Roundup Herbicide Toxic To Life In Parts Per Billion Range

via: GreenMedInfo
by: Sayer Ji
July 24, 2012

New research on the DNA-damaging effects of the popular herbicide known as Roundup® indicates that it can do significant harm to fish even after short-term, environmentally low concentration exposures in the parts per billion range (μg /L).[i]

Published this month (July, 2012) in the journal Environmental  Monitoring and Assessmentsresearchers set out to evaluate the genotoxic effects that the herbicide Roundup®, and its primary ingredient glyphosate, can have on a species of catfish known as Corydorasa paleatus.  When exposed to minute concentrations of Roundup (at a concentration of 6.67 μg/L, corresponding to 3.20 μg/L glyphosate) for 3,6 and 9 days, the following effects were observed:  “[T]he comet assay showed a high rate of DNA damage in group exposed to Roundup(®) for all treatment times, both for blood and hepatic cells.” The researchers summarized their findings:

We conclude that for the low concentration used in this research, the herbicide shows potential genotoxic effects. Future research will be important in evaluating the effects of this substance, whose presence in the environment is ever-increasing.

Discussion

First, it is very important to understand how low a μg /L or parts per billion concentration is.  One way to visualize it is to think of one drop in one billion drops of water, or what amounts to one drop of water in an entire swimming pool.[ii]

Owing to the fact that glyphosate is now a ubiquitous contaminant in our environment, having beenfound in most U.S. air and rain samples tested,[iii] as well as being measured beyond the limit of quantification (higher than 2.5 ug/L) in 41% of 140 groundwater samples collected from Catalonia Spain, this new finding has profound implications for environmental and human health alike. With over 88,000 tons of the stuff used in the US in 2007, according to the USGS, and with an ever-expanding volume being applied to increasingly glyphosate-resistant GM crops, the problem of exposure is only going to get worse in the future – that is, if we continue to support the growth of glyphosate-dependent GM crop industries.

Monsanto, the originator of glyphosate and its most popular branded formulation, Roundup®, once marketed their herbicide “as safe as table salt,” and claimed it was “highly biodegradable.” These claims have now been disproved. Like Agent Orange, another Monsanto co-creation (along with Dow Chemicals, and several other government contractors), this herbicide exhibits a broad range of biocidal (life-killing) properties. (Note: the concept of a “weedkiller” is absurd. These chemicals do not selectively kill only targeted plants. Also, a “weed” is simply a plant whose virtues we have yet discovered [Emerson], or which is encroaching on a plant we favor).

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

USDA Prepares to Green-Light Gnarliest GMO Soy Yet

via: MotherJones
by: Tom Philpott
July 18, 2012

In early July, on the sleepy Friday after Independence Day, the USDA quietly signaledits intention to green-light a new genetically engineered soybean seed from Dow AgroSciences. The product is designed to produce soy plants that withstand 2,4-D, a highly toxic herbicide (and, famously, the less toxic component in the notorious Vietnam War-era defoliant Agent Orange).

Readers may remember that during an even-sleepier period—the week between Christmas and the New Year—the USDA made a similar move on Dow’s 2,4-D-ready corn.

If the USDA deregulates the two products—as it has telegraphed its intention to do—Dow will enjoy a massive profit opportunity. Every year, about half of all US farmland is planted in corn and soy. Currently, Dow’s rival Monsanto has a tight grip on weed management in corn-and-soy country. Upward of 90 percent of soy and 70 percent of corn is engineered to withstand another herbicide called glyphosate through highly profitable Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seed lines. And after so many years of lashing so much land with the same herbicide, glyphosate-resistant superweeds are now vexing farmers and “alarming” weed control experts throughout the Midwest.

Continue Reading At: MotherJones.com

Exposing Monsanto – The Biotech Tyranny Multinational Company [Part 1]

TheRedPillGuide
July 2, 2012

Monsanto is a BioTech Fortune 500 Company whose main focuses are Genetically Modified Seeds, crop protection chemicals, as well as plant biotechnological traits.¹  It would seem that Monsanto – just like any other company would claim – has the “best” interest of its’ ‘consumer’.  Perhaps that was the case in the past, but their current track record speaks volumes which permeate otherwise.

