5 ms·

note: monsanto's roundup chemical is an endocrine disruptor. we put it on most of our food supply. this contributes to the high cost burden. secondary note: yo

note: monsanto's roundup chemical is an endocrine disruptor. we put it on most of our food supply. this contributes to the high cost burden. secondary note: you don't want to have endocrine disruptors anywhere. they aren't good for you.

nabla9 8y ago
That's not true as far as I know. EPA selected glyphosate for screening based on the widespread use of the chemical. Not because it was suspected to be endocrine disruptor for any real reason. After tier 1 screening did not find any evidence no other testing was considered necessary.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- hammock 8y ago
  Regardless of whether glyphosate (the "active ingredient" so they say) is an endocrine disrupter, which is controversial, there is no question that Roundup - the pesticide formula containing glyphosate in certain proportion with a host of other ingredients, the formula which is secret, contains other ingredients with known toxic profiles. Glyphosate gets most of the (cooked up) research to the detriment of the people being exposed to many other mostly ignored co-formulants. Here is a study that says as much: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4808927/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4808927/ >It was demonstrated for the first time that endocrine disruption by GBH could not only be due to the declared active ingredient but also to co-formulants. These results...challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake (ADI) value for GBHs exposures, currently calculated from toxicity tests of the declared active ingredient alone.
sschueller 8y ago
The purchase of Monsanto by Beyer has to be dumbest corporate acquisition ever. After all these years it is now that the lawsuits are coming in as the science and leaks start pilling up providing the fodder. Even dumber is that Beyer is retiring the brand Monsanto which will result in Beyer itself being named in the lawsuits and media. They probably thought they could shake it off like Dow chemical when they aquired Union Carbide and claimed they are no longer responsible for the Bhopal disaster. There was no social media in 1994, there is now.
- lumberjack 8y ago
  Monsanto teamed up with Bayer to gain influence within the EU. Monsanto was having trouble bribing EU officials. Bayer already have them in their pockets. Might not be good for PR, but Monsanto was terrified because the EU almost banned Glyphosate last year. Bayer itself does not have a good PR image either.
  - slededit 8y ago
    Bayer is responsible for thousands of horrendous birth defects with thalidomide in the 50s and 60s. They did nothing when they learned of the problem.
- notfromhere 8y ago
  They're going to make a killing by bundling products to farmers, or they'll do what DuPont did and spin out part of Monsanto into a standalone company designed to burden that spinoff with as much debt and liability as possible. See Chemours
kevinconroy 8y ago
I wanted to up vote you, but did some research and turns out that both the FDA and the European Food Safety Authority have not found evidence that it is: "The current assessment concluded that glyphosate does not have oestrogen, androgen, thyroid and steroidogenesis (EATS)‐mediated endocrine disrupting properties based on the facts that no endocrine‐mediated adverse effects were identified in apical studies; the weak evidence seen in a limited number of supplementary in vitro studies was inconsistent with the findings of the acceptable OECD (Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development) tests and it was not expressed in vivo in the OECD Level 4 and 5 studies; and no EATS‐mediated endocrine mode of action was identified. Since the database available to reach this conclusion was quite comprehensive, it was concluded that the data gap identified in the previous EFSA conclusion (EFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4302) was adequately addressed." Source: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4979 https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa...
- cryoshon 8y ago
  roundup is likely more harmful then glyphosate alone, which has been itself confirmed as harmful in a handful of investigations: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X09003047 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X0... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257596/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257596/ "Surprisingly, Roundup is always more toxic than its active ingredient... We conclude that endocrine and toxic effects of Roundup, not just glyphosate, can be observed in mammals." https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0154-8 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0154-8 "The cytotoxic, and potentially endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup are thus amplified with time. Taken together, these data suggest that Roundup exposure may affect human reproduction and fetal development in case of contamination. Chemical mixtures in formulations appear to be underestimated regarding their toxic or hormonal impact."
- jly 8y ago
  This may be the current assessment for mammals, but there is insufficient evidence about the endocrine effects on non-mammals. I know the original link and discussion is in relation to humans, but it's worth noting. All animals with a nervous system have hormone-secreting structures, analogous to the endocrine system of mammals. Several studies have highlighted serious sub-lethal neurological impacts of glyphosate (not as a formulation) on agriculturally-important arthropods. I'm not aware of any conclusive research, but it seems reasonable to anticipate some of these effects may be related to endocrine signaling. Either way, the toxicity is clearly more severe for non-mammals, and their disease burden has direct and indirect costs to us.

