Glyphosate, superweeds, urine, breast milk; Dr. Don Huber & future generations; Meet the Enablers: USDA & EPA
Jeff Kirkpatrick – Ban GMOs Now
Speaking of glyphosate Dr. Don Huber stated,“Future historians will look back on our time and write not about how many pounds of pesticides we do or don’t apply, what they’ll write about is how willing we are to sacrifice our children and jeopardize future generations just for this massive experiment that we called genetic engineering that’s based on failed promises, flawed science – just to benefit the bottom line of a commercial enterprise.”
This audio file can also be found here: “Future historians will write about how willing we are to sacrifice our children & jeopardize future generations,” GM Education (3-13-14)
In April 2015 the Detox Project started a project with a “specific focus on women and children in the U.S., [which offered] the first-ever validated public LC/MS/MS glyphosate testing for urine, water and soon breast milk.” (See: “World’s First Public Testing for Monsanto’s Glyphosate Begins Today,” by Organic Consumers Association; April 23, 2015). The results of that project are in, and there are two facts: glyphosate was in the majority of test subjects (it is ubiquitous), and it’s not a surprise. The following article goes into detail:
“Nine Out of 10 Americans Tested Positive for Monsanto’s Cancer-Linked Weedkiller Glyphosate,” by Katherine Paul, Alternet; May 27 2016
Note: this article was originally published in a slightly different format on OCA’s website on May 24: “Wake Up and Smell the Poison,” by Katherine Paul, OCA, May 24; 2016
Excerpt: A staggering 93 percent of Americans tested positive for glyphosate, according to the test results, announced yesterday (May 25, 2016).
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.
My Comment: One thing to understand is that when the FDA approves another new and shiny GMO brand that is herbicide tolerant (HT), there is no consideration for the cumulative effects of an additional GM crop that can survive applications of an herbicide. Specifically – in this context the concern is about glyphosate tolerant brands – such as those brands that are Roundup Ready. This is Monsanto’s trademark name for crops that are able to withstand applications of Roundup (the active ingredient is glyphosate).
[Note that there are also ‘stacked’ varieties; some have the HT trait for glyphosate and additional traits to withstand toxins like 2,4-D and dicamba, and some have other combinations which may have HT traits and insect resistant (IR) traits as well].
The EPA has approved glyphosate as safe “when used as directed.” However, when the USDA’s division APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) deregulates any particular HT brand, no consideration is given to the potential cumulative effects of another glyphosate based herbicide (GBH) tolerant crop on the environment – because according to APHIS, since the EPA has approved glyphosate, they see no issue.
“A regulatory system that cannot, or will not, analyze the cumulative effects of glyphosate-resistant crops on the development of glyphosate-resistant weeds in deciding whether to approve commercialization of these crops defies logic.” (See: “Is Anyone Regulating? The Curious State of GMO Governance in the United States,” by Rebecca Bratspies, Vermont Law Review, Vol. 37; 2013)
When federal agencies approve additional herbicide tolerant GM crops, they absolutely fail in their risk assessment to incorporate already existing HT crops and the cumulative effect that will result in yet another increase in glyphosate based herbicide use. When the agencies fail to incorporate this critical fact in their approval process, it is demonstrative of a system that makes biased decisions that favor the biotech industry and by default results in a total disregard to real and potential adverse events to the environment and on human health.
Writing in the Vermont Law Review, Rebecca Bratspies points out that the National Environmental Policy Act “[I]nstructs federal agencies to conduct a coherent and upfront environmental analysis to ensure informed decision making. Whenever substantial questions are raised as to whether a project may cause significant environmental degradation, NEPA requires that an agency conduct an EIS in order to ensure that the agency will not act on incomplete information, only to regret its decision after it is too late to correct.” [Citations and internal quotations omitted]
The fact that no agency considers the cumulative impacts of glyphosate for each new approval of glyphosate-tolerant GM crops appears to be in clear violation of federal regulations:
In effect, the USDA’s division (APHIS) claims that since the EPA approved certain GBHs (glyphosate based herbicides), it is not necessary to re-assess any potential harm from these herbicides at all. Specifically, Rebecca Bratspies quotes the EPA’s approval for a product which includes this statement: “there is no unreasonable environmental risk if the [glyphosate] user adheres to the labeled directions.”
