Do you use Roundup? Interesting article.....

[PJJIN]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ng-herbicide-p

[watcher]

Lab studies are one thing but I think if there were a problem it would have shown up after 35 years of wide spread use.

[Alice In TX/MO]

Personally, I think it HAS shown up. I know a number of people with children who have birth defects, and our granddaughter is missing the corpus callosum, the connecting nerves between the two halves of her brain. As you know, we have a five year old grandson who is a cancer survivor.

I'm not saying that it's just Round Up, but I think the cumulative effect of the chemicals in our food and environment is going to be detrimental to the next generations.

From the above referenced article:
The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.

[Windy in Kansas]

For starters this same information was posted on one of the Homesteadingtoday forums probably a month or longer ago. I wonder what prompted Scientific American to release such old news?

In my opinion it is a very poorly written article. The article clearly states the problems are in the inert ingredients, not in the glyphosate active ingredient itself, and the article states it is in the inert ingredients of Roundup, mentioning none of the generic glyphosate products. However it goes on to tell about how much glyphosate is used in the U.S. each year. Why tell about how much glyphosate is used rather than how much Round up is used? Certainly two different things because of so much generic glyphosate product on the market these days.

While the article does tell which inert ingredient is causing the problems wouldn't many similar household products also suffocate cells? I don't know, but the surfactant ingredient may contain the offensive ingredient. What is the first thing folks substitute for surfactant if they have none on hand to use? SOAP! Wouldn't soap also suffocate cells? I have used a soy based surfactant. Wouldn't soybean oil suffocate cells?

Is the offensive ingredient ONLY in the inert portion of Roundup or is it also in the inert ingredients of other generic glyphosate products? Seems to me that Monsanto is being singled out once again.

"Glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, is the most widely used herbicide in the United States. About 100 million pounds are applied to U.S. farms and lawns every year, according to the EPA." Why does this statement even matter since it is not the glyphosate where the problem may be? Care to venture a guess as to how much glyphosate product is applied to lawns and how much to farms where it shouldn't be a problem? If much was used there would be an awful lot of brown lawns throughout the U.S. Further, care to venture a guess on which of the two uses is applied correctly, or closest to label directions?

Bottom line is that the inert ingredient in question is an approved one by the EPA. If changes are needed then they need to get their act together and make the needed changes so that manufacturers can comply.

With so much used over the last 35 years or so if it were much of a problem surely we would have read about more issues with it. Probably no more detrimental than plastics, artificial sweeteners, or even grilling foods. From: http://www.helium.com/items/1021167-...tdoor-grilling

Heterocyclic amines are cancer causing compounds that appear linked with the grilling of muscle meat and it has shown potential to cause cancer in animals and very possibly people.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons instead are cancer causing compounds produced by fats leaking onto the hot coals and then being released through the smoke. The smoke produced releases these compounds that coat the meats we eat.

[Ravenlost]

Nope, won't allow it on our farm.

[mzzlisa]

Thank you Raven, me either. Two weeks ago, I caught the neighbor with a sprayer and a container of Roundup, out spraying along my fenceline, next to the creek (NOT a shared fenceline). He said he doesn't like looking at our pasture weeds so he sprays. I was furious. No permission, and he lives across the street from my fenceline. Hes lucky I didn't shove the sprayer... someplace.

[swamp man]

Originally Posted by mzzlisa

Thank you Raven, me either. Two weeks ago, I caught the neighbor with a sprayer and a container of Roundup, out spraying along my fenceline, next to the creek (NOT a shared fenceline). He said he doesn't like looking at our pasture weeds so he sprays. I was furious. No permission, and he lives across the street from my fenceline. Hes lucky I didn't shove the sprayer... someplace.

That's a neighbor problem rather than a glyphosate problem.

It's become awfully fashionable to be anti-glypho lately, and there's a whoooooooole lotta' hippy propoganda out there now.


Yep, the article is more or less baseless and devoid of any real factual evidence, so I'm gonna' take it abput as seriously as a PETA article I read recently that descrobes chickens as "sensitive and intelligent birds".....

[poppy]

That is basically an opinion piece. I use generic now, but I used Roundup for years. Contrary to what people think, it will not harm fish. It is the exact same chemical as Rodeo, which is approved for pond spraying. Some people are anti chemical and they will not like any chemical.

[mzzlisa]

I agree Swampman, it is definitely a neighbor problem. But, is it simply fashionable to be anti Roundup, or are we just now discovering that the stuff isn't the harmless liquid Monsanto says it is? I'd rather err on the side of caution.

Look how long it took us to figure out asbestos. In 1959, cigarette makers were using it in the filters. It wasn't banned for another 20 years.

[PA Katahdins]

Have used round-up for a long time and go through close to 60 gallons a year of it on our farm. I see no reason not to, just dont ingest the round-up and you will be good to go the way I see it.

[DQ]

I think that the main point of the article was about how ingredients can interact with each other and be a threat that goes undetected. just as with anything, chemicals, drugs, herbs, something is deemed safe if the side affects are not immediate and severe. they have know way of knowing how these chemicals in combination with all the other junk we are exposed to will affect the human body over time or track subtle changes that have trouble being attributed to the substance due to the obvious lack of controls in the real world. there is no doubt that the more effective a substance, chemical or natural, is the more potential for harm it has.



