Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide disrupts hormones – even with glyphosate exposures below regulation limits



(NaturalNews) Scientists out of Europe have conducted a thorough review of the safety profile of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, determining that the chemical disrupts human hormones at levels well below what the government considers “safe” for weed-control and agricultural desiccation purposes.

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GlyBH), they found, are erroneously regarded as a non-issue by many government bodies who have established safety regulations based solely on industry-backed studies, nearly all of which are favorable towards glyphosate. Meanwhile, independent reviews such as those considered by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which found that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic” to humans, are being ignored.

Hailing from the University of Caen in France, the research team looked at a cohort of scientific studies on glyphosate’s toxicity. They evaluated the chemical’s teratogenicity (potential to cause birth defects), tumorigenicity (potential to cause tumors), hepatotoxicity (potential to cause liver damage), carcinogenicity (potential to cause cancer) and more, as demonstrated amongst the whole of scientific research into glyphosate.

Perhaps most shockingly, they discovered that glyphosate is immensely toxic at levels well within established safety ranges, which is deeply concerning in light of independent tests showing glyphosate residues in food, drinking water, and even rain water.

This is particularly concerning when it comes to the endocrine system, which is what regulates human hormone production. Dr. Robin Mesnage and her team discovered that even low-dose exposure to glyphosate can trigger severe endocrine damage. Endocrine disruption can lead to a host of other health problems including cancer.

“We reveal a coherent body of evidence indicating that GlyBH could be toxic below the regulatory lowest observed adverse effect level for chronic toxic effects. It includes teratogenic, tumorigenic and hepatorenal effects,” the team wrote.

“They could be explained by endocrine disruption and oxidative stress, causing metabolic alterations, depending on dose and exposure time. Some effects were detected in the range of the recommended acceptable daily intake.”

Neither glyphosate nor the complete Roundup formula have ever been safety tested over an entire lifespan

Believe it or not, the U.S. Congress actually ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct an investigation into endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) like glyphosate nearly 20 years ago. However, to this day, the EPA has yet to follow through with this legal mandate, instead allowing glyphosate use to increase.

Regulatory authorities in the European Union have similarly betrayed their constituents, failing to take seriously the threat of EDCs. Former EU chief scientific advisor Anne Glover reportedly helped delay legislation that would have reined in the use of EDCs, which continue to wreak havoc on public health.

It isn’t just glyphosate that poses a problem. The Roundup formula contains a number of other pesticides that the University of Caen paper, which was published in the Elsevier journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, refers to as “adjuvants” that actually amplify the harm caused by exposure to glyphosate.

Large-scale, long-term safety studies on the complete Roundup formula have never been conducted. Even the effects of exposure to glyphosate by itself have never been tested over the entire lifespan of either animals or humans. Just like with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), industry studies on glyphosate focus solely on young animals exposed to the chemical for a very short period of time, after which these animals are terminated early in order to hide the long-term effects of glyphosate exposure.

“Toxic effects of commercial formulations can also be explained by GlyBH adjuvants, which have their own toxicity, but also enhance glyphosate toxicity,” the paper explains. “These challenge the assumption of safety of GlyBH at the levels at which they contaminate food and the environment, albeit these levels may fall below regulatory thresholds.”

Sources for this article include:

GMWatch.org

ScienceDirect.com

FoodAndWaterWatch.org





























Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
comments powered by Disqus



Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/051041_glyphosate_exposure_Roundup_hormone_disruption.html

Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide disrupts hormones – even with glyphosate exposures below regulation limits



(NaturalNews) Scientists out of Europe have conducted a thorough review of the safety profile of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, determining that the chemical disrupts human hormones at levels well below what the government considers “safe” for weed-control and agricultural desiccation purposes.

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GlyBH), they found, are erroneously regarded as a non-issue by many government bodies who have established safety regulations based solely on industry-backed studies, nearly all of which are favorable towards glyphosate. Meanwhile, independent reviews such as those considered by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which found that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic” to humans, are being ignored.

Hailing from the University of Caen in France, the research team looked at a cohort of scientific studies on glyphosate’s toxicity. They evaluated the chemical’s teratogenicity (potential to cause birth defects), tumorigenicity (potential to cause tumors), hepatotoxicity (potential to cause liver damage), carcinogenicity (potential to cause cancer) and more, as demonstrated amongst the whole of scientific research into glyphosate.

