You are viewing the NationofChange archives. For the latest news and actions, visit the new
Get Email Updates | Log In | Register

Monsanto’s Roundup Threatens Stability of Global Food Supply

Anthony Gucciardi
Natural News / News Analysis
Published: Tuesday 13 March 2012
“The negative effects of Monsanto’s Roundup on human health and the environment have been firmly established by numerous scientific studies and large-scale investigations.”
Article image

Monsanto's reckless disregard for public health and the agricultural stability of the planet may be even more significant than previously thought. A shocking new report reveals how Monsanto's Roundup is actually threatening the crop-yielding potential of the entire biosphere. The report reveals that glyphosate, which was developed by Monsanto in the early 1970s and is the active ingredient in its patented herbicide Roundup, may be irreversibly devastating the microbiodiversity of the soil - compromising the health of the entire planet, as a result.

New research published in the journal Current Microbiology highlights the extent to which glyphosate is altering, and in some cases destroying, the very microorganisms upon which the health of the soil, and - amazingly - the benefits of raw and fermented foods as a whole, depend. Concerningly, certain beneficial strains of bacteria used as food-starters in cultures for raw yogurt, such as Lactobacillus cremoris, have entirely disappeared from certain geographic regions where traditionally they were found in plenty. The study reports that the death and growth inhibition of selected food microorganisms was observed in concentrations of Roundup that are lower than are recommended in agricultural practice.

This means that farmers who are increasingly using larger and larger concentrations of Roundup and similar glyphosate-based herbicide formulations to countermand the increasingly resistant super weeds GM agriculture has spawned, are not only damaging the immediate health of the soil, but subsequent yields of indispensable food-starter microorganisms, as well as the microbes that ensure the overall fertility of the soil for producing crops well into the future.

Monsanto's Roundup assaults the planetary biosphere

Microorganisms are responsible for much more than just the health content of raw and fermented foods. The most numerous inhabitants in the web of life, microorganisms participate quite literally "at the root" of the nitrogen, phosphate, oxygen and carbon cycles, and are therefore indispensable for the health of the entire biosphere. Astoundingly, there are an estimated 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (6 x 10 to the 30th power) bacterial cells on the planet, and these soil microrganisms represent about 50 percent of the the total biodiversity in terms of numbers of species.

As Roundup usage threatens these soil microrganisms, including fungi and the mycellium (technically the largest organism in the world), it could lead to devastating implications. Compromising the health of the mycellium, in particular, may cause serious harm to the planet. According to prominent mycologist Paul Stamets, mycellium may actually act as a 'network' within the biosphere, acting as the Earth's 'natural internet' in which virtually all organisms may rely upon. It has been recognized throughout the ages that all life depends on the soil. Without healthy soil, the health of the entire planet is at risk.

Charles E. Kelogg was one individual who stated such in the USDA yearbook back in 1939. Kelogg said:

"Essentially, all life depends upon the soil ... There can be no life without soil and no soil without life; they have evolved together."

Franklin Delano Roosevelt also voiced similar concerns, warning:

"The nation that destroys its soil, destroys itself."

Based on an ever-increasing body of scientific evidence showing glyphosate biodegrades slowly, sinks down through the topsoil where it accumulates in the groundwater (source for natural drinking water, e.g. aquifers, springs), and is found in nearly all air and rain samples tested in the US, it is safe to say that Monsanto's best-selling Roundup is one of the greatest threats to human and environmental health ever created.

As the USDA continues to sit back and allow Monsanto to threaten the environmental stability of the planet, it becomes more apparent that the USDA and Monsanto are gladly willing to exchange the future of the planet and its inhabitants for short term gain. In fact, the USDA has even given Monsanto's latest GMO crops speedier approval in order to secure the company's profits, ignoring the numerous known harmful effects of Monsanto's past creations, e.g. Agent Orange, Aspartame, DDT.

The known effects of Roundup

The negative effects of Monsanto's Roundup on human health and the environment have been firmly established by numerous scientific studies and large-scale investigations, with scientists even linking the best-selling herbicide to conditions like infertility and cancer due to its genotoxic (DNA damaging) nature. Amazingly, even when diluted by 99.8 percent (450-fold lower dilutions than used in agricultural applications), Roundup still exhibits serious genotoxic characteristics and is harmful to the integrity of human DNA. Meanwhile, this carcinogenic herbicide product is used nationwide by unsuspecting homeowners and agricultural workers. According to the United States Geological Survey, 176 million lbs of glyphosate were used in the U.S. in 2007.

Outside of the public health realm, Roundup's startling environmental havoc is perhaps an even greater cause for concern. Despite being created to fend off weeds, Roundup is actually spawning resistant superweeds across millions of hectares (one hectare is 10,000 square metres), bankrupting farmers and destroying crop land. These resistant weeds currently cover over 4.5 million hectares in the United States alone, though experts estimate the world-wide land coverage to have reached at least 120 million hectares by 2010. The onset of superweeds is being increasingly documented in Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Europe and South Africa.

