Welcome to the Afibber’s Forum
Our 18th Year Online!
Moderated by: Shannon Dickson

Afibbers Home Afibbers Forum General Health Forum
Afib Resources Afib Database Vitamin Shop

Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile


science behind glyphosate

Posted by Larry 
Re: science behind glyphosate
March 11, 2018 09:47PM
Had a chance to read your link, Liz.
Desperately wish that they are correct. For the time being i'd like to avoid roundup in my system if that is possible sad smiley

Targeting the shikimate metabolic pathway in weeds, glyphosate interferes with protein synthesis in plants, bacteria, fungi and other organisms, but not in animals. There is no evidence that glyphosate residues on food affect the shikimate pathways of bacteria in the human gut.
Not convincing. Apparently it does not affect our gut biome because of the amino acid soup present. Well, i hope so but it does not sound reasonable. Hopefully it (amino acids) help to protect to an extent? After all the chemical is designed to inhibit the shikimate pathway.

The rat study was for two weeks only???? Why??? Interfering with our gut biome or enzymes often takes quite some time to manifest in health problems/ chronic health problems.

They also make out that killing soil bacteria could be a good thingconfused smiley Are they trying to argue that a healthy bio active soil isn't essential for nutrient rich and healthy produce???
Re: science behind glyphosate
March 12, 2018 09:30AM
Joe - - Take the time to read the transcript from the presentation The Health Dangers of Roundup Herbicide
and also do some research on the impact on mitochondrial function.

Page 1 “ There’s a huge flaw that indicates glyphosate doesn’t harm our cells. Because they do disrupt our beneficial gut bacteria which allows pathogens to overgrow. Then those produce toxins which cause inflammation which wrecks the gut lining.. you get leaky gut, and these toxins get into the blood stream. They can go to the brain, cause autoimmune disease and many other health issues as a result of that inflammation.”

Note this study....

Major Pesticides Are More Toxic to Human Cells Than Their Declared Active Principles
BioMed Research International
Author(s) Robin Mesnage, Nicolas Defarge, Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, and Gilles-Eric Séralini

Pesticides are used throughout the world as mixtures called formulations. They contain adjuvants, which are often kept confidential and are called inerts by the manufacturing companies, plus a declared active principle, which is usually tested alone.

We tested the toxicity of 9 pesticides, comparing active principles and their formulations, on three human cell lines (HepG2, HEK293, and JEG3). Glyphosate, isoproturon, fluroxypyr, pirimicarb, imidacloprid, acetamiprid, tebuconazole, epoxiconazole, and prochloraz constitute, respectively, the active principles of 3 major herbicides, 3 insecticides, and 3 fungicides. We measured mitochondrial activities, membrane degradations, and caspases 3/7 activities. Fungicides were the most toxic from concentrations 300–600 times lower than agricultural dilutions, followed by herbicides and then insecticides, with very similar profiles in all cell types. Despite its relatively benign reputation,

Roundup was among the most toxic herbicides and insecticides tested. Most importantly, 8 formulations out of 9 were up to one thousand times more toxic than their active principles. Our results challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake for pesticides because this norm is calculated from the toxicity of the active principle alone. Chronic tests on pesticides may not reflect relevant environmental exposures if only one ingredient of these mixtures is tested alone.

Published - February 26, 2014

Here's an 8 page pdf of that study...

Quote from pp 7 and 8

It is commonly believed that Roundup is among the safest
pesticides. This idea is spread by manufacturers, mostly in
the reviews they promote [40], which are often cited
in toxicological evaluations of glyphosate-based herbicides.
However, Roundup was found in this experiment to be
125 times more toxic than glyphosate.

Moreover, despite its reputation, Roundup was by far
the most toxic among the herbicides and insecticides tested.

This inconsistency between scientific fact and industrial
claim may be attributed to huge economic interests,
have been found to falsify health risk assessments and
delay health policy decisions [41].

BioMed Research International
7 and 8

(Read through the references in this study as well for confirmation)

Re: science behind glyphosate
March 13, 2018 05:14AM
I'm not surprised, Jackie. After all, the formulations are designed to be more effective (cytotoxic).
Also noted from other reading that Seralini is despised by the industry. I've listened to him being interviewed and he strikes me as a serious researcher.
Re: science behind glyphosate
March 13, 2018 09:58AM
Link to study on the impact of glyphosate on tight junctions.
Important info.

