Monsanto says glyphosate is safe as Colombia halts pesticide usage

FacebookEmail
Print Friendly

spraying glyphosate(NaturalHealth365) It seems the risk of poisoning civilians has been the price to pay in the midst of the United States war on drugs in South America. But officials in Colombia are finally seeing that crop dusting coca fields with the deadly herbicide glyphosate is too big of a health risk, particularly in an area where proper medical attention is hard to come by.

Meanwhile, spokespersons for the chemical giant Monsanto continue to trumpet the herbicide’s ‘safety.’ Yet, one lobbyist had an entirely different reaction when offered a glass of glyphosate to drink. This video (below) says it all – as a lobbyist freaks out at the prospect of drinking this toxic poison – check it out for yourself:

Twisting the facts and spitting out misinformation for profit

Colombia’s change of heart came about following a report by the research division of the World Health Organization classifying glyphosate as a ‘probable carcinogen.’ The country will be employing other tactics for addressing the production of cocaine, joining the ranks of other countries in the region that have avoided the practice of crop dusting with herbicides to combat bug and weed issues on its coca fields. But, naturally Monsanto scoffs at the WHO’s findings.

Glyphosate was discovered by Monsanto, which continues to maintain that the chemical is safe to use. The company frequently cites a 2012 ruling by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that products manufactured with a glyphosate base are safe. Monsanto, often described as one of the most hated corporations in the world, accuses naysayers of cherry picking the facts and pushing ‘anti-chemical agendas.’

In response to an October 2013 Associated Press article about the dangerous use of glyphosate on Argentina farms, Monsanto described the poisonous herbicide as less dangerous than common bug repellant. It claimed the chemical had been misused in Argentina.

Commercial formulations of the herbicide glyphosate commonly include any number of additional, often-toxic, chemicals, adding to the potential health risk. The result is that human poisoning caused by the use of the herbicide is not just from the glyphosate alone, but the combination of additional chemicals included in the various formulations, according to researchers at the National Poisons Information Service (Birmingham Centre) and West Midlands Poisons Unit, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.

The evidence is clear: Glyphosate is toxic and harmful to human health

It may seem logical that spraying a toxic chemical from the sky is going to put those on the ground at risk, but astonishingly, Colombians have been put at risk for a number of years by U.S.-based crop dusters attempting to rage the war on drugs from the air. The result has been villages full of innocent people afflicted with skin rashes, vision problems, high incidence of miscarriage and birth defects, and other health threats.

Research has shown a long list of health complications due to glyphosate toxicity, with greater exposures leading to greater health threats, including premature death. The elderly and very young are at higher risk of developing health disorders due to exposure to the chemical, but ingestion of greater than 85 mL has been shown to cause significant toxicity in adults of all ages.

Herbicide formulations based on glyphosate are known to cause gastrointestinal corrosion, with people typically complaining of mouth, throat and esophageal pain. Renal and liver impairment are also common, and thought to be caused by impairment of the body’s ability to circulate blood to all organs.

Other symptoms include respiratory distress, lack of consciousness, pulmonary edema, shock, heart arrhythmias, kidney failure, and metabolic disorders. Although official data is lacking, Colombian villages also report higher incidence of miscarriages and birth defects.

Meanwhile, U.S. officials refuse to condemn the use of the deadly toxin, pointing to its widespread use as an agrochemical as sufficient evidence of its safety. Colombia had been the only country to attempt to destroy coca plants by air, a practice that has been met with disapproval by a number of political and environmental interests.

References:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15862083
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/health/2015/05/14/colombia-decision-to-halt-coca-spraying-over-health-concerns-draws-us-criticism
http://peoplesworld.org/colombia-and-world-cope-with-monsanto-s-toxic-herbicide

FacebookEmail

Gain INSTANT Access:


  • » Vaccine World Summit
  • » 7-Day Juice Cleanse
  • » FREE Newsletter
 

Keep Reading:

  • Carlin Lei

    Yippee, an expert almost willing to drink the darn stuff. How do you make an industry become accountable? Monsanto is unbeatable at using every connection and resource to push and protect their agenda.

