Tech | January 21, 2012 | 43 comments

Now glyphosate (RoundUp) found in peoples' urine

JanforGore
According to an article in German in the Ithaca journal, a German university study has found significant concentrations of glyphosate in the urine samples of city dwellers. The analysis of the urine samples apparently found that all had concentrations of glyphosate at 5 to 20-fold the limit for drinking water. As well as being used increasingly widely in food production, glyphosate-based weedkillers often also get sprayed onto railway lines, urban pavements and roadsides.
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin

Disturbingly, the Ithaca journal reports (in our translation), "The address of the university labs, which did the research, the data and the evaluation of the research method is known to the editors. Because of significant pressure by agrochemical representatives and the fear that the work of the lab could be influenced, the complete analytical data will only be published in the course of this year."
http://www.ithaka-journal.net/herbizide-im-urin

News of this study comes not long after the publication of a study confirming glyphosate was contaminating groundwater. Last year also saw the publication of two US Geological Survey studies which consistently found glyphosate in streams, rain and even air in agricultural areas of the US.
http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/13549

Other recent studies - see the abstracts of the 4 below - indicate that people may not only be absorbing glyphosate from multiple sources but that it can circulate in the blood and can even cross the placental barrier and so reach the developing fetus.
---
---
Aris, A. and S. Leblanc (2011). "Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in EasternTownships of Quebec, Canada."
ReproductiveToxicology 31(4).

Pesticides associated to genetically modified foods (PAGMF), are engineered to tolerate herbicides such as glyphosate (GLYP) and gluphosinate (GLUF) or insecticides such as the bacterial toxin bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between maternal and fetal exposure, and to determine exposure levels of GLYPandits metabolite aminomethylphosphoricacid (AMPA), GLUF and its metabolite 3-methylphosphinicopropionicacid (3-MPPA) and Cry1Ab protein (a Bt toxin) in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada. Blood of thirty pregnant women (PW) and thirty-nine nonpregnant women (NPW)were studied. Serum GLYPand GLUF were detected in NPW and not detected in PW. Serum 3-MPPA and CryAb1toxin were detected in PW,their fetuses and NPW. This is the first study to reveal the presence of circulating PAGMF in women with and without pregnancy, paving the way for a new field in reproductive toxicology including nutrition and utero-placental toxicities.
---
---
Chang, F. C., M. F. Simcik, et al. (2011). "Occurrence and fate of the herbicide glyphosate and its degradate aminomethylphosphonic acid in the atmosphere."
Environ Toxicol Chem 30(3): 548–555.

This is the first report on the ambient levels of glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide in the United States, and its major degradation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), in air and rain. Concurrent, weekly integrated air particle and rain samples were collected during two growing seasons in agricultural areas in Mississippi and Iowa. Rain was also collected in Indiana in a preliminary phase of the study. The frequency of glyphosate detection ranged from 60 to 100% in both air and rain. The concentrations of glyphosate ranged from antipyrine>benzoic acid>glyphosate in terms of both the apparent permeability coefficient and the initial slope, defined as the linear rate of substance transferred to the fetal compartment as percent per time, a parameter used to compare the two experimental models. The results from the in vitro studies were in excellent agreement with the ex vivo results (caffeine approximately antipyrine>benzoic acid>glyphosate). However the transfer rate was much slower in the BeWo cells compared to the perfusion system. The advantages and limitations of each model are discussed in order to assist in the preparation, prediction, and performance of future studies of maternal-fetal transfer.
  1. groups:
    Tech,   Green,   Earth and Science,   Sustainable Agriculture,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Environment Earth Monsanto Toxic 10 more
  3.     
    |

43 comments // Now glyphosate (RoundUp) found in peoples' urine // Video

  • queenofit
    • +1
      queenofit  
    • The mere fact that this poison is being allowed to be used by anyone and everyone, just makes me so mad. I have to say, when we cannot even get raw milk to drink, but they can spray tons of toxic pesticides across the country where it has reached the point that it's in our bodies and winding up in our urine? Come on now. I use the raw milk debate, as I am so familiar with the inequities in that ploy to stop dairy farmers from giving us good milk (those who would chose to drink it at their own risk). But Roundup, I don't have much choice anymore at all. I feel like I have (we all are most likely) trapped in a corner; food crops sprayed, sprayed in yards, parks, road sides, play grounds, you name it, weeds, buy Roundup and no one to over see it's use, no telling where it ends up. Monsanto loving it, they make so much money and with the super weeds taking over, these chemical companies will just provide with another worse chemical. say dioxin? Did anyone see Bill Moyers and Company today? It is really a show about economy, but the bottom line is, it's all about the same problem, corporation controlling us.. here is clip of his show, watch the entire show online. This is just a clip....http://vimeo.com/35388533 (Video won't show up, but please take time to see it). thanks!

