Posted on 03/25/2026 6:49:03 AM PDT by MtnClimber
President Trump recently signed an Executive Order that expands U.S. production of glyphosate, a herbicide contained in commercial and domestic weed killers, such as Roundup.
Glyphosate has been rigorously tested in more than 2,000 studies, including the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s large Agricultural Health Study, and has been used by farmers and home gardeners for more than 50 years. Yet some environmental advocates and other groups contend it causes cancer, specifically non-Hodgkins Lymphoma.
This outcry stems primarily from a 2015 hazard assessment by the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC), a semi-autonomous agency of the World Health Organization, which concluded that glyphosate “probably” causes cancer.
That finding has also fueled mass tort litigation against Bayer/Monsanto, the company that produces glyphosate, resulting in thousands of lawsuits and billions of dollars in settlements. It should be pointed out that IARC looks at hazard (the potential to cause cancer under any circumstances) rather than risk (the likelihood of cancer occurring under real-world exposure levels)—leading to classifications that many experts feel cause unnecessary public alarm.
The IARC decision has been criticized by scientists and regulatory bodies on several grounds. First, it lacked transparency: meetings were by invitation only, and members were told not to discuss proceedings externally. Second, it excluded key studies finding no cancer link—most notably the National Cancer Institute’s Agricultural Health Study of 54,000 farm workers, which found no significant association. When omitted from combined analyses, the glyphosate-cancer relationship grew significantly; a Reuters investigation found that many other null-result studies were also edited out. Third, conflicts of interest tainted the panel: Christopher Portier, a special IARC advisor, reportedly signed a lucrative consulting contract with law firms suing Monsanto shortly after the report’s release. The animal data fared no better: Statistician Robert Tarone testified before Congress that IARC cherry-picked positive
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearscience.com ...
WAS, I BOUGHT some last fall at the local ACE hardware.
It had changed due to all the lawsuits.
From AI:
Glyphosate is not officially classified as a “forever chemical” (a term reserved for PFAS), but research indicates it can persist in the environment much longer than previously thought under specific conditions. While standard guidelines state glyphosate breaks down in days to weeks, studies show it can persist up to seven years in water and 22 years in soil when it forms complexes with trace metal ions like magnesium and calcium found in hard water.
Yes, glyphosate is present in rainwater, particularly in areas where it is heavily used, such as agricultural regions.
Studies have confirmed its presence through two main pathways:
Spray Drift: The primary source, where fine droplets of the herbicide become airborne during application and are carried by the wind.
Wind Erosion: Soil particles containing glyphosate or its breakdown product, AMPA, can be picked up by the wind and enter the atmosphere.
Research has linked glyphosate exposure to several potential health issues:
Neurotoxicity: Studies associate it with neuroinflammation, Alzheimer’s-like symptoms, anxiety, and an increased risk of autism spectrum disorder, especially with prenatal exposure.
Chronic Diseases: Linked to chronic kidney disease, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and metabolic syndrome.
Cancer: The WHO’s IARC classifies it as “probably
carcinogenic to humans,” while the US EPA considers it “not likely” to be a human carcinogen.
Endocrine & Reproductive Effects: Shown to be an endocrine disruptor and linked to reproductive issues and pathologies in offspring across multiple generations in animal studies.
Other Effects: Associated with DNA damage (genotoxicity), oxidative stress, and severe health outcomes when inhaled, especially in combination with other environmental particles.
I guess we are both right and wrong according to the Google:
As of 2024–2025, many consumer Roundup products in the U.S. have been reformulated and
no longer contain glyphosate, replacing it with a mix of active ingredients including diquat dibromide, fluazifop-p-butyl, triclopyr, and imazapic. Some formulations still use pelargonic acid for fast-acting control. Professional-use Roundup products generally still contain glyphosate.
There is no direct evidence of a specific chemical synergy between glyphosate and common processed food additives like emulsifiers. However, significant concern exists regarding the synergistic effects of glyphosate with the additives (co-formulants) already present in the herbicide formulations themselves.
Synergy with Herbicide Co-formulants: The primary synergy is not with food additives, but with the “inert” ingredients (like surfactants and solvents) in glyphosate-based herbicides (e.g., Roundup). These co-formulants, such as the now-banned POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amines), are not truly inert. They markedly enhance the toxicity of glyphosate by increasing its ability to penetrate skin, cell walls, and plant tissues. Studies show that the full herbicide formulation is often more toxic than glyphosate alone.
Potential for Combined Exposure Effects: While not a direct chemical synergy, human health is affected by cumulative and combined exposures. The concern raised by experts is that the health risks from glyphosate (such as endocrine disruption, oxidative stress, and effects on metabolism) could be exacerbated when combined with the effects of other common dietary chemicals, including processed food additives. For instance, a nutritionist noted that glyphosate’s negative effects on thyroid health, fertility, and metabolism “can increase when combined with exposure to other chemicals.”
In summary, the documented synergy is between glyphosate and the co-formulants in its pesticide formulation, not with additives in processed food. However, the combined biological impact of consuming glyphosate residues alongside other synthetic chemicals in a modern diet is a significant public health concern.
Is that from the glyphosate? Or from them genetically engineering the grain to be more resistant to certain diseases?
Knowing what I do about bio-chem, glyphosate literally has no pathway to be a carcinogen in mammals. No more so than air or water at least.