The research is clear: Roundup is not only harming human health and damaging farmland, it is threatening the very biosphere itself by destroying microbial biodiversity, with the future agricultural stability of the planet, i.e. the ability to produce food through monoculturing, at serious risk of collapsing.

Author pic
ABOUT Anthony Gucciardi

Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. A health activist and researcher, Anthony’s goal is informing the public as to how they can use natural methods to revolutionize their health, as well as exploring the behind the scenes activity of the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA.

I would have shared this

I would have shared this article if the sources were noted. It's too bad we always wait for the science to catch up some 30 years later. Why is our great scientific community so impotent? Money.......power.......greed at the expense of the lives of our children! Shameful!

There is a cheap and simple

There is a cheap and simple way to double food production using organic, open source methods with examples at:

Eating the same stuff?

Eating the same stuff? According to reliable sources (well, I trust them anyway!) Monsanto insists on organic food in all its staff canteens etc -- so they presumably know exactly the same things as we do about the effects of GM on human health.

I don't think Monsanto is on

I don't think Monsanto is on a crusade to wipe out the 99%, as some here suggest! What are you guys smoking? And probably many of the middle level employees believe that they're doing a very good thing for humanity by increasing crop yields. As far as potential danger to the biosphere, there's a tremendous ability to not hear things that one doesn't want to hear. I can't speak to the higher levels of Monsanto but I suspect that they do in fact have some idea of the problems they are causing, but don't actually care too much, or are able to assert an even more vigorous denial. That is the level where profit generally rules supreme.

Look, for decades now we've been pumping into the soil huge quantities of this substance that was never there before and is designed basically to kill many, many forms of life. How can we not expect to be causing serious problems?

It's so nice to know that

It's so nice to know that nature is on our side. Maybe not on our personal time frame but any society that shits where it eats will get its just desserts (deserts?).

Just remember: Monsantos's

Just remember: Monsantos's family members and CEOs are eating the same poison they produce. Hopefully they can make a profit before they kill their family members off and live long enough themselves to enjoy those profits.

It's so nice to know that

It's so nice to know that nature is on our side. Maybe not on our personal time frame but any society that shits where it eats will get its just desserts (deserts?).

This article makes a great

This article makes a great many expansive claims about RoundUp with no references, data, or other facts to back them up. Studies are referenced without any ability to backtrack on the studies to verify protocols, proper scientific method, area or location of studies, and how representative of the soil the study area/(s) might represent.

According to the President of the College of Agriculture at Washington State University, the world will need to produce as much agricultural product between 2011 and 2050, when the population is expected to reach 11B, as has ever been produced since the inception of agriculture, some 10,000 years ago.

It is not bad, thoughtless, or irresponsible farming that is driving the current industrialization of agriculture, including the need to maximize crop production by eliminating weeds. It is the exploding population growth that demands more and more product from less and less agricultural land, as cities are built to house the burgeoning population.

It should be self-evident that the stormwater runoff from towns and cities, which goes into rivers, lakes, the puget sound, bays, and into ground water all over the country carries with it fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, gasoline, oil, animal and other waste, and other pollutants from the city that I'm sure you can imagine, so I question the validity of damage to ground and surface waters, including the waters at the Mississippi (along the course of which some towns and cities still empty their sewage directly into the river), or the issues with Puget Sound and other water in the US being exclusively an agricultural issue. Cities play at least as big a role in water pollution as does farming, but since cities and towns do not wish to accept responsibility for that, there's little data to support it. Seattle, however, has started a program exploration for treating its storm runoff into the Puget Sound.

According to an agricultural program I watched on RFD TV, homeowners use ten times the amount of fertilizer per acre to grow their lawns and flowers as farmers do to produce agricultural products. They stated it much more scientifically than I, but their scientific process was clear and clean.

Farmers typically grow the crop/(s) which will thrive under their climate, soil, and water conditions. We grow dryland wheat, because that is what will grow in our location in Eastern WA State. The wheat from this one county adds up to 8-12M bushels per year. depending on how much rain we get and when we get it.(USDA, ERS Crop Report). Washington State jostles with Montana and Nebraska for third largest wheat producer in the country.

Before anyone jumps on the monocropping rant, let me point out that 80% of the worlds population depends upon five basic cereal grains for half OR MORE of their daily nutrition. Those grains are, in alphabetical order, Barley, Corn, Oats, Rice, and Wheat. This information came from the UN Comittee on World Hunger some time ago.

It's all well and good to sit around and hyper-intellectualize about agriculture. But, as a matter of common sense, I doubt that any corporation which depends upon a hungry, otherwise healthy population is going to deliberately poison the soil globally. That would rather defeat their corporate goals, would it not? Eventually, it would kill them and their families as well. Just as billionaires eliminating 95% of the population would be equally self-defeating. Or the 1% having it all to themselves. What all is is that they will have if there is no one producing the "all"?

Similarly, farmers are, in my experience in a farming community, acutely aware that if they negatively impact their soil, they will lose their farms. That is why we have USDA and the National Resource Conservation Service monitoring the soil and helping farmers with questions or issues, as well as providing regular testing of soil. There are a many forms of agricultural assistance available to farmers to ensure the sustainability of their farms. We are at the end of our fourth generation of farming this land, and about to begin the fifth generation. That is true sustainability.

Lastly, I would share with you what my Grandmother taught me. When you point a finger at someone, remember that you have three fingers pointing back at yourself. If accusations are made, they need to be carefully documented in explicit detail, otherwise they are just more opinionated scare tactics. This does not constitute a valid contribution to the betterment of society.

Have you considered having

Have you considered having your soil tested at the local Farmers Service Administration office NRCS professional? NRCS is the new name of the old Agricultural Soil Conservation Service. They can tell you if there is a problem with the soil that requires additives. I had the same issue with our flower garden, and just added aged manure. I can't speak to the cute little lizards or the green beatles. If you want butterflies and bees, try planting flowers that they find irrestibly attractive

Isn't that the point? Starve

Isn't that the point? Starve everyone else out so tthe 1% can have it all to themselves.

GMO Risk Assessments Based on

GMO Risk Assessments Based on Bad Science - You the Guinea Pig:

Take a look at the above revealing lecture by professor Gilles-Eric Seralini! He expose some truly incredible information about how the GMO-industry hide information that show GMOs are harmful for laboratory animals.

Why do they not publish this data: Because data which show different values for male and female animals are not considered valid data. So the data is not reported. As Gilles-Eric Seralini points out, how can data which where not the same before the feeding of the GMOs started, ever be the same after they have been feed GMO for 14 days or at the longest.. 3 months?

And how can such short term feeding studies ever reveal chronic health issues or problems with reproduction? Well ... they can not!

And as it is revealed in this exellent lecture, this is how the industry has been handling the data from feeding trials when testing chemicals used in agriculture the last 50 years.

Is this the perfect storm ... or what!

GMO news:

GMO videos:


Monsanto will not roll over

Monsanto will not roll over easily on this issue. It will be a long battle. People are still smoking and drinking poison every day. If we haven't stopped cigarettes and alcohol yet how are we going to stop Monsanto. Greed knows no bounds.

Monsanto has planted their

Monsanto has planted their people in the FDA and have bought off their share of politicians, which is the only reason they've been allowed to get by with their antics. If they are not stopped, they will end up controlling the food supply. Between Monsanto and the bankers, the people won't stand a chance, unless we all start boycotting Monsanto and the Huge banks. Something tells me, we are screwed.



Man lives--(more greed,

Man lives--(more greed, chemicals, me first attitude)--the earth is contaminated, all living things perish.
Man dies---(no more greed, chemicals, etc.) --- the earth is rejuvenated
and new life appeears.
We may have been thru this cycle before!

I have never used Round-up or

I have never used Round-up or other weed-killers.
In the eighties and nineties my husband and I were still having great results with growing our own vegetables. It started to diminish in the late nineties. Now my gardening results have strongly deminished, in spite of using new bags of potting-soil, topsoil and other soil for planting. May be because of that using. What I get from the stores, even when it says organic is not the same as I remember from old times.
I bought strawberryplants last year. They are producing in abundance. But the fruits are rock-hard and without tast or sweetness...
The cute little lizards have disapeared. So the big green beatles. Grasshoppers, crickets ants sand slugs are still there. Butterflys once in a while. Thank goodness still earthworms...

As long as politicians are

As long as politicians are elected with the dirty money of big business, nothing will change. It will take a huge National catastrophe to change anything. And they are so callous about accumulating as much money as possible, even a catastrophe might not change anything.

I am really glad you are

I am really glad you are speaking to these issues. In future, if you could reference the studies it would be much appreciated!Amy Hobbs

This is not being done by

This is not being done by accident or greedy neglect. The billionaires want the world's population reduced by 95%.

They look around and see a lot of people they don't need who are using non-renewable resources. Monsanto is on a mission.

Comment with your Facebook account

Comment with your Disqus account

Top Stories

comments powered by Disqus

NationofChange works to educate, inform, and fight power with people, corruption with community.

If you would like to stay up to date with the best in independent, filter-free journalism, updates on upcoming events to attend, and more, enter your email below:

7 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Support NationofChange

Our readers often tell us why they’ve decided to step up and become supporters. Here are some of the top reasons people are giving.

1. You’re keeping independent journalism alive
The corporate owned media has proven that it can’t be trusted. In a media landscape wrought with spin and corruption, NationofChange stands in very scarce company.

2. You’re sticking it to the rich, powerful, and corrupt
When you have money in this country you can get away with damn near anything, and they do. NationofChange isn’t afraid to expose these criminals no matter how powerful they are.

3. Your donation is 100% tax-deductible
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 charity. People tend to assume that many other organizations are (most nonprofits are NOT) but it’s that 501(c)3 status is a bit more rare than you think.

Read the rest...