In Alberta where we farm, our growing season is approximately 100 days (give or take), depending on the weather. Everything we do is timed, very precise and done for a very particular reason. We start planting our crops in late-April/early-May, weather permitting of course. Due to our short growing season, among other reasons, we choose to use glyphosate to pre-harvest our wheat.
The Use of Glyphosate on Pre-harvest Wheat
One of the practices that is highly misunderstood is the application of glyphosate for pre-harvesting wheat. In layman’s terms, this simply means spraying our mature wheat crop with glyphosate before it’s ready to be harvested. Though glyphosate is not a true desiccant (a desiccant is applied for rapid dry down & early harvest), it is generally used for weed control and can aid in dry down of crops, but the effects take much longer. This is done with care, precise timing, it is backed by science and it is regulated and monitored.
It’s important to understand that we don’t just spray herbicides recklessly and certainly not needlessly. We aren’t going to spend money on expensive herbicides if we don’t need to; just think about that for a moment. As a business, which our farm is, we want to make a profit and not lose it. We see the accusation constantly that our crops are “drenched” and “doused” in glyphosate. I assure you, they are not.
Recommendations for Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Application
- Always follow the label recommendations
- Glyphosate should be applied when there is 30% or less moisture in the seed, when the seed is firm and with reasonable pressure your thumbnail will leave a dent in the seed.
- It is applied then so glyphosate will not be moved into the grain from the plant; growers are recommended to use the lowest appropriate recommended dose for their target use
- Never harvest earlier than recommended, usually 7 days minimum post-application
We have a Crop Protection Guide to use and according to it, pre-harvest glyphosate must be applied 7-14 days before harvest. If you apply too early it can potentially reduce yields and damage the quality. It’s also important to note that wheat is only 1 of 14 crops registered for pre-harvest glyphosate and there are other desiccants that are commonly used like Reglone, Heat and glufosinate on various crops.
Which “Studies” Say This is Bad?
The study that gets shared and starts misconceptions about glyphosate in farming stem from Stephanie Seneff, a very well known anti-GMO proponent, whom I’ve read about a lot in the last year. One of the reasons why my red flag goes up when Senneff’s name is behind research is that she’s a senior research scientist at the computer science and artificial intelligence lab at MIT with biophysics and electrical engineering degrees also from MIT. So why the research on pesticides from an electrical engineer/computer scientist? Truth be told, she and her colleague didn’t conduct any research at all.
Bloggers like Sarah Pope from The Healthy Home Economist, have a big misunderstanding about wheat and glyphosate. She states on her blog after reading Seneff’s paper: “When you expose wheat to a toxic chemical like glyphosate, it actually releases more seeds resulting in a slightly greater yield.” This is completely false. The yield of the crop is already determined because the wheat has stopped growing—their job is done, the plant is dead. When the plant isn’t green anymore, that means photosynthesis cannot occur or transport nutrients. Spraying glyphosate won’t magically create more kernels of wheat that late in the game to create higher yields, however weeds are still growing which can take away from yields for next year’s crop.
Does Glyphosate Harm Our Health?
Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) sets and monitors maximum residue levels (MRLs) using scientific methodology far below the amount that could produce health problems. It is a very safe herbicide to use, even safer than vinegar as a herbicide. Caffeine is ten times more toxic than glyphosate! If accidentally consumed, glyphosate is excreted mostly unchanged in feces and urine, so it doesn’t stay in the body and accumulate. There have been no legitimate studies linking glyphosate to any human health ailments.
In Conclusion
As farmer Greg Peterson stated on his Facebook page: “It is quite frustrating as a farmer to be accused of providing anything but safe and healthy food. If we knew that we weren’t, we would change our methods.” I’m right there with him. It is so disheartening to see written that we grow “toxic wheat”. We take great pride in what we do for a living and part of that is being transparent and honest with all of you. I assure you, unless you have Celiac disease or a wheat allergy, the wheat we grow is not “toxic”.
My farmer tells me that this practice is being used more all the time and that it’s important to note that the product can be misused. This is a practice that is common for our growing area, but may not be used by all wheat farmers. Farmers are not perfect and there needs to be better communication of why you can’t spray too early such as loss in yield and increased MRLs. As I already mentioned, we are up against the calendar with our short growing season. For example, the wheat harvested in our video was graded as number 1 (the highest) before it snowed and was graded as number 3 because of the snow after. A difference of about $0.50 a bushel and about an 8% decrease in value in one snow storm.
So remember: if you ever have a question about farming, ask the farmers! I’m happy to direct you to an expert that can answer further questions.
For more information from people in agriculture, please see:
The Truth About Toxic Wheat by Prairie Californian
Long-Term Glyphosate Use Effect on Wheat by The Farmer’s Life
Wheat Farmers’ Response to Toxic Wheat by Ask the Farmers
Glyphosate use in wheat by Andrew Kniss
One of Glyphosate’s Most Valuable Uses by Mark Keating
References
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development Crop Protection 2014
Alberta Agridulture and Rural Development Desiccation or Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Application: FAQ
Glyphosate Facts Clarification of Pre-harvest uses of glyphosate: The advantages, practices and monitoring of residue levels
Kniss, A. Salt, Vinegar, and Glyphosate
XiaoZhi Lim. Is glyphosate, used with some GM crops, dangerously toxic to humans?
Hall, E. Roundup and Gut Bacteria
National Pesticide Information Center. Glyphosate General Fact Sheet
National Pesticide Information Center Glyphosate Technical Fact Sheet
RealAgriculture.com Wheat School: Timing a Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Application Right
Ryan, C. The Dose Makes the Poison
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2014 Sarah Schultz
Latest posts by Sarah Schultz (see all)
- I’m a Nurse and I Don’t Like Giving You Health Advice - February 13, 2019
- Potty Training the Last Child - January 23, 2019
- Curly Girl Method | 1 Month Update - December 25, 2018
I am a farmer with just a quick comment. I was in awe while reading your article. You are extremely naive to be repeating what you are getting from your sources and the government. Their is big money at play here. You are not in possession of the actual facts. You are in possession of the "facts" as the agri-chemical companies want you to be and as they have warped government regulators.
This is sad because you are so nice sounding and upbeat. Please be more careful about believing what you are told. In our life time, Glyphosates will be banned and called the biggest mistake ever made in agriculture and national health/security.
will not ever eat wheat from your farm again.
Isn’t it great we have these choices?
I’m curious as to what your rebuttal would be to the WHO that recently classified glyphosate as a ‘probable human carcinogen’? Are you still as comfortable and assured in your use of glyphosate? And are you still confident in you and your family consuming food products that have been treated with this chemical?
Sarah,
Time nor space afford me all the time required to rebutt much if not most of your assumptions in this piece. Have you asked why the guidelines suggest you not harvest less than 7 days following Roundup application?
Are you suggesting that the extensive testing of wheat results by people like Tropical Traditions is untrue?
Speaking of researchers who don’t do research, you i assume have checked your wheat grain for Gly/AMPA residues prior to and following application?
New research has shown the active ingredient in Roundup is found in every major organ of the body in less than 1 hour from ingestion. The chemical is not toxic so it has no LD 50 but that is not the mode of action. It is patented as a bacteriacide. You know what that is, right?
Out of time. Visit Soil Regeneration Unlimited on Facebook.
Glad to see you found more time to come back 4 weeks later to keep leaving comments.
I would like to know your response to this article I read last night. Very detailed research. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC39457…
Edited: after a quick search, I see expert and scientist Steve Savage has addressed this already, here: https://gmoanswers.com/studies/steve-savage-addre…
“A key element of the authors’ argument is based on a single example of a study with fish (Senapati et al., 2009). In that study, adverse effects were observed in fish that were exposed to water containing a glyphosate-based herbicide. Samsel and Seneff concluded that the effects observed in the fish were “highly reminiscent of celiac disease.” The Senapati fish paper is itself deeply flawed, but it is also irrelevant.”
and
“There is no pattern of potential glyphosate exposure for humans in the United States that is even remotely like that in this poorly designed fish study. The formulation surfactants would not be present in human foods, the rates of glyphosate would be orders of magnitude lower and they would be in the form of the metabolite AMPA.
The Senapati study simply provides no meaningful data that Samsel and Seneff can use to connect glyphosate and celiac incidence.”
Sarah,
As a farmer/agronomist/father why in the world would you use roundup as a desiccant. Wrong for all reasons. This product does do damage to microbial life and ties up some micronutrients in the soil. And as some other people have pointed out our gut bacteria do have the shikimate pathway. Not bashing you like some of these other people just asking you to really step back and think about it. Big food/big chemical/big pharmaceutical/big government are all tied together and of course they aren’t going to release any negative studies on roundup. We are the experiment. If you really want it explained listen to Dr Huber sometime. Even if 25% of what he claims is true then we all should be seriously angry
Quick response is we don’t use it as a desiccant, I stated that in the article. Will address further when I get home. I’m not surprised, farmers are my most harsh critics.
Well, what I know is this: when myself and my family eat glyphosphate layden wheat we get an eczema like rash and gut aches.
When we eat organic wheat our symptoms go away.
And I think there are thousands of others just like us.
Take what you will from that.
Tracy, an honest question: how do you know your wheat products are "glyphosate-laden"? How do you know with 100% certainty that you react to glyphosate? It's truly a practice that not most of the wheat farmers in the world use, but I'm truly glad that organic wheat fixes the problem for you, though there is no evidence to back up your personal claims that conventional wheat pre-harvested with glyphosate causes eczema and gut aches.
Here is an MIT scientist documenting the problems of Round Up Herbicide in our food system. I certainly think after California said Round Up is a carcinogen you will need to re-study more than the label recommendation for Round Up. Here is the link to MIT work on Round Up https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/
I've written about why this MIT artificial intelligence scientist (note not agriculture or food related) is not a credible source: http://www.nurselovesfarmer.com/glyphosate-wheat/
What a pack of lies!