Protective Effects of Lignite Extract Supplement on Intestinal Barrier Function in
Glyphosate-Mediated Tight Junction Injury

Intestinal barrier permeability refers to a dysfunction in tight
junctions whereby foreign substances (e.g. potential antigens,
inorganic compounds, and pathogenic organisms) are allowed
unregulated passage from the apical side to the basolateral
side of these epithelial cells.

Tight junctions are found in all epithelial and endothelial systems
such as the nasosinuses, digestive tract, renal tubules, and
blood-brain barrier. These tight junctions serve as firewalls,
regulating the absorption of water and macronutrients, and
participate in immune system response.

Tight junctions are comprised of dozens of proteins that aid in this
function, including occludin proteins, the Junctional Adhesion
Molecules (JAM) family of proteins, and the claudin family of
proteins, all of which span the paracellular space. Occludin
proteins are responsible for intercellular signaling within the tight
junctions, while the JAM proteins aid in trafficking of immune
cells to injured or inflamed tissues.

Re: science behind glyphosate
March 13, 2018 07:39PM
That's interesting, Jackie. We have plenty of brown coal near where i live (Latrobe valley - Victoria). Wonder (why it costs so much)how they make the extract and put it into a bottle.
Re: science behind glyphosate
April 18, 2018 08:25AM
Re: science behind glyphosate
April 23, 2018 09:07AM
Jackie: We've been through the Jeffrey Smith "expertise", several times on this subject over the years. Whether GMO is an overall benefit to mankind or terminal health risk, Jeffrey Smith is not the expert to believe.

No matter how many times someone repeats something repittiion may make us believe it more but it does not make it any more factual.


Re: science behind glyphosate
April 23, 2018 12:26PM
Hi Gordon - Jeffrey Smith is well-recognized by those who are working as public awareness advocates to educate about the potential health and environmental risks of GMOs as well as glyphosate, itself. He is invited to speak in many countries throughout the world beyond the US. Mentioned initially, in his interview with Stephanie Seneff, PhD, research scientist at MIT, Dr. Seneff confirms Jeffrey’s platform.

Regardless of his ‘approach’ to spreading the word, I think it makes sense to keep an open mind about the known risks of glyphosate as well as the potential risks from long-term exposure… only some of which are now being recognized. Opinions are just that but the science is showing there is cause for concern even though Monsanto, Sargenta and others are doing all they can to obfuscate the risk factors.

There are many studies examining both the glyphosate and GMO impact on the environment and health including animals fed GMO food that are then used for human consumption. Many state it is too soon to know the full extent of the potential for damage in humans.

Dr Seneff’s work was mentioned previously in the Jeffrey Smith discussion on this important study findings
Samsel A, Seneff S. Glyphosate's Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases. Entropy. 2013; 15(4):1416-1463.

As one example, from a report on this topic, I’ve included the accompanying study references below… and this conclusion from the first reference,

de Vendômois JS, Cellier D, Vélot C, Clair E, Mesnage R, Séralini GE. Debate on GMOs health risks after statistical findings in regulatory tests. Int J Biol Sci. 2010 Oct 5;6(6):590-8.

Here’s the conclusion….

Conclusions and perspectives
Controversy on biological interpretations is a usual way of advancement in science. It would however have been beneficial for the acceptance of biotechnologies by the public at large, to close this scientific debate by longer, more detailed, and transparent toxicological tests on GMOs, and in particular twenty years ago when the most widely grown GMOs were still experimental.

We wish to reassert that our work does not claim to demonstrate the chronic toxicity of the GMOs in question, especially since it is based on the data originating from insufficient tests that were accepted by regulatory authorities and Monsanto et al., a fact for which we are not in any way responsible. For the regulatory authorities, as well as Monsanto et al, these tests prove chronic innocuousness for mammalian and human public health. And they claim it is not essential to demonstrate the GMOs innocuousness. This again raises the same issues and consequences. We have revealed the inefficiency both of these tests and of their statistical analysis and biological interpretations, for the various reasons detailed above. However, some of the in vivo 90-day tests are not performed any longer today to get worldwide commercial authorizations, especially for GMO with “stacked events” (i.e., producing one or several insecticides and tolerating one or two herbicides), and this is even more seriously inadequate since the so-called “cocktail effects” are not taken into consideration.