Monsanto states on its very website that it could not exist without farmers.²  Lo and behold, in pure draconian standard, they have done nigh everything to pressure small farmers out of business – even coercing farmers into using the dangerous herbicide Round-Up.³  This conglomerate has even gone on record admiting filing 144 lawsuits againts farmers while concurrently settling another 700 cases for “patent infringement” that involves the contamination of non-genetically modified [Non-GMO] and organic crops with genetically modified traits and materials.⁴  Monsanto has even been sued for knowingly poisoning farmers.⁵

Furthermore, another disconcerting point about the Agriculture Giant’s audacious approach is the fact they have undertaken the job of attempting to assimilate as many seeds as possible without regard.  Monsanto has deemed many seeds their property through pattenting, not only in order to receive royalties but also to control nature itself, carrying out something that is arguably more insidious.⁶

As Rockefeller puppet and globalist Henry Kissinger stated once:

“Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.”

Those of you who have done your homework/research and read the Federal Reserve information by Dean Henderson [and countless others, for that matter] know that, the four horsemen of Banking [Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup & Wells Fargo] own – literally – the four horsemen of Oil [Exxon Mobile, Royal Dutch/Shell, BP Amoco & Chevron Texaco] thus controlling energy.⁷  And through the proxy Private [Un]Federal Reserve, the same Banking Cartels also control the money supply.  What does that leave? – Food.

Who is beginning to control a large portion of the food? You guessed it, Monsanto.

Succinctly stated, if the biotech company really wanted to flat out control the food supply, then they – hypothetically speaking – are doing a damned good job at it.

Monsanto now supplies 90 percent of the Genetically Engineered Seeds used in the US market.⁸

It is incredibly outrageous that in the United States GMO [genetically modified organisms] food is not required to be labelled, which makes it impossible to know what is in your food.⁹  With countless side effects that GMO foods pose, the only ways to really protect yourself and your family are by purchasing products that are labelled organic or growing them yourself.

Genetically modified foods have been shown to have detrimental side effects.

In a study conducted discussed in the International Journal of Biological Sciences in 2009, the dangers of GMO were shown quite evidently:

“There is a world-wide debate concerning the safety and regulatory approval process of genetically modified (GM) crops and foods. In order to scientifically address this issue, it is necessary to have access to toxicological tests, preferably on mammals, performed over the longest time-scales involving detailed blood and organ system analyses.”the introduction states. “For the first time in the world, we’ve proven that GMO are neither sufficiently healthy nor proper to be commercialized…Each time, for all three GMOs, the kidneys and liver, which are the main organs that react to a chemical food poisoning, had problems,” indicated Gilles-Eric Séralini, an expert member of the Commission for Biotechnology Reevaluation.^{10, 11}

There is a surplus of information out there outlining the dangers that Monsanto imposes upon us.  Another great way to learn about this confounding company is by watching the best documentary regarding the detestable Monsanto, The World According To Monsanto by Marie-Monique Robin, which is at the bottom of this article or by clicking on the hyperlink.  It outlines some of the topics covered here and delves into many other deleterious ones as well.

If you wish to know how to help yourself and your family, please read:

“How To Avoid GMO’s.”

Don’t forget to also take a gander at:

“GMO Alert: Top 10 Genetically Modified Foods To Avoid Eating”.

Sources:

[^{1, 2}] http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/Pages/default.aspx

[³] http://www.naturalnews.com/035592_Big_Tobacco_Monsanto_birth_defects.html

[⁴] http://www.naturalnews.com/035036_Monsanto_farmers_France.html

[⁵] http://www.naturalnews.com/035579_farmers_Monsanto_lawsuits.html

[⁶] http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-world-according-to-monsanto/

[⁷] http://theredpillguide.wordpress.com/2012/02/23/the-federal-reserve-cartel-the-eight-families-part-1-of-5/

[⁸] http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-declared-worst-company-of-2011/

[⁹] http://www.naturalnews.com/031569_GMO_GMOs_food.html

[¹⁰] http://naturalsociety.com/monsantos-gmo-corn-contributing-to-weight-gain-disrupts-organs/

[¹¹] http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm

Is Fructose As Addictive As Alcohol?

via: GreenMedInfo
by: Sayer Ji
July 2, 2012

Fructose, which literally means “fruit sugar,”* sounds so sweet and innocent. And indeed, when incorporated into the diet in moderate amounts in the form of fruit – always organic and raw, when possible – it’s about as pure and wholesome as as a nutrient can get.

