Scientists have linked it to birth defects. I hate weeds as much as the next person, but not at that price.
Here is a link that might be useful: Round-Up Linked to Birth Defects
Thanks for posting that info, Kay. Monsanto is bad news no matter what they manufacture. It is frightening to recognize how big they are and how much control they have in this country. Now, they want to control the food we eat with EMOs. We need to boycott their products and stay clear of produce that is genetically modified. I guess anything containing soy or corn (excluding organic) should be at the top of our list....Just sayin'
OK - I'm off my soapbox now! LOL Sorry for the rant!
I'm sort of a moderation-in-all-things kind of person. But genetically engineering food crops so that they are resistant to Round-up then drenching them in the stuff just doesn't sound very appetizing to me. It doesn't sound very far-sighted, either.
I'm right up on the soapbox with you Tressa, telling everyone I can that Monsanto and everything it produces is just no good for humanity, except the people who are making money on it, and in the long run it won't be good for them either.
We will just have to keep our eyes and ears open to be aware of what dangerous stuff Monsanto is up to now and in the future. Isn't it sad that there is such greed in our beautiful world? Min
Tressa and Min, I'm on that same soapbox, LOL! Read labels on foods I buy, and try to buy foods that are organic, heirloom, and grown in the U.S.
I agree completely. My feelings are that I can't go up against Monsanto or the FDA and politicians that they have in their pockets, all I can do is vote with my pocketbook and I do that by eating locally and responsibly grown foods. Here in Ca we're lucky enough to have access to a great diversity of locally grown produce and even some restaurants that cook local, organic foods as well. It's more expensive but my family has always been of the opinion that good food is worth the money. In an ideal world everyone would make enough to put good quality, healthy food on their tables and we wouldn't have to worry about large corporations making a buck by selling us the cheapest crap they can possibly get away with. *marches off ranting and waving arms*
The E. Coli outbreak in Europe in just a few weeks has a body count of 44 people suffering a horrible death, possibly from contaminated sprouts from a sprout farm. They still don't know how the sprouts got infected, but apparently the way they are cultured is a perfect environment for E. coli to thrive. They are also saying it may be in the fertilizer that was used, such as manure tea, that was not washed off. Other scientists in Germany postulate that the biogas process used to create methane also produces dangerous bacteria such as E. coli.
If either one of these "green" technology culprits turn out to be true, there still won't be a mass hysteria such as this press release on Monsanto will cause, even though the confirmed amount of dead bodies is far more severe than some scattered birth defects in mice. Organic = good, safe, and ethical and Corporate Profitable Synthetic = bad, dangerous, and unethical will still be the accepted norm despite the body count.
applenut- you bet it will be the accepted norm among informed and thinking people!
check back in 20 years and maybe by then we will see the sad results of the profitable synthetic crap they are selling to those who are willing to eat it. min
I have not seen any mass hysteria. I still have my bottle of Round-Up.
Anyone who uses poop tea on lettuce, sprouts, or any other leafy veggie is probably not a very bright character, and their operation should be shut down. As far as calling Monsanto unethical merely because they are a big profitable corporation, well, duh. All big profitable corporations are unethical, by definition. The difference is that a small business that kills 44 people did not mean to and the people who own it suffer with terrible guilt, whereas the big corporations have actuaries who figure out how many people they can kill while maintaining a profit margin. For them, it's nothing personal, it's just business. So, yes, it's horrible that people have died from e-coli and the guilty should be punished and effective laws put into place. And yes, I hope there's some hysteria over Round-up, Monsanto suffers a massive stock decline because of this news, and their actuaries decide they will lose money if they keep screwing with the world food supply, so they should stop. That's my wish.
Please ignore previous post. I really have no opinions, unless it concerns flowers. I don't know what came over me. Erase erase erase.
nevertheless renee, well said.
As I see it, the difference between an accidental organic-caused problem and a big chemical corporation poisoning is that the organic problem will be localized and fixable, but the chemical damage will be widespread and last in the environment for who knows how long. I agree that these companies just factor this in. Whether you choose to use it yourself or not, it's in everything we eat. This is a huge problem! Walk down the chemical aisle in a big box and hold your breath! How many people read the warnings? And don't these companies know that we don't! Let's fight back!!!
