FATAL KIDNEY DISEASE "CKDu" - LINKED TO DEADLY HERBICIDE USED GLOBALLY

Monsanto's Herbicide Linked to Fatal Kidney Disease Epidemic: Could It Topple the Company?

Thursday, 10 July 2014 09:18 By Jeff Ritterman, M.D., Truthout | News Analysis

(Photo courtesy of Vivien Feyer)

Also see: Dahr Jamail | Salvadoran Farmers Successfully Oppose the Use of Monsanto Seeds
Monsanto's herbicide Roundup has been linked to a mysterious fatal kidney disease epidemic that has appeared in Central America, Sri Lanka and India.

For years, scientists have been trying to unravel the mystery of a chronic kidney disease epidemic that has hit Central America, India and Sri Lanka. The disease occurs in poor peasant farmers who do hard physical work in hot climes. In each instance, the farmers have been exposed to herbicides and to heavy metals. The disease is known as CKDu, for Chronic Kidney Disease of unknown etiology. The "u" differentiates this illness from other chronic kidney diseases where the cause is known. Very few Western medical practitioners are even aware of CKDu, despite the terrible toll it has taken on poor farmers from El Salvador to South Asia.

Dr. Catharina Wesseling, the regional director for the Program on Work and Health (SALTRA) in Central America, which pioneered the initial studies of the region's unsolved outbreak, put it this way, "Nephrologists and public health professionals from wealthy countries are mostly either unfamiliar with the problem or skeptical whether it even exists."
Dr. Wesseling was being diplomatic. At a 2011 health summit in Mexico City, the United States beat back a proposal by Central American nations that would have listed CKDu as a top priority for the Americas.
David McQueen, a US delegate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who has since retired from the agency, explained the US position.
"The idea was to keep the focus on the key big risk factors that we could control and the major causes of death: heart disease, cancer and diabetes. And we felt, the position we were taking, that CKD was included."
The United States was wrong. The delegates from Central America were correct. CKDu is a new form of illness. This kidney ailment does not stem from diabetes, hypertension or other diet-related risk factors. Unlike the kidney disease found in diabetes or hypertension, the kidney tubules are a major site of injury in CKDu, suggesting a toxic etiology.
Salvadoran farmer returning from the fields, Palo Grande, El Salvador. Photo courtesy of Vivien Feyer.CKDu is now the second leading cause of mortality among men in El Salvador. This small, densely populated Central American country now has the highest overall mortality rate from kidney disease in the world. Neighboring Honduras and Nicaragua also have extremely high rates of kidney disease mortality. In El Salvador and Nicaragua, more men are dying from CKDu than from HIV/AIDS, diabetes, and leukemia combined. In one patch of rural Nicaragua, so many men have died that the community is called "The Island of the Widows."
In addition to Central America, India and Sri Lanka have been hit hard by the epidemic. In Sri Lanka, over 20,000 people have died from CKDu in the past two decades. In the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, more than 1,500 have been treated for the ailment since 2007. Given the rarity of dialysis and kidney transplantation in these regions, most who suffer from CKDu will die from their kidney disease.
Mural celebrating traditional agrarian life, Juayua, El Salvador. Photo courtesy of Vivien Feyer.
In an investigation worthy of the great Sherlock Holmes, a scientific sleuth from Sri Lanka, Dr. Channa Jayasumana, and his two colleagues, Dr. Sarath Gunatilake and Dr. Priyantha Senanayake, have put forward a unifying hypothesis that could explain the origin of the disease. They reasoned that the offending agent had to have been introduced into Sri Lanka within the last 30 years, since the first cases appeared in the mid-1990s. The chemical also needed to be able to form stable complexes with the metals in hard water and to act as a shield, protecting those metals from metabolism by the liver. The compound would also need to act as a carrier and be able to deliver the metals to the kidney.
We know that political changes in Sri Lanka in the late 1970s led to the introduction of agrochemicals, especially in rice farming. The researchers looked for likely suspects. Everything pointed to glyphosate. This herbicide is used in abundance in Sri Lanka. Earlier studies had shown that once glyphosate binds with metals, the glyphosate-metal complex can last for decades in the soil.
Glyphosate was not originally designed for use as an herbicide. Patented by the Stauffer Chemical Company in 1964, it was introduced as a chelating agent. It avidly binds to metals. Glyphosate was first used as a descaling agent to clean out mineral deposits from the pipes in boilers and other hot water systems.
It is this chelating property that allows glyphosate to form complexes with the arsenic, cadmium and other heavy metals found in the groundwater and soil in Central America, India and Sri Lanka. The glyphosate-heavy metal complex can enter the human body in a variety of ways. The complex can be ingested, inhaled or absorbed through the skin. Glyphosate acts like a Trojan horse, allowing the bound heavy metal to avoid detection by the liver, since the glyphosate occupies the binding sites that the liver would normally latch onto. The glyphosate-heavy metal complex reaches the kidney tubules, where the high acidity allows the metal to break free of the glyphosate. The cadmium or arsenic then damages the kidney tubules and other parts of the kidneys, ultimately resulting in kidney failure and, most often, death.
At this point, this elegant theory advanced by Dr. Jayasumana and colleagues can only be considered hypothesis-generating. Further scientific studies will need to confirm the hypothesis that CKDu is indeed due to glyphosate-heavy metal toxicity to the kidney tubules. For the present, this may be the best explanation for the epidemic.
Another explanation is that heat stress may be the cause, or a combination of heat stress and chemical toxicity. Monsanto, of course, is standing behind glyphosate and disputing the claim that it plays any role whatsoever in the genesis of CKDu.
While the exact cause of CKDu has not been proven conclusively, both Sri Lanka and El Salvador have invoked the precautionary principle. El Salvador banned glyphosate in September 2013 and is currently looking for safer alternatives. Sri Lanka banned glyphosate in March of this year because of concerns about CKDu.
Mural celebrating traditional agrarian life, Palo Grande, El Salvador. Photo courtesy of Vivien Feyer. 
Glyphosate has had an interesting history. After its initial use as a descaling agent by Stauffer Chemical, scientists at Monsanto discovered its herbicidal qualities. Monsanto patented glyphosate as an herbicide in the 1970s, and has marketed it as "Roundup" since 1974. Monsanto retained exclusive rights until 2000, when the patent expired. By 2005, Monsanto's glyphosate products were registered in more than 130 countries for use in more than 100 crops. As of 2013, glyphosate was the world's largest selling herbicide.
Glyphosate's popularity has been due, in part, to the perception that it is extremely safe. The Monsanto website claims:

Glyphosate binds tightly to most types of soil so it is not available for uptake by roots of nearby plants. It works by disrupting a plant enzyme involved in the production of amino acids that are essential to plant growth. The enzyme, EPSP synthase, is not present in humans or animals, contributing to the low risk to human health from the use of glyphosate according to label directions.

Because of glyphosate's reputation for both safety and effectiveness, John Franz, who discovered glyphosate's usefulness as a herbicide, received the National Medal of Technology in 1987. Franz also received the American Chemical Society's Carothers Award in 1989, and the American Section of the Society of Chemical Industry's Perkins Medal in 1990. In 2007, he was inducted into the United States' Inventor's Hall of Fame for his work on the herbicide. Roundup was named one of the "Top 10 Products That Changed the Face of Agriculture" by the magazine Farm Chemicals in 1994.
Not everyone agrees with this perception of glyphosate's safety. The first "Roundup resistant" GMO crops, soybeans, were introduced by Monsanto in 1996. The same year, the first glyphosate resistant weeds began to emerge. Farmers responded by using increasingly toxic herbicides to deal with the new super weeds that had developed glyphosate resistance.
In addition to the concern about the emergence of super weeds, a study in rats demonstrated that low levels of glyphosate induced severe hormone-dependent mammary, hepatic, and kidney disturbances. Recently two activist groups, Moms Across America and Thinking Moms Revolution, asked the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to recall Monsanto's Roundup, citing a host of adverse health impacts in their children from the herbicide, including failure to thrive, leaky gut syndrome, autism and food allergies.
Glyphosate is no ordinary herbicide. Besides being the most used herbicide on earth, it is also the central pillar of Monsanto's temple. Most of Monsanto's seeds, including soy, corn, canola, alfalfa, cotton, sugar beets and sorghum, are glyphosate resistant. As of 2009, Monsanto's Roundup (glyphosate) products, which include its GMO seeds, represented about half of Monsanto's yearly revenue. This reliance on glyphosate products makes Monsanto extremely vulnerable to research challenging the herbicide's safety.
Glyphosate-resistant seeds are engineered to allow the farmer to drench his fields in the herbicide to kill off all of the weeds. The glyphosate resistant crop can then be harvested. But if the combination of glyphosate and the heavy metals found in the groundwater or the soil destroys the farmer's kidneys in the process, the whole house of cards falls apart. This may be what is happening now.
An ugly confrontation has been unfolding in El Salvador. The US government has been pressuring El Salvador to buy GMO seeds from Monsanto rather than indigenous seeds from their own farmers. The US has threatened to withhold almost $300 million in aid unless El Salvador purchases Monsanto's GMO seeds. The GMO seeds are more expensive. They are not adapted to the Salvadoran climate or soil.
The only "advantage" of Monsanto's GMO seeds is their glyphosate resistance. Now that glyphosate has been shown to be a possible, and perhaps likely, cause of CKDu, that "advantage" no longer exists.