Not so for industrially processed fructose in isolate form, which may be as addictive as alcohol,[i] and perhaps even morphine [ii] [iii]and which according to USDA research published in 2008 into major trends in U.S. food consumption patterns, 1970-2005, we now consume at the rate of at least 50 lbs a year — the 800 ounce gorilla in the room.[iv]

Our dietary exposure to fructose, of course, is primarily through either sugar (sucrose), which is a disaccharide comprised of 50% fructose and 50% glucose by weight, or through high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which is mostly a 55% fructose and 45% glucose blend of monosaccharides, but goes as high as 90% fructose and 10% glucose in HFCS-90 form.  Pasteurized fruit juices are another concentrated source of fructose, but increasingly, even pasteurized fruit juice is being adulterated with additional sugar or HFCS for reasons that have mostly to do with protecting the manufacturer’s bottom line.

Because high-fructose corn syrup contains free-form monosaccharides of fructose and glucose, it cannot be considered biologically equivalent to sucrose, which has a glycosidic bond that links the fructose and glucose together, and which slows its break down in the body. The attempt by the HFCS industry to re-label their product as “corn sugar,” which was recently denied by the FDA,[v]belies their anxiety about the differences, and also reveals growing awareness among the public of isolated fructose’s inherently toxic properties.

The reality is that fructose can cause far more damage than glucose, and we must look beyond caloric equivalences to understand this. While in times of need (e.g. starvation), fructose is as effective as glucose in replenishing glycogen stores, in “hypercaloric” states of excess consumption, it can lead to a process of glycation

For example, in vitro studies show that fructose damages proteins seven times more rapidily than glucose through a process known as protein fructosylation, which is when a sugar undergoes a Malliard reaction with a protein, which basically results in the caramelization of blood and tissue contents, “gumming up the works.” For example, if you try baking a pastry made with fructose, instead of white sugar, it will brown much more rapidly as a result of this Malliard reactivity.

So toxic is “purified” fructose that here at GreenMedInfo we have indexed research on over 70 adverse health effects of industrially-isolated fructose, which include:

• Insulin Resistance (32 studies)
• Fatty Liver (22 studies)
• Obesity (13 studies)
• Metabolic Syndrome (19 studies)
• Hypertension (10 studies)
• Elevated Uric Acid (9 studies)
• Elevated Triglycerides (14 studies)
• Belly Fat (2 studies)
• Cardiovascular Diseases (4 studies)
• Liver Stress (6 studies)
• Pancreatic Cancer (2 studies)
• Leptin Resistance (2 studies)

To view the first hand research on 70+ forms of fructose toxicity click the hyperlink.

Like many foods consumed en masse, which may have a lesser known dark side (e.g. wheat), our global fixation on fructose may reveal something about it’s hitherto underappreciated addictive properties.

Fructose’s Drug-like Hold On Our Bodies

Fructose addiction and alcoholism, in fact, share a number of parallels. In an article titled, “Fructose: metabolic, hedonic, and societal parallels with ethanol,” published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association in 2010, Robert H. Lustig, MD broke new ground by identifying the great similarities between these two substances:

Rates of fructose consumption continue to rise nationwide and have been linked to rising rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. Because obesity has been equated with addiction, and because of their evolutionary commonalities, we chose to examine the metabolic, hedonic, and societal similarities between fructose and its fermentation byproduct ethanol. Elucidation of fructose metabolism in liver and fructose action in brain demonstrate three parallelisms with ethanol. First, hepatic fructose metabolism is similar to ethanol, as they both serve as substrates for de novo lipogenesis, and in the process both promote hepatic insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and hepatic steatosis. Second, fructosylation of proteins with resultant superoxide formation can result in hepatic inflammation similar to acetaldehyde, an intermediary metabolite of ethanol. Lastly, by stimulating the “hedonic pathway” of the brain both directly and indirectly, fructose creates habituation, and possibly dependence; also paralleling ethanol. Thus, fructose induces alterations in both hepatic metabolism and central nervous system energy signaling, leading to a “vicious cycle” of excessive consumption and disease consistent with metabolic syndrome. On a societal level, the treatment of fructose as a commodity exhibits market similarities to ethanol. Analogous to ethanol, societal efforts to reduce fructose consumption will likely be necessary to combat the obesity epidemic.

While the parallel between fructose and alcohol consumption may seem strange, the intimate connection between what we eat and our psychological health is beginning to gain wider recognition, especially considering new research linking aggression to trans fatty acid consumption, episodes of acute wheat mania, and the widespread presence of opiates in common foods.

It may come as a surprise to many, but there is a fructose-opiate infatuation deeply embedded within mammalian biology, which has been the subject of scientific investigation since the late 80′s. A study published in the European Journal of Pharmacology in 1988 found that both glucose and fructose were capable of antagonizing morphine-induced pain killing effects, likely due to the direct opioid effects of these sugars or their metabolic byproducts on the central nervous system. In fact, the researchers found that fructose was more potent than glucose in accomplishing these effects.

Could the narcotic properties of fructose, or one of its metabolic byproducts, explain why we would consume such vast quantities of something so inherently harmful to our bodies?

As it turns out, not only has fructose’s manifold toxic properties been studied, but researchers have also investigated what natural substances reduce fructose’s adverse effects.

GreenMedInfo contains research on 21 natural compounds with fructose toxicity attenuating action, including

• Berberine
• Fish Oil
• Astaxanthin
• Bitter Melon
• Chlorella
• Coconut Water
• Garlic
• Ginger
• Holy Basil
• Quinoa
• Resveratrol
• Spirulina

To view them all, you can visit our Fructose-Induced Toxicity page.

Ultimately, avoiding fructose in any other than its naturally embedded form in the intelligent and infinitely complex structures of food, e.g. fruit, is ideal. Food cravings for sweets, after all, may conceal unmet emotional or spiritual needs, so sometimes it is best to search deeper within for the answers. Or, using natural non- or low-calorie sweeteners like xylitol or stevia may also take the edge off an intense sweet tooth.

But, beyond the increasingly obvious adverse effects of isolated fructose to human health, is the “hidden” damage that fructose does to environmental/planetary health. This is because fructose from HFCS is invariably produced from genetically modified (GM) corn, which requires massive environmental inputs of harmful pesticides, glyphosate, gene products with the ability to transfer horizontally, and other unsustainable practices. The “hidden tax” of fructose consumption is the accelerating, GM-mediated destruction of the biosphere, without which human health and human existence, is not possible — which adds a highly bitter twist to the saccharine sweet story of fructose’s dark side.

*Fructose: derived from Latin fructus (“fruit”) + -ose (“sugar”).

---

[i] Fructose: metabolic, hedonic, and societal parallels with ethanol. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010 Sep ;110(9):1307-21.

[ii] Antagonism of the morphine-induced locomotor activation of mice by fructose: comparison with other opiates and sugars, and sugar effects on brain morphine. Life Sci. 1991 ;49(10):727-34.

[iii] Antagonism of antinociception in mice by glucose and fructose: comparison of subcutaneous and intrathecal morphine. Eur J Pharmacol. 1988 Feb 9 ;146(2-3):337-40.

[iv] USDA Economic Research Service, Dietary Assessment of Major Trends in U.S. Food Consumption, 1970-2005

[v] Packaging Digest, FDA rejects renaming of high-fructose corn syrup, 6/7/2012

Source: GreenMedInfo.com

GMO Farming, Glyphosate Significant Causes of Water Pollution

via: NaturalSociety
by: Mike Barrett
June 28, 2012

Water pollution and air pollution has been and continues to be a serious issue in many nations. Both of these pollution types are successfully bringing down the health of not only humans, but also animals, plant life, and the ecosystem as a whole. While the causes of water pollution and causes of air pollution are many, research is actually pointing a straight finger at GMO farming and chemicals like glyphosate for being important culprits.