    • Clark W

      Consumer purchasing behavior may be what eventually makes them accountable to their shareholders. For them this is a numbers game and they do have a dependency on consumer’s accepting and purchasing GMO foods.

  • tamarque

    The problem Becky is that we did NOT fight for freedom and liberty in foreign lands. This country fought for the control of resources and markets which is the same thing going on in this country. Maybe if the public clearly wrapped their mind around this, a)it would refuse to fight foreing wars and b) stay home to wage war against corporate control of our lives at our expense.

    • Eddie kantar

      There is so much truth to this comment, but it will never become part of our history books.

      • rgaura

        You are reading the wrong books, Eddie! Check out counterpunch books!

  • dhartley231 .

    What a Monsato pussy for not drinking the ROUNDUP its healthy for you right they say so KILLERS

  • KombaSCOBY

    It is no wonder that Anthony Gucciardi of Natural Society rates Monsanto as the most evil corporation in the world for so many years.

  • Phil

    I hope that it was the interviewer calling the man interviewed “a jerk.” Imagine how angry Monsanto execs are at the way that interview turned out !!! LMAS

  • Corine Hein

    Monsanto has a relationship with the FDA and influences their policies. In fact they privately exchange favors. They are not focused on customers except for profit.

  • OrganicGirl

    What do you think, I’m stupid…..what a liar and he knows it.

  • Michael Shoemaker

    So first of all, there is a huge difference between being asked to drink a glass of a glyphosate, and eating food that is contaminated with it. Ask any toxicologist, I did toxicological research in my undergraduate work, the concentration and the total amount administered are the important factors when it comes to the toxicity of a chemical. There’s flawed logic in the assertion that someone didn’t want to drink a glass of something, therefore it must be toxic in low amounts on food. Our bodies have an entire organ that is dedicated to cleaning our bodies of toxins, its called your liver. Toxic chemicals are impossible to avoid, and our bodies have adapted over centuries to fight them.

    Secondly, please note that the WHO did not take every article, and every piece of research into account when they labeled it as probably carcinogenic. In addition this label only means that there’s evidence to support the claim, not evidence to prove the claim. It is an important distinction.

    Finally, the FDA has strict regulations on the amounts of each chemical that can be found, and if you look at the regulations, the amount of each chemical that can be present on food is 100x lower than the lowest concentration that has been shown to cause health issues.

    If you want to hate monsanto, go ahead and hate them, just please have a good reason for it. I personally don’t like them because they treat their farmers poorly; however I do understand why they do what they do, their goal is to make money, and if they didn’t have those policies they wouldn’t make money.

    One more issue with the article, while there are sources, the information itself is not cited, which does not give someone an easy way to verify the information, and only one is an actual primary source, which doesn’t support the ban of the chemical, but simply precautions in how it is applied.

    • rgaura

      Dear shill, note also that glyphosate was originally patented as a chelator, to remove metals from industrial pipes, and as a broad spectrum antibiotic. Note the meaning of the term, `against-life´. Also, our sold out Congress passed a law allowing 100 times the amount of glyphosate residue in food as had been allowed previously. This in the face of increasing evidence that glyphosate spraying is causing deformities in the jaws (due to zinc deficiencies) in herbivores in Montana, deformities in birds that have caused several species to go extinct. Also, children are being born without brains in Washington and Argentina, where it has been widely used. Not to mention its role in autism, and at least 20 other chronic diseases, (and one new one). The data is piling up, and it does´t look pretty. We can just add glyphosate to the long line of defective and destructive products that Monsanto has foisted on the world; DDT, PCBs, Agent Orange, etc.

  • shaongaon

    He really is an idiot, but what a happy man he is..(not)! Wanker