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • queenofit:

      I agree. Last summer I was walking up one of the streets in my town. I saw a woman spraying it on the weeds in the cracks in the sidewalk in front of her house (not hard to just have pulled them out.) She was doing this while her baby was sitting in a walker right next to her, no protection. I just had to walk over to her and talk to her about it. She told me she didn't know because they advertise it as safe and said she wouldn't use it again. I hope she didn't.

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • LivingPong
    • +1
      LivingPong  
    • Ooops, I just pissed all over Monsanto executives' gardens, and I'm reasonably sure I've been thoroughly contaminated with that awful shit. Living in agricultural areas maybe is not as healthy as I once thought, but we do send our crops to the city so at least we are not alone.

    • 4 months ago
  • Fatalism
  • jimstoner
  • queenofit
    • +3
      queenofit  
    • Farming historically was a family business, one that grew out of an agrarian based society. In the early frontier, where there was a total dependency upon the family of farmers to provide the needed foods for our existence, there was a need for large families. Maintenance of said farm was the only way to survive. Thus, means were developed to make that happen, early on we had in our history here in the U.S a despicable experience of 'slave labor'. When that ended, so did some of the family farming. As time went on,(fastforward) we became an industrialized nation, and we moved off the family farms into the sweaty guts of industrial growth. Soon, (fastforward) we became more and more interested in finding ways to have more leisure life, and not such hard work. I think as we grew into that mindset, we also fell in love with the idea of "less is better". We see that in many things today, more in work related ideas, than the out come, which is consumer driven and so it is with our need to buy more and more stuff. But what we have done, is put more emphasis on the need to have that leisure lifestyle, than the work part of our early success here in the U.S. I am guilty as anyone. But, within that framework, we have also lost touch with the basics of successful farming. Our farmers now ride in airconditioned tractors, pumping out tons of chemicals on our lands, all in the name of comfort and efficient farming. We no longer depend upon one family of farmers to work a patch of land, we depend upon a corporate structure to feed us, and they do that job hiding in the confines of factory farms. Some of the things we have invented have proven to be great improvement to our life, but one thing that has not proven to be such, is the Genetically Engineered Mass Experiment which is proving more and more with every study which is "leaked" out, that we are doing more harm than good. We must take a step back and ask why is the term PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, not being used here? Why is this GMO experiment being forced upon us (especially) here in the U.S., even though at least 80% of our population says they want GM food labeled? Why is it that no one in the mainstream media will tell us about this, when they spend so much time on trivial matters, that basically keep our minds from seeing things that really do have an effect upon our children? This is a slippery slope we have landed upon, one that seems to be full of nothing but wet mud. It is time to slow down, take a hard look at GMO's and just like those recent movie goers did last night, when they saw they paid to see a silent movie called The Artist, and got up and demanded their money back. We must demand our money back, we did not ask for this poison, yes, maybe we asked for better technology, easier life for the farmers, and all the goodies, but we did not ask to be killed off by installment by a frightening chemical poison that is being tested on us day in day out. I don't want to spend my hard earned money on that crap, and yes, I WANT MY MONEY BACK...

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • queenofit
    • +2
      queenofit  
    • JanforGore:

      Here is some good information regarding weed control as stated in a comment I ran across today. Her name is Dr E. Ann Clark here is her link http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/research/homepages/eclark/ "1. Herbicides and hoes are not the only ways to deal with weeds. It is not a linear, my way or the highway, issue.
      2. Weeds - or pests in general - are a symptom of a dysfunctional production system. Whether herbicides or hoes, you are fixing a symptom rather than dealing with the cause. Fixing symptoms advantages exactly one party - the one selling the fix. Redressing the cause(s) advantages everyone except the one selling the fix. If you focus on fixing the symptom, without redressing the cause, then the symptom will reoccur reliably and predictably - obliging you to invest scarce resources (your labor, for example) in the fix. Does this make sense?
      3. What causes weeds? Many answers, but recognize first that continuous annual cropping is an affront, a vehicle for opening weed niches. How long do you see bare soil in Nature? About a nanosecond, following a forest fire, tornado, or landslide, before the seed bank, seed rain, or laterally encroaching vegetation - all vehicles that have evolved to keep the ground covered - come into play. The best weed control vehicle on the planet is perennial forages, which when inserted into annual crop rotations exert long-lasting benefits on weed suppression.
      4. Bare soil is an open niche, particularly for windblown seed but also for germination from the soil seed bank. Keeping the soil covered yeararound, through strategically sown cover crops, literally prevents weed germination by altering the balance of red/far-red radiation that cues phytochrome.
      5. Simple crop rotations - like corn/soy - offer an open invitation; growing them repetitively, as is the norm, selects for particular weed populations that then become problematic.
      6. These points and others are well known and well documented in the scientific literature, offering the alternative approaches to weed management which are commercially feasible - as shown by organic farmers.
      7. Huber's expertise and lengthy scientific record do not warrant your derision. Check out an entire issue of the European Journal of Agronomy (2009) Volume 31(3) which consists of a series of review papers documenting the effect of glyphosate and the RR trait on soil microbes. I'll attach one by Kremer, a USDA scientist, to make the point that the evidence has now accumulated to the point of fueling review papers on the harms caused by the Monsanto approach which you laud in your write-up. Ann" (me again) this comment was made Jan 13th of 2012, so it is pretty current. I don't see her "attachment" as this was a cut and paste in forum that I ran across, maybe it is on her site, or she would join us in this conversation. She would be good one to interview Jan, seems she is now retired. Thanks!

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +3
      JanforGore  
    • queenofit:

      I know of her. She was coming out against GMOs a few years ago. This is good information. Seeing your farm as one organism that is interconnected (biodynamics) to nature is really the best way to go. Thank you.

    • 4 months ago
  • LivingPong
    • +3
      LivingPong  
    • JanforGore:

      In Australia at least, our agricultural departments are the play things of companies like Monsanto. Ending this dangerous and very corrupt alliance would greatly benefit humanity, but it is a very difficult task. When farmers did not want to introduce poisons to their farming practices, it was quickly required under law. I should mention market gardening was quite diverse and pests were a mostly unheard of problem before the introduction of artificial herbicides, pesticides and fertilisers.

    • 4 months ago
  • LivingPong
    • +1
      LivingPong  
    • LivingPong:

      Shit 4 minutes and a PR spokesperson representing large multinational interests is yet to appear. I better go check my mailbox. - nothing they must still be wondering how to combat the reality of truth.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • LivingPong:

      Are you familiar with the Steve Marsh trial there? He was a certified organic farmer who lost his livelihood due to Monsanto's transgenic pollution drifitng onto his certified crop and is suing them. There are also reports of GM wheat trials going on and CSIRO being in bed with them as well on this. This is just so pervasive and in our faces. We have to fight back. If they get wheat, there goes our agriculture for sure.

    • 4 months ago
  • ecoalex
    • +1
      ecoalex  
    • queenofit:

      As an eco farmer,and being on the farm for over 60 years,I know about weeds.I will address only weeds, although the same applies for insects.I have always seen crop rotation.Weeds will always be present,it is a fact of life in cropping soils,even with no-till mulch systems,there will be some weeds.Soil balance,and the best soil mineral ratios are the key to reduce weed populations coupled with rotation of sods.I have eco farmed in Pa and Ca.What worked in Pa,; the use of calcium and molasses to inhibit weed germination didn't work in Ca.,still soil testing and eco principles did,I didn't have heavy weed infestations in either state.I am speaking about a corn/alfalfa rotation primarily.The key to weed control is a 65% soluble calcium,plus proper magnesium and other mineral ratios according to Albrect eco principles.Of course,I have never used any herbicides in cropping,I use a weeder after seeding before emergence,then cultivators until the crop is too high,the canopy of the crop does the rest to keep weeds at bay.I will walk the fields with a hoe too,but mainly I rely on a tool bar with rolling crop guards and cultivator sweeps.

    • 4 months ago
  • ampersand
    • 0
      ampersand  
    • Although I imagine the major agrochemical companies will have long ago taken steps to protect themselves from damage suits (i.e., it's cheaper to buy a half dozen members of Congress than to fight a series of billion-dollar class action suits) I would still like to know the possibility of such suits either here in the US, or in European courts.
      Is there a lawyer here in the mix at Current that can provide some information on that?

