Glyphosate In Cereal And Oats

[zewe]

 

[boxers]

Zewe, Will you eat a tube of your toothpaste?

 

[alywest]

@Travis

I agree with most of what you say. The point is that Monsanto is currently in the news and people need to be aware of their impact on the planet and all inhabitants.

They are engaged in monopolizing food. They are poisoning people. They are killing small farms. What they are doing is a crime and they are protected by an agency which was created to protect public health.

Zewe, I really admire your commitment to this cause and helping our society. However, I must admit I continue to flail around with the ideological aspect of the "how" it's best to help said society. Glyphosate is a disgusting thing, no question. But as our friend Janelle525 pointed out, there are several other equally egregious (if not worse) toxic chemicals poised to take it's place as soon as the powers that be finally give it the proverbial boot. And as Travis has pointed out, too, there's also the toxins that hide in plain site, like gluten. So what is the lynchpin here? Whom to target?
I would say that with all of the actually decent organic options available at market these days, the people do have a choice, but whether they will make those choices is not something we can control. That's, of course, the laissez-faire attitude of "let them eat cake," (just don't remind them it's laced with glyphosate.) That is the cultural stance of many generations of Americans at this point; mind your own business and I'll mind mine. It seems you want to create change from the top, meaning that you would like to make the changes so whole that it won't even affect the habits of the average consumer, and yet make that consumer healthier. That is quite noble, and I would love to see that occur as well.
However, let's be realistic. Unless you make an absolute change to the very fabric of our society, there will not be much impact on the actual foods that wind up on our plates as a whole. In my eyes, this is all about education, but targeting the education to those who would see. Unfortunately there are too many people who are too far gone into the abyss, so to speak. Life has become about getting by, survival, and for many that includes grabbing dinner at McDonald's on the way home from work. Snack choices are plentiful and usually involve a child grabbing for a bag of Lay's or Chips Ahoy! At the end of the day, parents are trying to please their kids because they need their kids to eat; something, anything! They need to eat, plain and simple. The rhetoric of Ray Peat is not going to work for the majority of America. So what to do? To whom do we appeal? Certainly not the parents who are happy to indulge their children if that indulgence results in a temporary satisfaction, regardless of long-term consequences.
Perhaps this is more a question of bringing awareness to the kids themselves. Make them complicit in their own health (or lack thereof.) At the end of the day, they are the ones trusting the adults to provide them with food. If I tell your mom that you're eating a glypho-sandwich, but not you, then in time (perhaps hours), she's going to realize that she doesn't have any other bread and they're going to eat the pbj she has on hand. However, if the child realizes that fact and therefore refuses to eat, the mom has a true dilemma. While mom might not have time to hem and haw over every decision that congress makes, she's going to be forced to reckon with the fact that her child is educated about the toxins in her food. And over time, those children will grow into adults and feed their children, and so on.
Quite frankly, the movement of organic foods is not a new one. And the use of glyphosate is not merely affecting the people who choose to eat Quaker oatmeal and the other myriad brands and products on the market. It is getting in the soil, the water supply. It's going to affect us all. But I say we target the kids in a positive way. Kids very naturally pick up on the truth, but most are ignorant because of what they're being taught. I'm talking about explaining in the most simple way what the difference is between organic and non-organic food, and discussing with the kids what exactly is in the non-organic food and if it would be better to just eat it or not. And then as time goes on, get into more specifics like gluten, polyunsaturated fats, etc. Why don't we include food in our curriculum at school? Why isn't cooking, growing, etc. part of the program? The most I ever learned was the "food pyramid" which is absolute crap.
I was fortunate in my life to know an organic farmer who introduced me to the ideas of Jeff Lowenfels and Wayne Lewis as presented in the book "Teaming with Microbes." The truths taught in this book are beyond precious. They are the kinds of truths we should be passing along to our children, much like the natives taught children through the generations. We have decided that the only way to feed the masses is to mass produce food. But look at cities like Detroit where lot gardens are popping up like Starbucks in a more financially wealthy city. People ARE capable of seeing the truth and acting on it, which is where it really matters, but in my opinion it has to come from the ground up. Our society is like the garden, if the soil isn't healthy, nothing it produces will be healthy. It doesn't matter how brightly the sun shines or how much acreage we raze in order to produce crops. Over time it will all die because the very microorganisms that create the basic building blocks of life are being suffocated and that is resulting in food that is not nourishing or sustainable.