Mural, Concepcion de Ataco, El Salvador. Photo courtesy of Vivien Feyer.
What is the message from the United States to El Salvador exactly? Perhaps the kindest explanation is that the United States is unaware that glyphosate may be the cause of the fatal kidney disease epidemic in El Salvador and that the government sincerely believes that the GMO seeds will provide a better yield. If so, a sad mixture of ignorance and arrogance is at the heart of this foreign policy blunder. A less kind interpretation would suggest that the government puts Monsanto's profits above concerns about the economy, environment and health of the Salvadorans. This view would suggest that a tragic mix of greed and callous disregard for the Salvadorans is behind US policy.
Unfortunately, there is evidence to support the latter view. The United States seems to be completely behind Monsanto, regardless of any science questioning the safety of its products. Cables released by WikiLeaks show that US diplomats around the world are pushing GMO crops as a strategic government and commercial imperative. The cables also reveal instructions to punish any foreign countries trying to ban GMO crops.N
Whatever the explanation, pressuring El Salvador, or any country, to buy GMO seeds from Monsanto is a tragic mistake. It is foreign policy not worthy of America. Let's change it. Let's base our foreign and domestic policies on human rights, environmental stewardship, health and equity.
Post script: After articles about the seed dispute appeared in the media, The New York Times reported that the United States has reversed its position and will stop pressuring El Salvador to buy Monsanto's seeds. Thus far, the aid money has not been released.

Jeff Ritterman, M.D.
Dr. Jeff Ritterman is vice president of the board of directors of the SF Bay Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.  He is the retired chief of cardiology at Kaiser Richmond and a former Richmond, Calif., city councilman.

 Source:  http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24876-monsantos-herbicide-linked-to-fatal-kidney-disease-epidemic-will-ckdu-topple-monsanto

SMALL FARMERS STANDING UP TO US FORCING NEEDY NATIONS TO TAKE GMO SEED

Dahr Jamail | Salvadoran Farmers Successfully Oppose the Use of Monsanto Seeds

Tuesday, 08 July 2014 09:04 By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | Report

(Photo: Edgardo Ayala)
Farmers across El Salvador united to block a stipulation in a US aid package to their country that would have indirectly required the purchase of Monsanto genetically modified (GM) seeds.

Thousands of farmers, like 45-year-old farmer Juan Joaquin Luna Vides, prefer to source their seeds locally, and not to use Monsanto's GM seeds.

"Transnational companies have been known to provide expired seeds that they weren’t able to distribute elsewhere," said Vides, who heads the Diversified Production program at the Mangrove Association, a community development organization that works in the Bajo Lempa region of El Salvador.

"We would like the US embassy and the misinformed media outlets [that are pressuring the Salvadoran government to change their procurement procedure] to know more about the reality of national producers and recognize the food sovereignty of the country," he added.

During the last two months, the US government has been attempting to pressure the government of El Salvador to sign the second Millennium Challenge Compact with the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), a US foreign aid agency created during the presidency of George W. Bush.

While the US government has not specifically requested the government of El Salvador or local farming coops there to purchase Monsanto products, it has tacitly looked the other way while Monsanto affiliates have raked in huge profits with highly priced, and less effective or less desired products.

The signing agreement was allegedly based upon the condition that El Salvador purchases GM seeds from Monsanto in conjunction with the Millennium Challenge Compact.

With Strings Attached
According to MCC, its role in El Salvador is a positive one.
"MCC is fueling economic growth in El Salvador's Northern Zone through technical assistance, rehabilitation of roads, credit, and investments in people, including vocational education, better water and sanitation services and an improved energy supply," according to the agency's website.

However, in late 2013, the US government made it clear that without "specific" economic and environmental policy changes, it would not provide the $277 million in aid funding it had promised to give El Salvador, via the MCC. In the following months, it became evident that these reforms included a policy change that would shift the country's current method of providing seeds to its farmers.

In stark contrast to what the US government is attempting to do by forcing farmers around the globe to purchase Monsanto GM seeds, Salvadoran farmers like Vides have been working with the government, alongside NGOs like the Mangrove Association, to provide certified corn seed for agricultural packets that are distributed to thousands of Salvadoran farmers. The program has been ongoing for more than five years in the country, and is continuing to expand.

"Before, small producers didn’t have the opportunity to participate in government seed procurement processes," said Vides, who farms coffee and vegetables, and raises cattle. "The program has generated employment and income for communities, inhabitants and cooperatives of the area, while producers have also greatly developed their capacity to produce certified seed. Catering to transnational companies could hurt these gains that the program has created."

Vides, along with hundreds of other farmers and their coops, has successfully produced high-quality seed that is adapted to the specific soil and climate conditions of their country. He notes that using indigenous seeds simply makes more sense agriculturally and economically.

Nevertheless, there has been an ongoing effort by the US government to work on behalf of multinational companies like Monsanto in pushing their GM products on the government of El Salvador.

In 2013, Food & Water Watch, a Washington, DC-based watchdog group, issued a report that detailed how the US State Department issued directives to US embassies to promote biotech products and be responsive to the concerns of the biotech industry.

"Between 2007 and 2009, the State Department sent annual cables to 'encourage the use of agricultural biotechnology,' directing every diplomatic post worldwide to 'pursue an active biotech agenda' that promotes agricultural biotechnology, encourages the export of biotech crops and foods and advocates for pro-biotech policies and laws," the report said.