nabla9 8y ago

That's not true as far as I know. EPA selected glyphosate for screening based on the widespread use of the chemical. Not because it was suspected to be endocrine disruptor for any real reason. After tier 1 screening did not find any evidence no other testing was considered necessary.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
hammock 8y ago
Regardless of whether glyphosate (the "active ingredient" so they say) is an endocrine disrupter, which is controversial, there is no question that Roundup - the pesticide formula containing glyphosate in certain proportion with a host of other ingredients, the formula which is secret, contains other ingredients with known toxic profiles. Glyphosate gets most of the (cooked up) research to the detriment of the people being exposed to many other mostly ignored co-formulants. Here is a study that says as much: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4808927/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4808927/ >It was demonstrated for the first time that endocrine disruption by GBH could not only be due to the declared active ingredient but also to co-formulants. These results...challenge the relevance of the acceptable daily intake (ADI) value for GBHs exposures, currently calculated from toxicity tests of the declared active ingredient alone.

sschueller 8y ago

The purchase of Monsanto by Beyer has to be dumbest corporate acquisition ever. After all these years it is now that the lawsuits are coming in as the science and leaks start pilling up providing the fodder. Even dumber is that Beyer is retiring the brand Monsanto which will result in Beyer itself being named in the lawsuits and media. They probably thought they could shake it off like Dow chemical when they aquired Union Carbide and claimed they are no longer responsible for the Bhopal disaster. There was no social media in 1994, there is now.

lumberjack 8y ago
Monsanto teamed up with Bayer to gain influence within the EU. Monsanto was having trouble bribing EU officials. Bayer already have them in their pockets. Might not be good for PR, but Monsanto was terrified because the EU almost banned Glyphosate last year. Bayer itself does not have a good PR image either.
- slededit 8y ago
  Bayer is responsible for thousands of horrendous birth defects with thalidomide in the 50s and 60s. They did nothing when they learned of the problem.
notfromhere 8y ago
They're going to make a killing by bundling products to farmers, or they'll do what DuPont did and spin out part of Monsanto into a standalone company designed to burden that spinoff with as much debt and liability as possible. See Chemours

kevinconroy 8y ago

I wanted to up vote you, but did some research and turns out that both the FDA and the European Food Safety Authority have not found evidence that it is: "The current assessment concluded that glyphosate does not have oestrogen, androgen, thyroid and steroidogenesis (EATS)‐mediated endocrine disrupting properties based on the facts that no endocrine‐mediated adverse effects were identified in apical studies; the weak evidence seen in a limited number of supplementary in vitro studies was inconsistent with the findings of the acceptable OECD (Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development) tests and it was not expressed in vivo in the OECD Level 4 and 5 studies; and no EATS‐mediated endocrine mode of action was identified. Since the database available to reach this conclusion was quite comprehensive, it was concluded that the data gap identified in the previous EFSA conclusion (EFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4302) was adequately addressed." Source: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4979 https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa...

cryoshon 8y ago
roundup is likely more harmful then glyphosate alone, which has been itself confirmed as harmful in a handful of investigations: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X09003047 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300483X0... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257596/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257596/ "Surprisingly, Roundup is always more toxic than its active ingredient... We conclude that endocrine and toxic effects of Roundup, not just glyphosate, can be observed in mammals." https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0154-8 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-006-0154-8 "The cytotoxic, and potentially endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup are thus amplified with time. Taken together, these data suggest that Roundup exposure may affect human reproduction and fetal development in case of contamination. Chemical mixtures in formulations appear to be underestimated regarding their toxic or hormonal impact."
jly 8y ago
This may be the current assessment for mammals, but there is insufficient evidence about the endocrine effects on non-mammals. I know the original link and discussion is in relation to humans, but it's worth noting. All animals with a nervous system have hormone-secreting structures, analogous to the endocrine system of mammals. Several studies have highlighted serious sub-lethal neurological impacts of glyphosate (not as a formulation) on agriculturally-important arthropods. I'm not aware of any conclusive research, but it seems reasonable to anticipate some of these effects may be related to endocrine signaling. Either way, the toxicity is clearly more severe for non-mammals, and their disease burden has direct and indirect costs to us.