 

[Peater Piper]

However, I must admit I continue to flail around with the ideological aspect of the "how" it's best to help said society. Glyphosate is a disgusting thing, no question. But as our friend Janelle525 pointed out, there are several other equally egregious (if not worse) toxic chemicals poised to take it's place as soon as the powers that be finally give it the proverbial boot. And as Travis has pointed out, too, there's also the toxins that hide in plain site, like gluten. So what is the lynchpin here? Whom to target?
I would say that with all of the actually decent organic options available at market these days, the people do have a choice, but whether they will make those choices is not something we can control.

People can entirely avoid both gluten and additives like iron if they so choose. As for pesticides? Organic does not guarantee pesticide-free, or safe pesticides. Short of growing all of my own produce, all I have are some options that may be a little better than other options, but I cannot eliminate pesticides entirely. That doesn't even get into what bad farming practices do the soil and waterways, and again, organic is no guarantee of safety.

 

[zewe]

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT FOOD, WHICH SOME HAVE THE MEANS TO BUY ORGANIC.

THIS HERBICIDE SHOWS UP IN OTHER PRODUCTS.

ALSO, MAYBE WE SHOULD QUIT CALLING THESE CHEMICALS HERBICIDES/PESTICIDES AND CALL THEM WHAT THEY REALLY ARE: BIOCIDES.

IF YOU LOOK OUT YOUR WINDOW AND SEE A FOREST ON THE HILLS YOU ARE VIEWING A DYING FOREST.

SAME WITH PEOPLE. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THE CURRENT GENERATION IS THE FIRST THAT WILL NOT LIVE LONGER THAN THEIR PARENTS.

SO, ON ONE'S DEATHBED, WOULDN'T IT BE SOUL SATISFYING TO SAY THAT I DID AT LEAST ONE THING IN MY LIFE TO STOP THE PSYCHOPATHS THAT ARE RUNNING THE SHOW HERE ON PLANET EARTH. I TOOK ONE STEP TO HELP THE DISENFRANCHISED, THE THIRD WORLD FARMERS, THE POOR, THE SICK.....

AND LADIES OF THIS FORUM, HERE'S ANOTHER PLACE TO LOOK:

Tampons: The Dioxin Glyphosate Vagina Cocktail

SNIP:

What I didn't know when I wrote my first series of posts on tampons back in 2008 was that Monsanto had pulled up a chaise lounge in my vagina and was serving up a chemical vag cocktail of glyphosate, dioxin and chlorine. If my vagina could talk, it would likely have said, "What the f--- are you doing here?!?!"

When chemical lobbyists and the government approval boards talk about chemicals, they often describe them in parts per million or parts per billion with the common statement that the average exposure of the average consumer isn't enough to cause issue. Here's the thing though: it is enough and it is an issue. A big one.

The average woman menstruating for five days a month for 38 years will use approximately 11,400 tampons in a lifetime, with direct contact to the chemicals in tampons for 2,200 days. And pads. Pads too. Oh, and also baby diapers. Yes, these chemicals are in diapers, ear swabs, cotton pads and toilet paper, too.

The average woman is using tampons or pads for 2,200 days of her life.

Tampons require contact over an extended period of time with one of the body’s most porous and highly absorbent mucous membranes. They are categorized by the FDA as a ‘medical device’, which means that manufacturers aren't required to adhere to the same chemical regulations or labeling regulations as foods, drugs or cosmetics. Testing on chemical levels in tampons is done by the manufacturer or private researcher with findings presented to regulating bodies for review. When we consider that North American women spend an average of two billion dollars per year on these commercial brands of sanitary napkins and tampons, and few are asking questions, brands like Proctor & Gamble - the makers of Tampax - have no incentive to fix what is very, very broken.