There is proper university conducted research showing the proven toxic effects of roundup : http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416, Dr. Robin Mesnage of the Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics at Kings College in London, revealed new data analysis showing Roundup, the most common brand of Glyphosate based herbicides, is 1,000 times more toxic than genotoxic glyphosate alone due to the inclusion of other toxic chemicals in its mix.
this article is more nonsense from some ***** trying to justify poisoning the food supply the ground and the water it is not needed in any way hasnt been used ofr thousands of years and since it has been pushed health of everyone has gotten worse not better yields and nutrients have gotten lower once you start using this poison you need to keep using more costing more every year not to mention the cost of the genocide machine to spray it wake up ppl poison is poison its making you sick its killing you dont buy anything from those who use it if others you know use it treat them as the criminals harming others they are i farm i farmed for big farmers all my life is see this only makes things worse you get sick just from the dust during harvest it needs done away with period and no one crying i use it its safe is lying to you
Hi lost wood,
I don't appreciate the name-calling, so if you come back please refrain from doing so. I'm not sure how the food supply is "poisoned", can you explain that a bit further? Actually nutrients have been added to crops with the use of biotechnology, it's one of the many amazing and exciting things available with GMOs.
I wish you the best, you seem a bit scared and worried about our very abundant and safe food supply.
I appreciate this article. Just curious then what your thoughts are that all of a sudden the is an epidemic of ppl who seem to not be able too consume what products comfortably.
Thank you,
Becky
Hi Becky, do you mean "wheat" products? Wheat has not changed on a genetic level in hundreds of years, so I'm not sure why all of a sudden there would be an epidemic of people suddenly not able to tolerate it. The world gets 20% of it's daily calories from wheat, it's pretty remarkable!
This is just one study, of course. Glyphosate might be considered safe for humans given the current state of knowledge, but it might be seen differently when we know more about some health effects that remain mostly unexplained. A few years ago, on a five-week trip in France, I enjoyed as much bread and pastries as I wanted and I felt great; six months later, back in Canada, I had to ban wheat and all gluten from my diet. The incidence of celiac disease and gluten intolerance is increasing; it is absolutely normal to scrutinize products that, after all, are specifically designed to destroy life.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC39457…
I've never quite understood the "traveling and feeling better eating wheat products" thing, because Canada is a major exporter to European countries. They seek out our high quality wheat to mill for their high-quality products. I've written about this extensively here: http://www.nurselovesfarmer.com/2014/11/the-skinn… and here: http://www.nurselovesfarmer.com/2015/02/the-war-o…
If you need me to clarify anything, please let me know.
Thank you for being a voice of reason and please don’t be disheartened by all the negative comments.
Thank you, Brian. There are far more good than bad comments…but it's the bad ones that tend to stick in the forefront of my mind!
Just because you’re a nurse doesn’t give you any credibility. In fact, it cements your belief in western medicine and science. You and your husband the farmer are a lambs, dear nurse, being led to the slaughter on the idea that GMOs are safe and toxic herbicides are harmless. You are both ***** and because of this ridiculously lame and scripted article, I will question the judgement of nurses going forward.
I'm sorry, Nancy, were did I claim that being a nurse gives me credibility? And yes I absolutely believe in medicine and science…you don't? What do you do if you get sick? If you do reply I ask that you do so kindly without calling us further names.
Few more thoughts. No, you didn't say they were good. I do understand the production part of it. I worked as an entomologist for a big corporation and my job was to identify insect infestations and then recommend spraying. We sprayed the hell out of peas, green beans and corn—and we used poisons, nasty poisons. Without them the losses would have been tremendous. It is not possible to grow potatoes here without spraying—I pick the bugs off in my own garden and can barely keep up.
No, it is not just Monsanto, there are others that make all sorts of compounds used in agriculture. Monsanto, and the others, maybe not all, primarily care about their bottom line. There are so many incidences, world wide, where they have knowingly done very bad things and in every case of legal confrontation have fought with all of their money—just like the cigarette companies. The company itself is not a "person" and has no conscience.
I doubt seriously if it could ever be proven that single person has ever died using Roundup in the manner recommended. That doesn't mean it is good for the earth, or for people in the long run. There doesn't seem to be any long term studies out there and all to frequently the studies that are done have a direct trail right tho the manufactures or to the institutions that support them. I just checked a major research department at the Univ. of Wisc., my alma mater, and quickly found a list of sponsors and contributors to the research. Made me a little uncomfortable.
I suspect what is being done in agriculture, and I was part of it, is an act of desperation to maintain endless growth. It is a system designed by big money and big corporations all of it suspect for a good life in a very finite world. Much of the innovations and technology is what is sometimes called a "progress trap". I have no solutions nor do any of the excessively critical posters on this site—but there is room for some good discussion and maybe some options and adaptions. Thanks for the effort—it will be a tough fight.
I am late in this interesting discussion. I do find it fascinating and informative as a whole. As a botanist, I have found miss information on both sides, some of it just simple mistakes, others possibly more devious. I do believe the blogger is being upfront and transparent to the best of her ability and that is to be respected.
There is a bigger issue, however. The reason we are using various hydrocarbons to increase yield is because the huge population of the world can not be fed by any other means. There is tremendous pressure to provide more and more food just to keep the exponential growth of population and GDP going. The big corporations are a part of that paradigm, We are simply tools doing the best we can. The likelihood that these exotic complex chemicals are good for us, and that includes all the interrelationships of combined chemicals, organic and inorganic, is probably not great. What would be worse is if we did not have the food at all.
I suspect we have to keep in mind that 100 years ago the life expediency was around 45. So what can you say? It probably is also true there will be a time when these chemicals will not be available, but that is another story. In the mean time, we might as well keep talking. We (my family) only eat what we can grow and catch—with some exceptions—but most people of the world can do that. Use those chemicals carefully because they are not gong away—but remember Monsanto does not give one damn about our safety and the government knows the people have to be fed. Then there is the subject of economics!
Thanks for the comment, David. I'm not sure anywhere where I eluded that "exotic complex chemicals are good for us", but for the greater good for our farm raising food, we feel it is. I think it's unfair to say "Monsanto does not give one damn about our safety", there's far more to biotechnology and pesticides than Monsanto. It's not great business practice to kill off your customers 😉
Very informative information. I’d say he’s done some solid homework in the issue. Wouldn’t you think?
What was interesting was the style and locations of modern day tumors and how even Monsanto’s own research is somehow aligned. A fair smoking gun wouldn’t you think?
Do you think the headline ‘The Truth about Glyphosates’ should be an impartial discussion about the Truths?
Im interested in reading your opinion on this article.
Regards….
I'd say the conspiracy theorist of all conspiracy theories, perhaps second only to Mike Adams of Natural News, Mercola wrote this so I'll take it with a grain of salt, or perhaps wheat! 😉
I am glad to find your post that puts to rest the idea of dumping Roundup on wheat to increase seed yield or hasten harvest-readiness.
However I must correct your etatements about the safety of glyphosate. Studies find a significant association between glyphosate and myeloproliferative disorders such as Multiple Myeloma. As a nurse you know what a devastating diagnosis this is to receive.
The precursor to myeloma is MGUS, “monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance”. One study of populations in Minnesota found twice as many cases of MGUS in a group of pesticide applicators as was found in the general population.
Roundup is far from benign. A link to studies:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=gl…
Hi Marilyn, the risk is always highest to the applicator, not to the consumer. My husband and our family feel safe using this herbicide and I have a strong personal connection to MM. http://fafdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Glyphosate_…
My comment related to glyphosate in our food potentially having an effect on the gut microbiome.
Yes, you have made several and I have responded to several.
It's odd, i had a comment here and the blog author replied to me, and i replied back, and now it's gone.
Is this thew way it is? Did it just get lost somehow?
Blog author, please advise, i hope it's not intentional censorship….
I'm not sure what comment? You've made a few. I don't delete comments willy nilly, you can refer to my comment policy if you'd like.
If you believe that Glyphosate is safe then maybe you believe PCB's and Agent Orange are safe also. Monsanto produced these products also.
Hi Dave, this comment comes up time and time again. That was a different Monsanto, perhaps they should have chosen a different name, hey? I love this article explaining it further: http://www.quora.com/Is-Monsanto-evil
Dear Sarah,
You wrote in this post "There have been no legitimate studies linking glyphosate to any human health ailments". But that was in 2014 – now it's 2015 and the World Health Organization has classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/2…
Maybe it's time for a post update?
Margarida Silva
Hi Margarida, it is listed as a "probable" human carcinogen along with working night shifts and smoke from camp fires. There are tons and tons of "probable" carcinogens in the world and the people that are actually at risk from glyphosate are people like my husband who use it directly and mixes it from it's concentrated form. You can read more here from my friend Amanda: http://www.thefarmersdaughterusa.com/2015/03/glyp…
I'm afraid "probable" has two meanings and you're mixing both. In current language "probable" means likely but uncertain. However, in IARC speak, "probable carcinogen" means something wholly different: it means that the chemical has been demonstrated as a true carcinogen from lab studies. So there is no uncertainty there. And this means that there are in fact legitimate studies linking glyphosate to human health ailments. Contrary to what you say. Sorry.
I'm afraid you're mistaken. There is no direct link, no new research has been conducted. Thus the word “probable”. And again—probable to those who use it directly, not the consumer.Sent from my iPhone
Sorry, Sarah, what you say is not correct. See here what the World Health Organization's specialist that chaired the evaluation had to say about the "probability": http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/03/26/us-monsa…
He says there is "sufficient" evidence in animals. So there is a link. He also says there are "hundreds of studies on glyphosate". So there is relevant research. When you write "There is no direct link, no new research has been conducted. Thus the word "probable"." , who's your source? Valid, scientific, independent source, I mean.
Thanks,
Margarida Silva
All of the press releases say that. What cancer does glyphosate cause? "Cancer" is a a very very broad term for a widespread disease.
Also not sure if you read through the link I sent you, but follow the links in this post, it is a very thorough assessment: http://www.thefarmersdaughterusa.com/2015/03/glyp…
Let's not stray from my original point… I'm not trying to discuss the whole glyphosate gives you cancer controversy. I'm just taking issue with your statement here that "There have been no legitimate studies linking glyphosate to any human health ailments". The IARC has found legitimate studies linking glyphosate to human ailments and that's all I'm saying. Wether those studies are robust enough to definitely prove the cancer link (namely non-Hodgkin lymphoma, since you asked), that's for scientists to decide in the coming months and years. The important thing in the meantime is to recognize there is at least some evidence already. Tested, scientific, valid evidence. And that's my only suggestion to you.
Margarida Silva
Can you link me to the studies? Because in the report it was specified that their conclusions came from no new data.