    • 4 months ago
  • Dagum
  • JanforGore
  • Ihatethemall
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • JanforGore
  • artemis6
  • JanforGore
    • +3
      JanforGore  
    • artemis6:

      It's everywhere now. The air, the water, the rain, the soil, our food. And it has all been going on while we were busy with the distractions put before us. But now that the spraying has become so pervasive because pests and superweeds are thriving, Monsanto along with DOW will just put out another toxic concoction to finish us off. This time the component of Agent Orange, 2-4D. I suspect they knew Round Up would one day become ineffective (if it ever was effective in doing anything but killing all life) but just didn't care.

    • 4 months ago
  • cmc101
    • +1
      cmc101  
    • no more freedom
      I can't pee on my roses any more
      but i can get rid of my weeds in the back yard
      will need to do it after dark because copy rights infringements

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • artemis6
    • +3
      artemis6  
    • JanforGore:

      I know it , only the unfriendly soil microbes survive ... they use it a lot where i live , and the soil is dead thereabouts . I want to move . If i put a plant outside , it immediately gets a deadly fungus ...

    • 4 months ago
  • LivingPong
    • +2
      LivingPong  
    • JanforGore:

      No wonder our native plants are facing so much trouble, 90% depend on soil biology to get their nutrients from the soil. High levels of phosphates in fact kill many of our native plants.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • LivingPong:

      It is at crisis levels now. Soil nutrients are being depleted through overuse of these herbicides. We need to get back to basics where we can and scale back and find safer ways to do this elsewhere. It can be done if we truly care about the future, because it is here. But again, politics rears its ugly head in all of this. I don't think there isn't anything that politics doesn't turn to crap. Real people and our biodiversity are being affected by politicians and their egos. It needs to change on all sides now.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  
    • Image
    • http://current.com/community/93421953_glyphosate-monsantos-round-up-commonly-fou...

      "EXTRACT: "Though glyphosate is the mostly widely used herbicide in the world, we know very little about its long term effects to the environment," says Paul Capel, USGS chemist and an author on this study. "This study is one of the first to document the consistent occurrence of this chemical in streams, rain and air throughout the growing season."

      Technical Announcement:
      Widely Used Herbicide Commonly Found in Rain and Streams in the Mississippi River Basin
      Released: 8/29/2011
      snip
      Glyphosate, also known by its tradename Roundup, is commonly found in rain and rivers in agricultural areas in the Mississippi River watershed, according to two new USGS studies released this month.

      Glyphosate is used in almost all agricultural and urban areas of the United States. The greatest glyphosate use is in the Mississippi River basin, where most applications are for weed control on genetically-modified corn, soybeans and cotton. Overall, agricultural use of glyphosate has increased from less than 11,000 tons in 1992 to more than 88,000 tons in 2007.

      "Though glyphosate is the mostly widely used herbicide in the world, we know very little about its long term effects to the environment," says Paul Capel, USGS chemist and an author on this study. "This study is one of the first to document the consistent occurrence of this chemical in streams, rain and air throughout the growing season. This is crucial information for understanding where management efforts for this chemical would best be focused."

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  
    • Image
    • http://current.com/technology/93511923_roundup-glyphosate-and-birth-defects-rese...

      This is a serious issue that needs more coverage.

      "On 28 September 2011, the scientist at the centre of the global row over glyphosate/Roundup herbicide and birth defects met with representatives of the German government to present his scientific findings that Roundup herbicide and the chemical on which it is based, glyphosate, cause birth defects in laboratory animals.[1]

      Prof Andres Carrasco, MD, is head of the Molecular Embryology Laboratory at University of Buenos Aires (UBA) and chief scientist at the National Council for Science and Technology (CONICET), Argentina. Carrasco’s findings gave scientific credibility to reports of people in Argentina who claimed escalating rates of birth defects and cancers after the introduction of genetically modified soy, which is engineered to tolerate being sprayed with huge amounts of glyphosate.

      Accompanying Dr Carrasco at the meeting were representatives of the sustainability nonprofit organisation Earth Open Source. The delegation met with representatives from BMELV, BVL, UBA, and BfR. The current approval of glyphosate dates from 2002.

      The current approval (in common with all approvals of pesticide and genetically modified crops) is based on studies performed by the very same pesticide companies that stand to profit from an approval of the substance.

      Originally glyphosate was due to be reviewed in 2012 but the Commission delayed the review until 2015. Germany has a special responsibility in the Roundup controversy because it is the rapporteur member state for glyphosate, responsible for liaising between the pesticide industry, the EU Commission and the EU member states on the EU approval of glyphosate. Germany will remain as the rapporteur member state for the 2015 review of the substance.