This is rather insane. APHIS concludes that cumulative effects don’t have to be considered because the EPA approved glyphosate based herbicides (i.e., Roundup), but the EPA does not consider cumulative effects of its use when it approves glyphosate based products, such as the various Roundup brands made by Monsanto. As she puts it:
“To be clear, this means that no regulator considers the cumulative environmental impacts of glyphosate use before glyphosate-resistant crops are approved for market even though the entire raison d’être for these plants is their tolerance to glyphosate. Monsanto markets – and farmers purchase – these seeds because the fields can be treated with glyphosate. The fact that these plants will be sprayed with glyphosate is their most salient characteristic – one that should be front and center in any assessment of this technology’s environmental impact. It makes no sense to evaluate the potentials for impacts to the human environment from these crops while excluding as somehow unrelated glyphosate use in conjunction with these plants.” [Emphasis added] (See: “Is Anyone Regulating? The Curious State of GMO Governance in the United States,” by Rebecca Bratspies, Vermont Law Review, Vol. 37; 2013)
Apart from the fact that glyphosate is now found in urine , breast milk , water supplies , food  and even rainfall  there are additional impacts as well: ecological damage. One example is the growth of superweeds – that is, weeds that have developed tolerance for glyphosate.
Although it is the farmers who foot the bill combatting superweeds in this ongoing national nightmare, it is ultimately paid for in subsidies by the taxpayers in increased food prices.
Who is liable?
“As things currently stand, there are no regulatory mechanisms in place to review the cumulative environmental impacts of glyphosate use before glyphosate resistant crops enter the U.S. marketplace. As a result, superweeds will likely continue to multiply, and the harms caused by both the unruly weeds themselves and the associated increased use of herbicides that are necessary to kill them will most likely be resolved, if at all, in tort suits between farmers, which will challenge only the collateral damage caused by farmers’ responses to superweeds, rather than the weeds’ costly origins. [Emphasis added]. (Rebecca K. Stewart, “Weeds, Seeds & Deeds Redux: Natural and Legal Evolution in the U.S. Seed Wars,” Stanford Technology Law Review, Vol. 18:79; 2014 – citations omitted).
It is true that some herbicide resistant weeds existed before GM crops were introduced in agriculture in the 1990’s. However, the severe growth of superweeds in the past few decades is unlike any other weed resistance event in agricultural history, reaching such extreme levels that it was described in 2010 as “[T]he single largest threat to production agriculture that we have ever seen.” (Andrew Wargo III, the president of the Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts as quoted in “U.S. Farmers Cope with Roundup-Resistant Weeds,” by William Neuman and Andrew Pollack, New York Times; May 3, 2010).
Obviously, the fact that the NAS report on GMOs (published during May 2016) only made a passing reference to superweeds and claimed that they could not find any cause and effect relationship between GMOs and environmental harm is a stupendous achievement of deception. For more on my criticism of the report, see GMO News Summary and More: May 25, 2016 – Ban GMOs Now; May 25, 2016 and GMO Information: May 29, 2016 – Ban GMOs Now; May 29, 2015.
In fact, the problem is so bad that in 2010, Congress held hearings about this national problem (See: “Are Superweeds on Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?” hearing of the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy; July 28, 2010 – 331 pages).
Andrew Kimbrell (Director of the Center for Food Safety) testified before Congress and pointed out that: “Since the first glyphosate resistant weed populations were confirmed in 1998, 53 populations of 10 different weed species at tens of thousands of sites have evolved glyphosate resistance. Glyphosate resistant weeds now infest an estimated 11.4 million acres. North Carolina Weed Scientist, Alan York, has called glyphosate resistant weeds ‘potentially the worst threat to cotton since the boll weevil’ due to extraordinary levels of dependence on glyphosate.” (Source: Policy Statement of Andrew C. Kimbrell, at the hearing “Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotechnology,” to the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy; July 28, 2010 – 7 pages).