Here's the summary of their publication in The Lancet/Oncology: http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanonc/PII…
The full monograph will be published as
International Agency for Research on Cancer Volume 112: Some organophosphate insecticides and herbicides: tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon and glyphosate. IARC Working Group. Lyon;
3–10 March 2015. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risk Chem Hum.
Enjoy the reading,
Margarida
I transparently admit I am not an expert, I reach out to people who are. This is what my friend Steve Savage (plant scientist) had to say:
"Its interesting timing since all of the references are at lest 6 years old and even in the Lancet article they say that a huge epidemiological study from the US (Iowa and North Carolina) didn't see any link with carcinogenicity. Actually that study says that farmers live longer and are less likely to get cancer than the general population."
And from Robert Sacerich on his website: http://www.rationalityunleashed.net/roundup-isnt-…
"First off, the study they cited takes their conclusions while admitting “There was limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.”
The study noted to indicate DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals was a Columbian meta-analysis that notes directly:
“The results have been contradictory, because there are several factors that influence them, as the active ingredients, technical formulations and chemical groups which they belong, the type of exposure (acute or chronic), type of contact (direct or indirect), the amount used, duration and intensity of the applications, the exposure to mixtures, climate and the seasons of the year when the application were made, the age of the persons, among other factors.”
The claim quoted from the report “Its use has increased sharply with the development of genetically modified glyphosate-resistant crop varieties.” Is an interesting one. The use of herbicides since the implementation of genetically modified crops (with resistances) actually has a downward trend.
And finally, they make some great claims at the end in regards to kidney disease in Central America. The conclusions of the actual studies on that epidemic were that it’s due to heat and dehydration. The note about pesticides was an afterthought in the initial reporting that this Al Jazeera writer latched onto. Add to that the fact that glyphosate is an herbicide and not a pesticide, a difference the author doesn’t seem to understand in a meaningful enough way to be reporting on it, and you get sensationalist conclusions on a poorly written report that just feeds into the public panic unnecessarily.
It should also be noted that they classified it as a group 2A carcinogen. Also classified in this level is shift work and being a hairdresser. So, let's keep the panic down to a…nothing.
Side note: Glyphosate has been off patent for years now. There’s a myriad of other companies producing it, so the “argumentium ad monsanitum” is just lazy journalism."
I can see our back and forth is getting us really nowhere. Have a good one and best wishes finding the information that you are looking for.
Defending poisoning the idiots that are still willing to eat wheat and the GMO crops that are also sprayed with this crap. Amazing. Stunning.
Your rude comments are not tolerated here, Jmac. Please show some kindness and respect.
We are what we eat!
Roundup is a poison designed to kill.
I congratulate the people posting who have by direct experience tested and trialed removing this source of poison from their food with positive results.
The majority if scientific research can be linked to funding sources that desire a predetermined outcome.
Direct experience is a very powerful source and should not be discredited by calling it anecdotal.
We all have the right to eat what we wish. I don't feel producers have the right to feed us with poisons. Roundup is a poison. Lets not forget that point.
We are what we eat. Eat wisely.
I've never understood the "we are what we eat" slogan…but you're right about this: RoundUp IS a poison, designed to kill weeds. It's designed in a very specific way to kill certain weeds and not harm humans. If anecdotal evidence is going to be considered a powerful source, consider that I'm a farm wife whose husband works in direct contact with glyphosate, it is sprayed around our house in our yard to kill unwanted weeds as it is also sprayed in the fields around us to protect our crops. I have had 2 healthy pregnancies and 2 healthy baby boys. So on that logic, I can claim that glyphosate is 100% safe, right? Farmers are not feeding you poisons and it honestly is so disheartening to read these statements thinking that you think that we are doing this.
I dont feel the farmers have much of a choice anymore. Just like we have limited choices to the food we are fed. Whether that is wheat, rice, vegetables or meat products.
I don't lay blame on farmers. Salt of the earth people who toil to feed the masses.
It's a corporate driven agenda putting profit before the people.
Monsanto isn't a decent company. The farmers are the decent folk doing the best they can.
Best wishes.
SJF, we are real farmers and I assure you we have plenty of choices. This is a really great blog post explaining more in depth about those choices: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-dewey-rohrich…
So if glyposate is an amino acid formation disrupter and nutritionally results in a lower quality food source why are we doing it? The review ofc Glyphosate is that it is a residual in food even after processing. Further the product is showing up in locations using it in europe in groundwater. Does it not seem to be a price I as a consumer am not willing to pay just for more harvestabl3e calories when farmland per person presevation is a bigger issue?
Oddly enough, Stephen, without the use of crop protection products we would need 37 million more acres of farmable land in Canada, which equals out to all the farmable land currently being used in the province of Saskatchewan (via CropLife Canada). Can I have a citation for "residual in food even after processing" please?
Studies showing residual glyphosate in food: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19411135 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11569770 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1783592 http://cdn.intechweb.org/pdfs/13027.pdf – although the only glyphosate specific mention is in beer
You are obviously an intelligent and well educated person, so I am surprised that you did not catch your logic mistake in your response to Hannah VW, regarding glyphosates effect on gut bacteria. You stated:
"This might help, taken from David B. from GMO Skepti-Forum:
"Here is one study looking at in vitro treatment of bacteria from poultry guts. The minimum detectable effect was at 0.150 mg/ml which is orders of magnitude higher than would be found in the human gut given that glyphosate residues, when found, are in the ppm level and any food residues would be diluted in the gut. The other problem with this study is that they used roundup rather than glyphosate, so the effect might well be due to the surfactant."
The logic mistake: when would you apply pure glyphosate, WITHOUT the surfactants, as opposed to the finished product, Roundup? To the best of my knowledge, it only commercially available as Roundup, or some variant thereof.
A little food for thought along this topic: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24434723
Although I have different views regarding the safety of Roundup, I want to thank you for this interesting and informative article.
I don't precisely follow the thread logic here, but let me say that glyphosate in very tiny amounts, like micrograms in the human gut, can exert selective pressures on the microbes. It may take a lot to kill a cell in vitro in single strain culture, but it takes a lot less to inhibit or affect a cell such that it can be overcome by pressure from more resistant species like Pseudomonas. I would suggest looking at the study done in the 1980s on glyphosate effects on the Nicotiana sylvestris plant cells. It shows that glyphosate presence can cause huge overexpression of the shikimic acid pathway, to the tune of 300+ times the amount of the first enzyme of that pathway, and these enzyme molecules have molecular masses on the order of 50,000 so it's not a trivial thing for a cell to overproduce it.
I was just shown this: https://twitter.com/CraigBuntNZ/status/5797885967…
And how much glyphosate must be present to cause harm to the millions of bacteria in our guts? What dose is relevant?
Another quick fact sheet on acute/chronic toxicity: http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/die…
I acknowledge fully that I am not an expert, I am reaching out to people that are to learn more about these things.
You do know that while humans may not have the shikimate pathway, the bacteria that comprises our micro-biome does, and since they outnumber our cells 10-1, I would think that we humans would be very concerned about this. And Stephanie Seneff's credentials are impeccable. We are very fortunate to have her on our side — and that is the side of health. If you truly care about your family, I would start spending my energies on how to convert your farm back to conventional, or better yet, organic. Many farmers are doing just that.
We live in a world with free will and choices. Our family chooses to farm this way knowing that what we do is safe and sustainable. As a consumer, you have the choice to buy other 'conventional' and certainly organic food. If Stephanie Seneff has merit in the agriculture world, then so does Mr. Andrew Wakefield in the medical world.
GMO Canada has written on facebook newsfeed:
Somebody should let this nurse know that glyphosate is patented as an antibiotic in 2004, biocide in (2010) and a demineralizer (1964). And somebody ought to wash her mouth out with roundup ! Her blog should be entitled" Nurse loves GMO farmers and parrots big agri's propaganda!
Glyphosate an antibiotic must be getting into our bodies, thus our society is becoming tolerant to it. As you know society is having a large problem with intolerant treatment of antibiotics.
Can you please send me a link? I couldn't find anything. It's a shame that personal attacks need to start like this. There is a lot of misinformation in that statement and I would be happy to chat with them, but not if they're going to wish me to wash my mouth out with RoundUp.
Glyphosate does not affect humans or livestock AT ALL!!! However, it's presence in reproductive processes of microorganisms creates a preferential environment for "bad" bacteria in the gut of cows and humans, etc.. This had been shown to negatively affect dairy cows, and more scientists are starting to unearth the mechanism that causes "good" bacteria in our guts to be out-competed. This mechanism, as well as the bad bacteria—>inflammation—>chronic disease connection, will be subjects of intense study in the coming years. In the mean time, don't eat much processed food, and try to find ways to live a stress-free lifestyle. Because, a healthy mind-body will allow your systems to flush out toxins and bad bacteria. Also, read Eckhart Tolle!
Hi Ethan,
There's always lots of talk about "bad gut bacteria" with glyphosate, but no one ever follows up with peer-reviewed studies for me to take a look at. Being a farmer and "living a stress-free lifestyle" cannot be used in the same sentence 🙂
Nut allergies are being triggered by inclusion of nut germplasm in crops for helping correct the abnormal amino acid balances which result from gene splicing technology to create various traits such as Bt events and herbicide tolerance. The first feeding trials of GMO soy made this very clear in the results experienced with hogs. All reported in Jeffrey Smith's book Seed of Deception.
Remind me again, what is Jeffrey's Smith's background? What makes him an expert in food, agriculture and/or plant genetics?
Check out the presentation from Dr. Monika Kruger, DVM. for your peer reviewed study on the fate of gut microbiome.
Nothing which Monsanto has ever submitted to the FDA or EPA has ever constituted anything thAT RESEMBLES GOOD SCIENCE. Even the courts agreed that Seralini’s work was not flawed science like Monsanto had alleged. Have you examined tHE FATE OF THE SAME RAT SPECIES THAT MONSANTO USES? How about the Ermakovich study which clearly demonstrated with the same rats again that the third generation was sterile? I don’t have time to look up the links. You need to do it for yourself.
You don't have time to back up your claims? Then why bother saying anything at all. Seralini is not a credible resource here.
glyphosate is patented as an antibiotic. . .check it out and then get back to me about whether you think it's harmless. . .
Yes, you're absolutely right. I still think it's harmless when used properly.
Just a question: Do you feed your family with your crops?