Perhaps most shockingly, they discovered that glyphosate is immensely toxic at levels well within established safety ranges, which is deeply concerning in light of independent tests showing glyphosate residues in food, drinking water, and even rain water.

This is particularly concerning when it comes to the endocrine system, which is what regulates human hormone production. Dr. Robin Mesnage and her team discovered that even low-dose exposure to glyphosate can trigger severe endocrine damage. Endocrine disruption can lead to a host of other health problems including cancer.

“We reveal a coherent body of evidence indicating that GlyBH could be toxic below the regulatory lowest observed adverse effect level for chronic toxic effects. It includes teratogenic, tumorigenic and hepatorenal effects,” the team wrote.

“They could be explained by endocrine disruption and oxidative stress, causing metabolic alterations, depending on dose and exposure time. Some effects were detected in the range of the recommended acceptable daily intake.”

Neither glyphosate nor the complete Roundup formula have ever been safety tested over an entire lifespan

Believe it or not, the U.S. Congress actually ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct an investigation into endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) like glyphosate nearly 20 years ago. However, to this day, the EPA has yet to follow through with this legal mandate, instead allowing glyphosate use to increase.

Regulatory authorities in the European Union have similarly betrayed their constituents, failing to take seriously the threat of EDCs. Former EU chief scientific advisor Anne Glover reportedly helped delay legislation that would have reined in the use of EDCs, which continue to wreak havoc on public health.

It isn’t just glyphosate that poses a problem. The Roundup formula contains a number of other pesticides that the University of Caen paper, which was published in the Elsevier journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, refers to as “adjuvants” that actually amplify the harm caused by exposure to glyphosate.

Large-scale, long-term safety studies on the complete Roundup formula have never been conducted. Even the effects of exposure to glyphosate by itself have never been tested over the entire lifespan of either animals or humans. Just like with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), industry studies on glyphosate focus solely on young animals exposed to the chemical for a very short period of time, after which these animals are terminated early in order to hide the long-term effects of glyphosate exposure.

“Toxic effects of commercial formulations can also be explained by GlyBH adjuvants, which have their own toxicity, but also enhance glyphosate toxicity,” the paper explains. “These challenge the assumption of safety of GlyBH at the levels at which they contaminate food and the environment, albeit these levels may fall below regulatory thresholds.”

Sources for this article include:

GMWatch.org

ScienceDirect.com

FoodAndWaterWatch.org





























Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
comments powered by Disqus



Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/051041_glyphosate_exposure_Roundup_hormone_disruption.html

Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide disrupts hormones – even with glyphosate exposures below regulation limits



(NaturalNews) Scientists out of Europe have conducted a thorough review of the safety profile of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, determining that the chemical disrupts human hormones at levels well below what the government considers “safe” for weed-control and agricultural desiccation purposes.

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GlyBH), they found, are erroneously regarded as a non-issue by many government bodies who have established safety regulations based solely on industry-backed studies, nearly all of which are favorable towards glyphosate. Meanwhile, independent reviews such as those considered by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which found that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic” to humans, are being ignored.

Hailing from the University of Caen in France, the research team looked at a cohort of scientific studies on glyphosate’s toxicity. They evaluated the chemical’s teratogenicity (potential to cause birth defects), tumorigenicity (potential to cause tumors), hepatotoxicity (potential to cause liver damage), carcinogenicity (potential to cause cancer) and more, as demonstrated amongst the whole of scientific research into glyphosate.

Perhaps most shockingly, they discovered that glyphosate is immensely toxic at levels well within established safety ranges, which is deeply concerning in light of independent tests showing glyphosate residues in food, drinking water, and even rain water.

This is particularly concerning when it comes to the endocrine system, which is what regulates human hormone production. Dr. Robin Mesnage and her team discovered that even low-dose exposure to glyphosate can trigger severe endocrine damage. Endocrine disruption can lead to a host of other health problems including cancer.

“We reveal a coherent body of evidence indicating that GlyBH could be toxic below the regulatory lowest observed adverse effect level for chronic toxic effects. It includes teratogenic, tumorigenic and hepatorenal effects,” the team wrote.