      In June 2011, Earth Open Source published a report by a group of international scientists, Roundup and birth defects: Is the public being kept in the dark?[2] which examined the original approval documents for glyphosate and found that industry’s own studies from as long ago as the 1980s-1990s (including some commissioned by Monsanto) showed that glyphosate causes birth defects in laboratory animals, specifically rabbits and rats.

      Birth defects were found in these industry studies not only at high, maternally toxic doses, but also at lower doses. As the industry studies were supposed to be on pure glyphosate, they show that it is not only the toxic added ingredients in Roundup (called adjuvants or co-formulants) that cause problems, but also glyphosate itself. Earth Open Source disagrees with Germany’s interpretation of these industry studies as laid out in its report to the EU Commission in 1998.

      In this report, which formed the basis of the EU Commission’s current approval of glyphosate, Germany incorrectly classified malformations as "rather a developmental variation than a malformation" and dismissed findings of malformations at lower doses.[2]

      Earth Open Source believes that as a result of such data being ignored, a potentially unsafe "acceptable daily intake" limit for glyphosate was set by Germany and accepted by the Commission in its 2002 approval. Earth Open Source says that the industry study findings are confirmed by Carrasco’s research, which found birth defects from both Roundup and pure glyphosate.

      Carrasco commented that the malformations found in the industry studies were consistent with those found in his own study, as both types of malformations depend on a mechanism called the retinoic acid pathway. Carrasco's findings were not welcomed by some sectors of society in Argentina.

      The Argentine government is heavily dependent on the soy economy because it has levied taxes of 35% on soy exports. Earth Open Source believes that the Argentine situation is highly relevant to Europe. Much the soy grown in Argentina is imported into Europe to feed our livestock and it is unclear that these glyphosate-sprayed soy imports are tested for residues.

      In addition, there are several applications in the EU approvals pipeline for the cultivation of GM herbicide-tolerant crops, which, if cultivated in Europe, will result in an escalation of glyphosate exposure. Claire Robinson, spokesperson for Earth Open Source, said, "We requested this meeting to bring attention to the inadequacies of the current approvals process for pesticides and other risky substances.

      "We asked the German government to conduct a rigorous and transparent review of glyphosate for the 2015 review – taking into account the full range of independent scientific findings as well as the industry studies.

      "On the EU level, we are asking the Commission to cease allowing industry to conduct its own studies on risky substances like pesticides, chemicals, genetically modified foods, and food additives. "Instead, industry should pay money into a central fund administered by the EU government and the government should commission independent scientists to do the studies.

      The scientists doing the testing could be blinded to the identity of the substance and its manufacturer to ensure impartiality.

      "We thank the German government representatives for their willingness to listen to our concerns and hope that together we can move the approvals process in the direction of stronger science and better protection of human health and the environment."

      Notes 1. Paganelli, A., Gnazzo, V., Acosta, H., Lopez, S.L., Carrasco, A.E. 2010. Glyphosate-based herbicides produce teratogenic effects on vertebrates by impairing retinoic acid signalling. Chem. Res. Toxicol., August 9.http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749

      2. Antoniou et al. Roundup and birth defects: Is the public being kept in the dark? Earth Open Source. June 2011.http://www.earthopensource.org/index.php/reports/17-roundup-and-birth-defects-is...;

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +5
      JanforGore  
    • This is a crime against humanity.

      But I'm supposed to vote for the current president who supports them, or some Republican criminal accomplice, or some candidate who thinks regulations don't matter? Sorry, not happening. No environmentalist with a conscience could vote for anyone who supports Monsanto policing themselves and suppresses this important information.

      We need to Occupy this election and Occupy Monsanto and really change this country. We keep voting in the same cronies and it never changes. And Obama wasn't impeded by any Congressional obstruction when he appointed all Monsanto cronies and employees to top food policy positions.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  
    • JanforGore:

      And just as an aside: Notice how no Obama supporters come in the threads about this because as much as they deride people for not giving him credit, they don't ever rightfully criticize him. He really didn't do anything regarding Keystone XL btw, the State Dept did, and they only did that because the people were on their a&&es and in reality it only got deflected until after the election for another location. In the case of supporting Monsanto, I find it highly illogical that those who support him can give him a free ride on this. This is too important to put the man first ... But I guess that's politics.

    • 4 months ago
  • unimatrix0
    • -2
      unimatrix0  
    • JanforGore:

      Hi Jan,

      I am an Obama supporter and I voted this post up as well as several of your comments because I think it is an important story.

      However, I voted the comment I am replying to down because I don't appreciate the attack on Obama supporters, for obvious reasons.