We don't eat raw wheat, canola or yellow peas but we buy local canola oil that could very well come from our crops and buy locally milled flour which could also come from our crops.
100 day growing season,of course you are going to spray Roundup…You would be flipping burgers and not be farming that ground.It is all about collateral damage and making a living.It is those who have a conscience that will make a difference.
Six weeks ago, following pure gut instinct, a made one single change in my life. At that point I had hyperthyroid causing me to develop eight inch sweat rings under my arms every two hours. I would go through six t-shirts every day. Also, I was only able to force my body into a very shallow sleep for two hours at a time all night long with natural sleep aids. I also had hypertension as well as chronic knee pain. This suffering has been plaguing me for years now and no one has been able to find a cause. I also had psoriasis all over my body and an eczema like rash on my arms. Needless to say, it was horrible. I eat healthy, no soda, very little sugar, hike regularly, do everything right. That is, aside from eating poisoned wheat. Six weeks ago I stopped eating all forms of mass produced garbage wheat products. I also switched to only occasional eating locally baked organic bread made from ancient and organic grains. So I am still eating wheat! Did you hear that? Did you? I then and added a very high quality pro biotic and lightly increased my already sizable intake of fresh organic vegetables. That is all that I did! As of now, the recently developed rash on my arms and the psoriasis that has plagued me for years are about 85% diminished and fade a little more every day. And I sleep unlike I have slept in at least ten years. My hypertension and hyperthyroid are almost completely a symptomatic. And my knee pain is gone.
This , I find wholly and completely shocking! Nice to know that our food producers are poisoning us. This makes me sick. I mean literally, it was making me sick. Thanks farmers. Thanks Monsanto! If either of you read this comment, please wake up!!!!!!!!!
I just wanted to add a couple of details. The armpit sweating is virtually gone. I wear one shirt per day. Also, a persistent puffiness under my eyes for several years seems to be going away as well. People have actually commented. And the final thing I have noticed is that mild but chronic knee pain is for all practical purposes gone. Is this all a coincidence? I suppose it could be but it is very interesting and I am quite surprised and excited by all of these developments. Again, the only thing I did was stop eating highly processed wheat products. That’s it! But I am still eating wheat!
One final note I would like to make is that I have tried almost every natural approach to healing my health issues. I have tried cutting out different allergic foods very diligently on many different occasions and I have also worked with a lot of quality enzyme, mineral, and vitamin supplements, trying to address these issues. Nothing has produced the results that cutting out poisoned wheat has produced. Again, thank you Monsanto for your blind greed. I find this whole topic amazing and almost hard to believe. It is incredible that people behave like this, that they are actually willing to poison their fellow citizens at the altar of profit and power. Stunning!
Although yours is purely anecdotal evidence, I am happy that you found a solution for your health problems. I'm not sure what "highly processed wheat products" you were eating, but like I said—I'm sure glad you're feeling better. Not sure what on earth this has to do with Monsanto and their "greed".
P.S. Your other comment was deleted for vulgarity, please be respectful and watch your language should you continue to comment.
I don't get why people need proof that this stuff is poisonous. Personally I would prefer proof that it's NOT before feeding it to my children! Our bodies are an intricate ecosystem of cells and bacteria – we have considerably more bacterial cells than human ones and science is only just beginning to realise the staggering importance that the flora within us has on our health. Allowing our food sources to be polluted with chemicals is idiocy.
Cigarettes were "harmless" for years. So was asbestos. People don't learn from past mistakes.
Pardon my assertion, but the statement "Allowing our food sources to be polluted with chemicals is idiocy" is absolutely absurd. Our whole makeup, including the food we eat, is composed of different chemicals.
Sarah, I think your comment made you sound like you are a robot, and that Ted is one smart guy. I checked out some things, and I don't think anyone that isn't either a Monsanto employee or a robot would endorse or write some of the other things you've written here. You're going to have to prove yourself now. Where is your farm? How many acres? Pictures of you doing things on your farm? Pictures of your husband, the farmer? Pictures of your family? What are you growing on your farm right now? Pictures of you at work nursing & on duty? Where is the pic of your two boys? How long have you been married? When did you start the farm? Where are some of your photography exhibits? The FB photography page under your name looks nothing like you and that lady only has one child. If you can't prove you're who you say you are, then everyone who reads your blog is going to believe that you've got the same standards as Monsanto has. Good luck!
Ted has been extremely rude and vulgar. Would you like me to forward you his last email? Actually you can read it here.
If you browse my blog a bit, you'll find all the answers. We farm in Wheatland Country, Alberta about 6300 acres and we grow wheat, canola and yellow peas. There's photos all over my blog and social media sites of me and my family. It doesn't really take too long to find out that I really am a real person 🙂 I don't have photography exhibits though, not a goal of mine. I don't have a FB photography page so that would definitely explain the confusion of not looking the same. How should I further prove and entertain your notions? All you have to do is a little bit of research (all of which you can find on this blog) to figure it out….but by the sounds of it, research might not be your strong suit, especially if you're going to take Ted's word.
Oh, BTW, by viewing my site stats with your IP address I can see you haven't browsed my blog at all, you've been on this blog post for >3 hours. Hope the weather is nice in Salt Lake City!
Anyway here you go: http://instagram.com/p/wXQQCOtUDl/
Thanks, Francesca! Good to hear!
Really, really, really….I’m going to stop reading the comments now. It has been a guilty pleasure, though.
I will enjoy the story that “outs” the “farmer loving nurse” as a shill for Monsanto.
We’re supposed to believe that a nurse who lives on a farm in Northern Alberta, with two small children, researched and wrote the article above. There are 10 referenced articles, and 4 blogs this links to.
Yeah, sure she did. Between working as a nurse, caring for her family and raising two boys, and keeping up with the farm….she writes blog posts that are remarkably polished. She seems to never tire and say something unpleasant to her detractors. She is super human. She is…
….a robot. She does not exist. At least, I don’t think she does. In any event, it does not matter.
We are talking about weed killer. Sprayed on food. Monsanto can sponsor all the bloggers they want denying the health impacts.
Let’s not forget that for decades the tobacco companies denied a link between smoking and cancer.
Anyway, goodbye all. It’s been tons of fun.
Ted,
I find it extremely rude and disrespectful to use the "shill" card. Really? That, to me, are persons like yourselves' last ditch efforts to discredit me. If I don't made it evidently clear that I'm not a "robot" by sharing most of my life online, then I must have some pretty good robot skills sharing recipes and photos of my daily life on all my social media channels.
Goodbye, please don't come back.
Wow! I’m sorry people are so rude! I truly believe they turn to name calling and saying you’re not even real because they have no other legitimate counter. Thank you for being an “ag”vocate for farmers.
Sorry, but you've made a huge mis-statement. The URL below is to a study, of several, that disprove the unfounded notion the glyphosate doesn't build up in mammalian tissue and organs. Even Monsanto has acknowledged this fact. I submit that there have been no long term studies done to conclude possible toxic effects.
http://omicsonline.org/open-access/detection-of-g…
Which have I misstated?
"If accidentally consumed, glyphosate is excreted mostly unchanged in feces and urine, so it doesn’t stay in the body and accumulate."
This is simply not true. Several studies have shown that glyphosate does bio accumulate. There have been no long term studies regarding potential long term damage or illness due to this bio accumulation.
Where are the several studies?Sent from my iPhone
If you simply read my original post, you will find one there. With the tiniest of effort, you can find more.
Here is an article in Scientific American that indicates glyphosate in humans kill cells: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-wh…
An Article in PubMed indicating a probable causal effect of glyphosate and human breast cancer: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23756170
An article in Entropy regarding studies that suggest that glyphosate may be responsible for a whole host of human ailments: http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416
the Institute of Science in Society lengthy article (with lots of references) that argues that glyphosate os a potent human cancer progenitor: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Glyphosate_and_Cancer.php
Well, I'm a busy person with a lot of comments to read, thank you for providing the links. That article references Seralini's work with glyphosate so I'm not very trusting of that information. The breast milk study has proved to be junk science: http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/05/06/… and http://academicsreview.org/2014/04/debunking-pseu… and your Entropy article doesn't work but I assume that is authored by Seneff? I could go on and on about Seneff.
Sarah, I'm curious to know what your opinion is on the increase in health problems in our society. Things like autism, obesity, diabetes, ADHD, heart disease. What do you think is causing this increase in health problems for us, if not our food?
Good question. I think better diagnostics is part of it for autism. The biggest global killer is cardiovascular diseases. Obesity (poor diets—-which is a personal choice, not a fault of the wheat farmer or GMOs, in my opinion) and tobacco use are a huge factor and contributor to carciovascular disease. I know people want to point a finger (ie. vaccines cause autism) and have someone or something to blame…but often that's not the case. People have to take responsibility for their health and make better choices period.
Sarah, while I appreciate your response to the glysophate-wheat discussion, your refusal to examine the issue from the other perspective is frustrating.
To imply that no farmer would ever produce and sell an unhealthy crop is a bit naive. To add the caviat of "knowingly produce" seems disingenuous considering the unwillingness to concede even the smallest point. I would think it in your best interest to examine both sides of the argument. Am I really to believe you would prefer a dressing of round-up and oil on your salad instead of oil and vinegar?
“My refusal”? When the evidence links glyphosate to issues in farming, the environment and health—I will happily look into it. I found no such things at the time of writing this post. Here is something that is not all sunshine and roses about glyphosate from a comment I made yesterday:
“Overall, the research shows that there may be some concern about glyphosate reducing availability of some minerals when the soil is deficient in those minerals. It is important to note that the stack of peer reviewed papers indicating glyphosate to be a problem with disease or yield is much smaller than the stack indicating there is no problem. We must look at the entire body of evidence, not just cherry pick one or a few papers, in order to get a clear understanding of what’s really happening.” – Anastasia Bodnar, Plant Geneticist
To be truthful, I did the best I could with the information I found. If you would like to do a blog post in rebuttal to mine and the Healthy Home Economist’s, send it my way, I look forward to reading your thoughts.
I have never, ever made the blanket statement of speaking for all farmers, you are implying that that is what I’m saying—it is not. This is what we do on our farm, I speak from our experiences. Glyphosate is not intended for human consumption, vinegar is, you last comment is nonsensical.
I'm kinda of the opposite. I like a little pasta and sauce with my cheese !
"Your refusal" Ohhhhhh, Sarah is a scientist! Wow, watch her give them liberals hell!
However, you say: "Glyphosate is not intended for human consumption,,,,"
You describe spraying glyphosate on wheat 7-14 days before harvest. Where do you think it goes, the monsanto fairy washes it off?
This whole blog is, I'm sure, dreamed up by the Roundup marketing department.
Epic fail, guys. I expect the adults will figure this out soon and the whole blog will disappear. In the meantime, I'm enjoying my switch to organic bread. Goodbye Canadian wheat.
Hi Ted,
Nope, I'm not a scientist, I thought I made it evidently clear I'm a farmer's wife and my profession is in nursing, but perhaps I have to work on making it more clear. I suggest you read the blog post more in depth and follow the links and the other posts I've provided for "where do you think the glyphosate goes. I do not appreciate the "shill" allegation, that is extremely disrespectful and I could say the same thing to you on who is paying you to comment, but that is equally ridiculous. You are being banned from this page for 'yelling' in the comments section, calling people names and not being respectful.
Regards.
Are you aware that vinegar is a more environmentally friendly alternative. Put some in a spray bottle and spray it on a weed. Check back the next day.
Hi veh,
If you read my post and followed the links that I've provided you would have come to read this post by Dr. Kniss called Salt, vinegar and glyphosate clearly demonstrating in a very easy-to-understand way that vinegar is more toxic and more costly to use. Enjoy reading, it's really great stuff!
That's like saying would you prefer a dressing of manure and oil on your salad to an Organic farmer. Many things are put on growing crops in all styles of farming that would not be good to eat straight. Totally illogical.
I found this blog through the western producer article. I dont have have so called research to back me up but the first hand experience.
When talking about desiccant wheat before harvest it does render the seed infertile. Which means that you cant seed that grain next year. When we desiccant we make sure that we dont spray one field so that we can have seed for the following year. I dont know the science behind it but most of the farmers out this way does that.
Also this year my Dad was giving me heck for standing and spraying the booms on because nothing grows there. Ya I know that its operator competent and doing the job right but after years of roundup dont you think the chemical will build up in the soil. I dont know. But we had a custom sprayer come in last year to do the pre burn and he cleaned out the sprayer on a part that he sprayed already and this year I could diffidently tell on the canola where the line was and it produced halve of what the rest of the field did.
Farmers in our area just spray to help the bottom line. I custom spray peas for a neighbor and he got a great yield on it. So I asked him what I sprayed do you think it helps? He shrugged his should and said I dont know, beats me. There are guys that come into our area from 60 miles away and we sometimes shake our head at what they do. This year they were doing in crop spraying the first week of June that should be done two weeks later. Same with desiccating, when the wheat is still green. But they have big arces and one machine and they just have to go. Also those big acre guys dont care about spray drift onto other fields. One big wig told us that as long he gets 80% of the maximum yield he is happy. Then there is the probability that clubroot (disease) will be in the area in the next few years and see what will happen then as you can only grow canola once in four years. Canola is the money crop and most guys in the area grow it every two years because it has the best return on investment.
Recently started to not eat as much wheat and notice a difference. Im not needing something to eat at ten a night or when I just get out of bed. I always eat healthy but now take a eat more fruits and veggies approach. http://humansarefree.com/2014/07/7-scientific-rea…
Im in Lamont county and realize that this was my last year farming. What I realize that for a young farmer that owns and farms 2000 acres you need 12 million, 8 in capital and 4 in interest payments. My dad farmed by owning little and renting most land. But now it comes that I will need to buy the land or you wont have a chance. I will pull out what I have and go enjoy myself. Not having to work my ass off. I dont know the future in farming is. One Earth Farm proves that cooperation farming doesnt work.
Hi Tim,
Thanks for taking the time to find me and comment. I am learning more and more (as is my husband) and the reason why we don't save our seeds after we spray with glyphosate is that it affects the vigor of the seed, very interested to learn more about it. Everybody farms differently and certainly not all farmers are perfect. We've noticed some farmers in our travels around our area in their fields way before we ever would, but they know their fields best I 'spose!
I've heard of clubroot and we got hit really hard with sclerotinia a few years ago which is why we use fungicides for our canola now.
There's a big push coming called "Half Your Plate" to have 1/2 your plate full of veggies so it sounds like you're doing good. I know for me I can't eat a ton of cheese, but the difference is I don't go touting how awful and toxic cheese is and hating on the dairy farmers, which is the approach that the blogger who wrote the "toxic wheat" post took.
Enjoy your last year, thank you for all that you did and continue to do for farming. God bless!
Sarah, Have you considered trying organic cheese or at least cheese from cows that haven't been given the RBST growth hormone shot; which, btw, causes early maturation in girls and sterility in boys. RBST consumptioin might be contributing to your cheese issues. I don't have time to look up sources on that for you, but if you're curious or interested, you can look them up. There are pros and a cons and arguments for everything in the research and consumption dept., but the bottom line is we just all have to decide for ourselves what we want to do there. Most people commenting here seem to just be trying to contribute info about what they know, and I find no fault in that. I don't hate dairy farmers, but dairy is one of the things I buy organically grown, because of my own experiences and what I know. I don't use Roundup any more to kill weeds or anything for that matter, because I've found more environmentally friendly alternatives; and regrettably, we have super weeds (pigweed, etc.) now from using it in the past, which have to be dug up manually with a full sized shovel; because we can't pull them out. Do you have superweeds too? Some peanut farmers told me about how the corn farmers in GA are having to hire crews of workers just to pull the pigweeds out of their fields now. You're a nurse, so it is natural for you to look first at the scientific side of things, I have always loved the nurses who have compassion for their patients, so I do wish you'd add that element to your replies instead of shouting everyone down who doesn't agree with you. I think what most people who've comments you don't like are really trying to say is "Sarah, you've stated that you're spraying your wheat with Roundup, and we really wish you wouldn't." There are a lot of people in the world who don't like Roundup, and who believe farmers who are using it will probably regret it one day for one reason or another. I believe that chemicals should be used sparingly and with extreme caution in order to be respectful of the environment and for people's health concerns. Anyone who's ever sprayed a weed knows it is much easier to spray it instead of pulling it out. The organic grower puts in in a lot of time, effort, and education in order to figure out how to grow things well organically. They have my respect and loyalty, because in earning their living, they show they care about me, my health, and the environment. And yes, they are making a lot of money, which sends a very loud message to farmers everywhere! Monsanto does own organic seeds too, possibly so they can take advantage of both sides of the market that way.
Hi veh,
No, I can barely afford conventional cheese, let alone organic cheese. In Canada our dairy farmers are not allowed to use rBST, but I haven't heard those claims and I'd kindly ask you to provide a peer-reviewed source so I can take a look. I agree, we do have to decide what to do with the information we're give and the info we provide.
No, at this time where we live, we do not have "superweeds", there's definitely some that are harder to control, but they can be controlled. I've never heard of conventional farmers hiring workers to hand pick weeds, I suppose it is possible but not for a large-scale farm like we are.
I'm sorry you feel I 'shout' at people, I strive to treat people with respect so perhaps I will have to look at how I reply to comments from now on, thanks for the feedback. If people are trying to say "Sarah you're doing this and we don't like it" they need to come up with better solutions. Feasible solutions for our farm. We do what is best for our farm, we follow the rules and regulations set forth by chemical companies and the government, we farm ethically and safely. There's lots of choices for consumers if they feel what we do is unsafe. I've been transparent here sharing a practice we do on our farm.
Our chemicals are used sparingly. They cost a LOT of money and we don't like to waste money, as I already mentioned in this post. Since you mentioned organic farming and I've already mentioned how transparent I'm trying to be, can you direct me to a post by an organic farmer who uses pesticides? I would like to learn more but can't seem to find any information out there, though I know there are lots of products available for organic farmers to use. To insinuate that any farmer works harder than another just because they choose different farming methods is rather insulting. It's apples and oranges. It doesn't mean apples are harder or oranges are harder, they're just different. We take great pride in being stewards of the land—we practice no-till which saves fuel and helps maintain good soil health. Organic "double dips" and takes advantage of both sides of the markets too like using conventional hog manure (likely fed GMOs) and using it as 'organic' fertilizer on their organic grain crops.
We're lucky enough to live in a world where we can choose our foods and you can be loyal to the organic farmers you support.
Wow! I’m sorry people are so rude! I truly believe they turn to name calling and saying you’re not even real because they have no other legitimate counter. Thank you for being an “ag”vocate for farmers.
Glyphosate levels reach a steady max state (given a steady state of application) because it breakdowns on its own and some microbes actually eat the stuff.
Well said!! many thanks for explaining herbicide use is a rational fashion.
Thanks for your efforts in writing your article, but as a biologist and consumer of wheat I'm failing to see any value to my health or the health of the environment in spraying a long-lived compound with biological activity on a food crop right before harvest. This is not the intended use of this product, and I very much doubt that the general public would approve of this practice on a food product that they consume.
Hi Joel,
If you read my post a bit more carefully, follow the links, and read "Prairie Californian's" post that I've linked at the bottom you will have these questions answered, or at least clarified a bit better. Glyphosate isn't sprayed for your health benefit, it isn't listed as an actual desiccant for wheat but it clearly states that it is approved for pre-harvesting wheat. It also helps to kill fall weeds like Canada thistle that take away valuable nutrients from the plants for next year's crops. I feel that if the general public has a problem with this practice, they should ask the farmers who use it and more importantly the people and bodies that regulate and monitor glyphosate. I've never understood why conventional farmers like us are held to such scrutiny? Do you follow along with what organic farmers are spraying on their crops? I have yet to find a single article written by an organic farmer even admitting they use pesticides; and here's me being transparent to help people understand why we do what we do. People are (rightfully so) very scared of what they don't know, and I blog about agriculture to attempt to alleviate some of those fears. Clearly I'm not going to get through to everyone and I'm okay with that.
I’m a member of the general public, and while the farmer can tell me how and why they apply glyphosate, their answers are not comforting because this practice is not for my benefit. When my health is involved I ask the experts who research these issues. The experts have identified glyphosate in human tissue. Why should I take that risk. Glyphosate has not been proven safe because this not required by the U.S.’s system; we do not operate under the cautionary principle. Conventional farming is under scrutiny because you produce FOOD, yes, I ask organic farmers what they use for pest management, and the tell me. And, yes, have read articles on this very topic. This comment of yours undermines your credibility.
There are a number of legitimate reasons to be mistrust Monsanto: PCB’s, DDT, Dioxin, Agent Orange to name just a few.
In the name of transparency, what are the funding sources for the blog?
I have plenty of legi
Can I ask who are your "experts"? Because the experts that I've asked and read their research are opposite of what you're telling me. You should really read the post on Prairie Californian that I've linked to. Her article is more American based.
For your comfort, not that it would matter to me, but we don't buy products from Monsanto. Not for any particular reason other than we just have a good relationship with our Syngenta reps, this isn't about Monsanto.
Your insinuation that I am getting paid to write this article is disrespectful, Michael. Read more here: http://www.nurselovesfarmer.com/2014/05/i-am-not-… On that token I could just as easily ask you who is paying you to comment here?
You could ask him who is funding him to comment? That is Not the same as running a blog that is clearly biased.
Sure! Why not! You go search Mamavation.com and search for her "how to spot a troll" article. According to her commenting falls under the "shill" category. It's ridiculous. I may be biased as a wheat grower's wife, but the science is fact and not biased.
So what are the funding sources for this blog?
I pay for everything out of my own pocket. When a blog post is sponsored it is disclosed. Thanks for asking and for your interest, Colter!Sent from my iPhone
I grew up on a farm, never used any chemical, now I am a rancher, and raise natural grass fed animals. It's not about being right or wrong, it's about doing the right thing for the environment. The focus should be on round up, not the crop it's sprayed on. This product is harmful to life. It not only kills plants, but also organisms and biology in the soil, insects, wildlife. This product does more harm than good. Unfortunately people are trusting, and don't do enough research in their own. Just read the label of round up and then ask yourself if there is a better way. This is not traditional farming, it's kill farming. I didn't really think much about chemicals until a few years ago when I was driving my four wheeler down the road and a crop sprayer was praying a field beside the road. I had a bloody nose every day for a week. I started asking questions and listening to scientists, government employees, even ex Monsanto employees. These people were not trying to sell a product, they just wanted to inform anyone they could about the side affects of roundup. Monsanto will try to do anything they can to keep us in the dark. Can u imagine the amount of money they would loose if we as food producers and consumers said they would not buy their product, it would be a disaster for them. The longest study Monsanto has done on roundup is 90 days. We all need to stop pointing fingers at each other and point them all towards Monsanto to tell us the truth.
I've provided you with a lot of citations and references, I would kindly as that you do the same. Beliefs are not the same as facts, Penny. This is must more argumentum ad Monsantium nonsense.
Penny, that's kinda funny that you mention that Round Up is harmful to life, such as " organisms and biology in the soil, insects, wildlife." Have you read the MSDS label? Here's the link http://www.cdms.net/LDat/mpC1J001.pdf
Round Up is practically non toxic to earth worms and it takes a lot of RoudUp to harm mammals. It is also practically non toxic to honeybees as well. . So I call BS that you've actually have read the label on Round Up. I'm pretty sure you haven't just by reading your comments above.
No-Till farmers use Round Up and other chemicals because it does kill weeds, so that they can till seed directly into the soil while gaining the biological benefits of soil micro organisms working in the soil. Thereby creating a healthier soil. Without Round Up no-till is much more difficult to do.
Oh and by the way, Penny, Monsanto also produces seed for the organic farmer too. They just don't produce GE seeds.
Thank you for writing this! It's nice to see some actual references and someone who writes an honest article!
Thanks, Austin. People may call me biased because we farm, but science isn't biased and that's what I use to write my articles.
would you spray your lawn with RoundUp then let your kids play on it?
Yes.
Hi John,
Spraying your lawn with roundup would kill it as it is a herbicide for broadleaves and grasses. But would I let me kids play on my dead lawn I sprayed with roundup? Yes
My recent post Beef Stir Fry featuring Kellie Gregorich
Exactly.
Glyphosate residues, found in most commonly consumed foods in the Western diet courtesy of GM sugar, corn, soy, and wheat, “enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and toxins in the environment to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease.” Interestingly, your gut bacteria are a key component of glyphosate’s primary mechanism of harm. Scientific American magazine
Link please?
Shirley-
They use glyphosate outside of the U.S. and Canada.
My recent post Beef Stir Fry featuring Kellie Gregorich
Good morning, a couple of years ago I came down with a terrible disease. At the time in my life when I finally had raised my children and my husband and I could finally start to travel a bit more. I must say I have seen my fair share of head shaking doctors, telling me that there was no real cure or even treatment for my illness, which left me often very weak and sometimes bedridden. More accidentally I stumbled over GMO's, bt-toxin and Glyphosate. I was never a fast food or junk food eater, so I did not believe that changing my diet would make any difference in my situation. But than again, at this point I had nothing to loose and it is far and wide known, that ill people are great victims right, they fall for lots of things, because they so desperately want to get better. Well, to make this boring storing short, I completely went bananas and off the GMO's and Glyphosate as much as it is possible here in the US ( we all know that Glyphosate is even being sprayed on our lawns, golf courses, school yards etc). After a couple of months, my body started to calm down, slowly but surely I felt like I was getting better. I than went for a therapy to Germany, which has a very high quality of organic food and you can also find it allover, even in public restaurants. As a society they also seemed not to have all the obesity problems which I do see on a daily base here in the US. Anyways – my background is in law. But I was so happy that after 11 years of being ill to feel better, only by taking GMO;s and chemicals out of my diet, that I started to really look into farming etc. I have visited a great deal of organic working farms in Germany as well as here in the US and have learned a lot. I never planned to be a farmer in my life, but because I want to have the quality of food back which I tasted in Europe and probably our grandparents here, also still had, I started my own huge garden. I have learned a lot about mono cropping, crop rotation, the importance and how to attract pollinators, which plants and bushes are very beneficial to have around in order to divert pets and last but not least the importance of soil….I have learned that the soil is your alpha and your omega. Your produce will only be as good and nutritious as the quality of your soil is. I have learned how to enhance your soil quality and in doing so, seen firsthand that your crops get stronger and more resistant once you have all the right trace minerals in your soil. And I am not talking about vitamins here. Not only can you see the difference firsthand on your crop, you can also taste it. It is a complete different experience. On the contrary if you de-mineralize your soil, you create an imbalance and you will run into problems like fungus and or weak crops which are not able to fight off the smallest of diseases. I did a bit of research and found out that Monsanto bought 20 – 30 years ago almost all the little independent seed distributors which America until than used to have. These little independent seed distributors used to sell American heirloom seeds, seeds which were adjusted to the different climate area's of each state. Once Monsanto had bought them all off, they destroyed most of the old heirloom seeds and went ahead and replaced them with their genetically modified seeds which they by than had patented. And the rest is history. Meanwhile I have met lots of people with similar experiences and a lot of them you will actually find in this fight against GMO's. Like Zoe, I believe you absolutely should eat your GMO's and feed it to your children, if this is what you believe in.. But we, the ones which believe for a strong reason in organic food will fight for our right to have our food "untainted" also. Most of us are not in this because of money reasons, rather conviction. We will not go away, we will fight this fight to the end, now that we know that we have been fed GMO's for over 20 years. Each mother which I met and has a child which symptoms and allergies got better, after they have been taken of the GMO's is a strong force now, do not make the mistake to underestimate this. We are no criminals and we are not asking for much. We will find the farmers which will cater to our demands. All the best to you and your lovely family.
I'm glad you've taken an interest, have learned about organic farming and have found a solution that works for you. I am pro-food choice, I personally don't believe in a "GMO-free" diet to aid health and allergy issues as they are the most highly tested foods in our history and have shown no health problems and certainly not allergies—but to each their own and I thank you for your respectful comment. As I say time and time again, "GMO" isn't an ingredient—it's a technology. The same technology used to make insulin for diabetics. You mention Bt at the beginning of you comment, which is used in some GMO corn and cotton, but it is also a naturally occurring bacteria in the soil AND it is sprayed directly on organic crops as a pesticide. This is why I have such a hard time buying into the "GMO-free diet cured me of my ailments" claims. BUT, like I said, it's your choice and you're absolutely entitled to it, just like I am mine.
Sarah- There is a common theme to each one of your replies… you cherry pick data and are not looking at thing holistically. Life isn’t a matter of parts, but a relationship of wholes. If you were to look at a Venn Diagram of the the issues that we are looking at today, you’ll find that glyphosate has an interaction with each one of the areas that we are having issues. Can we point at it as the absolute cause? No… but when you look statistically at the start of the explosion of auto-immune, gluten intolerance, etc. it is directly timed with the introduction of glyphosate into mainstream application on a wide-scale. Name one other major sweeping change that occurred in our diet at that time? Sugar was going on long before that time (yep- I was a Big Gulp kid in the 80’s) and the issues didn’t start until late 90’s. I completely concur with others, the practices of the company is another reason why I refuse to support anything that comes from those companies. Take a look at the ethics of the company leadership… the fruit it bears will demonstrate those ethics. I grieve for the farmers that are dependent upon a system that is unsustainable.
Dependent on an unsustainable system? Care to elaborate? (Or was that a cherry picked response?)
You're doing the correlation/causation game, Ann. If that were the case I'm going to start spreading the rumor that the rise in organic sales causes autism and diabetes. They fit on a chart perfectly together. That's my answer for you: "Name one other major sweeping change that occurred in our diet": the rise of sales in organic food.
Organic Food Causes Autism and Diabetes
And the reduction of Altrazine use and insecticide use.
Farmers feed cities! I appreciate all you do to grow food for Canada and the fact that you have the courage to write about this important, very controversial topic. But I will clarify a few things. No sane person will ever drink glyphosate, whereas drinking vinegar is commonplace. The EPA requires a warning label on glyphosate not to consume it internally, unlike vinegar. The EU had data in 2002 that showed evidence of a relationship between glyphosate exposure during pregnancy and cardiovascular malformations. I am distrustful of anything Monsanto does, because it was not so long ago that they were a chemical munitions company responsible for nerve gas, Agent Orange and many environmental disasters. I would like to hear from responsible farmers such as yourself if you've ever considered an alternative to this Monsanto product? My grandma used to farm and used all sorts of natural wonders to keep the weeds down and the bugs off the plants. Her crops were the best ever, but I guess she didn't do it on the industrial scale that you do? Profits are definitely important and they keep farmers in business. So is health and our environment. I hope one day we find a happy medium that isn't based on a Monsanto product.
I am a 58 yo engineer/MBA from California. I was born in Havre, Montana and spent summers on my granfathers farm north of Turner, where you could throw a rock into Canada if you had a good arm. I learned to drive a tractor before I learned to drive a pickup, and I have joyously ridden in the back of a grain truck filled with wheat.
Spraying a herbicide on wheat 7-14 days prior to harvest is, in my opinion, crazy.
I'm sure the Monsanto rep drinks a glass of roundup at his "seminars"
People can, of course, have other opinions about whether or not Glyphosate is good for you. I'm willing to let farmers do what is legal…
…but I would like, and will campaign for, accurate labeling of the resulting product. Put a nice, large label on that bag of flour or loaf of bread that says "THE FLOUR USED IN THE PRODUCT WAS SPRAYED WITH ROUNDUP 7-14 DAYS BEFORE IT WAS HARVESTED. THE CANADIAN AND US AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENTS HAVE BOTH APPROVED THIS PRACTICE"
Of course, products that do not use wheat that has been sprayed, however carefully, with roundup just before harvesting would not have this notice and might, wisely I think, post a notice to the contrary.
How about that, Nurse Sarah? Then the Canadian Farmers would be accurately informing the public of their practices. People who agree with your "point of view" would then be able to eat their PBJ with glyphosate…or not.
Disclose it. Tell people the wretched truth about the glyphosate laden wheat you are trucking down into Montana, or STFU.
Hi Ted,
You're entitled to your opinion and you're allowed to think it's "crazy", I don't expect everyone to agree with me and what we do. If we labeled every single practice we did there wouldn't be room to say what the food actually was. Should organic farmers label what the cows were fed, where they are from and what manure was used to fertilize organic crops? How much pesticides they spray on their crops? If it's safe/legal/tested/monitored? Should we know how organic crops were made? How many times a seed was blasted with radiation to make an organic seed by mutagenesis?
Disclose it.
BTW, we don't truck to Montana, so no worries there and if you comment again, please use respect and don't cuss at me.
Thanks once again for a great article, and for putting up with some of the commenters (many of whom, no doubt, have never stepped foot on a farm).
Does your husband grow anything other than wheat, or is that his specialization? (You do mention crop rotation, so I suspect the answer is Yes, but I'm curious as to what other crops he grows.)
Hi! Thanks for the comment, I continually have to remind myself that there's far more people reading my posts than the negative comments I receive.
Yes, we grow canola and yellow peas as well!
MCATTIE- You’d be shocked at how many of us are farmers that have worked in agriculture and in health for many years. While Sarah is expressing a viewpoint that directly impacts her livelihood, many of us do not. Sarah is undoubtedly bought into the entire focus of better living through better chemistry. That is fine, it is her right. To state her views as fact, however, is dangerous as the sources that she is quoting are not unbiased and are funded by sources that receive money from organizations that directly profit from their research. If you want to find the truth, you must be willing to dig deep and follow the money trail. Sarah has a lot to lose if glyphosate is outlawed. Their entire farm is growing crops that are completely dependent on glyphosate.
So, Ann:
You would rather take "unbiased" sources like the Seneff studies? She didn't do any of her own research? She plunked others' findings into her computer program. Do you go to an architect for advice on how to make a cake because they are unbiased? Do you go to your hairdresser for advice on your stomach ache because they are unbiased and a doctor (the professional) will actually know what to do to help you? This is just a big, huge "big ag" and "big government" conspiracy theory you're toting. I assure you, our crops (for my family farm, I cannot speak for others) is not "dependent" on glyphosate. I encourage YOU to dig deeper. Talk to people in the government at the regulatory level, talk to the people who test MRLs and set their limits.
this is fake more propaganda
Fake more propaganda? Interesting take.
Listen to Zoe for the facts. Tobacco farmers were also producing a legal and "SAFE" product. Let the attorneys feast on the wheat industry. It is time
Tobacco farmers are still farming, John. Comparing tobacco and wheat? Come on now. Actually they are looking at an Ebola treatment with tobacco, so there ya go! http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/exp…
How is this comment productive to the conversation being had here? You're entitled to your own opinion but simply trying to tear someone down based upon their views is highly not productive or necessary.
My recent post Beef Stir Fry featuring Kellie Gregorich
Same rhetoric, different person!
Wow – I am from Europe. Yes your blog has made it to Europe. I am not a mommy blogger, but I did study the influence of chemicals/pesticides on the mitochondrial growth ! I am also friends with one of the Professors of the Criigen group, you know….these guys around Professor Seralini which actually did the first long term study on the health impacts of GMO's on human beings. Because the matter of the fact is, that Monsanto has not allowed one long term safety study on them so far in the US. And this is actually a very well known fact in scientific circles.
You discredited Dr. S. Seneff….hmm did you even read all the 50 pages of her scientific work ? If yes – than my dear I recommend that you are taking some serious microbiological class because we human beings do actually posses the shikimate pathway, just not in our cells like the insects, rather in our gut bacteria's and these gut bacteria's my dear outnumber our cells in a great number.( as a nurse you should know that 80 % of our immune system is located in our guts, isn't it a bit funny in this context that so many Americans and especially children suffer from IBS, and gastrointestinal diseases, as well as allergies now). You know we here in Europe look at you guys, you are the posterchilds and guinea pigs for the GMO's (Glyphosate). You guys have been fed this now for almost 20 years. You claim you are a nurse…..well than, look around ….what do you see in America. Are you guys the nation or a nation with people of thriving health ? 3 weeks ago I received this numbers ( by the by they are not from Dr. Seneff, rather your public agencies lol) 1 out of 2 American males will come down with cancer in his lifetime, 11 million children are currently growing up in America on psychotropic medications. Every 60th boy, born in America suffers from Autism, every 10th child has one or more allergies or asthma etc. cancer on children in the age group von 1 – 14 years has exploded and the obesity rate in your country has reached a dramatic point, the same applies for Diabetes II ! So – I am not out to argue, nor do I want to engage in any discussion, but these numbers speak for themselves, might be one reason why Russia abandoned GMO's completely and China is on the same way !You say you are a nurse loving a farmer, you are a Monsanto farmer, of course I understand you need to make a livelihood. This all being said, there is only one thing for you to think about. You can eat GMO's and Glyphosate doused crops and other chemicals as long as you love to and also feed it to your family. Nobody really cares about this fact. But the fact of the matter is, that a lot of other consumers do not want to eat it anymore! Consumers in Europe are very educated by the subject and very determined, no matter if you find this now precautionary or conspiratorial. That really does not matter. Each and every chemical which we eat or put on our skin has a certain effect on our body and immune system, to not understand this, is not understanding science……Love Zoe
Hi Zoe,
I don't believe Seralini did his study on humans, it was done on rats and feeding them glyphosate directly if I'm not mistaken. Also, the only thing his study showed was that male rats who ingested glyphosate lived longer.
I'm happy with my article, I stand behind what I wrote. It's a good thing we have our food choices. You make yours, I'll make mine, I just ask that you do it respectfully. You cannot point the finger at Monsanto/glyphosate/farmers for the rise in illnesses until you show me data. Correlation doesn't always equal causation, if that were the case we could blame the rise in sales of organic food on the rising rates of autism, they fit on a graph perfectly together, but that doesn't mean it's true.
I am not a "Monsanto farmer", our farm actually doesn't purchase any products directly from Monsanto. The crops are not "doused". You accuse me of not reading all of Seneff's work (I've read enough to have made my conclusions) but you didn't even read my 2 page (if that) article and follow the links I've provided.
If consumers don't want to eat what we grow, they can buy certified organic. Just because a country makes a decision based on fear (precautionary principle) and not science, doesn't mean it's the "right" thing to do. We're blessed to have the food choices we do when so many in the world are starving.
And I'm sure that the war in Syria and Iraq is all caused by glyphosate and GMO too.
The trouble is that as a consumer my food choices are becoming very limited. If wheat, barley, rice dried legumes and beet sugar are all to be sprayed with glyphosate, I am terrified of eating anything non organic. I know enough about soil ecology to know that beneficial soil organisms are essential for trans-location of minerals and for digestion of plant material to make humus which stores carbon and retains moisture. I know that I have 10 million bacteria in my gut which produce many essential nutrients such as the aromatic amino acids and that these and the soil organisms all use the Shikamate pathway. Eating glyphosate will change the bacteria in my gut in a very negative way just as putting it on the soil will negatively change the soil biota. Glyphosate is a chelator meaning that it binds minerals. Eating it will reduce the availability of minerals that i need to make important enzymes. In plants it also binds these minerals so as to make them unavailable to anyone eating them. I think that farmers aught to have a good understanding of soil ecology so that they do not condemn us all to ill health. You can improve yields by inoculating soils with composts that are suited to the plants you are growing. And don't forget that the WHO has just declared glyphosate a probable carcinogen because in in vitro and in vivo tests it damages DNA..
I do wish people wouldn't hap hazardly throw Canada and USA as being the same. They are unique as it should be.
I always make my posts Alberta and then Canada-based, but it's important to show a bit of what the rest of the world is doing too sometimes.
You seem to blaming a lot on the practices used in our farming methods, when in turn farming has very little or nothing to do with some of your implications! You want to blame farming and spraying for obesity and diabetes? Does obesity and diabetes not go hand in hand for the most part? The biggest problem we have up here with obesity is because of technology! Nobody goes outside anymore! It's just as easy to pick up a smart phone as it is to walk to your neighbours for a visit. My children do not have allergies, diabetes, or birth defects, and most certainly are not obese! They play outside every day all year round and love it. They are the ones that turn the t.v. off, which is usually only on to watch the news anymore. Parents and the general population have gotten spoiled, lazy and now seem to have adopted a sickening sense of entitlement. Kids learn by watching and we are ruining them. I just recently cancelled my flip phone. I refuse to sign my kids life sentence, and don't need all the suicide causing, mass murdering, self-esteem ruining social media that everyone seems to thrive on. I use my laptop to market grain, research varieties, chemicals and so on as well as do my billings and taxes. If you go back 50 years to when people used to socialize in person, the obesity rate, birth defect rate, and half the world's problems did not exist! Get off your *ss and go play with your kids, or go play ball with friends. Get outside and enjoy what you have before it's too late. Life is what you make it, and it's too short to worry about the things that you can't change. Oh ya and leave that stupid phone at home. Worst invention ever!!!