The same controversy took place (February 2010) in India, in relation to the authorization process for a transgenic eggplant that produces a new Bt insecticide. This authorization was based on three-month tests on three mammals and other animals for shorter times, which presented significant biological effects after this GM consumption 10, 25. The same arguments were used in the debate in India. But in this case, the government decided to take the time to study chronic health effects, following our expertise, and therefore to implement a moratorium 26.
In the present case, we wish to underline that the commercial GMOs in question contain pesticide residues, some of which have been demonstrated as human cellular endocrine disruptors at levels around 1000 times below their presence in some GM feed 27. Such Roundup residues are present in more than 80% of edible cultivated GMOs. This does not exclude other possible effects.

As a conclusion, we call for the promotion of transparent, independent and reproducible health studies for new commercial products, the dissemination of which implies consequences on a large scale. Lifetime studies for laboratory animals consuming GMOs must be performed, by contrast to what is done today, like the two-year long tests on rats for some pesticides or some drugs. Such tests could be associated to transgenerational, reproductive or endocrine research studies. And moreover, shortcomings in experimental designs may raise major questions on other chemical authorizations.

A few of many references on this topic:

.Gilles-Eric Séralini, Dominique Cellier, Joël Spiroux de Vendomois . New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2007 May;52(4):596-602. Epub 2007 Mar 13.

. de Vendômois JS, Roullier F, Cellier D, Séralini GE. A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. Int J Biol Sci. 2009 Dec 10;5(7):706-26.

. Carl-Alfred Alpert, Denis D G Mater, Marie-Claude Muller, Marie-France Ouriet, Yvonne Duval-Iflah, Gérard Corthier. Worst-case scenarios for horizontal gene transfer from Lactococcus lactis carrying heterologous genes to Enterococcus faecalis in the digestive tract of gnotobiotic mice.Environ Biosafety Res. 2003 Jul-Sep;2(3):173-80.

. M Gruzza, M Fons, M F Ouriet, Y Duval-Iflah, R Ducluzeau. Study of gene transfer in vitro and in the digestive tract of gnotobiotic mice from Lactococcus lactis strains to various strains belonging to human intestinal flora. Microb Releases. 1994 Jul;2(4):183-9.

. Aris A, Leblanc S. Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada. Reprod Toxicol. 2011 May;31(4):528-33. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2011.02.004. Epub 2011 Feb 18.

. Shehata AA, Schrödl W, Aldin AA, Hafez HM, Krüger M. The effect of glyphosate on potential pathogens and beneficial members of poultry microbiota invitro. Curr Microbiol. 2013 Apr;66(4):350-8. doi: 10.1007/s00284-012-0277-2. Epub 2012 Dec 9.

Krüger M, Shehata AA, Schrödl W, Rodloff A. Glyphosate suppresses the antagonistic effect of Enterococcus spp. on Clostridium botulinum. Anaerobe. 2013 Feb 6. pii: S1075-9964(13)00018-8. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2013.01.005. [Epub ahead of print]

F Mañas, L Peralta, J Raviolo, H García Ovando, A Weyers, L Ugnia, M Gonzalez Cid, I Larripa, N Gorla. Genotoxicity of AMPA, the environmental metabolite of glyphosate, assessed by the Comet assay and cytogenetic tests. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2009 Mar ;72(3):834-7. Epub 2008 Nov 14.

Benachour N, Séralini GE. Glyphosate formulations induce apoptosis and necrosis in human umbilical, embryonic, and placental cells. Chem Res Toxicol. 2009 Jan;22(1):97-105. doi: 10.1021/tx800218n.

Taetzsch T, Block ML. Pesticides, Microglial NOX2, and Parkinson's Disease. J Biochem Mol Toxicol. 2013 Feb;27(2):137-49. doi: 10.1002/jbt.21464. Epub 2013 Jan 24.