Note that in 2010, 11.4 million acres were affected; last year, Wenonah Hauter (Food & Water Watch) stated the number of known acres was already much greater since 2010. As of January, 2015 “… at least 70 million acres in the U.S. [are] afflicted with Roundup-resistant weeds. It is only a matter of time before those weeds become resistant not just to Roundup, but to a mix of other herbicides, as their associated herbicide-tolerant crops are being planted and sprayed with chemical cocktails.” (See: “USDA Green-Lights Yet another Monsanto GMO crop,” by Wenonah Hauter, EcoWatch; January 15, 2015)
Pigweed (Palmer amaranth) alone is notoriously bad; it grows at an incredibly fast rate (according to Edward Hammond, “each female plant grows a long, flower-covered panicle that can produce up to half a million seeds”). Many farmers resort to manual labor to try to eradicate them and at great financial cost, according to Dr. Lynn M. Sosnoskie. She states that: “Prior to the development of glyphosate-resistance in Palmer amaranth, growers in Georgia spent, on average, $25 to $35 per acre on herbicides for weed control in cotton. Since the discovery of glyphosate-resistance (in 2004), herbicide costs have nearly doubled. The cost of additional, cultural control methods has also increased. From 2000-2005, approximately 3% to 5% of Georgia’s cotton acres were hand-weeded at a cost of $2 to $4 per acre (when averaged over all farm acres); from 2006-2010, 50% to 70% of all cotton acres were hand-weeded at an average cost of $22 to $24 per acre. (See: “An introduction to Palmer amaranth,” by Dr. Lynn M. Sosnoskie, Agriculture and Natural Resources Blog, University of California Weed Science; January 3, 2013).
Edward Hammond also had this to say:
In many cases the weeds have proven impossible to control even with chemicals and increased tilling and, in a seeming anachronism in the highly mechanized environment of American agriculture, farmers must hire laborers to manually weed crops. In short, the collapse of the Roundup Ready (RR) system is causing a 30-year throwback in agricultural practices in a large and growing portion of the US, especially in southern areas where cotton and soya are major crops…
A formerly effective herbicide is now rapidly becoming useless in many applications, ultimately causing a throwback to expensive and even more environmentally damaging farming methods. It is a severe indictment of one company, Monsanto, and how it was permitted to run amok with patents and control over seed companies to its financial benefit, and to the detriment of others … Far from bringing American cotton farmers into a new, gilded biotech age, the price of Monsanto’s profits and overreliance on glyphosate is an expensive unfolding chemical catastrophe that is leading US farmers right back to where they started: hoes, ploughs, unsustainable reliance on toxic chemicals, and unacceptable environmental impacts.
See: “Genetically Engineered Backslide: The Impact of Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Pigweed on Agriculture in the United States,” by Edward Hammond, TWN Biotechnology & Biosafety Series 12; 2010 (34 pages).
 See: “High levels of glyphosate found in Portuguese volunteers’ urine,” by GMWatch (Source: Sustainable Pulse); May 19, 2016
Also see: “Herbicides found in Human Urine,” by Dirk Brändli and Sandra Reinacher, Delinat Institute for Ecology and Climate-farming, Ithaka Journal, Vol. 1; 2012 (3 pages)
Also see: “Overwhelming majority of Germans contaminated by glyphosate,” by Nicole Sagener, EurActiv; March 7, 2016
Also see: “Glyphosate Biomonitoring for Farmers and Their Families: Results from the Farm Family Exposure Study,” by John F. Acquavella et al., Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 112, No. 3; 2004
 See: “Glyphosate found in German breast milk,” by GMWatch; June 27, 2015
Also see: “World’s Number 1 Herbicide Discovered in U.S. Mothers’ Breast Milk,” by Sustainable Pulse; April 6, 2014
 See: “Widely Used Herbicide Commonly Found in Rain and Streams in the Mississippi River Basin – USGS Technical Announcement,” by U.S. Geological Survey; 2011
Also see: “Widespread Glyphosate Contamination in USA,” – By Dr. Eva Sirinathsinghji, Institute of Science in Society; October 8, 2014
