User avatar
Gary350
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7392
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:59 pm
Location: TN. 50 years of gardening experience.

Roundup Cancer Claims

Click the link. Never put toxic poison on your yard or in your garden.

https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A ... P7xx75ENlc

SQWIB
Greener Thumb
Posts: 970
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:21 am
Location: Zone 7A - Philadelphia, PA


imafan26
Mod
Posts: 13947
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:32 am
Location: Hawaii, zone 12a 587 ft elev.

The IARC made a determination that glyphosate was a probable carcinogen based upon a single unpublished study and testimony from one of the researchers who was trying to prove a link between glyphosate and lymphoma. It was later revealed that the testifier knew that the research did not implicate glyphosate at all since it took ridiculously high doses of glyphosate fed to rats to make them sick. There are hundreds of other studies that said there was no link. The organic groups latched on to this and have blown it way out of proportion and have not corrected what they have said even though later the EU and EPA based their initial statements on the IARC ruling, but later changed them, after finding out the evidence given to the IARC was not true.
The EPA and American Cancer Society have both amended their statements. While they still classify glyphosate as a likely carcinogen, it is not likely to cause cancer in humans. The reason for this is because many substances are carcinogenic but there needs to be a susceptible host and the exposure needs to be high enough to cause cancer. Glyphosate, if used according to the label, under normal use is unlikely to cause high risk exposure.
When people say that they have found glyphosate in our food supply, they have not found really found glyphosate. They have found most likely the metabolites after it is broken down by soil bacteria. No one has yet found with 75 years of exposure to billions of people, any evidence that the metabolites cause any harm. After all this time, something should have come up by now.


https://echa.europa.eu/-/glyphosate-not ... en-by-echa
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/sp ... ncer-data/
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-ca ... ogens.html

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30504
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

I remember there was a discussion about this a couple of years ago. At that time, someone pointed out that Round-up does not = glyphosate because of the additives in Roundup. She said it would be safer to use glyphosate alone products that doesn’t contain the additives/surfactants/stickers in Roundup.

So when they say glyphosate was exonerated, my understanding is that it still doesn’t mean Round-up is safe....

I think this was mentioned in the links SQWIB posted? Or is that also part of the overall recanting made by responsible agencies?

PaulF
Greener Thumb
Posts: 910
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:34 pm
Location: Brownville, Ne

Even the "additives" being demonized by some (and I am not fan of Monsanto...now Bayer) have never been linked to cancer by any real study. All the studies linking to cancer have been proven to be bogus. I am a follower of those who say to use chemicals as a last resort rather than a first resort and then to follow the label instructions to the letter (integrated pest management).

Nothing is safe if misused. I drink treated water, have regular fillings in my teeth, have been immunized and my children have been also. After fifty years of scrutiny glyphosate (Round-Up) has never had a judgement stand up against them...maybe rich lawyers, maybe not guilty. Use or don't, your choice.

User avatar
rainbowgardener
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 25279
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: TN/GA 7b

Personally I think ordinary gardeners are unlikely to be affected if they use reasonable precautions and don't drink the stuff, but agricultural workers with chronic daily exposures to high doses are likely to suffer consequences.

See my thread about garden poisons here: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=57653&start=15

Human Toxicity: RoundUp was marketed as the ideal herbicide, toxic to weeds and harmless to everything else. For years glyphosate was assumed to be non- toxic to humans. The EPA considers glyphosate to be non-carcinogenic and relatively low in dermal and oral acute toxicity. However, as noted, most health studies have focused on the safety of glyphosate, rather than the mixture of ingredients found in RoundUp. Also most toxicity tests cited by industry and the EPA investigate toxicity through oral exposure routes. The toxicity of glyphosate and its common surfactant POEA is much greater through inhalation routes of exposure. Roundup is the third most commonly reported cause of pesticide related illness among agricultural workers. Humans ingesting as little as 100 ml of Roundup have died (suicide attempts using Roundup have a 10-20% success rate).

However to me, there are many other reasons not to use RoundUp or glyphosate besides human toxicity.

*Massive use of Round-Up in conjunction with RoundUp ready GMO plants has resulted in RoundUp resistant weeds. RoundUp was marketed with the premise that use of RoundUp ready crops would allow the use of less herbicides. In fact the volume of glyphosate used increased 10-fold from 15 million pounds in 1996 to 159 million pounds in 2012 AND total volume of herbicides used has risen by 26 percent from 2001 to 2010. Total volume is going up because as RoundUp starts failing, farmers resort to combination treatments and poison cocktails.