I will not use herbicides. personally I would rather have a messy fenceline then wonder about the possible affects of exposure to yet one more concentrated chemical especially on my children who unlike older people might face a lifetime of increased exposure. there are some things that can't be avoided so why take the optional risks too?

[Dusty Heels]

I read an article on Round up about ten years ago in Organic Gardening magazine, and decided I wouldn't use it. I heard somewhere recently that it was against the law to sell it to landscapers,for commercial use, but not to homeowners ?

[plowjockey]

Isn't that special?

Since It's getting harder to "whip the dead horse", of Roundup being dangerous, they have to go after Roundup's application ingredients.

In the "scientific" article, they go after POEA - Which is made from animal fat!

It is an emulsifier - a type of soap.

Soaps can break down cell membranes. When that happens, cells usually die.

This is 8th grade science.

Does "They sky is falling - The sky is falling", have to be our rallying cry, to lead us into the future?

[plowjockey]

Originally Posted by Dusty Heels

I heard somewhere recently that it was against the law to sell it to landscapers,for commercial use, but not to homeowners ?

Roundup can be purchased at nearly every Walmart or Lowes, in the U.S. - most of it already watered down, to ready-to-use. These are for the "consumer".

In states where it is restricted, probably all other herbicides and pesticides, in the higher concentrations, are restricted also. Often an "applicators license" and maybe some application training is required.

The Pro's are supposed to know how to properly mix and safely apply the chemicals.

No one wants "Average Joe", to just fill his sprayer with 25% Roundup and just start spraying. When he's done, he'll probably just pour the leftovers into the storm drain.

[Windy in Kansas]

Originally Posted by PA Katahdins

just dont ingest the round-up and you will be good to go the way I see it.

Or swim in it in order to suffocate your cells!
---
We should use all chemicals judiciously and according to label directions.

As to just now finding out about issues with it or other things--I believe we are now looking at things much more intensely and in-depth compared to the way we used to. As well, better medical communication may tend to point out where issues might lie.

I think we also need to keep in mind the overall use of chemicals and not just one specific one. Let us say for example that chemical B has come into use and is an excellent product to control pests whether they be weeds or whatever. It may do such a great job that popularity of it grows by leaps and bounds and millions of gallons are sold each year for use. We must keep in mind that although the use of that chemical has skyrocketed the use of another inferior chemical might have had a nearly equal decline of in usage. Further, it might be that even double the usage of chemical B still does not equal any potential usage danger of chemical A. That is one of the many reasons we continue to see pesticides evolve into safer and safer products.

One step further---does the introduction of genetically modified plants such as ones containing Bacillus thuringiensis thus eliminating or greatly reducing the need for insecticide render an overall safer crop than one where insecticide is heavily used?

Bottom line for many of us is simply which path we choose to follow, no chemicals, only as necessary, or at will.

[Blossom'sGirl]

Normally I'm against it mostly because it is made by Monsanto. I ended up buying a small bottle this spring when several Hogweed popped up around the farm. I was careful to just spray the hogweed and let all the other weeds survive. Hogweed makes poisonous smoke when burned and if you cut it or try to dig it up it will just multiply. Apparently its sap makes poison ivy look like a walk in the park. So I pulled out the big guns and that weed shriveled up quickly.

[arabian knight]

I use 2-4-D for killing brush and weeds and such THAT is some good stuff.

[Fae]

We sell 2-4-D in the feed store a lot. I object to the use of chemicals because I truly believe it is causing a lot of health problems. I cannot even be in the area it is displayed because it smells so strong. It is "safe" to use around ponds as it won't kill fish. If I know a pond has been sprayed with it I certainly won't eat the fish. This is just my opinion of it and many other chemicals. I also have strong opinions about Monsanto which I won't get started on.

[Old Vet]

Originally Posted by arabian knight

I use 2-4-D for killing brush and weeds and such THAT is some good stuff.

I use roundup to kill weeds both on a farm setting and landscaping and home owner. I have been doing it for ever since it came on the market. They talk about soybeans. If you get one drop of round up on a soybean plaint it will die roots and all.I have used roundup on soybeans before and what you do is have a wick applicator and get the weeds that are above the Soy Beans. No drip or anything to get roundup on the soy beans. The only roundup ready plaint that I know about is Corn and maybe Soy Beans in the last couple of years. I know that Monsanto is working on them but I doubt they are on the market now. I really never sprayed the whole field to kill weeds because there were other herbicides that were a lot cheaper. The only reason to spray roundup is to kill weeds in a narrow path like fence or along a drive way.

I used to use 2-4-D until they made it a restricted use herbicide. The 2-4-D animie can still be bought in a bar that you can drag over a yard and get rid of broad leaf weeds but the 2-4-D is so restricted that most farmers have quit using it and commercial applicators will run away if you are using 2-4-D. The reason is that even the fumes from a fairly clean tank of 2-4-D will kill broad leaf plaints like Cotton Soy beans and Corn.

[Yvonne's hubby]

Well now this is great news, now maybe they will leave us smokers alone and go after the real health hazards rather than dwelling on second hand smoke.