged credentials to make it look like independent research. They also prevented a health review by the EPA, thanks to a mole within the agency, and even were tipped off about the WHO’s reclassification of glyphosate months before the official announcement (which gave them time to launch a smear campaign against the data).

You can read more about these unsealed documents here, but suffice it to say that Monsanto has nothing legitimate to offer that proves the safety of glyphosate.

Real research demonstrates worrying connections between glyphosate contamination and developmental disorders like autism[1] and ADHD, birth defects,[2] accelerated cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease,[3] celiac disease and other gastrointestinal issues,[4] chronic kidney disease, diabetes, depression, heart disease, liver disease, and cancer.

And the coup de grace: Monsanto’s own unsealed documents reveal evidence of acute toxicity. The company knew the risks that RoundUp poses, and therefore did whatever was necessary to bury the data and prevent further safety reviews.

A quick perusal of mainstream media will reveal that despite this mountain of data demonstrating the toxicity of glyphosate, the battle is far from over. Many sources simply deny that any research has ever linked glyphosate with disease etiology.

More commonly, pundits rely on the argument that glyphosate could be toxic, but we just don’t know. They claim that even the WHO’s classification means that the pesticide could cause cancer, but we just don’t know. Regardless, isn’t this a good enough reason to exercise more restraint? 1.6 billion kilograms of RoundUp pesticide have been applied since 1974 in the United States, and a staggering two thirds of this total have been applied in the last ten years alone.[5]

Advocates claim that no restraint is required, because glyphosate levels never exceed the point of toxicity in the human body. Which leads us to our second question…

Does glyphosate accumulate in the human body?

Once again, Monsanto and its supporters answer with a resounding no. They claim that glyphosate residues would never be able to build to toxic levels, because it’s designed to be biocompatible and biodegradable.

Yes, Monsanto actually says that their poison is biodegradable—in the glyphosate FAQ on their website, they claim that the pesticide “breaks down into naturally occurring compounds” as soon as it’s done killing weeds.[6]

Never mind the fact the environmental assays contradict this claim—let’s stay focused on human biology. Many studies over the years have conclusively demonstrated that glyphosate does bioaccumulate within the human body; it is not easily excreted or metabolized, and it most certainly does not break down into harmless compounds.

Researchers from the University of California San Diego recently released data from a long, comprehensive analysis of glyphosate levels in the human body. They collected urine samples from a large group of people between 1993 and 1996, and then again between 2014 and 2016.

What they found was rather shocking: glyphosate levels had increased an average of 500% over the twenty-year period, with some individuals exhibiting a 1,208% increase.[7] The glyphosate levels found during this study are 100 times higher than those linked with liver disease and other health problems.

So what’s your verdict?

Isn’t this data enough to give us pause? If you’re ready to act with caution when it comes to glyphosate, all you need to do is eat exclusively organic, get serious about detoxification practices, and join the movement to ban the use of glyphosate-containing pesticides.


References

[1] http://www.autismone.org/content/autism-explained-synergistic-poisoning-aluminum-and-glyphosate-stephanie-seneff

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241196/

[3] http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.med.nyu.edu/science/article/pii/S0300483X14000493

[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/

[5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5044953/

[6] https://monsanto.com/company/media/statements/glyphosate-herbicide/

[7] https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/2017-10-24-exposure-to-glyphosate-chemical-found-in-weed-killer-increased-over-23-years.aspx

Image source

oganic-vs-conventional

The issue of organic versus conventional foods has turned into quite a debate in recent years.

At first, organic food was encouraged as an alternative to the dangers and deficiencies of conventional products. Studies revealed that conventional produce contains fewer essential nutrients[1] and more toxins, pesticides, and other contaminants.[2]

Buying organic also quickly became a way to move away from supporting giant, unscrupulous agricultural businesses that are destroying the earth’s soil and polluting every other aspect of the environment in the process.

But as organic food caught on, it soon came to be derided as a “fad” and a money-making scheme. All sorts of articles and publications (some of which are undoubtedly supported or fabricated by the conventional food industry) claim that organic foods are not safer, healthier, or more nutritious than conventional foods.

While all of these criticisms can be disproven with a lengthy enough argument, there’s one point that no one debates: conventional foods contain dramatically higher levels of pesticides. In most cases, organic foods contain none whatsoever (except in the cases of large manufacturers, where slight cross-contamination can occur).

Pro-food-industry pundits argue that it’s not necessarily a bad thing that conventional foods contain pesticides, because “there’s no proof that pesticides are bad.”

But a mountain of evidence speaks to the contrary—some of which we’ve discussed here and here. Remarkably conclusive studies suggest that pesticides lower IQ, stunt brain development in children, and disrupt the functioning of the endocrine system, immune system, and reproductive system.[3] And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

At the very least, most people can agree that we know very little about the long-term effects of cumulative pesticide consumption, and that the correlations between pesticides and chronic health conditions are rather frightening. Even skeptical researchers admit that the combination of multiple pesticides in the body—even at small doses—has a high chance of leading to health problems, due to the unpredictable synergy of the different chemicals.

Therefore, it seems best to avoid polluting your body with them whenever possible.

Now a new study conducted by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute proves that this sage advice is definitely worth taking.

A “conventional” family takes the plunge

This Swedish study set out to prove that switching completely to organic food consumption can significantly lower levels of pesticide contamination in the body—and the results were even better than they hoped for.

A family used to eating primarily conventionally grown food switched to an all-organic diet. In a surprisingly short period of time, their body burden of pesticides dropped significantly, which strongly suggests eating organic may make a positive difference to your health.

Check out this amazing video that they made to showcase their findings:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB6fUqmyKC8

Prior to making the switch from conventional to organic, urine samples revealed that all members of the family had high levels of (multiple) pesticides in their bodies. After a mere two weeks of eating organic rather than conventional food, these levels had dropped to nearly zero.

While further research is necessary to demonstrate that these results are replicable, this study is a powerful, straightforward presentation of the virtues of organic eating. Its simple and impressive results combat the notion that the higher price of organic food “isn’t worth it.” As more and more people are beginning to realize, it’s still way cheaper than the health care you’ll probably need after long-term consumption of conventional foods.

Now it’s your turn!

So if you’ve been waiting for a good enough reason to go organic, here it is. You can read all the details about the study here if you’re still on the fence.

Despite the mainstream supporters of pesticides and herbicides who are hanging on for dear life (and insisting that there’s nothing harmful about them), the day is approaching when we’ll wonder why and how we ever used these toxins of industrial agriculture.

Even the World Health Organization now classifies glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp, as a probable carcinogen.

Organic food may be somewhat more expensive, but it really is worth it. Make the switch, and before long, you’ll wonder how you could’ve ever eaten any other way.


References     

[1] https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/ofgu/vegies121205.php

[2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17613056

[3] http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/04/29/pesticide-exposure.aspx

Image source