. Wang G, Fan XN, Tan YY, Cheng Q, Chen SD. Parkinsonism after chronic occupational exposure to glyphosate. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2011 Jul;17(6):486-7. doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2011.02.003. Epub 2011 Mar 2.

. Barbosa ER, Leiros da Costa MD, Bacheschi LA, Scaff M, Leite CC. Parkinsonism after glycine-derivate exposure. Mov Disord. 2001 May;16(3):565-8.

. Gui YX, Fan XN, Wang HM, Wang G, Chen SD. Glyphosate induced cell death through apoptotic and autophagic mechanisms. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2012 May-Jun;34(3):344-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ntt.2012.03.005. Epub 2012 Apr 4.

Lennart Hardell, Mikael Eriksson, Marie Nordstrom. Exposure to pesticides as risk factor for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and hairy cell leukemia: pooled analysis of two Swedish case-control studies.Leuk Lymphoma. 2002 May;43(5):1043-9

Anneclaire J De Roos, Aaron Blair, Jennifer A Rusiecki, Jane A Hoppin, Megan Svec, Mustafa Dosemeci, Dale P Sandler, Michael C Alavanja. Cancer incidence among glyphosate-exposed pesticide applicators in the Agricultural Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Jan ;113(1):49-54.

R M Romano, M A Romano, M M Bernardi, P V Furtado, C A Oliveira. Prepubertal exposure to commercial formulation of the herbicide glyphosate alters testosterone levels and testicular morphology. Arch Toxicol. 2010 Apr;84(4):309-17. Epub 2009 Dec 12.

. Clair E, Mesnage R, Travert C, Séralini GÉ. A glyphosate-based herbicide induces necrosis and apoptosis in mature rat testicular cells in vitro, and testosterone decrease at lower levels. Toxicol In Vitro. 2012 Mar;26(2):269-79. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2011.12.009. Epub 2011 Dec 19.

Gasnier C, Dumont C, Benachour N, Clair E, Chagnon MC, Séralini GE. Glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines. Toxicology. 2009 Aug 21;262(3):184-91. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2009.06.006. Epub 2009 Jun 17.

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. Accessed 3-15-13 at: [www.ecfr.gov]

R Mesnage, E Clair, S Gress, C Then, A Székács, G-E Séralini. Cytotoxicity on human cells of Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac Bt insecticidal toxins alone or with a glyphosate-based herbicide. J Appl Toxicol. 2012 Feb 15. Epub 2012 Feb 15.

R Mesnage, B Bernay, G-E Séralini. Ethoxylated adjuvants of glyphosate-based herbicides are active principles of human cell toxicity. Toxicology. 2012 Sep 21. Epub 2012 Sep 21.

. Green JM, Owen MD. Herbicide-resistant crops: utilities and limitations for herbicide-resistant weed management. J Agric Food Chem. 2011 Jun 8;59(11):5819-29. doi: 10.1021/jf101286h. Epub 2010 Jun 29.

. Heap I. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds; available at [www.weedscience.com], 2010, accessed April 15, 2010.

. María L Zapiola, Carol A Mallory-Smith. Crossing the divide: gene flow produces intergeneric hybrid in feral transgenic creeping bentgrass population. Mol Ecol. 2012 May 24. Epub 2012 May 24.

. Astrid T Groot, Marcel Dicke . Insect-resistant transgenic plants in a multi-trophic context. Plant J. 2002 Aug;31(4):387-406.

. Richard H Coupe, Stephen J Kalkhoff, Paul D Capel, Caroline Gregoire. Fate and transport of glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid in surface waters of agricultural basins. Pest Manag Sci. 2012 Jan ;68(1):16-30. Epub 2011 Jun 16.

. Dani Degenhardt, David Humphries, Allan J Cessna, Paul Messing, Pascal H Badiou, Renata Raina, Annemieke Farenhorst, Dan J Pennock. Dissipation of glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid in water and sediment of two Canadian prairie wetlands. J Environ Sci Health B. 2012 ;47(7):631-9.
Re: science behind glyphosate
April 30, 2018 01:45PM
Weedkiller found in granola and crackers, internal FDA emails show

The FDA has been testing food samples for traces of glyphosate for two years, but the agency has not yet released any official results


Follow the hyperlinks in the report as well for related info.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login