Weed Killer Under Attack From Tree Huggers

For over two years now, environmental activists and anti-industry groups have been raging against the U.S. government, the European Union, and practically anybody else that would listen about the herbicide glyphosate.

Glyphosate is a weed killer and the main ingredient in RoundUp. Weed killers are obviously a critical tool for American farmers and farmers around the world. The left-wingers are attacking weed killers despite the chemical receiving a clean bill of health from both the EPA and Europe’s main food safety and chemical authorities.

PRI.org reported late last year that “in November 2015, the European Food Safety Authority, or EFSA, found that glyphosate was ‘unlikely’ to cause cancer in humans. In the US, the EPA released a report that also said glyphosate was unlikely to cause cancer. That report was posted online in late April, but disappeared three days later. The EPA says that, although the report was labeled ‘final’ on every page, it was prematurely released.” Yet the left wingers are protesting from California to France and have been marching in the streets and testing their own urine to get it banned or restricted.

The impact to consumers of the anti-weed killer mafia would be to ban glyphosate, the most widely-used agricultural chemical of all time. U.S. farmers use 300 million pounds of the stuff each year. While anti-glyphosate activists argue that all that use is a threat to public health, they now have a major problem in trying to make their story stick.

Reuters reported on June 14, 2017 in a bombshell article titled “The WHO's cancer agency left in the dark over glyphosate evidence,” that “When Aaron Blair sat down to chair a week-long meeting of 17 specialists at the International Agency for Research on Cancer in France in March 2015, there was something he wasn’t telling them. The epidemiologist from the U.S. National Cancer Institute had seen important unpublished scientific data relating directly to a key question the IARC specialists were about to consider: Whether research shows that the weedkiller glyphosate, a key ingredient in Monsanto’s best-selling RoundUp brand, causes cancer.” It appears that the one study that drives their entire campaign has been exposed as bogus.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) found that the weed killer was “probably carcinogenic,” yet the review’s chairman ignored some evidence that contradicted that conclusion. In fact, and according to EcoWatch, Blair himself worked on the decades-long Agricultural Health Study (AHS), which debunked allegations of a link between glyophosphate exposure and cases of cancer. The scientist was part of a team that looked at health data from 89,000 U.S. farm workers and family members that dated back to the 1990s on. Earlier data from that study had already found no link between the two, and the latest findings only strengthened that case. And Blair testified that the data would have changed the IARC’s whole analysis.

For some reason, this report was never published. Results oriented scientific research has no place in this type of important analysis. This cuts the legs out of the protesters who are relying on this IARC “study” to work over governments to ban the popular weed killer. According to the Reuters story, one of Blair’s researchers emailed him before a 2015 meeting that “it would be irresponsible if we didn't seek publication of our NHL manuscript in time to influence IARCs decision." Three years later, that data has yet to be published because as Blair states, “you couldn’t put all that in one paper.”

One reason why Americans should be angry with results oriented scientific research is that they pay for it. American taxpayers’ money pays for IARC’s work through the World Health Organization and the United Nations, in addition to direct grants from the U.S. government.

In Europe, the head of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) came under attack by green campaigners because his researchers dared contradict IARC’s conclusion. For mild-mannered scientists, EFSA raised eyebrows for coming out swinging against what it called “Facebook science.”

The federal government and the states rely on IARC to make determinations of what substances can be linked to cancer. Sept. 11 first responders relied on the IARC to determine that 15 of the compounds present at the World Trade Center were known carcinogens. Yet, in this case the new revelations have spurred talk of withdrawing the IARC glyphosate monograph that is the underpinning of a pending case against RoundUp in California right now. The IARC needs to fix the deliberative process and stop suppressing scientific evidence that contradicts the finding they want to conclude. The public deserves an organization to produce an accurate judge of potential cancer hazards – the IARC has called into question whether they deserve to be that source for reliable scientific analysis.

Liberals seem to be forever looking for non-existent problems to "fix" so as to meet their political agendas but have little to do with the reality of how the rest of the world operates.

What possible agenda could they have in wanting Round-Up destroyed, other than to bankrupt a successful company and to cause food shortages? Why is it that virtually every Leftist cause leads directly to widespread death and economic decay?

"....Why is it that virtually every Leftist cause leads directly to widespread death and economic decay?...."

Well, that question leaves open a long list of potential answers. I'll just name a few off the top of my head. I know there are many other explanations just as deserving.

First, they are stupid.

Second, they are self-centered.

Third, they are all about "feelings", how they feel themselves, not the recipients of their stupidity.

Fourth, they never calculate the unintended consequences of their feel-good actions.

Fifth, did I already say they are stupid? :-)

“Obama’s EPA took off market a chemical that kills chipmunks 3 or 4 years ago. I hated using it, but it was one produce that worked...”

Jack Russell Terror....no more chipmunks!

“What -does- work on Dallas grass?”

Obama’s sons? It works on DC, Baltimore, Detroit, etc grass, I can’t see why it wouldn’t work on Dallas grass.

A good friend of mine, a business owner I work back and forth with for years, went through chemo for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma a couple of years ago. His family farms the largest amount of acreage in our county, he’s been around Roundup his entire adult life and even though he doesn’t farm he’s helped the family out every spring since he was a kid.

He beat it, but the Dr.s all told him it was really rare to get this at his age. He researched it more and if you dig deep enough you can find that Monsanto hasn’t been exactly truthful in their claim that the stuff is so safe you could drink it. There is a class action suit starting up from all the farmers and their kids who have developed cancer who coincidentally were in prolonged exposure to the stuff. I’m on the fence because I really don’t know enough to make a firm decision, but billions and billions of dollars can make for some creative test results, if you don’t think that then just look at global warming and how that worked out for them.

Get a good pellet rifle. And remember always have fun!

LOL, well it might be a way to improve my aim...but I think it would take me a while to be a true threat to them ;)

Several Tips to Get Rid of Chipmunks.

Thank you....I have tried some of those ideas—others I have not. The critters seem to be getting smarter—stealing the food without getting caught :(

I am having a tree stump removed and the tree specialist saw chipmunks had tunnels in the stump...so I am also looking for ways to dislodge them!

Thanks...As I just posted, I already have 2 dogs...Obviously they are not much of a deterent :(

Next dog very well may be a Terrier!!

Not sure where in Florida you are but I know here in St. Lucie there is concern about run off into the Indian River Lagoon. Not only from agriculture but from sources such as golf courses. I know Ag is not the all time villain some point it to be and most farmers and ranchers take excellent care to protect the environment.

It is a problem that people don’t get the difference between using a weed killer to pretty up a yard and using it to protect an essential food crop (for people or livestock). Ignorance about the day to day operation of a cattle ranch and other ag operations doesn’t help.

Not sure where you are in Florida but you should check out Florida Farm Bureau’s “Young Farmer and Ranchers” program. A close friend of my son’s is very active in it here in St. Lucie County. They are doing a lot to support agriculture here in Florida.

You eat it when you eat food sprayed with it.

Many wheat farmers spray the wheat crop right before harvest to increase yield.

Resistant plants contain it at harvest.

Other plants pinck it up through the soil.

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.