Glyphosate: a revisit

Back in the UK when I was a lowly agri student, the prospect of reducing costs in an agriculture enterprise by being able to happily spray a broad spectrum herbicide, that apparently had no affect on fauna or the soil, and having crops that were resistant to this, was interesting.

I had always been uncomfortable with the use of chemicals, but willing to use them in certain situations, when I could ensure that they were being used as safely as possible.  So, to me, glyphosate was "just another chemical".  One of the many that were used in agriculture.




Shortly after my career in agriculture met a premature end, there were concerns raised by Friends of the Earth regarding glyphosate and the related glufosinate ammonium (DL-Phosphinothricin), after a European Commission Report on their usage in the EU was leaked.  This report apparently recommended that the products should not be approved for use in the E.U., but as the report was confidential, I was never able to find it to read it myself and my interest in the matter waned.


Over the years, I've picked up on concerns regarding glyphosate, and related products, having possible harmful effects on beneficial insects and spiders, glyphosate resistance in target weeds and concerns over the possibility of harmful effects on livestock, and eventually humans, from long term exposure to the chemicals when being sprayed, as well as the ingestion of 'roundup ready' crops.

Yet, without the scientific evidence from long-term field trials, I'd never really paid any more attention.



Since then however, with widespread reports of serious ill effects, I am finding my "discomfort" at their use is becoming more of a strong dislike and perhaps even an outright aversion.

Just some of the things that give cause for concern...

In the mid-1990s, glyphosate was reviewed in Australia following advice from the Environmental Protection Agency, which saw it's usage around waterways being tightened up and labelling requirements changed.  Prior to this, glyphosate was used for control of aquatic weeds!!

The current position in Australia can be found here.

The change in stance of Monsanto, the company behind Roundup and RR crops, regarding glyphosate resistance in weeds has had some impact on my views.  They appear to have gone from denial that there was any chance of resistant weeds appearing - to accepting that it was possible, but that the problem was manageable.  Now it would appear that Monsanto have not only accepted that the problem is not manageable, but are attempting to cover their backs financially by stating that "Roundup agricultural herbicide warranties will not cover the failure to control glyphosate-resistant weed populations."

My feeling is that if they can backtrack on this matter and are concerned more for their profit margins, than the farmers whose likelihoods are being ruined and the health of the planet as a whole, then what else can we expect in future?


Revelations from the scientific community: Don Huber, a plant pathologist and retired Purdue University professor, has been researching glyphosate for around 22 years and has been warning the scientific and political communities for a number of years regarding it's adverse effects.


Huber noticed a few years back that there was an increase in disease in crops that had been treated with glyphosate.  His research into the causes discovered that glyphosate immobilised plant nutrients, in particular manganese, copper, potassium, magnesium, iron, calcium and zinc, so that they were no longer available for uptake by the plants.  By doing this, it effectively starves and weakens the exposed plant.  They are then more susceptible to disease and certain pests.


Huber has said:
"Glyphosate is the single most important agronomic factor predisposing some plants to both disease and toxins. These toxins can produce a serious impact on the health of animals and humans."


More recently, he has written to both the US Secretary of Agriculture and the European Commission regarding a microscopic pathogen, apparently new to science, that can seriously impact the health of plants and animals.  This pathogen is found in higher concentrations in RR soy-beans and corn, therefore suggesting a link with either the RR gene, or Roundup itself.


Among the very frightening effects of this pathogen, are high fertility rates recorded in dairy cows (over 20%) and spontaneous abortions in cattle (45%).


"For example, 450 of 1,000 pregnant heifers fed wheatlege experienced spontaneous abortions. Over the same period, another 1,000 heifers from the same herd that were raised on hay had no abortions. High concentrations of the pathogen were confirmed on the wheatlage, which likely had been under weed management using glyphosate." 


More from Don Huber can be found on YouTube and, particularly worth a look, are his interviews with Dr. Mercola.


In Argentina and Paraguay, there have been widespread reports of environmental damage.  Perhaps more terrifying, there have also been increased medical reports of infertility, still birth, miscarriage and high levels of birth defects and cancers, in areas where soy crops are sprayed with glyphosate.  The first reports occurred just 2 years after the first big harvests of RR soy and, in the Chaco province, had increased nearly 4-fold over the province in 10 years.


A recent study conducted in Argentina found that glyphosate caused malformations in both frog and chicken embryos, at doses far lower than those used in agricultural spraying.  The full report can be purchased here and there have also been further reports regarding birth defects and whether or not Monsanto, and the European Commission, failed to advise the public of these risks.


I now eagerly await the forthcoming reviews of glyphosate in the US and the EU and cannot wait to see what scientific, peer reviewed and independently backed up, evidence Monsanto gives for their continued approval.