"The State Department views its heavy-handed promotion of biotech agriculture as 'science diplomacy,' but it is closer to corporate diplomacy on behalf of the biotechnology industry," the watchdog group added.

Monsanto, which describes itself as "A Sustainable Agriculture Company," is a massive multinational corporation well known for deleterious practices like suing small farmers when Monsanto seeds have blown into their crops, using "suicide seeds" (also referred to as terminator technology, these are seeds that have been genetically-engineered so that when the crops are harvested, all of the new seeds produced from these crops are sterile, which then forces farmers to buy seeds annually from Monsanto in order to continue growing their crops)and altering the genetic structure of natural organisms and then patenting these seeds.

The company's concentrated control over the seed sector in India, as well as much of the rest of the world, has caused tens of thousands of farmers to go out of business, and triggered a spate of related suicides.

Farmers in Brazil are suing Monsanto for $2.2 billion for unfair collection of royalties - and this is just one among countless lawsuits against the company, which maintains extremely close ties with the US government.

Keeping It Local
Sixty-five-year-old farmer Manuel Cortez has been farming the Lower Lempa region of El Salvador since he was a small child. Cortez is the president of the La Maroma Cooperative, which is made of up 150 rural families and manages over 940 hectares of farming and pastureland.

The cooperative has been using 140 hectares for certified corn production for government contracts. Together with five other local coops, this farming area grows over 45 percent of the government of El Salvador's certified corn supply, specifically with the H59 certified corn seed, which is under threat by Monsanto's GM corn seed that the US government is pushing the country to use.

"We have heard that the United States would prefer that El Salvador purchase seeds from transnational sources, which would limit local seed producers like us," Cortez told Truthout. "We have lived with these inferior transnational seeds that previous governments have promoted, and our market was saturated with them. It seems as if the United States doesn’t support local production of seed.”
A farmer with the La Maroma farming coop, farming with H59, the certified corn seed. (Photo: Edgardo Ayala)
Cortez explained that his coop and those he works with receive credit at the national bank, which relies on government contracts as collateral.

"With the United States inserting uncertainty in the legal future of El Salvador's seed contracting," he said, "we are worried that we won't be able to pay off our debt if the law changes to prefer transnational seed suppliers."
According to Cortez, all the local farmers prefer the certified corn seed his coop is producing, and the US government should respect that.

"The United States should support the government of El Salvador as it attempts to build a local rural economy, so that we don't have to migrate away from the area," he concluded. "Often times, when people immigrate north [to the United States], they end up worse off than when they started."

Supporting Farmers Against Monsanto
Nathan Weller is the program and policy director of EcoViva, a small NGO that, according to its website, "works in partnership and solidarity with low-income communities in Central America organized to achieve environmental sustainability, economic self-sufficiency, social justice, and peace."
Truthout asked Weller, who has been working with rural communities in the Lower Lempa area of El Salvador for 18 years, what he thinks the most sustainable course of action might be for Salvadoran farmers.

"There are now viable alternatives to the way seeds are produced in El Salvador, and the traditional reliance on a singular source of seed, or seed from just a handful of conventional agribusinesses, is no longer necessary," Weller said. "Domestic producers have proven their ability to cultivate a quality product to government standards, offered at a significantly lower price than what the government had historically paid for conventional seed supplied, by-in-large, by a singular Monsanto affiliate." 

EcoViva has supported the capacity building of five local cooperatives currently participating in the corn procurement process. Weller explained that the local H59 corn variety is grown under climatic and growing conditions that make the seed more suitable to the region. "This lends it toward higher yields without the need to apply the same expensive, harmful additives that Monsanto products generally require," he said.

According to Weller, the government of El Salvador's current ability to procure seed from local producers, who offer the best product at the cheapest price, has led to record corn yields in 2013.
"This has also led to a record outreach in national farming programs, and an injection of nearly $25 million total into the rural economy, creating hundreds of rural jobs," he said.

The Confederation of Federations of Salvadoran Agrarian Reform (CONFRAS) is a confederation that represents 131 farming coops in the country, which represent over 5,911 rural farmers throughout El Salvador. The group released a May 18 press statement that addressed the US government pressure on the government of El Salvador to purchase Monsanto GM corn seed, noting: "We are threatened because the US is pressuring the government of El Salvador so that its seed is not purchased from local families struggling to escape poverty, but transnational businesses."

CONFRAS states that from 2004 through 2009, farming inputs were delivered to Salvadoran family farmers with one primary purpose: to generate business to major importers of seed and other inputs, particularly to the seed producer Semillas Cristiani Burkard, a Monsanto affiliate.

As a result of widespread and mounting resistance to Monsanto seeds across El Salvador, the US government might now be softening its stance regarding its attempts to tie the $277 million aid deal to the requirement of the use of Monsanto GM seeds. Due in large part to the organization and resistance from the Salvadoran farmers, the US government appears to be leaving the GM seed requirement out of the aid deal.

However, even if that is the case, the US government could, as it has often done in the past, attempt to find another El Salvador aid package to tie the required purchase of Monsanto GM seeds.
At the time of publishing, Monsanto had not responded to Truthout's request for comment.

Source:  http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24811-el-salvadoran-farmers-successfully-oppose-the-use-of-monsanto-seeds

HILL STILL GMO SHILL

Hillary Clinton Goes to Bat for GMOs at Biotech Conference

The potential presidential candidate's old industry ties resurface
Published on Thursday, July 3, 2014 by Common Dreams

- Max Ocean, editorial intern

Hillary Clinton in Hampton, NH (Photo: flickr/cc/Marc Nozell) Speaking at a conference in San Diego last week for the world's largest trade organization of biotechnology firms, potential presidential candidate Hillary Clinton backed GMOs and Big Ag, further displaying her allegiance to the industry in the eyes of sustainable food and organic advocates.

While trumpeting her endorsement of GMO seeds when she served as Secretary of State, Clinton told the crowd that the term "'genetically modified' sounds Frankensteinish," and thus turns people off to GMOs. "Drought resistant sounds really like something you'd want," she said, encouraging the industry to improve their semantics. “There’s a big gap between the facts and what the perceptions are.”

"If Hillary Clinton intends to run for office in 2016, she should think carefully about supporting a food and farming system that is proven to be detrimental to public health." —Katherine Paul, Organic Consumers Association

Clinton's certainty concerning the safety of GMO foods stands in stark contrast to public opinion. A Consumer Reports poll in June found that 92 percent of Americans favor labeling the foods.
U.S. campaigners rejecting the industry's push for genetically-modified crops have been pushing hard to get states to pass labeling laws.

"Hillary Clinton's views on GMOs are disappointing, but not surprising," said Katherine Paul, associate director of the Organic Consumers Union, in an email to Common Dreams. Unfortunately, Paul continued, Clinton's positions are "no different than those of previous administrations, including the Bush, Clinton and Reagan administrations, and they are taken straight from the biotech industry's talking points."

"Credible scientists, backed by independent (not industry-funded) studies are clear about the fact that foods containing GMOs are linked to a host of chronic illnesses," Paul continued. "The American Medical Association has called for pre-market safety testing and a recent pilot study found unsafe levels of glysophate, the key ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, in the blood, urine and breast milk of American women."

During the hour that Clinton addressed the conference she also addressed fears that current subsidies and tax breaks aren't enough, or won't continue to be there in the future. “I don’t want to see biotech companies or pharma companies moving out of our country simply because of some perceived tax disadvantage and potential tax advantage somewhere else,” she assured the crowd, receiving vigorous applause in response.

"We should have an intensive discussion," Clinton said. “Maybe there’s a way of getting a representative group of actors at the table” so that the federal government can help biotechs with “insurance against risk.”

Clinton's ties to biotech have surfaced before, particularly her history with industry heavyweight Monsanto. The Rose Law Firm where Clinton worked in the 1980s represents both Monsanto and Tyson Foods.

Mark Penn, who served as CEO for one the world's largest public relations firms, Burson-Marsteller, which has also represented Monsanto, was a White House advisor under Bill Clinton and served as chief strategist and pollster to Hillary Clinton in her 2008 presidential campaign.

During Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State, the State Department heavily pressured other countries to use GMOs through a variety of methods, including bringing foreign journalists to the U.S. to "participate in a one-week biotech tour" so that they could help shift public opinion in their home country.

Yet Clinton's choices in her personal life indicate she's not so convinced that the science is in on genetically modified foods. According to Walter Sheib, who served as White House executive chef during the Clinton presidency, the job offered him the "professional challenge of fulfilling Hillary Clinton's mandate of bringing...nutritionally responsible food to the White House," meaning nearly everything he used "was obtained from local growers and suppliers."

And as Mother Jones reported in 2012, Scheib said that while Clinton's rooftop garden at the White House wasn't "certified organic," everything in it "was absolutely grown without pesticides and fertilizers. I guess it's what these days we call 'natural.'"

"If Hillary Clinton intends to run for office in 2016, she should think carefully about supporting a food and farming system that is proven to be detrimental to public health," said Paul, "unless she and her family are willing to give up eating organic and eat the same toxic food that she promotes to the general population."
Watch a video of Clinton's comments below:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/07/03-4

________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

"NOT YOUR GRANDDAD'S 2,4-D" : ENLIST DUO's DOUBLE DEADLY DOW-MONSANTO DREAM "CROP SYSTEM"

Federal Support For Potent New Weedkiller Raises Fears About Children's Health

Lynne Peeples  lynne.peeples@huffingtonpost.com Posted: 07/03/2014 8:23 pm EDT Updated: 07/03/2014 9:59 pm EDT

In his public plea for the Environmental Protection Agency to reject registration of a potent new weedkiller, Christopher Lish of Olema, California, revisited a decades-old warning from environmental prophet Rachel Carson: "As crude a weapon as the cave man's club, the chemical barrage has been hurled against the fabric of life."

Lois Rose, a registered nurse in South Milwaukee, Wisconsin, posted her own, less ornate caution to the EPA website: "Stop listening to the chemical lobby and start listening to the humans affected by these poisons."

As a federal decision looms over whether to approve Dow AgroSciences' proposed Enlist Duo herbicide -- a mix of 2,4-D and glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller -- challenges from critics across the country have poured in. And children's health advocates are among the most vocal.

More than half a million people shared their thoughts before the EPA closed its public comment period on Monday. Among the submissions was a letter signed by 35 doctors, scientists and researchers, which highlighted human health risks they suggested had been overlooked by the agency -- especially for "young children in residential communities, schools, and daycare centers near the 2,4-D-sprayed fields."

On Wednesday, an environmental nonprofit released a report, including an interactive map, that warns the new weed-killing recipe may soon be sprayed on corn and soy fields within a thousand feet of more than 18,000 U.S. schools. Around 5,600 schools are within 200 feet of fields that could potentially be sprayed, according to the Environmental Working Group's new analysis. The EPA's proposed approval of the double herbicide calls for a 200-foot buffer zone around locations where it is sprayed.

"The analysis is pretty scary," said Mary Ellen Kustin, senior policy analyst with the Environmental Working Group. "To think that there are this many schools so close to fields that may be turned over to this new cropping system."

Inhalation of drifting herbicide is the key concern, Kustin noted, although children may be exposed via other routes such as dust tracked around on shoes, clothes and the like.

Industry representatives, meanwhile, call the group's claims "inflammatory," "specious" and "irresponsible." They suggest the federal government is poised to approve the chemical spray with good reason: The herbicide is safe and a necessary solution for struggling American farmers.
"Regulatory and health and safety organizations worldwide have reviewed the database on 2,4-D and found little concern for adverse effects when the product is used as directed," Garry Hamlin, a spokesman with Dow AgroSciences, told The Huffington Post in an email. He added that the 2,4-D in the company's product has been formulated to reduce volatilization and drift: "This is not your granddad's 2,4-D."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that if Enlist Duo is green-lighted, agricultural use of 2,4-D would at least triple by 2020 to between 77.8 and 176.2 million pounds annually. The latter herbicide was first introduced on the market in 1946 and is also commonly used by homeowners to kill weeds in their lawn -- much to the chagrin of environmental health advocates.

Chensheng Lu, an environmental health expert at the Harvard School of Public Health, is among those not comforted by industry's claims. "The reproductive hazards [of 2,4-D], as well as the concern of cancers, have been well documented," said Lu, one of the signatories on the EPA letter. "The EPA should at least host a scientific advisory panel meeting to gather independent review of Enlist Duo."
To the list of potential health risks for children exposed to even tiny amounts of the double herbicide, Warren Porter, a toxicologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and another signatory, added attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, asthma and immune disorders.

The EPA's assessment, he said, misses emerging evidence that certain chemicals in minute amounts can disrupt human hormones and therefore mess with multiple systems in the body. Research suggests both 2,4-D and glyphosate carry that capacity.

"Why should we be supporting some kind of a policy that is going to directly impact the health of our children?" said Porter. "The EPA seems totally in the pocket of Dow right now."

The EPA stated that it will review all comments before its final decision, which is expected sometime late summer or early fall. "Our proposal was based on an extensive assessment," the agency told HuffPost in an email, adding that it had looked at herbicide drift and risks to kids, among critics' concerns.

Another worry is potential interactions between glyphosate and 2,4-D, as well as with other ingredients in Enlist Duo. In its environmental risk assessment, the EPA acknowledges that "there could be additive, synergistic, or interference between the two herbicides," potentially increasing or decreasing the overall toxicity of the product.

Fifty years ago, Rachel Carson wrote in Silent Spring of a pesticide combination that resulted in health risks "up to 50 times as severe as would be predicted on the basis of adding together the toxicities of the two."

The EPA did not include any such potential synergisms in its human health risk assessment. While the potential for drift is discussed, the agency also dismissed it from aggregate exposure calculations, determining it didn't pose a sufficient risk.

In addition to the EPA's verdict on the dual herbicide, Dow AgroSciences also awaits final word from the USDA regarding its herbicide-resistant seeds, the other component of its Enlist system. Corn and soy crops would be genetically modified to withstand exposure to 2,4-D and glyphosate, theoretically leaving only the weeds vulnerable to the chemicals.

Weeds, however, may evolve to withstand exposure, as farmers learned after years of employing Monsanto's genetically engineered Roundup Ready seeds. Repeated application of a herbicide can literally weed out the weak weeds, giving the rare resistant ones the opportunity to reproduce and eventually dominate.