Have you noticed how many supermarkets are trying their hand at supplying "organics"? They must be feeling the pinch from those of us who are willing to spend a little extra by doing our shopping at smaller speciality markets/stores that offer "green" alternative products and organic foods. Here in Riverside County, we have a couple of co-op organic farms. I have also recently found some in San Diego County. The problem with that for me is DH is such a picky eater we wouldn't be able to use a lot of the veggies that are offered in a co-op pickup package. It is becoming very popular here in wine county to find cooking classes using fresh organics, as well as restaurants that participate in the co-ops and buy local produce. It is great to see this movement evolving. There are certified farmers markets popping up everywhere. Sure wish I could grow my own - but like a lot of you - I lose most of it to the rodents and birds!!! You should see what we go through to try to minimize the attack on our grapevines!
judging from the few people adding to this forum about the dangers of using Roundup, as opposed to the hundred or so who were talking about keeping cats out of gardens, it would appear that Monsanto is going to prevail. how very sad. min
So true, Min. In their defense, gardening gives us a respite from all the political garbage that is thrown at us on a daily basis. However, a friend of mine sent me a huge article on Monsanto and said "what to do?" My response: Get involved, become an activist, stay informed. At the very least buy local, know your farmer, read labels, buy seeds from places like Seeds of Change - grown your own! Just don't turn a deaf ear.....
Yes, but for some, this is old news. The bad news about Roundup is that how bad it is has been preached for many years...nobody was listening.
I just read the article in the Huffinton post, and the lack of actual data presented seemed pretty typical to me. What sort of dosage was given to these rats? Was it topical, intervenious, digestive, etc??? Seems like a pretty typical scare tactic write up to me. This is why i am curious as to to dosages where they saw birth defects. How much roundup does one have to consume for this to happen?
If you look at the original MSDS for Glyphosate it states "Rats given doses up to 3,500 mg/kg on days 6 to 19 of pregnancy had offspring with no teratogenic effects, but other toxic effects were observed in both the mothers and the fetuses. No toxic effects to the fetuses occurred at 1,000 mg/kg/day."
Pretty average female weight is 67kg, so that would be nearly 7grams per dose, or 234g at the higher dosage.
Not exactly sure how one goes about even consuming 7 grams of roundup per day, that would be a heck of a lot of veggies, and at 234g that would be drinking nearly a 12oz pop can serving of straight out of the bottle 40% roundup.
I am not trying to start an argument here, but rather just curious to see some more info.
As a comparison, pyridine is a known teratogen, but i doubt that stops many people from brewing up a cup of coffee in the morning, taking vitamins, or smoking cigarettes.
Cats in gardens? I welcome them. They hunt the gophers. I won't put out poisons because I don't want to inadvertently poison a cat, hawk, or owl. I've had a red shouldered hawk hunting in my yard before.
Won't use roundup either because my kids played barefoot in the garden. And I didn't want them walking through it.
Yeah my yard is weedy but I understand it's more welcoming to birdlife that way.
I really don't feel Monsanto or Scotts are firms worthy of any of my cash, so it's less about any one individual product for me.
Monsanto stock has been doing well, so apparently the views expressed here are not universal. Al
i'm sure that Monsanto is BANKING on the fact that most people will take the easiest way to do do things, with no thought of checking on the possible long-term consequences of their actions. Min
There is a problem with the anti-Round Up issue.
First all the anti-Round Up verbatim you read about it started immediately when it was put on the market. It give a lot of people the feeling the issue has more to do with people hating Monsanto, herbicides, or that group of people who can't wait to say something bad about any method of gardening that isn't "organic."
All the negative "information" comes from the same organizations that are appear to be only interested in promoting organic gardening. These articles cite similar articles from similar organizations and are very vague about where the research comes from. Anyone can write an article stating "a leading group of researchers" made some claim. Who are the researchers? Where is the peer review? It is kind of odd that with the amount of universities we have in this country noted for agricultural research it is difficult to find much research backing up the claims of these organizations.
These articles often end with a paragraph about killing weeds organically by smothering them with cardboard, newspaper, solarizing, or whatever. This makes it clear they are trying to promote an idea.
No mention of how the misuse of the product may be to blame. If Round Up is in the water that means someone didn't apply it according to the label. If you bother to read the label it makes it very clear not to contaminate water with the product and not to apply it before it is going to rain.
Research of any scientific value would take many variables into consideration and some effort into how Round Up got into the environment. Where there water samples taken from agricultural and urban runoff to determine if the problem is from farmers or gardeners? What steps could be taken to reduce the problem in the future?
These articles only state Round Up is evil because some mysterious team of scientists said so, if there is a hell Monsanto is going there, and everyone should bury their front lawns in newspaper, cardboard and plastic for the next six months if they want to kill it.
That is why most people ignore it.
I'm guessing that those that are in support of using pesticides, herbicides, etc., are not concerned about our water supply. Think about what is sprayed continually by
farmers, home gardeners. Do you think that it does not seep into ground water even if it is used properly? and it only happens when it rains? I don't know where you live, Toyon, but if you peruse your local water quality site you can get a good idea of the enormous efforts that are made to improve our water quality. You will also find information regarding water samples from your sources of drinking water. The research is there....but you have to care. Promoting ecologically sound ideas is what we all should be listening to.....hmmm....killing weeds with newspaper and cardboard...what a concept!