AND HERE THE BLOG AUTHOR GIVES SUGGESTIONS HOW TO GET INVOLVED: [WHICH WAS THE POINT I TRIED TO MAKE EARLIER IN THIS THREAD]


What Can We Do To Keep The Chemicals Out

• Add Your Name:When you see those petitions come your way, or there is a vote in your local election, opt to have GMOs labelled so we at least get to choose what we eat and insert.
• Vote With Your Dollar: Buy from the brands you want to support. Leave the rest on the shelf. If we stop buying toxic products, companies are going to change how they're making them.
• Share this post: Share this on your social media channels to help get the word out that something has to change.
• Send Letters To The Makers: There are humans behind these products. Lots of them. You can find brand managers for products like Tampax, Pampers, QTip and more very quickly on LinkedIn. Or simply post to the Facebook pages of these brands.

- Tampax
- Kotex
- Q-Tips
- Huggies
- Pampers

You can come up with your own creative message, or share this simple one:

Over 84 million pounds of pesticides are sprayed on cotton crops every year in the United States. You are part of this problem. It's time to ditch the endocrine disrupting, carcinogenic chemicals in your products. The health of your farmers, suppliers, and customers matter. http://undiet.me/toxictampons

Read it all:
https://www.meghantelpner.com/blog/tampons-the-dioxin-glyphosate-vagina-cocktail/

 

[zewe]

Anti-GMO Groups – United States


If you’re looking for other like-minded individuals with whom you can volunteer to raise awareness about GMOs in your state, the following list represents various Facebook pages that have been set up to help people do just that. In addition to state groups, we’ve also included national groups at the bottom of the page.

GO TO:
Anti-GMO Groups – United States

THEY ALSO HAVE CANADIAN AND OTHER COUNTRIES' LINKS. IT'S NOT DIFFICULT TO BECOME A KEYBOARD WARRIOR!

 

[NickC]

Can glyphosate’s disruption of the gut microbiome and induction of sulfate deficiency
explain the epidemic in gout and associated diseases in the industrialized world?

 

[alywest]

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT FOOD, WHICH SOME HAVE THE MEANS TO BUY ORGANIC.

THIS HERBICIDE SHOWS UP IN IN OTHER PRODUCTS.

ALSO, MAYBE WE SHOULD QUIT CALLING THESE CHEMICALS HERBICIDES/PESTICIDES AND CALL THEM WHAT THEY REALLY ARE: BIOCIDES.

IF YOU LOOK OUT YOUR WINDOW AND SEE A FOREST ON THE HILLS YOU ARE VIEWING A DYING FOREST.

SAME WITH PEOPLE. IT HAS BEEN SAID THAT THE CURRENT GENERATION IS THE FIRST THAT WILL NOT LIVE LONGER THAN THEIR PARENTS.

SO, ON ONE'S DEATHBED, WOULDN'T IT BE SOUL SATISFYING TO SAY THAT I DID AT LEAST ONE THING IN MY LIFE TO STOP THE PSYCHOPATHS THAT ARE RUNNING THE SHOW HERE ON PLANET EARTH. I TOOK ONE STEP TO HELP THE DISENFRANCHISED, THE THIRD WORLD FARMERS, THE POOR, THE SICK.....

AND LADIES OF THIS FORUM, HERE'S ANOTHER PLACE TO LOOK:

Tampons: The Dioxin Glyphosate Vagina Cocktail

SNIP:

What I didn't know when I wrote my first series of posts on tampons back in 2008 was that Monsanto had pulled up a chaise lounge in my vagina and was serving up a chemical vag cocktail of glyphosate, dioxin and chlorine. If my vagina could talk, it would likely have said, "What the f--- are you doing here?!?!"