“They could be explained by endocrine disruption and oxidative stress, causing metabolic alterations, depending on dose and exposure time. Some effects were detected in the range of the recommended acceptable daily intake.”

Neither glyphosate nor the complete Roundup formula have ever been safety tested over an entire lifespan

Believe it or not, the U.S. Congress actually ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct an investigation into endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) like glyphosate nearly 20 years ago. However, to this day, the EPA has yet to follow through with this legal mandate, instead allowing glyphosate use to increase.

Regulatory authorities in the European Union have similarly betrayed their constituents, failing to take seriously the threat of EDCs. Former EU chief scientific advisor Anne Glover reportedly helped delay legislation that would have reined in the use of EDCs, which continue to wreak havoc on public health.

It isn’t just glyphosate that poses a problem. The Roundup formula contains a number of other pesticides that the University of Caen paper, which was published in the Elsevier journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, refers to as “adjuvants” that actually amplify the harm caused by exposure to glyphosate.

Large-scale, long-term safety studies on the complete Roundup formula have never been conducted. Even the effects of exposure to glyphosate by itself have never been tested over the entire lifespan of either animals or humans. Just like with genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), industry studies on glyphosate focus solely on young animals exposed to the chemical for a very short period of time, after which these animals are terminated early in order to hide the long-term effects of glyphosate exposure.

“Toxic effects of commercial formulations can also be explained by GlyBH adjuvants, which have their own toxicity, but also enhance glyphosate toxicity,” the paper explains. “These challenge the assumption of safety of GlyBH at the levels at which they contaminate food and the environment, albeit these levels may fall below regulatory thresholds.”

Sources for this article include:

GMWatch.org

ScienceDirect.com

FoodAndWaterWatch.org





























Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
comments powered by Disqus



Source Article from http://www.naturalnews.com/051041_glyphosate_exposure_Roundup_hormone_disruption.html

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125

Dangerous Surfactants in Glyphosate Herbicide Slip Pass EU Regulators: Monsanto ‘Secret’

The only Europeans to ban glyphosate (the main active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide roundUp) and its dangerous additions (surfactants) thus far are the Dutch, with Brazil and France to follow. Yet Germany, keeping their evidence of these toxic chemicals secret, pressures EU regulators to allow these unhealthy compounds to be sprayed liberally over the continent.

These surfactants, apparent in formulations called Rodeo, Accord, RoundUp, and RoundUp Pro, along with other glyphosate formulations, are extremely dangerous. Rodeo/RoundUp are aqueous solutions of the isopropyl amine salt of glyphosate and other chemical adjuvants.

The manufacturer [Monsanto, et. al.] recommends use of a nonionic surfactant with all applications to improve efficacy. Surfactant formulations that are used with Rodeo, aside form Monsanto’s formulations, include:

  • There has been a significant lack of toxicology studies on these chemical compounds, especially as a mixture, though glyphosate has likely been tested more than any other herbicide. One study; however found that:Agri-Dex (Setre Chemical Co.)
  • LI 700 (Loveland Industries, Inc.)
  • R-11 (Wilbur-Ellis Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 (Rohm and Haas Co.)
  • Latron AG-98 AG (Rohm and Haas Co.)

“A major qualitative difference between the effect of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations on aquatic and terrestrial organisms concerns the surfactant used in Roundup. The surfactant is much more toxic than glyphosate to aquatic organisms. Unlike glyphosate, the surfactant is more toxic in alkaline water than in acidic water. Thus, the relative potency of the surfactant with respect to glyphosate is pH dependent. There is relatively little information regarding the toxicity of Roundup Pro to aquatic species. Nonetheless, the acute lethal potencies of Roundup and Roundup Pro are similar.”

The herbicide glyphosate has been deemed ‘safe.’ but based on what?

Glyphosate Isn’t So Safe

Pushing for glyphosate’s use, Germany has made a draft re-assessment report on glyphosate. It concludes that:

‘…the available data confirms the previous evaluation: Glyphosate does not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties, has no toxic effect on fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals and is not considered to pose any risk to human health.’

But an investigation of their newly published report shows that glyphosate is not safe at all, and important omissions were made.

Though farmers and gardeners using glyphosate have seen it as a cost-effective way to control weeds, with sales reaching $5.46 billion in 2012 and expected to reach $8.79 billion by 2019, it is also heavily sold in other countries. In fact, glyphosate is now one of the most widely used herbicides in the world.