*RoundUp in ordinary dosages does not directly kill honeybees, but new information suggests that it does contribute to their population decline. It has been found to have "sub-lethal effects on the brood, workers, drones, and queen, who may be killed or rendered infertile. Sublethal effects of pesticides include impairment of enzyme activity and brain activity, learning, and memory, feeding behavior, and reproduction.

*In the presence of glyphosate earthworm populations decline, apparently due to sublethal effects impairing eating and reproduction.

*glyphosate is a phosphonate. Like the phosphates which were removed from laundry products, it leads to algae blooms that are killing Lake Erie and other waterways.

*glyphosate is toxic to soil micro-organisms including bacteria, fungi, yeasts, etc.

and more ....

there's more information and links to where the info comes from in the thread noted above.

SQWIB
Greener Thumb
Posts: 970
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:21 am
Location: Zone 7A - Philadelphia, PA

applestar wrote:I remember there was a discussion about this a couple of years ago. At that time, someone pointed out that Round-up does not = glyphosate because of the additives in Roundup. She said it would be safer to use glyphosate alone products that doesn’t contain the additives/surfactants/stickers in Roundup.

So when they say glyphosate was exonerated, my understanding is that it still doesn’t mean Round-up is safe....

I think this was mentioned in the links SQWIB posted? Or is that also part of the overall recanting made by responsible agencies?
Yes, something to do with the inert additives in combination with glyphosate?

Anyhow, I still purchase a 1.3 gallon bottle every other year to spray on my pavers. I tried vinegar and salt and that just browned everything that sprouted back to life after a rain.

I think my neighbor gets it in 55 gallon drums lol.

Vanisle_BC
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:02 pm
Location: Port Alberni, B.C. Canada, Zone 7 (+?)

I generally avoid weed killers, but I've used Roundup for only one purpose; getting rid of Morning Glory. I sprayed as selectively as possible from a small hand-held bottle on a windless day. Even so other weeds & grasses were affected but this was not in an area where I grow edibles. The next year I did make my compost pile close by. A few shoots of MG are showing again; I intend to 'paint' their leaves with Roundup to minimise its effect on other plants or the soil.

I find it difficult/impossible to decide which claims to believe, about the toxicity or biodegrading of Roundup, especially if they ignore discussion of the way it's actually used. I have no way to extrapolate from the effect of feeding large doses directly to small animals, to the level of risk to my own health of using it carefully & selectively, in the recommended dilutions and on specific plants in my own garden. (And I don't know anyway, to what extent I'm already consuming foodstuff from Roundupped fields.)

I'll continue to use it regretfully and cautiously, where I see no effective alternative.

User avatar
rainbowgardener
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 25279
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: TN/GA 7b

As noted, except for agricultural workers, I don't think the main problem with RoundUp is human toxicity, it is environmental effects.

In my previous location, I did use it occasionally - I would cut down the Japanese honeysuckle shrubs and then paint the RU on the cut stumps. And I would paint it on to poison ivy, which I am very allergic to. Haven't done any of that since I moved here, where both of those pests are less common (in my yard).

imafan26
Mod
Posts: 13947
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:32 am
Location: Hawaii, zone 12a 587 ft elev.

Yes, it is true, there are environmental effects, but probably not one that most people consider. There is a problem of drift onto non-target plants that may not necessarily be killed but are damaged. Persistent herbicides on plant residues that get composted or put in green bins can lead to contaminated compost that causes herbicide injury when the compost is spread on planting sites. These are usually not glyphosate itself, but other types of herbicides or additives to glyphosate that give extended control.

Herbicides glyphosate and others can be very effective at weed control, but weeds do serve a purpose. Weeds do prevent soil erosion and washout by covering the soil. Weeds are also host to many insects both bad and good. Weeds are forage for larger animals and diversity makes the environment healthier by supporting a variety of life forms and is better than monoculture for both the plants and the animals in the ecosystem. Monoculture like commercial farms and orchards are not healthy for bees. Most of the trucked in bees that are brought in for pollination will die in the fields, not just from pesticide residues and general lack of care in the fields but also because when only one food source is available it is like you eating only one thing day in and day out. No one food provides enough of all nutrients a body needs and over time, malnutrition will weaken the individual. If whole families and colonies are forced to live on one kind of food, it does not bode well for the species.

Some states have been on a campaign to eradicate milkweeds from their states. Milkweed is the exclusive food for the larvae of Monarch butterflies that annually migrate from Mexico to the states. The monarchs are on the decline partially as a result of the interference of humans in eradicating what humans consider to be invasive weeds of no value.

User avatar
rainbowgardener
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 25279
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: TN/GA 7b

yes, because RU is so broad spectrum and kills most anything green, when it is indiscriminately sprayed it wipes out all kinds of habitat, that is needed by frogs, toads, birds, insects, etc etc.

Vanisle_BC
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:02 pm
Location: Port Alberni, B.C. Canada, Zone 7 (+?)

I strongly decry the widespread spraying of herbicides and fully agree that weeds have an important place in the health of our environment; but as generations of gardeners & farmers have believed, that place is seldom among 'softer' food crops. Removing most weeds from vegetable gardens is usually advisable, but by the safest means available.

Some of the statements made about Roundup, intended no doubt to be alarming, are quite funny. In one article, Friends of the earth Europe said: "... Glyphosate is never used on its own as a herbicide, it is always combined with other chemical ingredients. For example, a class of chemical called ‘surfactants’ are added ..."

A common chemical in the 'class of surfactants' is dish soap. You've likely used it on aphids and other pests. Surfactants are used in garden insecticides - including organically approved ones - to reduce the surface tension of liquids; either to drown garden pests or to intensify their exposure to other substances like Pyrethrin etc.

I think people on both sides of this issue are frequently guilty of exaggerated rhetoric or quoting from extreme cases, just for the sake of emphasis. Both sides!

User avatar
rainbowgardener
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 25279
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: TN/GA 7b

Most of us here are gardeners. If you are a farmer with acreage, you have different issues.

For gardeners there are many non-poison ways of dealing with weeds. I keep my veggie and flower gardens well mulched and have little trouble with weeds.

Vanisle_BC
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1353
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:02 pm
Location: Port Alberni, B.C. Canada, Zone 7 (+?)

Despite strenuous efforts I've found no practical non-poisonous way of eradicating Morning Glory from my garden. If anybody knows of such a method I could give it a try. Over several years, digging up all the roots has proved impossible.

The potential consequences of indiscriminate or careless insecticide & herbicide spraying are the same everywhere, but likely to be much more widespread (and of more concern for the public) on farms, than in private gardens. The fact that the farmer's livelihood can be enhanced by, or even require support from the practice could be considered unfortunate. But that's a subject of greater complexity and wider ethical/economic implications than gardening.

imafan26
Mod
Posts: 13947
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:32 am
Location: Hawaii, zone 12a 587 ft elev.

I have similar problems. I have California grass , bind weed, bamboo, nut sedge, kylinga, cammoma (Fukien tea). I cut off the water to the grass and I have a lot of bare ground. I also went back to work part time because I could not afford to pay for healthcare without a job. I did not have as much time to work on the yard and I had to cut water because it was getting so expensive with all the sewer fees and minimum charges that rise every year, BTW.

I tried to dig out the California grass and pull the bindweed. Fukien tea is impossible to pull out. All of these weeds have deep roots and will grow back where they break and they have been seeding my yard for years so I have even more to get rid of. I cannot keep up with them and keep them from flowering. Using Image for the turf to kill nutsedge and RU for the pathways and spot treatment of bindweed between the pavers is the only way I can try to keep up with them reseeding. I still have not caught up. Fukien tea is hard to kill even with RU because of the shiny leaves and RU actually does not kill everything. Fukien tea has been unphased by Round Up, so I have to use the cut and treat method on them or the hack and squirt on bigger ones. There are some plants that are able to survive small amounts of roundup like Indian hawthorne and plants with shiny waxy leaves. RU ready plants use similar genes so that RU does not affect them either. The real downside is that some weeds have acquired resistance as well. I have been trying to cover the bare ground and pathways with weed block, but weeds will grow on weed block too. If I pull the weed, it can tear the weed block, so it is better to spray some of them with herbicide instead. I have lost a rose and a stem from the rosemary because the roots of translocation, so it is not perfect. Neither of those plants are irreplaceable and the rose was supposed to be in the pot; not in the ground, so I would have had to take it out eventually.

I do agree that there is probably a lot of influence being exerted on legislative and government agencies by both sides.



Return to “What Doesn't Fit Elsewhere”