
The Herbicide Glyphosate Doesn’t Cause Cancer. It Saves Natural Ecosystems - pseudolus
https://slate.com/technology/2019/10/glyphosate-does-not-cause-cancer-saves-native-plants.html
======
mikece
A good friend of mine is a PhD Toxicologist who worked at Monsanto. He was one
of the people charged with attempting to reproduce the claims of all of the
people who claimed Roundup (the herbocidical ingredient in Roundup) was
carcinogenic in some way. One of the things he pointed out to me is that, to
humans, the most toxic thing in Roundup is the surfactant (industrial-grade
detergent, essentially) that allows the glyphosate to actually stick to the
plant and be ingested by it. Detergents can cause chemical burns to the skin
and other nasty maladies if you ingest them; the stuff you use for washing
dishes has to be formulated to be safe/less irritating to human skin but they
almost always recommend wearing dish gloves just to be completely sure.

------
grawprog
[https://www.iarc.fr/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-
gly...](https://www.iarc.fr/featured-news/media-centre-iarc-news-glyphosate)

[https://www.cornucopia.org/2013/07/organophosphates-a-
common...](https://www.cornucopia.org/2013/07/organophosphates-a-common-but-
deadly-
pesticide/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI09rc6MWe5QIVE73sCh2qMAJQEAAYAiAAEgJzJvD_BwE)

>Organophosphates are so toxic to humans that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has taken steps to limit their availability to the public.

>Upon entering the body—through ingestion, inhalation, or contact with
skin—organophosphates inhibit cholinesterase, an enzyme in the human nervous
system that breaks down acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter that carries signals
between nerves and muscles.

>When cholinesterase is inactivated, acetylcholine builds up in the nerves,
which become overactive. Victims of organophosphate poisoning typically die
because they can’t breathe.

~~~
dekhn
IARC's findings stand in contradiction to nearly every other governmental
agency. From what I can tell, they intentionally chose this position and then
curated their data sources to emphasize their beliefs. This is an ongoing
situation where I encourage you to read as widely as possible.

~~~
grawprog
Yes. I'm sure the EPA, currently headed by Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist
for Murray Energy, known for trying to push back environmental protection
laws, would be fairly quick to dismiss any health concerns on a product that a
large corporation, with deep lobbying pockets and a track record of doing
terrible things to both the environment and farmers that use their products,
relies on for hefty profits.

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030881461...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201)

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01664...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166445X14002422)

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393511...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935117316730?via%3Dihub)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16263381](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16263381)

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01664...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166445X17303156)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21922334](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21922334)

~~~
dekhn
I don't think it's only the EPA that made this determination. IARC stands in
opposition to a wide range of government agencies. Note that much of their
opposition is based on results in S-D rats which really aren't indicative of
any effect in humans.

~~~
grawprog
I really don't need the EPA or the IARC to tell me that spraying a
bioaccumulative nerve toxin designed specifically to kill things, into the
environment, year after year on a mass scale has negative repercussions for
the environment and the potential to cause damage in humans.

~~~
dekhn
if it's that bad, can you point to the health outcomes in the US (which uses
this at massive scale) that definitely are attributed to this?

I worked in life sciences and there are many things which are published that
don't actually have anything to do with a compound being safe.

------
opwieurposiu
Glyphosate is the anything else, it has costs and benefits. One benefit is
that you can use it for no-till farming, which conserves the topsoil, and
reduces the amount of diesel fuel , water, and fertilizer inputs required per
acre.

A big part of no-till is always keeping some kind of plants growing in the
fields. The theory being that acres of bare dirt are not found in healthy
natural ecosystems. Cover crops are planted in the fall after cash crops are
harvested. In the spring, Glyphosate is used to "burn down" the cover crop
instead of ploughing it under. This allows the cash crop to grow through the
mulch of the dead cover crop, keeping which protects the soil from the sun
drying it out or the wind blowing it away.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-
till_farming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-till_farming)