More than 70 million acres of farmland in the U.S. are now infested with glyphosate-resistant "superweeds." And that number is rising.

"As a farmer located in Iowa, I look forward to approval of this herbicide option," wrote Fred Wirtz of West Bend, Iowa, in a comment posted on the EPA's website. "Weed resistance to gly[ph]osate and other herbicides is becoming an increasing concern, and this will provide a valuable additional option to protect the crop."

Approval of Enlist Duo should keep farmers from unleashing other -- potentially more toxic -- herbicides, as well as larger quantities of Roundup, said Dow's Hamlin.
Mike Owen, a weed expert at Iowa State University, agreed that the product would be a useful tool for farmers.

While he was among those who first warned of the likelihood of Roundup resistance in the early 1990s, Owen is hopeful that more stringent restrictions included on the Enlist Duo product label will result in more sustainable use. Dow AgroSciences provides specifics on application rates and advises rotating use of Enlist Duo with other herbicides and non-chemical practices such as mechanical cultivation.

Diversifying crops and methods to manage weeds, Owen emphasized, is the real key to getting off what many now call the "pesticide treadmill." He pointed to one factor thwarting that effort: the growing size of the average American farm. "There are fewer farmers farming larger areas over greater distances," Owen said. "And many want to spray one herbicide over all their acres."
Dow AgroSciences also advises on appropriate spray nozzles and weather conditions, among other factors that affect drift. The label, for example, warns applicators not to spray "at wind speeds greater than 15 mph" or in "areas of temperature inversions."

But even if a farmer perfectly adheres to all the label's directions, there is still the chance of dangerous drift, said Porter of the University of Wisconsin. And again, young children may be particularly vulnerable to any toxic effects.

"If the wind is blowing, or even if not, stuff is going to move in all dimensions," said Porter. "They could be well outside the buffer zone, but still get a dose that could affect their immune system, their endocrine system, their nervous system."

"We may be loading ourselves up for some very long-term consequences," he added, noting other new research that hints at the potential for a chemical's harm to be passed down through the generations. "I think we have to be really careful."

More: Epa Herbicides Toxic Chemicals Children Enlist Duo Roundup 2 EPA Herbicides Epa Enlist Duo Monsanto Herbicide Drift Toxic Chemicals Environmental Protection Agency Pesticide Drift Dow AgroSciences Weedkiller Health 4 D

SOURCE:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/03/enlist-duo-children-health_n_5554828.html?utm_hp_ref=tw 

LINKS: WAR MACHINE, GATES AND MONSANTO

Monsanto’s GMO Food and its Dark Connections to the “Military Industrial Complex”

By Steven MacMillan

Global Research, July 03, 2014

The Analyst Report

Region: Canada, Europe, USA

Theme: Biotechnology and GMO, Environment, Science and Medicine

Monsanto, the world’s largest genetically modified (GM/GMO) seed producer, has been at the centre of controversy for decades as evidence of the harmful effects on humans of GM foods continues to mount.  Joined with the likes of DuPont’s Pioneer Hi-Bred International and Syngenta, Monsanto and partners comprise the corporate nexus of Big-Agri, where the control over our food supply is increasingly transferred into the hands of private trans-national corporations as opposed to local farmers and governments.
A US peer-reviewed study conducted last year which was published in the scientific journal Entropy, linked Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup – which is the most popular weed killer in the world – to infertility, cancers and Parkinsons Disease amongst other ailments. The authors of the study were Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant from Arthur D. Little, Inc. and a former private environmental government contractor. The main ingredient in Roundup is the “insidious” glyphosate, which the study found to be a deeply harmful chemical:

“Glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins. Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body [...] Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease” (Samsel and Seneff, 2013).

The Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT) Jeffrey M. Smith has discovered a link between gluten disorders and GM foods in a study he conducted last year. Gluten disorders have sharply risen over the past 2 decades, which correlates with GM foods being introduced into the food supply. Smith asserts that GM foods – including soy and corn – are the possible “environmental triggers” that have contributed to the rapid increase of gluten disorders that effect close to 20 million American’s today:

“Bt-toxin, glyphosate, and other components of GMOs, are linked to five conditions that may either initiate or exacerbate gluten-related disorders [...] If glyphosate activates retinoic acid, and retinoic acid activates gluten sensitivity, eating GMOs soaked with glyphosate may play a role in the onset of gluten-related disorders” (Smith, 2013).

One of the more damming studies on the safety of GM foods was led by biologist Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caen, which was the first study to examine the long term affects on rats that had consumed Monsanto’s GM corn and its Roundup herbicide. The study was conducted over a 2 year period – which is the average life-span of a rat – as opposed to Monsanto’s usual period of 90 days. The peer-reviewed study found horrifying effects on the rats health, with a 200% to 300% increase in large tumours, severe organ damage to the kidney and liver and 70% of female participant rats suffered premature death. The first tumours only appeared 4 to 7 months into the research, highlighting the need for longer trials.