      I agree Obama should do more against Monsanto, and a whole host of other issues. I agree Obama is not perfect. Obama is a pragmatist and a centrist. I wish he would move much farther to the left. If I had my way I would have Bernie Sanders in the White House, or somebody even more progressive.

      However, I am also a realist, and I know right now Obama is the best we can hope for, and I know that working against Obama, or simply sitting it out, would only help the GOP, which would be far more catastrophic than another 4 years of Obama.

      I want you to know that even though I don't often comment on your green posts, I almost always vote them up because they are important, and people need to see them.

      Peace

    • 4 months ago
  • queenofit
    • +1
      queenofit  
    • JanforGore:

      How hard would it have been to find at least one , ONE PERSON who is favorable toward sustainable agriculture, to sit on a critical appointment seat? "First, we spit out our coffee over President Obama’s appointments of former Monsanto goon Michael Taylor as Food Safety [sic] Czar and ‘biotech governor of the year’ Tom Vilsack as Secretary of Agriculture. Then we choked on our grits when he made Monsanto lobbyist, Islam Siddiqui, the US Ag Trade Representative. Now, the real food movement has completely lost its appetite with Obama’s nomination of Monsanto defender, Elena Kagan, to the US Supreme Court." http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2010/05/16/obama-s-latest-monsant... Please is there anyone out there we could get in one of these kind of positions who actually cares about the safety and health of all people? I mean, it is pretty obvious what is going on with appointments such as this, right? But really, what happened to ethics and, are we no longer (citizens of the USA) relevant? I mean really relevant in terms of health? I think it's called loosing touch with the real world. Part of this is our fault we have to stop bowing to the status quo and demand better leaders, someone who actually walks the walk. But as usual, I am just a dreamer. Not asleep, but dreaming.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +4
      JanforGore  
    • queenofit:

      Exactly my point. He promises to do something and then does the complete opposite. Those appointments, most of them at least were up to him and he could have made choices regarding sustainable agriculture, but he went the Monsanto way. That seems to be something some don't want to accept, and it is important and does make a difference to our food system as a whole because that also effects health and biodiversity. Monsanto is absolutely despicable. I just can't see voting for someone who supports them when he has the chance to do what is right for the people. I'm tired of the excuses.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +5
      JanforGore  
    • unimatrix0:

      Firstly, it has nothing to do with voting me up but thanks for acknowledging that. And I also didn't attack I made an observation. This is an incredibly important topic and is the epitome of what the 99 % are fighting against. So believe me I'm not sitting it out. But I'm sure not going to vote for the status quo.

    • 4 months ago
  • LivingPong
    • +2
      LivingPong  
    • queenofit:

      It's a pity not all problems can be solved with a gun, fake passport and unlimited travel expenses. I've a quick eye for complete scum of little worth to the human race, but I'm far too compassionate for their spouses and children.

      Unfortunately I too have little patience for the workings of politics and can't keep a straight face when I lie through my teeth. I've entertained the idea of politics, but luckily I got to sit back and watch such animals gorge themselves on their cocaine and the food that I served them (no I didn't serve them the coke). I did meet the occasional person of worth in the political maelstrom, but they were greatly outnumbered by what I'd call "shitbags", and no I'm not concerned if they don't want to be my friends.

      Public pressure must be forever squarely aimed upon the corporate take over of all food production. Families and those who care about the land should forever have a right to grow healthy and wholesome food by natural means and remain on their farms without being kicked and bullied by vested interests.

    • 4 months ago
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • Truthitswhatsfordinner
  • queenofit
    • +1
      queenofit  
    • Truthitswhatsfordinner:

      Exactly, it is like promoting lies as the norm really. Majority of our leaders lie to us to get elected or stay elected and turn around an pander to corporations, who could care less about our well being. I was thinking about it this afternoon, and wondered if that is the way we all want to live? You know, depending on anything, anyone says to be a lie? What a crazy mixed up place this is becoming, because that is what we have become. Integrity, honesty and compassion for our fellow man have been shot to the wind.

    • 4 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
    • +5
      JanforGore  
    • I posted the video above to show you the macabre outlook some have towards this. Just like spraying Agent Orange over thousands of hectares of forest in Vietnam.... that was for our own good too, right? These companies have been killing, maiming and poisoning people for decades and they are still getting away with it, only in a much more insidious way... they are not doing it through miltary excursions, they are now employing average farmers to do it for them globally.

    • 4 months ago
more from Tech:

top videos