This is the same "Hate Monsanto" mantra I hear on various other organic web sites. I'm not a hater nor a supporter, I'm sort of a "life in moderation" kind of person. When I went through my Master Gardener course in Indiana (Purdue University), many of us asked about Round Up (glyphosate), and the affects to the environment and people. We were told it did not leach into groundwater readily at all, and had a short half life. We all did our homework, and found that Round Up, when used by the label directions, is actually very safe. Here is the info from the EPA Ground & Drinking water website, glyphosate technical fact sheet about glyphosate:
"...Glyphosate is most often applied as a spray of the isopropylamine salt and is removed from the atmosphere by gravitational settling. After glyphosate is applied to forests, fields, and other land by spraying, it is strongly adsorbed to soil, remains in the upper soil layers, and has a low propensity for leaching. Iron and aluminum clays and organic matter adsorbed more glyphosate than sodium and calcium clays and was readily bound to kaolinite, illite, bentonite, charcoal and muck but not to ethyl cellulose.
Glyphosate readily and completely biodegrades in soil even under low temperature conditions. Its average half-life in soil is about 60 days. Biodegradation in foliage and litter is somewhat faster. In field studies, residues are often found the following year.
Glyphosate may enter aquatic systems through accidental spraying, spray drift, or surface runoff. It dissipates rapidly from the water column as a result of adsorption and possibly biodegradation. The half-life in water is a few days. Sediment is the primary sink for glyphosate. After spraying, glyphosate levels in sediment rise and then decline to low levels in a few months. Due to its ionic state in water, glyphosate would not be expected to volatilize from water or soil."
I think one of the great things I learned as a MG is IPM principles - Integrated Pest Management principles. Which is to try to use the least toxic method of resolving an issue first, then moving to more toxic measures only if necessary. I like to use pickling vinegar (10% acetic acid) for my weeds that pop up between cracks in my pavers or pavement, which after 2 or 3 applications, will kill the weeds down to the roots. Or pulling, or covering with newspaper or landscape cloth. But on occasion, I resort to Round Up, taking great care to only use it when it's really necessary, and carefully follow the label directions. As several of our esteemed list members have pointed out, there are some much more toxic chemicals that folks use on a much more regular basis without even giving it a thought. I'm an RN, having spent quite a few years in the NICU, so I'm pretty cognizant of birth defects. I also want to take care of my little piece of the planet, as well as my own health, but I just won't jump on the "death to Monsanto" bandwagon. This attitude towards Monsanto has risen to hysterical proportions. Am I saying Monsanto does all good things? No. Just saying that we have to really, really think about these blanket condemnations against large corporations. There are other motivations at work with this "death to Monsanto" rage, and sadly, some folks have become pawns in these types of disinformation campaigns. I would suggest taking some serious time to investigate - seriously investigate - both sides of the story before castigating an entire organization based on what you hear on various chat lists. Do your homework thoroughly, read both sides of this debate. I bet you'll find the answer will lie somewhere the middle.
Here is a link that might be useful: EPA Ground & Drinking Water Glyphosate Fact Sheet
I do not advocate any kind of pesticides, herbicides, etc., when it can be taken care of in a more natural and healthful way, and it usually can be. It does take more effort, but it can be done. As for the "death to Monsanto" bandwagon, as long as Monsanto continues to genetically modify food, and sues land-owners when their ready-Roundup seed blows into someone's land and grows, I am on that bandwagon! We all have to do what is best for ourselves and our families. Working at a university for over 32 years, I learned what research/data/statistics are all about. These can be manipulated in favor of those who will benefit the most.
You are right Eloise, when you have as much money as Monsanto you have a lot of clout. CNBC news reported on June 20, 2011, in part, that "The company also lobbied Congress and USDA on issues surrounding consolidation and antiturst law in agriculture...The company also lobbied the U.S. Trade Representative and Department of State on issues surrounding foreign regulation and trade of biotech seeds" to a tune of $1.2 million in the first quarter of this year. Guess that's a savings compared to the same amount the first quarter of last year - $2.5. Way too much control..
Founded in 2009, Earth Open Source is a non-profit organization incorporated in the U.K.
How long has glysophate been around? I'm going to keep my opinion open. I question a group just founded in 2009 and two years later, after a "comprehensive" study comes up with this.
By the way, Monsanto's patent on glysophate expired over ten years ago.
Monsanto's patent could have expired, but they are still causing great harm to farmers, and possibly to us with GMO crops. For anyone interested, a suit has been filed in the U.S. to protect organic and heirloom farms:
I hope others jump on the bandwagon