When chemical lobbyists and the government approval boards talk about chemicals, they often describe them in parts per million or parts per billion with the common statement that the average exposure of the average consumer isn't enough to cause issue. Here's the thing though: it is enough and it is an issue. A big one.

The average woman menstruating for five days a month for 38 years will use approximately 11,400 tampons in a lifetime, with direct contact to the chemicals in tampons for 2,200 days. And pads. Pads too. Oh, and also baby diapers. Yes, these chemicals are in diapers, ear swabs, cotton pads and toilet paper, too.

The average woman is using tampons or pads for 2,200 days of her life.

Tampons require contact over an extended period of time with one of the body’s most porous and highly absorbent mucous membranes. They are categorized by the FDA as a ‘medical device’, which means that manufacturers aren't required to adhere to the same chemical regulations or labeling regulations as foods, drugs or cosmetics. Testing on chemical levels in tampons is done by the manufacturer or private researcher with findings presented to regulating bodies for review. When we consider that North American women spend an average of two billion dollars per year on these commercial brands of sanitary napkins and tampons, and few are asking questions, brands like Proctor & Gamble - the makers of Tampax - have no incentive to fix what is very, very broken.

AND HERE THE BLOG AUTHOR GIVES SUGGESTIONS HOW TO GET INVOLVED: [WHICH WAS THE POINT I TRIED TO MAKE EARLIER IN THIS THREAD]


What Can We Do To Keep The Chemicals Out

• Add Your Name:When you see those petitions come your way, or there is a vote in your local election, opt to have GMOs labelled so we at least get to choose what we eat and insert.
• Vote With Your Dollar: Buy from the brands you want to support. Leave the rest on the shelf. If we stop buying toxic products, companies are going to change how they're making them.
• Share this post: Share this on your social media channels to help get the word out that something has to change.
• Send Letters To The Makers: There are humans behind these products. Lots of them. You can find brand managers for products like Tampax, Pampers, QTip and more very quickly on LinkedIn. Or simply post to the Facebook pages of these brands.

- Tampax
- Kotex
- Q-Tips
- Huggies
- Pampers

You can come up with your own creative message, or share this simple one:

Over 84 million pounds of pesticides are sprayed on cotton crops every year in the United States. You are part of this problem. It's time to ditch the endocrine disrupting, carcinogenic chemicals in your products. The health of your farmers, suppliers, and customers matter. http://undiet.me/toxictampons

Read it all:
https://www.meghantelpner.com/blog/tampons-the-dioxin-glyphosate-vagina-cocktail/

I think to an extent, you are preaching to the choir here on the Ray Peat forum. People on this website are pretty savvy about toxins in the products available on the market. Yes, the question is what is the best way to help the greater majority be safe from these toxins? I understand that your primary way of doing it is to bring awareness through mediums like petitions and letter-writing. I think that anyone who is educated in this should be willing to at least sign a petition that helps in the movement away from allowing these toxins in our food and hygeine products. Absolutely!

I believe that the best way to create change in the long run, though, is to work on the mindset of the youth. The proverbial old rich white males are not going to change their minds. All I can hope for is that there are enough young adults and middle age folks out there who are willing to teach the young what they know and to actually build something real. To teach by example. To create a real thing that makes what we are teaching something that can be relied upon. In school we teach theoretically, and as a result we have a sort of detachment to our Earth, our food, our products in general.

So, zewe, I will gladly sign any petition that I come across, and I will even attempt to share it with others. I will look for opportunities to vote. I will make conscious efforts to get this horrible toxin removed from our foods and products in general.

And likewise, I would hope that everyone on this thread would take the time to learn some sort of skill that can be taught to the younger generations. Something that doesn't rely on electricity. Something that could be beneficial to a person if the whole of civilization collapsed. How to grow a squash. How to make fertilizer. How to make a solar stove to cook in. Anything! And teach it to any kid who will listen.

 

[alywest]

Can glyphosate’s disruption of the gut microbiome and induction of sulfate deficiency
explain the epidemic in gout and associated diseases in the industrialized world?

" Lactobacillus species are preferentially killed by glyphosate, likely due in part because of their strong dependency on manganese, which glyphosate chelates, making it unavailable " wow~

 

[zewe]

@alywest From the bottom of my heart: Thank you!

My higher education was in Environmental Science. Even as a kid, I would get on soapboxes to any who would listen. When friends have asked why I get involved, I tell them; something intrinsic to who I am COMPELLS me to do so!

I've given talks in grade schools about Rachel Carson. Yes, education of children is paramount to the sucess of the human race. I spend time wtth neighborhood kids and we talk of many things; even just to admire and protect the beauty of our planet, our home.

But, I'm getting old and it is time to pass the banner on to future generations.....Yours was the response I was looking for.
So thank you again and blessings to any endeavor that you may take on.

Warm Regards,
Michelle

 

[sladerunner69]

Actually, round-up is not even used in growing oats. I know a person who owns a large conventional farm, and grows oats. They use pesticides, but no round-up or weedkiller.

 

[Travis]

@Travis

I agree with most of what you say. The point is that Monsanto is currently in the news and people need to be aware of their impact on the planet and all inhabitants.

They are engaged in monopolizing food. They are poisoning people. They are killing small farms. What they are doing is a crime and they are protected by an agency which was created to protect public health.

Their legal disputes concerning the ownership of wind-dispersed seed progeny of patented genetically-modified strains are downright shameful, yet I'd found it hard to reconcile published glyphosate toxicity data with the many claims against it. Yet that had been a year ago, and another look at the feeding trials may be warranted; it may take a bit more persistence and insight to detect the subterfuge. I had since read studies on Searle and aspartame, a food additive blacklisted by the FDA due to the manufacturers blatant contrivance of safety data—extensively-documented in congressional reports. Searle had eventually been bought by Monsanto, but before even that they'd enlisted the political clout of Donald Rumsfeld to catalyze its approval—still blacklisted yet otherwise extremely profitable. Yet the toxicity of Aspartame™ often appears exaggerated by some, a phenomenon likely having more to do with Monsanto affiliation than its chemical properties. While true that Aspartame™ had increased brain tumors in rats, this had been achieved at chronic doses 10³ × greater than a can of soda would provide to a human. I'm under the impression that the new amplitude-modulated 5G radiofrequencies are going to cause many more cases of brain cancer than Aspartame™. [The frequency-modulated waves of past and previous generations of telecommunications, with exception of 2G-waves, are all harmless by comparison.]

 

[sladerunner69]

That's, of course, the laissez-faire attitude of "let them eat cake," (just don't remind them it's laced with glyphosate.)

I would like to point out that this comparison makes no sense from a historical perspective. The French Revolution is one of the penultimate examples of government intervention gone wrong. It proved the monarch's mercantilist policies deranged and awful.

Laissez-faire is, of course, the notion of non-intervention into the free market by the government. Don't regulate business, but instead, promote competition. On the other hand, "let them eat cake" was attributed to Mary Antoinette during the onset of the Jacobin protests in the early days of the French Revolution (although there is no existing proof she used the words).

It is important to note that the term "cake" did not mean the delicious iced confectionary as we know today. Instead it was the crumbs and excess baked flour scraped off of an oven or stove after bread was made. It was common to eat these crumbs at this time, because of the terrible grain shortage in France at that time.

What caused this grain shortage? Well, it certainly was not free market competition or laissez-faire policy. Quite the opposite, in fact. In a misguided attempt to make grain available to the public, the French Monarchy (house of bourbon) had for centuries instituted a price ceiling and quota for grain. A few years before the French Revolution, the Monarchy had been concerned with a minor drought, and fiercely mercantilist trading policies which forbade grain imports from other powers. In turn they dialed up the quotas and dropped the price ceilings. The result? Fewer farmers than ever grew grain, as many migrated to the cities for more sustainable work. In order to meet quotas, most farmers were required to hand over almost their entire harvest, often not holding onto enough to feed their own families.