 See: “High Levels of Residues from Spraying with Glyphosate Found in Soybeans in Argentina,” by Testbiotech, October 22, 2013 (14 pages)
Also see: “Compositional differences in soybeans on the market: Glyphosate accumulates in Roundup Ready GM soybeans,” By T. Bøhn et al, Food Chemistry, Volume 153, 15 June 2014, Pages 207–215
Also see: “Monsanto’s Glyphosate Found in California Wines, Even Wines Made with Organic Grapes,” by Zen Honeycutt, EcoWatch; March 27, 2016
 See: “Roundup Weedkiller Found In 75% of Air and Rain Samples, Gov. Study,” by Sayer Ji, GreenMedInfo; February 20, 2014 [2 pages]
Also see: “U.S. researchers find Roundup chemical in water, air,” by Carey Gillam, Reuters; August 31, 2011
Also see generally,
“Detection of Glyphosate Residues in Animals and Humans,” By Monika Krüger et al, Journal of Environmental & Analytical Toxicology, Vol. 4 Issue 2; 2014 (5 pages)
“Review of GMO safety assessment studies: glyphosate residues in Roundup Ready crops is an ignored issue,” by Marek Cuhra, Environmental Sciences Europe; November 7, 2015
“Teratogenic Effects of Glyphosate-Based Herbicides: Divergence of Regulatory Decisions from Scientific Evidence,” by Michael Antoniou, et al, Environmental and Analytical Toxicology, Vol 4, Issue 2; June 23, 2012 [Special Issue – Toxicology of Pesticides] (14 pages)
“Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases IV: cancer and related pathologies,” by Anthony Samsel & Stephanie Seneff, Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry Vol. 15, No. 3; January 2015 (39 pages)
“Why Glyphosate Should Be Banned,” Ban GMOs Now Blog April 18, 2016
For more on superweeds, see:
“Superweeds: How Biotech Crops Bolster the Pesticide Industry,” by Food & Water Watch; July 2013 (19 pages)
“The Rise of Superweeds – and What to Do about It,” published by the Union of Concerned Scientists; December 2013 – 8 pages)
“Herbicide-Resistant Genetically Modified Plants and Sustainability,” Edited by Sissel Rogne & Audrun Utskarpen, the Norwegian Biotechnology Advisory Board; August 2014 (72 pages)
“Herbicide Tolerance in GM Crops: Why the World Should Be Ready to Ready to Round up Glyphosate,” by Pete Riley et al., Greenpeace International; June 2011 (44 pages)
Excerpt: GM herbicide-tolerant crops, as epitomized by GM RR [genetically modified Roundup Ready] crops, are not part of a sustainable agriculture system. As with all GM crops they have been developed for, and are economically profitable within, an industrial agriculture system that involves large-scale monocultures that depend on costly, polluting inputs such as herbicides, synthetic fertilizers and fossil fuels.
The widespread and increasingly intensive use of glyphosate in association with the use of GM RR crops, poses risks to the environment and human health. Given the problems that are now evident, no new GM glyphosate-tolerant crops should be authorized. As part of broader considerations of the way forward for agriculture, no GM herbicide-tolerant crop can form part of a sustainable agriculture model, and the cultivation of all such crops should be banned.
Go further: all GMOs should be banned.
Ban GMOs Now
Congress held hearings about superweeds in 2010:
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?” Part 1 – YouTube (36:20) published by oversightandreform on July 29, 2010
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?” Part 2 -YouTube (19:05) published by oversightandreform on July 29, 2010
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy?” Part 3 -YouTube (9:28) published by oversightandreform on July 29, 2010
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy? (Part II)” Part 1 -YouTube (58:34) published by oversightandreform on October 1, 2010
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy? (Part II)” Part 2 -YouTube (58:31) published by oversightandreform on October 1, 2010
“Are Superweeds and Outgrowth of USDA Biotech Policy? (Part II)” Part 3 -YouTube (8:00) published by oversightandreform on October 1, 2010
See: “Policy Statement of Andrew C. Kimbrell at the hearing ‘Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotechnology,’ to the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy” July 28, 2010 (7 pages).
“Statement of Troy Roush at the hearing ‘Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotechnology,’ to the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy,” July 28, 2010 (3 pages)
William Freese Testimony at the hearing “Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotechnology,” to the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy; September 30, 2010 (10 pages)
William Freese Response to Questions with Regard to Herbicide-Resistant Weeds Following Testimony at the hearing “Are Superweeds an Outgrowth of USDA Biotechnology,” on 10-30-10 (26 pages)
Also see: “‘Superweeds’ choke farms,” by Donnelle Eller, Des Moines Register; June 22, 2014)
Excerpt: [F]armers like Young say they have been forced to adopt less environmentally friendly farming practices, such as increased tillage, to battle herbicide-resistant weeds. Tilling is blamed for increased soil erosion and the loss of nutrients that can make their way into rivers and streams … Iowa farmers should be scared, said Young, who had stopped tilling 7,000 acres that his family farms until the discovery of Palmer amaranth four years ago. He said crop rotation and other conservation methods helped him keep the weed at bay for about four years after becoming resistant in the state. Southern states have plowed under thousands of acres of crops such as cotton in an effort to control Palmer amaranth – and spent millions of dollars hand-weeding it. “I’m sitting in a sprayer that cost over $350,000,” Young said. “It’s got a computer system that lets me tell you precisely what herbicide I sprayed, how many ounces I sprayed, the wind direction and speed, the field I was in, the humidity. “I’ve got all this fantastic technology, but nothing to pour in my tank,” said the 50-year-old.
How could the National Academy of Sciences not acknowledge the connection of GMOs and environmental harm? By lying.
Dr. Don Huber (professor emeritus at Purdue University) has a lot to say about glyphosate. And – it’s not good. You know that he is right if for no other reason than how his findings drew harsh reactions from GMO proponents and a cold shoulder by none other than Tom Vilsack, biotech award winning former governor and currently head of the USDA (aka, the Bastard Child of Monsanto).
Dr. Huber’s Bio:
Dr. Huber is Professor Emeritus of Plant Pathology at Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. He received B.S. and M.S. degrees from the University of Idaho (1957, 1959), a PhD from Michigan State University (1963), and is a graduate of the US Army Command & General Staff College and Industrial College of the Armed Forces. He was Cereal Pathologist at the University of Idaho for 8 years before joining the Department of Botany & Plant Pathology at Purdue University in 1971.
His agricultural research the past 50 years has focused on the epidemiology and control of soil-borne plant pathogens with emphasis on microbial ecology, cultural and biological controls, and physiology of host-parasite relationships. Research also includes nitrogen metabolism, micronutrient physiology, inhibition of nitrification, and nutrient-disease interactions.
In addition to his academic positions and research, Dr. Huber has had several concurrent careers including 14 years as a professional labor-relations mediator with 7 years’ service on the Indiana Education Employment Relations Board as a Mediatory/Fact Finder/Conciliator, and served 12 years on two school boards with recognition as a Master Board Member from the Indiana School Board Association and Honesty in Public Service Award from Taxpayers United For Fairness. He retired in 1995 as Associate Director of the Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center (Colonel) after 41+ years of active and reserve military service.
He has received various awards for his scientific accomplishments and contributions to government. Dr. Huber is an active scientific reviewer; international research cooperator with projects in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Mexico, and Russia; and a consultant to academia, industry, and government. He is author or co-author of over 300 journal articles, Experiment Station Bulletins, research presentations, book chapters and review articles; 3 books, and 84 special invited publications. He is internationally recognized for his expertise in the development of nitrification inhibitors to improve the efficiency of N fertilizers, interactions of the form of nitrogen, manganese and other nutrients in disease, herbicide-nutrient-disease interactions, techniques for rapid microbial identification, and cultural control of plant diseases.
His greatest accomplishment has been his marriage to Paula Huber and their 11 children and 35 grandchildren. Dr. Huber currently serves as APS coordinator of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS).
Source: “Bio: Dr. Don M. Huber,” by Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
Farm & Ranch Freedom Alliance reports:
In January 2011, one of the nation’s senior scientists alerted the federal government to a newly discovered organism that may have the potential to cause infertility and spontaneous abortion in farm animals, raising significant concerns about human health. Dr. Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University, believes the appearance and prevalence of the unnamed organism may be related to the nation’s over-reliance on the weed killer known as Roundup and/or to something about the genetically engineered Roundup Ready crops. In a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, the professor called on the federal government to immediately stop deregulation of roundup ready crops, particularly roundup ready alfalfa.
My Comment: The letter was hand delivered because Dr. Huber firmly believed the ramifications could severely impact international trade relationships regarding GMOs. Oddly, the letter was leaked. Not oddly, Vilsack did NOTHING.
See: “Letter to Secretary Vilsack from Dr. Huber – Roundup May Be Causing Animal Miscarriages and Infertility,” by Farm & Ranch Freedom Alliance; (date of letter: January 17, 2011)
Excerpt: A team of senior plant and animal scientists have recently brought to my attention the discovery of an electron microscopic pathogen that appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings. Based on a review of the data, it is widespread, very serious, and is in much higher concentrations in Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans and corn – suggesting a link with the RR gene or more likely the presence of Roundup. This organism appears NEW to science!
This is highly sensitive information that could result in a collapse of U.S. soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies. On the other hand, this new organism may already be responsible for significant harm (see below). My colleagues and I are therefore moving our investigation forward with speed and discretion, and seek assistance from the USDA and other entities to identify the pathogen’s source, prevalence, implications, and remedies.
After the letter was leaked, Dr. Huber (still acting responsibly, unlike Vilsack), wrote to the EU to try to address their concerns.
See: “Letter European Commission from Dr. Huber,” by Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance; (date of letter: March 2011)
Excerpt: This cover letter is provided to explain the reasoning and concerns that were conveyed in a letter which I sent to Secretary of Agriculture, Thomas Vilsack on January 17, 2011 (Attachment 1) [a copy of the actual letter]. The letter was not intended for public distribution; however, the letter was ‘leaked’ and subsequently posted on the internet from which it soon became public knowledge world-wide. Once it was widely distributed, I gave permission for subsequent postings in order to keep it consistent. My busy meeting and travel schedule has delayed getting further information on this matter out publicly to the many individuals who have requested it. The scientific data on this newly recognized organism is being prepared for formal publication.
I wrote the letter to Secretary Vilsack for a very simple reason: we are experiencing a large number of problems in production agriculture in the U.S. that appear to be intensified and sometimes directly related to genetically engineered (GMO) crops, and/or the products they were engineered to tolerate – especially those related to glyphosate (the active chemical in Roundup® herbicide and generic versions of this herbicide). We have witnessed a deterioration in the plant health of corn, soybean, wheat and other crops recently with unexplained epidemics of sudden death syndrome of soybean (SDS), Goss’ wilt of corn, and take-all of small grain crops the last two years. At the same time, there has been an increasing frequency of previously unexplained animal (cattle, pig, horse, poultry) infertility and spontaneous abortions. These situations are threatening the economic viability of both crop and animal producers.
More from & about Dr. Huber:
“USDA Scientist Reveals All – Glyphosate Hazards to Crops, Soils, Animals, and Consumers,” by Dr. Eva Sirinathsinghji, Institute of Science in Society; January 9, 2012
Excerpt: The conversion of US agriculture to mono-chemical herbicide practice has resulted in the extensive use of glyphosate herbicides. Coincidentally, farmers have been witnessing deterioration in the health of corn, soybean, wheat and other crops, and epidemics of diseases in small grain crops. All are associated with the extensive use of glyphosate, which has increased further since the introduction of glyphosate-tolerant, Roundup Ready (RR) crops.
Glyphosate immobilizes nutrients required to maintain plant health and resistance to disease. This weakening of the plants defense could explain the infestation of GM crops with the new pathogen, which has now been observed in horse, sheep, pigs, cows, chicken, multiple animal tissues including reproductive parts (semen, amniotic fluid), manure, soil, eggs, milk, as well as the common fungal pathogen that is currently infesting RR crops, Fusarium solani fsp glycines mycelium. All are coming into contact with glyphosate either through direct exposure or consumption through animal feed. It is also highly abundant in crops suffering from plant Goss’ wilt and sudden death syndrome.
The pathogen can be cultured in the lab, and has been isolated from livestock fetal tissue, replicated in the lab and re-introduced back into the animals. It appears to be very common and may well be interacting with the effects of glyphosate on both plants and animals, exacerbating disease and causing reproductive failure in livestock (see below). Although great expectations have been placed on Huber to publish his findings, he insists that before this can be done, further resources are necessary to be able to characterize the ‘entity’ and identify what type of species it is, including sequencing of its genome. This is a slow process and once complete, it is his intention to publish the work in a peer-reviewed journal … Over 100 peer reviewed papers have been published by Huber and other scientists on the detrimental effects of glyphosate. Glyphosate increases disease in plants (as well as animals), prompting Huber to write to the Secretary of Agriculture. It may be linked to many health problems in animals and humans, which are an added cost to all the failed promises of a new agricultural technology that would feed the world. As Huber concluded, the “public trust has been betrayed.”
“Scientist says flawed science of GMOs jeopardizing future generations,” by Ken Roseboro, The Organic & Non-GMO Report; March 1, 2012
Excerpt: There are more than 40 plant diseases reported with use of glyphosate, including many fungal diseases such as fusarium.
“There has been a 500% increase in fusarium and huge increases in sudden death syndrome (SDS) in soybeans,” Huber said…
Last year, Huber caused a stir when he wrote a letter to US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack warning him about a “pathogen new to science” that has been linked to glyphosate and Roundup Ready crops. Huber said the pathogen, which he describes as a microfungus, is linked to illness and reproductive problems in animals and poses threats to human health…
“We shouldn’t expose the entire agricultural infrastructure to a massive experiment,” Huber said.
The introduction of GM crops, Huber said, was a “betrayal of the public trust by a failure to address potential risks. The irresponsible and premature widespread use is based on flawed and unsound scientific assumptions … Glyphosate has totally changed the environment; it has impacted humans, vegetables, grains, fruits, plants, feeds, and animals,” Huber said.
In conclusion Huber said that our basic responsibility in agriculture is providing safe and nutritious food. Instead, with current GMO-based agricultural practices, “we are willing to sacrifice our children and jeopardize future generations based on failed promises and flawed science just to benefit the ‘bottom line’ of a commercial enterprise.”
“GMOs, Glyphosate & Tomorrow –Interview with Dr. Don Huber,” by Chris Walters, ACRES, Vol. 41, No. 5; May 2011 (9 pages)
“A Transparent Plan Episode #2,” – YouTube (7:45), published by Megan Noble on March 13, 2014
Excerpt:“Future historians will look back on our time and write not about how many pounds of pesticides we do or don’t apply, what they’ll write about is how willing we are to sacrifice our children and jeopardize future generations just for this massive experiment that we called genetic engineering that’s based on failed promises, flawed science – just to benefit the bottom line of a commercial enterprise.”
“Dr. Mercola Interviews Dr. Huber about GMOs,” YouTube (1:09:06) published by Dr. Mercola on October 3, 2013
“What about Glyphosate-Induced Manganese Deficiency?” by Dr. Don Huber, Fluid Journal; Fall 2007 (3 pages)
Summary: Glyphosate weed management programs can influence all components of the “plant disease triangle” by reducing plant uptake and translocation efficiency, changing soil biology, and modifying nutrient form or availability in the environment. Crop cultivars highly efficient in nutrient uptake should be selected where possible. Remediation treatments for micronutrient deficiency (Fe, Mn, Zn) should be applied at least eight days after the glyphosate event, and glyphosate formulations least inhibitory to plant essential functions and the soil biota should be used where possible. Biological amendment with glyphosate-resistant organisms (Mn reducers and N fixers) needs further study, as well as more effective means of detoxifying glyphosate in the rhizosphere. Alternate weed control or the use of non-systemic herbicides should be considered to minimize impacts on soil organisms and predisposition to disease. Herbicide rotation may be as important as crop rotation in the future.
Glyphosate crop interactions: Four studies on glyphosate authored and/or reviewed by Dr. Don Huber (42 pages); published by the Institute of Science in Society
This collection includes:
- AG CHEMICAL AND CROP NUTRIENT INTERACTIONS – CURRENT UPDATE Don M. Huber, Emeritus Professor, Purdue University (13 pages)
- Glyphosate Associations With Cereal Diseases Caused by Fusarium spp. in the Canadian Prairies, by M.R. Fernandez, R.P. Zentner, P. Basnyat, D. Gehl, F. Selles and D. Huber; European Journal of Agronomy, July 6, 2009
- Glyphosate Effects on Diseases of Plants, by G.S. Johal and D.M. Huber; European Journal of Agronomy, April 29, 2009
- Glyphosate and Glyphosate-Resistant Crop Interactions with Rhizosphere Microorganisms; European Journal of Agronomy, June 29, 2009
“Dr. Don Huber – The Latest Science on GMOs, Glyphosate and Infertility,” by Carol Grieve’, Food Integrity Now; September 25, 2015 [Please note: there is an audio file at the bottom of the article, 1:00:57]
“Dr. Don Huber: GMOs and Glyphosate and Their Threat to Humanity,” by Carol Grieve’ Food Integrity Now; April 8, 2014 [Please note: there is an audio file at the bottom of the article, 45:31]
“The Truth About GMOs with Dr. Don Huber,” by Valley News Live; March 22, 2015 [Embedded video 8:02]
“Dr. Huber: A Professor Emeritus and Government Scientist Calling Out Glyphosate,” by Robyn O’Brien; April 14, 2015
Excerpt: According to Dr. Huber, glyphosate kills weeds by turning off key enzymes that produce defense mechanisms for plants. It essentially targets and destroys their immune systems by chelating, stripping, micronutrients like magnesium, copper and zinc from the plant. As a result, there are fewer of these key micronutrients in the plants and in our food supply.
And as Dr. Huber shared, as glyphosate immobilizes critical enzymes responsible for life and resistance in plants, it turns off the natural suppressive mechanisms, leaving these plants more vulnerable to diseases (like Sudden Death Syndrome in soy and Goss’ Wilt in corn), as well as increasing levels of toxins and mycotoxins as seen in the Root Rot and Head Scab being seen in our cereal crops…
With these increasing doses and applications, I asked him what the “acceptable levels of risk” is here in the US. Given that residual levels of glyphosate are found in human and animal feed, I asked if studies had been conducted to assess the long term impact of this increased exposure and application level and if any studies had been conducted to see what the increasing impact of these synthetic ingredients might be on the developing immune system of a child.
He went very quiet.
And he shared that the Canadian tolerable levels for glyphosate are 58 times lower than those in the US and that European tolerance levels are even lower as a precautionary measure to protect vulnerable subsets of the population, like pregnant women and children. He then shared that the levels of glyphosate now found in the US food supply have been clinically shown to be toxic, citing its effects on human placental, kidney, liver and testicular cells.
An interview with Dr. Huber by Dave Murphy, executive director and founder of Food Democracy Now! is available on VIMEO:
“Dr. Huber Explains Science behind New Organism and Threat from Monsanto’s Roundup, GMOs to Disease and Infertility, VIMEO (video 19:50),” – by David Murphy of Food Democracy Now! (2011)
The primary and bulk of glyphosate based herbicides (GBH) such as Roundup is used on GMOs: the majority of GM crops are herbicide tolerant (HT). However, GBHs are also used on non-GMO crops for ‘drying out’ or ‘pre-harvest treatment’ or what is referred to as desiccation. Most notably is the use of GBH for this purpose on wheat. See: “Why Is Glyphosate Sprayed on Crops Right Before Harvest?” by Ken Roseboro (The Organic & Non-GMO Report), EcoWatch; March 5, 2016
There are those who say glyphosate is safe (ahem, Monsanto and GMO advocates) and then there are those who claim that glyphosate is safer than the alternatives – the older chemicals that were once used. However, when looked at from a historical context, it’s appears that glyphosate was sold as a replacement for toxins that are now making a comeback (such as 2,4-D and dicamba). The reason these older and more toxic poisons are now being sprayed on our crops? Because of superweeds.
It’s quite pathetic to see the GMO supporters, shills and trolls parrot people like Monsanto’s CEO Hugh Grant who claims that glyphosate is not carcinogenic (classified by the IARC in 2015 as a Group 2A probable carcinogen); in fact, Grant accused the world’s most renowned specialists in that category of using ‘junk science.’
Yes, Monsanto, King of Pseudoscience, Scientific Fraud and Suppression, has accused the world’s experts of ‘junk science.’ It might be funny if people weren’t dying of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (cancer). It is despicable behavior. And the intense efforts by the teams of pro-GMO advocates on social media websites don’t convince anyone of their position about the loveliness of glyphosate; instead it demonstrates an obvious act of the desperate and deceptive personality of an industry which will do and say anything to squeeze out every penny of profit at the expense of human health and the environment.
सत्यमेव जयते – Satyameva Jayate
(Truth Ultimately Triumphs)
Re-posting is encouraged, provided the URL of the original is posted with attribution to the original author and all links are preserved to the referenced articles, reports, etc. on their respective websites.
Copyright © Jeff Kirkpatrick 2016 Ban GMOs Now All rights reserved.