Natural Revolution Empowering people with solutions to embrace a natural life for a healthy mind, body, home and planet.
Many top U.S. farmer organizations say glyphosate is too beneficial to give up. But critics say glyphosate may not be as safe as initially believed, and farmers should be fearful.
Environmentalists, consumer groups and plant scientists from several countries are warning that heavy use of the chemical over the years is causing dangerous problems for plants, people and animals alike.
The Environmental Protection Agency is examining the issue and has set a deadline of 2015 for determining if glyphosate should continue to be sold or in some way limited. The EPA is working closely with regulators in Canada as they also assess the ongoing safety and effectiveness of the herbicide.
The publication of a study in 2010, showing that a glyphosate herbicide formulation (Round Up) herbicide and glyphosate alone caused malformations in the embryos of the African clawed frog as well as chickens through disruption of the retinoic acid signalling pathway, caused scientific and regulatory controversy.
Retinoic acid is a metabolite of vitamin A that controls the functions of vitamin A required for growth and development. Debate centred on the effects of the production and consumption of genetically modified Roundup Ready® soy, which is engineered to tolerate applications of glyphosate herbicide.
The study, along with others indicating teratogenic (substances or agents that can interfere with normal embryonic development) and reproductive effects from glyphosate herbicide exposure, was rebutted by the German Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety, BVL, as well as in industry-sponsored papers. These rebuttals relied partly on unpublished industry-sponsored studies commissioned for regulatory purposes, which, it was claimed, showed that glyphosate is not a teratogen or reproductive toxin – which is contrary to the claims of this scientific study.
Glyphosate chemical at a critical crossroads
Amid rising voices of alarm, regulators in the United States and Canada are conducting a formal review of glyphosate’s safety, lawsuits are pending and some groups are calling for a global ban.
“Glyphosate’s days are numbered,” said Paul Achitoff, a lawyer for Earthjustice, an environmental law firm that last month sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture in part over concerns about heavy glyphosate use.
Agricultural seeds and chemicals giant Monsanto Co introduced the chemical to the world in 1974 and has made billions of dollars over the years from Roundup as well as from the “Roundup Ready” corn, soybeans and cotton the company has genetically engineered to survive dousings of glyphosate.
German authority breaching the line of transparency
However, examination of the German authorities’ draft assessment report on the industry studies, which underlies glyphosate’s EU authorization revealed further evidence of glyphosate’s teratogenic toxicity. Many of the malformations found were of the type defined in the scientific literature as associated with retinoic acid teratogenesis.
Attempts by industry and government regulatory bodies to dismiss this research are unconvincing and work against the principle that it is the responsibility of industry to prove that its products are safe and not the responsibility of the public to prove that they are unsafe.
Other scientists, both from private institutions and from the federal government, have said research shows harmful effects of glyphosate products on soil organisms, on plants, and on certain animals. A 2008 lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity said glyphosate was harmful to California’s red-legged frog and the EPA subsequently agreed it was “likely to adversely affect” the frog.
The Institute of Science in Society has called for a global ban on glyphosate, citing research showing the chemical has “extreme toxicity,” including indications it can cause birth defects. It also submitted a report to EPA.
The EPA is not the only entity that has the power to ban glyphosate. Citizens have every right to petition their local city council to seek a city-wide ban on glyphosate (Round Up) which is every U.S. citizen’s constitutional right, given that glyphosate is:
- responsible for a deadly new pathogen that is plaguing plants with new diseases and animals (including humans) with infertility
The top users of glyphosate are farmers. In 2007 alone, for instance, as much as 185 million lbs of glyphosate was used by U.S. farmers, double the amount used only six years earlier.
Many top U.S. farmer organizations say glyphosate is too beneficial to give up. But critics say glyphosate may not be as safe as initially believed, and farmers should be fearful.
Environmentalists, consumer groups and plant scientists from several countries are warning that heavy use of the chemical over the years is causing dangerous problems for plants, people and animals alike.
The Environmental Protection Agency is examining the issue and has set a deadline of 2015 for determining if glyphosate should continue to be sold or in some way limited. The EPA is working closely with regulators in Canada as they also assess the ongoing safety and effectiveness of the herbicide.
Sources for this article:
