Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Roundup toxic to soil fungus at doses well below agricultural dilution [View all]womanofthehills
(10,989 posts)25. Lots of controversy here - you always side with Monsanto
Seralini's study is the ONLY long term study of Roundup. Monsanto's study was 90 days and Seralini's study was 2 years. So why doesn"t Monsanto do a 2 yr study?
Ten things you need to know about the Séralini study
1. Most criticisms of Séralinis study wrongly assume it was a badly designed cancer study. It wasnt. It was a chronic toxicity study and a well-designed and well-conducted one.
2. Séralinis study is the only long-term study on the commercialized GM maize NK603 and the pesticide (Roundup) it is designed to be grown with. See here: Why is this study important?
3. Séralini used the same strain of rat (Sprague-Dawley, SD) that Monsanto used in its 90-day studies on GM foods and its long-term studies on glyphosate, the chemical ingredient of Roundup, conducted for regulatory approval.
4. The SD rat is about as prone to tumours as humans are. As with humans, the SD rats tendency to cancer increases with age.
5.Compared with industry tests on GM foods, Séralinis study analyzed the same number of rats but over a longer period (two years instead of 90 days), measured more effects more often, and was uniquely able to distinguish the effects of the GM food from the pesticide it is grown with.
6. If we argue that Séralinis study does not prove that the GM food tested is dangerous, then we must also accept that industry studies on GM foods cannot prove they are safe.
7. Séralinis study showed that 90-day tests commonly done on GM foods are not long enough to see long-term effects like cancer, organ damage, and premature death. The first tumours only appeared 4-7 months into the study.
8. Séralinis study showed that industry and regulators are wrong to dismiss toxic effects seen in 90-day studies on GM foods as not biologically meaningful. Signs of toxicity found in Monsantos 90-day studies were found to develop into organ damage, cancer, and premature death in Séralinis two-year study.
9. Long-term tests on GM foods are not required by regulators anywhere in the world.
10. GM foods have been found to have toxic effects on laboratory and farm animals in a number of studies.
1. Most criticisms of Séralinis study wrongly assume it was a badly designed cancer study. It wasnt. It was a chronic toxicity study and a well-designed and well-conducted one.
2. Séralinis study is the only long-term study on the commercialized GM maize NK603 and the pesticide (Roundup) it is designed to be grown with. See here: Why is this study important?
3. Séralini used the same strain of rat (Sprague-Dawley, SD) that Monsanto used in its 90-day studies on GM foods and its long-term studies on glyphosate, the chemical ingredient of Roundup, conducted for regulatory approval.
4. The SD rat is about as prone to tumours as humans are. As with humans, the SD rats tendency to cancer increases with age.
5.Compared with industry tests on GM foods, Séralinis study analyzed the same number of rats but over a longer period (two years instead of 90 days), measured more effects more often, and was uniquely able to distinguish the effects of the GM food from the pesticide it is grown with.
6. If we argue that Séralinis study does not prove that the GM food tested is dangerous, then we must also accept that industry studies on GM foods cannot prove they are safe.
7. Séralinis study showed that 90-day tests commonly done on GM foods are not long enough to see long-term effects like cancer, organ damage, and premature death. The first tumours only appeared 4-7 months into the study.
8. Séralinis study showed that industry and regulators are wrong to dismiss toxic effects seen in 90-day studies on GM foods as not biologically meaningful. Signs of toxicity found in Monsantos 90-day studies were found to develop into organ damage, cancer, and premature death in Séralinis two-year study.
9. Long-term tests on GM foods are not required by regulators anywhere in the world.
10. GM foods have been found to have toxic effects on laboratory and farm animals in a number of studies.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Roundup toxic to soil fungus at doses well below agricultural dilution [View all]
JohnyCanuck
May 2016
OP
Union of Concerned Scientists concerned about hidden costs of industrial agriculture
JohnyCanuck
May 2016
#2
As someone who has gotten pretty good at backyard composting over the years
Warren DeMontague
May 2016
#6
Benbrook's buddy who managed to make the news 5 years ago with a story that went nowhere
Major Nikon
May 2016
#23
Yeah, it was republished in a shit journal that will publish anything for money
Major Nikon
May 2016
#32
Glyphosate the single most important factor predisposing plants to diseases and toxins
womanofthehills
May 2016
#29
If you haven't seen it, check out this longer video I recently posted in the Video forum
JohnyCanuck
May 2016
#11
Good info - who would want to eat food grown in soil that worms & good microbes can' t even live in
womanofthehills
May 2016
#15
Sure, so instead of carrying guns, criminals should just carry squirt bottles of glyphosate
Major Nikon
May 2016
#28
Sure, believe it or not people have actually managed to do suicide by glyphosate
Major Nikon
May 2016
#36