The important distinction to make, however, is that it isn’t glyphosate alone that is being sprayed on crops, though this has proven to be toxic in its own right. (Acute toxicity levels have been found in many places around the globe.) Additional chemicals (surfactants) are always added to glyphosate to make it ‘effective.’ The chemicals deemed ‘active’ in RoundUp formulations are tested, but its full formulations are not.

Most of us have or will ingest glyphosate in our lifetimes due to its prevalent use. It is so prevalent, in fact, that is is already being found in our blood, urine, and even breast milk. It is now sprayed over 80% of all crops in the U.S., leaving residue on many foods we purchase and eat. It goes without saying that RoundUp is also sprayed heavily on GM crops meant to be RoundUp ready – like soy, corn, etc.

Many of the crops grown in North and South America and exported to the EU for animal feed are also doused in glyphosate and its surfactants.

Dangers of Just One Surfactant – Polyethoxylated Tallow Amine

One surfactant in particular is drawing heavy criticism. POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine) is likely very toxic to humans, animals and the environment. German authorities have taken their own protective action against this chemical, but the EU has failed to take any action whatsoever.

Martin Häusling, Member of the Greens / European Free Alliance Group says:

“Given the alarming results of independent studies, this is simply shocking. . .Even though I have been criticising The European Food and Safety Authority for many years because of its conflict of interest with the agricultural industry, it would be wrong to blame them alone. The national authorities play a big role in this process.”

Monsanto and Cheminova have tried dismissing the alarms sounding over POEA.

For over a decade, the German Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV) has requested Member States in the European Union not to accept glyphosate products containing the surfactant based on high cytotoxicity of the compounds.

A 1999 report from Monsanto was submitted when glyphosate was up for re-approval by Germany:

“Accordingly, in the formulations for which toxicological data has been submitted as part of the joint dossier of Monsanto and Cheminova, surfactants of this type are not contained any more.”

No surprise, though – Agro-Chemical companies continue to manufacture and sell products containing POEA.

A spokesperson of Monsanto praised surfactants like POEA because “the amount of active ingredient needed per treated area can be reduced.”

He also stressed that “the development of new products requires several years of research and development and review by competent public authorities and Europe has some of the highest standards in the world.”

The high standards he speaks of are absent since there have been no independent studies on glyphosate and its surfactants since 1999 that claim it is ‘safe’.  In fact, a paper by J. M Brausch et al. in 2007 “found all POEA formulations to be extremely toxic”.

When German regulatory bodies requested more information on POEA, biotech gave them nothing, so they conducted their own studies after a German forestry worker developed a lung condition, and found that the “toxic inflammation of the lungs” was significantly different from a bacterial infection.

Since then,the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and other German safety authorities published their draft re-assessment report (RAR) on glyphosate and the representative formulation, in the process re-assessing hundreds of studies and public domain literature (as mentioned earlier).

And the Germany Environmental Agency (UBA) has included a chapter called ‘Further toxicological data for other potential co-formulants’ about the surfactant POEA to make sure all Member States of the EU are informed that nearly all toxicological endpoints investigated are clearly more toxic than glyphosate alone.

By the end of this year, all formulations containing POEA will have been removed from the German market. So why exactly has Germany now changed from banning glyphosate to simply ‘restricting’ its use?

German authorities have declined to release; however the list of companies that had to replace POEA, and what surfactants are now used instead, claiming this information is ‘industry protected’.

I guess the rest of us are meant to swallow POEA, along with glyphosate, and just wait and see what happens. What a farce!

Even Monsanto admits in one of their own patents:

“By exploiting a newly discovered synergistic interaction between two classes of surfactant applied together with the glyphosate, surprisingly enhanced herbicidal effectiveness is obtained by this method.”

The Monsanto formulations remain secret.

Due to ‘data confidentiality’ we are not allowed to know just how toxic these chemical combinations truly are. How can you regulate a pesticide/herbicide industry if the public and regulatory agencies don’t even know what is in the chemicals sprayed on our food?

Source Article from http://www.nationofchange.org/dangerous-surfactants-glyphosate-herbicide-slip-pass-eu-regulators-monsanto-secret-1411570125