Causes of Water Pollution – GMO Farming, Glyphosate Big Contributors

One groundbreaking study found that glyphosate, the active ingredient residing in the ever-so-popular Roundup product from Monsanto, is making its way into groundwater across the nation through widespread contamination of aquifers, wells, and springs. The explosive study that confirmed the contamination effect of Monsanto’s Roundup was published in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry in late 2011, where researchers discovered that 41% of the 140 groundwater samples taken from Catalonia Spain were actually above the limit of quantification.

The findings indicate that glyphosate actually doesn’t break down rapidly in the environment, and is continuously building up in concerning quantities. With glyphosate growing among the causes of water pollution, it is becoming more and more apparent that the chemical is polluting groundwater in alarming quantities, enough to pose a significant threat to the purity of drinking water wherever it is used.

How prevalent is this issue, really? One study conducted by a German university found very high concentrations of glyphosate in all urine samples tested. The amount of the chemical found in the urine was quite alarming, with each sample containing concentrations of 5 to 20-fold the limit established for drinking water. Unfortunately, the study doesn’t clearly say how many samples were tested for, and needs to be translated using one of the many translators available.

In addition, the issue of water contamination is only part of the pollution problem. Other findings, published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, came across glyphosate in 60-100% of all air and rain samples tested for. This shows that glyphosate is not only among causes of water pollution, but also resides in the air due to massive overuse.

While GMO farmers and other individuals using Roundup are the heavy contributors, biotechnology giant Monsanto is ultimately fueling water pollution surrounding glyphosate involvement. Monsanto is the world’s largest provider and producer of glyphosate, and dominates the genetically modified crops market. With many of Monsanto’s GM crops being resistant to glyphosate-containing Roundup, glyphosate is sprayed in massive amounts in order to function properly against the resistant crops. In fact, 88,000 tons were used in the US in 2007 alone.

Regarding glyphosate being found in rain and streams in the Mississippi River Basin, Paul Capel, USGS chemist and author of one study has this to say:

“Though glyphosate is the mostly widely used herbicide in the world, we know very little about its long term effects to the environment. This study is one of the first to document the consistent occurrence of this chemical in streams, rain and air throughout the growing season. This is crucial information for understanding where management efforts for this chemical would best be focused.”

With glyphosate becoming more of an issue and player in the causes of water pollution, it is becoming more apparent that the massive use of this chemical needs to cease.

Source: NaturalNews.com

Monsanto-Funded Science Denies Emerging Roundup-Cancer Link

Via: Activist Post
Sayer Ji, Contributor
Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Monsanto-funded research has been proliferating as uncontrollably as their genetically modified (GM) plants, and the bugs increasingly resistant to them.

Two studies have appeared in scientific journals in the past eight months, both funded by Monsanto, and both discrediting a Roundup herbicide-cancer link.[i] [ii]

The context within which these new studies are appearing is the growing body of experimental research indicating that the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, along with the surfactants and related “inactive” ingredients found within glyphosate-based formulations, cause genetic damage associated with cancer initiation, and at levels far below those used agricultural applications and associated with real-world exposures.[iii] [iv] [v] [vi] [vii]

This has put manufacturers and proponents of glyphosate, as well as “Roundup Ready” GM plants in a vulnerable position.

If, the precautionary principle is employed and a much-needed reclassification of glyphosate as a class III carcinogen to a class II or I occurs, the increasingly global dominance of GM-based food crop systems will come to a screeching, regulation-induced halt.

So, given the threat posed by non-industry funded research on glyphosate’s toxicity, Monsanto has been putting money into research and development — but not in the reputable sense of the phrase — bypaying for research to develop the storyline that, despite damning research to contrary, Roundup is still safe.

Read More At ActivistPost.com