USDA Scientist Reveals All
#####################

Glyphosate Hazards to Crops, Soils, Animals, and Consumers

Don Huber painted a devastating picture of glyphosate and GM crops at UK
Parliament Dr Eva Sirinathsinghji

In less than an hour, Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University and
USDA senior scientist (see Box) delivered to the UK Houses of Parliament a
damning indictment of glyphosate agriculture as a most serious threat to the
environment, livestock, and human health [1].

Don Huber

Don Huber, Emeritus Professor at Purdue University and senior scientist on
USDA�s National Plant Disease Recovery System, has been a plant physiologist and
pathologist for over 40 years. His academic career began with 8 years as a
cereal pathologist at the University of Idaho, and the next 35 years at Purdue
University where he specialised in soil-borne disease control, physiology of
disease, and microbial ecology. For the past 20 years, he has conducted
extensive research into the effects of glyphosate on crops, in response to the
increase in crop diseases on glyphosate-applied fields.

Since his letter to the US Secretary of State Tom Vilsak was leaked in February
2011, there has been a great deal of controversy over what Huber described as a
pathogen "new to science" and abundant in glyphosate-tolerant GM crops (see [2]
Emergency! Pathogen New to Science Found in Roundup Ready GM Crops?, SiS 50). As
he concluded in the letter: "We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of
increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be
instrumental to understanding and solving this problem".

His talk linked glyphosate to reduced nutrient availability in plants,
increasing plant diseases, the emergence of a new pathogen, animal illness and
possible effects on human health (see [3, 4] Glyphosate Tolerant Crops Bring
Death and Disease, Scientists Reveal Glyphosate Poisons Crops and Soil, SiS 47).

Pathogen new to science

The conversion of US agriculture to monochemical 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 immobilises nutrients required to maintain plant health and
resistance to disease. This weakening of the plants defence 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
foetal 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 characterise 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.

Read the rest of this report here
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/USDA_scientist_reveals_all.php

But maybe the problem is that there isn't that big a DNA database out there on fungal pathogens.

So many of the depts. of biological sciences are now dependent upon funding from biotech corps. to erect and fund research facilities and hire graduates of such programs.

$7,000 and some clean DNA will get you the sequence. Annotation (linking genes and known or unknown functions to the millions of nucleotides in the genomic sequence) is still a hurdle. There is a growing need for independent, non-profit research work of this type.

Now Monsanto has created a $$$ new market for a new pathogen.

Classic Job Creators. Why do you hate freedom?
/sarcasm

With the same, perhaps naive, logic, I try really hard never to buy and eat foods whose label ends with "urowyudjej", added to "preserve freshness". I don't want any food entering my body that won't rot.

Hay

Back to the topic... the use of so many dangerous chemicals in agriculture was/is bound to come back and bite the industry in the rear. It's scary to think about the possibilities created in the lab environment, and loosed upon the public.

What university wants to risk losing secret funding from the biotech industry?

Dupont. The miracles of science.

Back to the topic... the use of so many dangerous chemicals in agriculture was/is bound to come back and bite the industry in the rear. It's scary to think about the possibilities created in the lab environment, and loosed upon the public.

Last year at the mulch yard the young man asked me if I wanted the mulch that is pretreated with preemergent. Good gawd, man! Hell no!

COLUMBUS, OH � It turns out that application strategy is just as important as the types of mulches or herbicides used for weed control.

The first-year results of the two-year study at Ohio State University revealed that herbicide applied between mulch and bare soil had benefits in reducing weed growth and was effective up to 120 days, compared to herbicide applied on top of mulch or with just mulch or herbicides applied alone.
"This study is unique in that this is the first time herbicide trials have been taken to the field," said Hannah Mathers, an Ohio State University Extension nursery and landscape specialist. Researchers tried 38 treatments. Of those, 20 had a rating of seven or above, which is considered commercially acceptable.

Some pretreated mulches (mulches sprayed with herbicides, dried, bagged and applied to the site afterward) offered even better control than those applied over or under mulches.

Imagine spreading that mulch on a breezy day, passing it on to the neighbors and their children. Imagine the wind carrying that dust from the mulch yard when loading.

Danger!

Even Dr. Huber's former coworkers at Purdue say his claims are unsubstantiated.

-Ron-

*** Don Huber Discredited by His Own University and his Claims REFUTED by REAL Experts

*** LACK OF CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE from West Coast Environmental Law and Josette Weir

*** Health Canada Consumer Product Safety Re-Evaluation Note REV2010-02 Glyphosate

*** Glyphosate Is SCIENTIFICALLY SAFE

Please go to the following link ...

http://pesticidetruths.com/toc/glyphosate/

WILLIAM H. GATHERCOLE AND NORAH G

NORAHG is the National Organization Responding Against HUJE that seek to harm the Green space industry.

NORAHG is a NATIONAL NON PROFIT NON PARTISAN organization that does not accept money from corporations or governments or trade associations, and represents NO VESTED INTERESTS WHATSOEVER.

NORAHG is dedicated to reporting the work of RESPECTED and HIGHLY RATED EXPERTS who promote ENVIRONMENTAL REALISM and PESTICIDE TRUTHS.

http://pesticidetruths.com/

Totally follows Monsato's MO:

Q: Tell me about your involvement in uncovering who was orchestrating the attacks on the Berkeley researcher, Ignacio Chapela.

GM WATCH: That really is a tangled web...

No, wait, I get it. That post is actually a radical Hin-viro-mentalist trying to make Monsanto look bad by hiring internet trolls.

Check out these odd comments:

LET'S DUMP PESTICIDES in the Campbell River

YOU DIRTY HIPPIES JUST HATE GOLF

and my favorite:

The Golf Industry Should Tell Anti-Golf Activists to Get OFF Our grASS and Roast In H#ll

--Lena (aka Nancy Drew of the Tundra)

I'm posting this here since it's related to the subject at hand -- Assange has some info on Monsanto:

The US embassy in Paris advised Washington to start a military-style trade war against any European Union country which opposed genetically modified (GM) crops, newly released WikiLeaks cables show.

In response to moves by France to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety in late 2007, the ambassador, Craig Stapleton, a friend and business partner of former US president George Bush, asked Washington to penalise the EU and particularly countries which did not support the use of GM crops.

"Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits".

[...]

In addition, the cables show US diplomats working directly for GM companies such as Monsanto. "In response to recent urgent requests by [Spanish rural affairs ministry] state secretary Josep Puxeu and Monsanto, post requests renewed US government support of Spain's science-based agricultural biotechnology position through high-level US government intervention."

There's their "self-made-business" model (snicker) again. Were it not for their dirty and outright illegal behaviour, nowhere would it get them.

It's already been proven that nothing good came out of Agent Orange, DDT, and other chemicals mentioned.

We're poisoning our world... and the shills keep squeezing out of the woodwork hoping to stop the protests that lessen profit. Whose profit, though? I hope the shills are getting paid what it's worth...

As a footnote... I don't even like golf. It wouldn't bother me if every golf course were plowed under to grow organic foods for human and/or animal consumption.

I'll be more than happy to believe what he has to say when he produces some actual proof. In the mean time, this sounds like little more than the standard nonsense you see associated with genetic engineering, especially given that he's going around talking about it on websites instead of presenting his claims to the scientific community, which should have been his first step.

Yeah.

Right.

In other words, when deregulation allows even more pollution to come pouring out of the coal fired plants, its up to somebody else to prove that this is a problem, not the power plant to prove that its safe.