This misguided government intervention on grain was the direct cause of the calamity known as the French revolution. Although, it is really not such a calamity because it led to the implementation of liberal policies and modernization of tired institutions under Napoleon Bonaparte. It also granted a space to free-thinkers, whom were able to promote the blessings of ideas such as Laissez-Faire.

 

[alywest]

@alywest From the bottom of my heart: Thank you!

My higher education was in Environmental Science. Even as a kid, I would get on soapboxes to any who would listen. When friends have asked why I get involved, I tell them; something intrinsic to who I am COMPELLS me to do so!

I've given talks in grade schools about Rachel Carson. Yes, education of children is paramount to the sucess of the human race. I spend time wtth neighborhood kids and we talk of many things; even just to admire and protect the beauty of our planet, our home.

But, I'm getting old and it is time to pass the banner on to future generations.....Yours was the response I was looking for.
So thank you again and blessings to any endeavor that you may take on.

Warm Regards,
Michelle

Thank you to you, as well, for bringing your wisdom to this forum. You are such an admirable soul! Many good wishes to you, too.

 

[alywest]

I would like to point out that this comparison makes no sense from a historical perspective. The French Revolution is one of the penultimate examples of government intervention gone wrong. It proved the monarch's mercantilist policies deranged and awful.

Laissez-faire is, of course, the notion of non-intervention into the free market by the government. Don't regulate business, but instead, promote competition. On the other hand, "let them eat cake" was attributed to Mary Antoinette during the onset of the Jacobin protests in the early days of the French Revolution (although there is no existing proof she used the words).

It is important to note that the term "cake" did not mean the delicious iced confectionary as we know today. Instead it was the crumbs and excess baked flour scraped off of an oven or stove after bread was made. It was common to eat these crumbs at this time, because of the terrible grain shortage in France at that time.

What caused this grain shortage? Well, it certainly was not free market competition or laissez-faire policy. Quite the opposite, in fact. In a misguided attempt to make grain available to the public, the French Monarchy (house of bourbon) had for centuries instituted a price ceiling and quota for grain. A few years before the French Revolution, the Monarchy had been concerned with a minor drought, and fiercely mercantilist trading policies which forbade grain imports from other powers. In turn they dialed up the quotas and dropped the price ceilings. The result? Fewer farmers than ever grew grain, as many migrated to the cities for more sustainable work. In order to meet quotas, most farmers were required to hand over almost their entire harvest, often not holding onto enough to feed their own families.

This misguided government intervention on grain was the direct cause of the calamity known as the French revolution. Although, it is really not such a calamity because it led to the implementation of liberal policies and modernization of tired institutions under Napoleon Bonaparte. It also granted a space to free-thinkers, whom were able to promote the blessings of ideas such as Laissez-Faire.

My apologies for my misguided attempts at humor with overused political phrases. However, I must disagree that laissez-faire is a perfect or even altogether good system. I'm not necessarily for controlling trade, especially across international borders, however when it comes to the attitude that we should just let all things go freely without any penalties on our nation's wealthiest corporations, even if they are knowingly selling toxic products to consumers has led us into this mess where there IS glyphosate being detected in our cereal. Laissez-faire is the idea that the market will determine what will succeed or not succeed. Unfortunately the vast majority of our nation are undereducated and being manipulated by large corporations to steer education away from making people critical thinkers, but rather memorizing robots who remember facts long enough to take tests and then move on without so much as one original thought in their heads.

 

[InChristAlone]

Glyphosate is used as a dessicant on grains. It supposedly helps kill it off in preparation for harvest. Not all grain farmers use it though. Wheat is commonly dried before harvest as well. But there are major brands even at Walmart that don't use it. Wheat Montana is one even though it's not labelled as organic. I react better to wheat than oats. But I think that has to do with the roughage factor. I'm not really one to believe gluten is a poison. Do muscle testing on all food you eat. My body says a strong no to whole grains but a strong yes to pasta.

 

[zewe]

@Janelle525 For years there have been anecdotal reports from Americans with gluten sensitivity having no reaction whatsoever when they ate wheat products overseas.