Initially the study was published in the September issue of Food and Chemical Toxicology, but was then later retracted after the publisher felt the study was “inconclusive”, although there was no suspicion of fraud or intentional deceit. Dr. Seralini strongly protested the decision and believed “economic interests” were behind the decision as a former Monsanto employee had joined the journal. Monsanto is infamous for employing swaths oflobbyists to control the political, scientific and administrative decisions relating to the organisation, and this incident was a major whitewash by the GM producer to stop the barrage of negative media reports relating to the toxic effects of their products. The study led by Dr. Seralini was later published in a less well renowned journal, the Environmental Sciences Europe, which reignited the fears of GM foods safety.

France has recently implemented a ban on Monsanto produced maize (MON810) – a different variety of the Monsanto GM corn that was discussed in the study above (NK603) – citing environmental concerns as the reason for the ban. France joins a list of countries including Italy and Poland who have imposed bans on GM corn over the past few years. Additionally, Russian MPs have introduced a draft into parliament which could see GM producers punished as terrorists and criminally prosecuted if they are deemed to have harmed the environment or human health. In India, many of the GM seeds sold to Indian farmers under the pretext of greater harvests failed to deliver, which led to an estimated 200,000 Indian farmers committing suicide due to an inability to repay debts.
There is growing evidence to support the theory that bee colonies are collapsing due to GM crops being used in agriculture, with America seeing the largest fall in bee populations in recent years. Resistance to Monsanto and GM foods has been growing in recent years after the launch of the worldwide ‘March Against Monsanto’ in 2012, which organises global protests against the corporation and its toxic products within 52 countries. Monsanto was also voted the ‘most evil corporation’ of 2013 in a poll conducted by the website Natural News, beating the Federal Reserve and British Petroleum to take the top position.

Monsanto Produced and Supplied Toxic Agent Orange
Researching Monsanto’s past reveals a very dark history that has been well documented for years. During the Vietnam War, Monsanto was contracted to produce and supply the US government with a malevolent chemical for military application. Along with other chemical giants at the time such as Dow Chemical, Monsanto produced the military herbicide Agent Orange which contained high quantities of the deadly chemical Dioxin. Between 1961 and 1971, the US Army sprayed between 50 and 80 million litres of Agent Orange across Vietnamese jungles, forests and strategically advantageous positions. It was deployed in order to destroy forests and fertile lands which provided cover and food for the opposing troops. The fallout was devastating, with Vietnam estimating that 400,000 people died or were maimed due to Agent Orange, as well as 500,000 children born with birth defects and up to 2 million people suffer from cancer or other diseases. Millions of US veterans were also exposed and many have developed similar illnesses. The consequences are still felt and are thought to continue for a century as cancer, birth defects and other diseases are exponential due to them being passed down through generations.

Today, deep connections exist between Monsanto, the ‘Military Industrial Complex’ and the US Government which have to be documented to understand the nature of the corporation. On Monsanto’s Board of Directors sits the former Chairman of the Board and CEO of the giant war contractor Lockheed Martin, Robert J. Stevens, who was also appointed in 2012 by Barack Obama to the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations. As well as epitomising the revolving door that exists between the US Government and private trans-national corporations, Stevens is a member of the parallel government in the US, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). A second board member at Monsanto is Gwendolyn S. King, who also sits on the board of Lockheed Martin where she chairs the Orwellian ‘Ethics and Sustainability Committee”. Individuals who are veterans of the corporate war industry should not be allowed control over any populations food supply! Additionally, Monsanto board member Dr. George H. Poste is a former member of the Defense Science Board and the Health Board of the U.S. Department of Defense, as well as a Fellow of the Royal Society and a member of the CFR.

Bill Gates made headlines in 2010 when The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation bought 500,000 Monsanto shares worth a total of $23 million, raising questions as to why his foundation would invest in such a malign corporation. William H. Gates Sr. – Bill’s father – is the former head of Planned Parenthood and a strong advocate of eugenics– the philosophy that there are superior and inferior types of human beings, with the inferior type often sterilised or culled under the pretext of being a plague on society. During his 2010 TED speech, Bill Gates reveals his desire to reduce the population of the planet by “10 or 15 percent” in the coming years through such technologies as “vaccines”:
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really good job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent” (4.37 into the video).

In 2006, Monsanto acquired a company that has developed – in partnership with the US Department of Agriculture – what is popularly termed terminator seeds, a future major trend in the GM industry. Terminator Seeds or suicide seeds are engineered to become sterile after the first harvest, destroying the ancient practice of saving seeds for future crops. This means farmers are forced to buy new seeds every year from Big-Agri, which produces high debts and a form of servitude for the farmers.

Sources:

Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff (2013) – Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases†

Jeffrey M. Smith (2013) – Are Genetically Modified Foods a Gut-Wrenching Combination?

Source:  http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsantos-gmo-food-and-its-dark-connections-to-the-military-industrial-complex/5389708