Agronomist

Now you will have to prove to readers that the researchers in the scientific papers I have provided are all frauds (or idiots) in support of your innuendo. You will also need to tell us why the scientific community has not ostracised the scientists who have administered "inappropriate amounts" of glyphosate to trial animals to "fudge" the potential impacts on human health.

You will also need to tell us why you harp on glyphosate metabolites being tightly bound to soils when analytical surveys reveal that rivers around the planet are polluted with glyphosate and its metabolites (including areas which do not carry out aerial spraying.)

And since you are adamant that glyphosate formulations are harmless to biodiversity and human health (when used "according to directions") you will also need to supply evidence to support that claim.

While Monsanto and you maintain that Roundup is safe, many others disagree, including the New York State Attorney General. Based on a thorough investigation, the Attorney General’s office filed a lawsuit arguing that the company’s advertising inaccurately portrayed Monsanto’s glyphosate-containing products as safe and as not causing any harmful effects to people or the environment.

In another case, Monsanto paid a US$225,000 fine for having mislabeled Roundup containers, not once, but on 75 separate occasions.

No doubt you would have the same opinion of another "harmless" organophosphate pesticide, Fenthion, where the conclusive evidence in WA this week, revealed that hundreds of ibises, ravens, gulls, ducks and a pelican were found frothing and convulsing before dying from being contaminated with Fenthion?

Protagoras, you obviously assume Glyphosate alternatives are somehow safer. Check out sprayseed for hair raising.

Lets address "rubbery science"(although you didn't take it in the context it was delivered).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17988468
Does this case study suggest to you that flouride toothpaste should not be used, as evidently flouride can be fatal. If your answer is yes, then read no further.

Having established that chemicals in large enough concentrations can indeed be harmful we then have to address how we come in contact with them. Undiluted glyphosate will undoubtably cause eye irritation, and possible dermal reaction - probably why they state "use protective equipment" on the label. The rest of the commonly attributable symptoms are from ingesting large doses of product, which could occur for any chemical. Take aspirin, potentailly fatal at 30grams.



"Monsanto et al's "revolutionary" pesticides have fouled every ecosystem on the planet, maiming and killing off the planet's biodiversity and are held responsible for unknown numbers of human and animal mortalities and illnesses over 6 or 7 decades."

Lovely spiel, but we're talking about Glyphosate here, Roundup if you prefer. My guess is the above refers to PCBs and agent orange, references to which are commonly found on anti GM sites. Probably because they haven't found anything wrong with the GM products and can only attempt to insinuate that they are a timebomb.

Protagoras, like I said you need to look at the facts. There is nothing per se wrong with the research done in these three papers, except that the amount of exposure and type of exposure has no relationship to the real world. This is why regulatory agencies around the world discount studies like these.

And yes I can show you what is wrong with these studies in relation to real world situations. Lets take them one at a time:

The teratogenic potential of the herbicide glyphosate-Roundup® in Wistar rats
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TCR-47WDB6R-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=2ee88cf534a785731a4b7c49423a44a1

“Dams were treated orally with water or 500, 750 or 1000 mg/kg glyphosate from day 6 to 15 of pregnancy.”

1000 mg/kg is equivalent to an average person consuming 65g of glyphosate (or a cupful of concentrated Roundup) every day during pregnancy.

Effect of the Herbicide Glyphosate on Enzymatic Activity in Pregnant Rats and Their Fetuses
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WDS-458W6TK-32&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=03f56e365b620e58bc52a4d94809012f

“The rats were separated into three groups (eight rats/group); I, control group which drank tap water; II, group which drank glyphosate solution 0.5% w/v in tap water (dose: 0.2 ml glyphosate/ml water); and III, group which drank glyphosate solution 1% w/v in tap water (dose: 0.4 ml glyphosate/ml water).”

These rats were given a 5 or 10 g/L glyphosate solution to drink every day for 21 days during pregnancy. Using the US recommended 2.4L of water per day for women, 10 g/L would be 24g of glyphosate per day (or about a third of a cup of Roundup concentrate).

Clastogenic Effects of Glyphosate in Bone Marrow Cells of Swiss Albino Mice
http://hindawi.com/GetPDF.aspx?doi=10.1155/2009/308985

“A single dose of glyphosate was given intraperitoneally (i.p) to the animals at a concentration of 25 and 50 mg/kg b.wt.”

50 mg/kg body weight for an average person is like shooting up 3.5g of glyphosate (or 9 mL of concentrated Roundup).

All three are highly unrealistic levels of exposure. Of course the reasons these high levels of exposure were used in the experiments was because more realistic exposure does not produce effects.

Why should farmers in Australia listen to these two activists from the NGO ETC in Canada knocking GM crops? Canada is a GM exporting nation: Canada does not want opposition from Australia and Europe for its exports so funds ETC to prevent crop advancement elsewhere.

The best response to climate change is crop introduction, and not genetic diversity and local adaptation. Nearly all crops in Australia and North America are introduced from elsewhere and are adapted to the various `new' climates from the start.

ETC also has the nasty habit of preventing farmers in developing countries adopting GM crops. ETC believes that local crops are locally adapted: so they are, but to local pest and disease which they escape by being moved to other continents.

In trying to maintain diversity in local crops in developing countries such as Ethiopia, ETC projects are supporting huge reservoirs of crop pests and diseases. The wheat rust Ug99 is maintained by traditional diverse farming in Ethiopia: it is now a threat to wheat production globally. ETC should stop meddling with farming in other countries and stay at home.