What I’m more worried about is the genetic tinkering in the crops themselves which seems to get side-lined in the scientifically illiterate debate over glyphosate.
“International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC), a semi-autonomous agency of the World Health Organization, “
Aw. Yes.... A trustworthy source for sure NOT at all interested in raking in billions scam in tax payers and corporations alike selling their headlines to the highest competitive bidder of the current boogy man. Monsanto has their dirty corrupt fingers in a lot of things but the world is not dying from Roundup.
Where? It is not
When a man made chemical is used so extensively that trace contaminants of the chemical can be found in the most remote and uninhabitable reaches on this planet, it should no longer be used. Glyphosate fits that scenario. Glyphosate has been used so extensively that many plant species now have a 100% resistance to its affects.
Nice idea. I remember bike riding behind the fog trucks in Tampa years ago. LOTS of years ago.
It is nearly impossible to get completely glysophate free food. Seeds harvested early or late have degradation, so they kill the plant when the seed is optimal.
Since only the best wheat is made into flour, and the path to ensuring making the grade for flour is to spray glysophate, everything you eat with flour has at least two generations of exposure to glysophate. (I can find no studies on this).
The chemicals that replace glysophate can be worse. With Crossbow, the composted manure from a cow that ate the wheat can seriously stunt or kill your garden. It operates at an enzyme level so they claim it passes straight through all mammals, it will be interesting to see if history proves this to be true. For now, it is a plague to gardeners, hopefully that is the worst problem.
Yup ... EEET ze bugzzz ... Get yer mRNA injection ... impair agriculture ...
Btw...interesting note...
Who is Phil Perry besides Monsanto’s lead attorney. ?
Liz Cheneys husband.
Follow the money.
Yes, Philip Perry, a partner at the law firm Latham & Watkins LLP (https://www.lw.com/en/people/philipjperry), has acted as outside counsel for Monsanto. He has represented the company in biotechnology, environmental, and litigation matters, including challenging California Proposition 65 warnings on Roundup and corresponding with the EPA regarding herbicide approvals. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Key details about Philip Perry’s work with Monsanto include:
• Role: Perry is a partner in the litigation and regulatory groups at Latham & Watkins (https://www.lw.com/en/news/2018/08/litigation-trailblazers-phil-perry).
• Representation: He has represented Monsanto and other clients in complex biotechnology cases, according to Modern Counsel (https://modern-counsel.com/2015/monsanto/).
• Specific Actions: He successfully represented Monsanto in a First Amendment challenge against California’s Proposition 65 warning requirements for the herbicide Roundup, notes Latham & Watkins.
• EPA Communications: He has represented Monsanto in communications with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding herbicide regulation, says Investigate Midwest (https://investigatemidwest.org/2018/07/25/lawsuit-epa-unlawfully-approved-monsantos-herbicide/). [1, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Note: This refers to Philip Perry, the Washington D.C. attorney, not the R&B singer of the same name, according to . [7]
Would you like more information on the specific legal cases Perry handled for Monsanto?
AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses
[1] https://www.lw.com/en/news/partnerphilperrynamedlitigationtrailblazer
[2] https://www.lw.com/en/people/philipjperry
[3] https://modern-counsel.com/2015/monsanto/
[4] https://investigatemidwest.org/2018/07/25/lawsuit-epa-unlawfully-approved-monsantos-herbicide/
[5] https://www.lw.com/en/news/2018/08/litigation-trailblazers-phil-perry
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Perry
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Perry
Why do you think they’ve had to pay billions in settlements—and are trying to buy protection from lawsuits?
Here, from I’m sure one of your favorite sources, is a list of studies showing the damage. Just type in glyphosphate:
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/search/
Glyphosate is not a pesticide and it is not applied to crops.
It is an excellent weed killer to prevent losses from invasive plant species.
No, it isn’t.
Much of this nonsense begins with a dead communist named David Fenton who , after working for the North Vietnamese side in the war, made his living as an agent for hire against American industry and agriculture , starting scares and spreading misinformation. His company is Fenton Communications… but I heard he finally kicked the bucket after destroying farms and businesses on behalf of competitors, used to be the go to guy for Ben and Jerry’s, the Sierra Club, etc, to do damage for them.
Glyphosate is basically a heavy duty fertilizer. It kills plants by “overfeeding” them.
Life is a chemistry test one way or another no way out of it.
No, it isn’t.
Much of this nonsense begins with a dead communist named David Fenton who , after working for the North Vietnamese side in the war, made his living as an agent for hire against American industry and agriculture , starting scares and spreading misinformation. His company is Fenton Communications… but I heard he finally kicked the bucket after destroying farms and businesses on behalf of competitors, used to be the go to guy for Ben and Jerry’s, the Sierra Club, etc, to do damage for them.
And the EU… they cannot compete with US farmers so they defame them with fear porn. Foreign agribusiness went after US crops like Golden Rice even at the expense of people in third world countries going blind from malnutrition, etc.
I know its not a pesticide—simply stating I avoid these types of chemicals wherever possible and for me it appears to be having a very beneficial effect
That said, it IS applied to crops:
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/glyphosate
“ This outcry stems primarily from a 2015 hazard assessment by the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC), a semi-autonomous agency of the World Health Organization, which concluded that glyphosate “probably” causes cancer.”
Anything tied to the WHO should be suspected to be questionable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.