I did a quick search and here are examples in the comments section of this article:

www.motherearthnews.com/real-food/gluten-intolerant-zm0z13aszmar

I still include grains in my diet; they are a source of vitamin E. At one time, I thought to eliminate them, that perhaps wheat and or other gluten containing grains were part of my food reactions.
No such luck. I am a histamine intolerant person....and that was the culprit. I can monitor my levels just by how I feel and check the reddness of my skin and palms, allowing me to eat some high histamine foods, within reason.

I've used muscle testing with good success and I think it a useful tool because I do not always react to foods which I have been told to avoid.

This might sound crazy but my son and I will go further than that in that we can hold our hands over a food and know whether or not it is a good choice. But then again, we both appear to be more perceptive than most on subtle levels.

 

[General Orange]

The herbicide industry claims that glyphosate has minimal toxicity for people, but findings from numerous studies show the opposite.

Are you talking about chelated glyphosate?

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world. Its residues are found in water and soil. It’s sprayed along roadsides, sidewalks, parks and playgrounds, gardens, and on school grounds. Testing shows a variety of foods contain glyphosate. It has been detected in the urine of the majority of people who have submitted samples for testing. Glyphosate has been found in breast milk, it damages the placenta and it crosses the placenta, which may result in birth defects.

You are talking about glyphosate residue... but glyphosate itself can act as a glycine and disrupt protein binding. Residue is inactivated by chelation. What form is damaging then?

• Exposure to glyphosate correlates with chronic illness. Chronically ill people have significantly higher levels of glyphosate in their systems than healthy people.

• Glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor which is toxic to placental cells. This means it may impact our ability to conceiveand carry healthy babies to term. It may also cause breast cancer.

• Glyphosate destroys the gut bacteria we need for good health. Scientists have observed that in chickens and cattle, glyphosate kills the good gut bacteria while leaving behind bacteria that causes food poisoning.Glyphosate’s negative impact on our microbiome may be the reason for increasing rates of allergies, celiac sprue and gluten intolerance, and colitis and Crohn’s disease.

• Glyphosate makes vaccines far more toxic than they would otherwise be. When children are overexposed to glyphosate, they are more likely to react badly to vaccination. There’s an intricate connection between the gut and the brain, such that an unhealthy digestive system translates into pathologies in the brain. Aluminum, mercury and glyphosate work synergistically to create severe deficiency in sulfate supplies to the brain. This may be what’s causing the epidemic levels of autism and other diseases such as Alzheimer’s.

Again. What form of it is doing that? I can link all kinds of stuff with all kinds of diseases, does not mean there must be a causality.

• Glyphosate is a chelator that deprives living things of vital nutrients, vitamins and minerals. This is how glyphosate kills plants. It may also be how it’s killing people.

Again, in what form is it damaging? Why don't you figure this out first? You do not know what you are talking about.

 

[General Orange]

It is easy Condemning Monsanto With Bad Science

edit:
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2013/04/30/is_glyphosate_poisoning_everyone

 

[Badger]

But note this reply to this article after it (my highlights):
"While glyphosate may be fairly non-toxic, when it’s included in Monsanto’s Roundup, it becomes deadly toxic. It is the one of the inactive ingredients in Roundup that makes glyphosate deadly. Since it’s a Monsanto trade secret on exactly what is in Roundup, we don’t know what chemical is reacting with glyphosate to make it deadly to humans and animals. Additionally, Roundup Ready food crops are also deadly to humans. The Roundup gene Monsanto fires into the DNA of plants is a crapshoot. Even Monsanto doesn’t know the long term effects on humans are. Why not? Because they haven’t done any studies and they don’t care. There are studies out there that have pretty good evidence that human DNA can be affected by consuming Roundup Ready products. “The World According to Monsanto,” is a great place to start understanding Roundup and Monsanto."

It is easy Condemning Monsanto With Bad Science

edit:
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2013/04/30/is_glyphosate_poisoning_everyone