The biggest case of people dying in Europe from a contaminated crop was an e-coli 0104:H4 outbreak in 2011. 3950 hospitalised and 53 DEAD…..cause,organic Bean Sprouts,von Germany. Why are you so quick to quote American statistics and not European statistics?? Why only Monsanto(US)….and not Syngenta or Bayer….(EU)…get your attention??? When organic food is 3 times the price of non-organic food,which most people can not afford…..is it not a good idea to bring the prices of non-organic food up (by banning certain pesticides…so you end up with less crop per hectre,or,putting labels saying it has GMO ingriedients in it….all of which would make food MORE expensive). WHO has to gain from these policies?? Monsanto making $13 billion a year….or the Organic Growers Association making $60 billion a year???
Thanks Zoe! You are right! Thank you for taking the time to write and help others understand – I mentioned in an earlier reply…that I'm able to eat bread and pastries in Europe with not one sign of allergic reaction…yet, with one bite of bread in the USA or Canada I immediately have bloating, fatigue and a migraine among others….I really appreciate you referring to the doctor and your knowledge – for now even organic bread at Whole Foods is hard for me to eat….I'm avoiding it…and making cookies and bread out of almond and coconut flour –
Natasha this is something I say to people time and time again: Canada exports 75% of it's wheat all over the world—including Europe. Millers blend varieties of wheat for specific traits when baking, they use Canadian wheat too, so that point is moot unless you can prove that they source 100% French wheat, but to my understanding they can and do practice this method in Europe as well (follow the links in my article). I like to call this the "vacation effect" too. No stress, relaxing vacation, no worries!
100% agree with you Zoe.
Well I am a farmer as well, and I can say that 99.9 percent of farmers would not "knowingly" produce bad wheat. There has been ergot since the beginning of time and it is toxic, and a natural occurring fungus. Its the devil himself. That's why there are agencies that study these things, natural and unnatural thresholds for human consumption. OOps, I just dropped my crystal ball. The power is still in the publics hands, all you have to do is stop buying wheat, and we will gladly stop growing it, and it is about that simple. Still way to much communism. Every agricultural area has its differences, that being said, I am glad that you Australians have all the answers, I would appreciate some insight from some of your mommy-bloggers. Who were they educated by…."presumably and apparently"…..?
So I'm curious, what do you think is the cause of the seemingly recent and rapid increase of gluten allergies, celiac disease and so on?
Roundup/glyphosate clearly appears to kill healthy bacteria in human digestive systems. Food companies and pharmaceutical companies have developed and marketed probiotic foods and supplements far more heavily in the past 10 or so years (to replace the missing good digestive bacteria). Big pharma and big chemical run North America and control what is "good practice". If we want to find biased "studies" theirs are the ones to look at.
You mentioned it's been about 40 years of this practice in use, and now we have more digestive and allergy problems than ever. Granted other things must be contributing but wheat is a main ingredient of the food source and this practice is totally unnecessary. It's just become popular and accepted which doesn't mean it's "needed". 15 or so years ago in rural Manitoba, cattle producers weren't allowed to feed straw to their animals if it had been sprayed with Roundup. Now it's moved so far that the grain is suddenly fit for human consumption? C'mon, this has to offer a warning about this practice.
I think a big part is trying to find a study that is truly credible. It is hard to find, if not impossible, something unbiased today from one side or the other. As a grain farmer, glyphosate is a fantastic tool of modern agriculture. However, I don't agree that big chem runs north America. If glyphosate is proven unsafe and it is banned…..Monsanto is in trouble and they better come up with something in a hurry or they will become a company of the past…..and yields of all crops, not just wheat, would be in serious decline until something better comes along. Its very easy to point fingers…and I do it too…but in my area the wildlife and the habitat is more lush and healthy looking than its ever been since I was around, and I am faring not too bad myself. It makes it hard to jump on the glyphosate is terrible bandwagon, so in the meantime we use the stuff as responsibly as we possibly can. Hopefully, if it somehow really is causing problems, someone will find out for sure before too long. Its tough to stop using a good product on speculation……
There is no clear evidence of the increase in gluten intolerance/Celiac disease. One of the theories is that we're more aware of it and have better diagnostic tools. We have to be mindful of the correlation/causation—just because something has been used more we can't automatically relate it to illness without solid data. If this practice makes you feel uncomfortable, there's plenty of other wheat choices and it will encourage you to dig deeper in your research than just my article!
I agree with you! I'm fine when I eat bread and wheat products in France – but, as soon as I take a bite of bread in the US or Canada – I have immediately bloating, migraines and fatigue among other reactions….I think you hit it on the nail – Roundup must be the problem! This subject needs more research for now, I'm avoid wheat in North America and craving French pastries and baguette for my next trip!
Most wheat is not dry downed with glyphosate ( see Sarah's article and comments), almost none in the lower 48 of the US. Can any trace thereof even survive the baking process? Care to guess again?
I just responded to another one of your comments that Canada exports 75% of it's wheat all around the world, including Europe so there's a really good possibility that when you're in France, you're still eating products made from Canadian wheat.
Just a FYI the farmers in France use Round-up as well as we do in North America. Just because places like France and the rest of Europe do not allow the use of Round-Up Ready crops doesn't mean they don't use Round-Up.
I used to run large ag sprayers in Ontario and Alberta and yes I did use Round up maybe once or twice as a burn down in Alberta but it was not a very common practice. Only for fields that the earlier herbicides application for some reason or another did not work.
There could be other reasons for having issues after eating bread in North America, like the different types of yeast, or other ingredients that are different.
It is far too easy to point fingers at one thing, we all like to have a smoking gun but it is not always as simple as that
Just my 2 cents worth
Absolutely agree. I always wonder too if it's because we have "vacation brain" when we're away from home and don't have time to worry about the food we eat and the reactions we have.
Can you provide scientific evidence of ‘vacation brain’?
You’ve used this reference several times and I’d like to know your source.
It sounds like you are dispelling peoples personal experiences. Yet you are trying to convince us of yours.
I do hope that in the future should this product be proven to have been diabolical to the masses that you feel somewhat responsible as a facilitator.
You’ve also stated that you ‘do what is best for your farm’. Is this blog about what’s best for your farm? What is your blogs purpose? To somehow prove that using poison on our food us acceptable. Because your in the minority here that would even consider that valid. Would you consider asking the masses a simple question, do you accept poisons being sprayed on your food? Its great that people want their health and wellbeing so they can enjoy their lives, watch their children grow uphealthy etc. Its a great cause a healthy rewarding and positive cause. That benefits so many.
Would you agree that if this product was found to be diabolical, because of your current dependence on it, would that put your livelihood at stake?
If that’s the case then wouldn’t your blog be all about your best interests and therefore be nothing more than that.
Would you potentially say sorry and give back all that you have profited from pedaling poisoned products from your own hand?
These are hypotheticals of course but I’m interested in ‘what if’. Because a ‘what if’ is a possibility. And how would you feel?
Common sense is very valid in this day and age due to the propoganda and corrupt practices that big business must engage in to protect its bottom line. Its about profit, not people.
Similar to anyone protecting their livelihood. Including farmers, politicians, used car salesmen etc etc. Turning a convenient blind eye has become normal. Its like a social sickness. Me vs You…
Id like to know your moral viewpoint not your scientific viewpoint.
There is enough science out their that clearly points the finger at a smoking gun. Please try not to insult our intelligence. It only discredits your intelligence.
Warm regards.
Hi Simon,
What I mean by "vacation brain" is that we're on a vacation, worry and stress-free and don't have time to focus on the things we worry about while at home.
I blog to openly and transparently share our farm story and practices with anyone who is interested. The use of the word "poison" here is a bit exaggerated, don't you think? It is a poison, yes, but to the pests we are killing to protect our crop. Keep in mind anything can be poisonous at the correct dose, even water.
If you wish to have further discussions, please ask your questions respectfully and don't accuse me of "pedaling" anything.
You state that the product can be missused and that the farmers in your area are under a tight timeframe therefore they are under a higher economical stress to get the crops off early. A field may have the majority of the grain dry and ready for harvest but often there are greener areas around sloughs where the grain may be riper, and greater than 30% moisture as recommended, therefore those areas would draw the glyphosate into the seed. Are there not also studies linking glyphosate to health interactions with bees? I know that the article talking about the toxic wheat has many errors but also I think we should be looking closer at the health effects and product use of glyphosate and this needs to be done truly independently.
No health interactions with bees, please share if you do find a good evidence-based article. It's absolutely a practice we're very mindful of and yes, we have to be mindful of the lower green spots when we spray.
We have winter wheat in Australia – it dries off in summer. I've never heard of desiccant use on wheat in Australia. However our glyphosate and AMPA (glyphosate breakdown product) Maximum Residue Limits on wheat have skyrocketed, presumably to cope with imported products containing such desiccated wheat. People who eat your wheat will be consuming residues of the pesticides. I suggest you read "Roundup and Birth Defects". Apparently Monsanto knew about roundup/glyphosate's teratogenic nature. http://www.earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/Roundup… While the practice may make commercial sense to the farmer, and be a solution to a population's specific food requests, it is perhaps idealistic to hope for complete safety of a product capable of killing almost all plant life, and certainly capable of binding nutrients._I'm guessing you're one of the mommy-bloggers educated by Monsanto?
Oh I've heard lots about you, Madeleine. The only thing I'm going to say is that no, I am not "educated by Monsanto".
Why is that the only thing your going to say? Won't you address her other points?
Hi Crm,
Now that I have the time to sit down and do this, here you go:
– in Australia they have very warm, very dry climates—no need to pre-harvest their wheat
– in Alberta where I live, we have a very short growing season (as I stated) and depending on the weather, we will pre-harvest our wheat so we can harvest it in time
– Madeleine has not provided any reputable sources for the supposed "skyrocket" of glyphosate MRLs, so why address that?
– there have been no links of glyphosate and birth defects
– the amount of glyphosate we spray is very little, it is a broad-spectrum herbicide intended to kill weeds and can be used as a desiccant—when we spray it, we want it to kill things (that's what it's supposed to do) in the field we spray (not intended to kill all the plant life on all of our farm, if that's what she was eluding to)
– as for binding nutrients, take a look at what the experts say from just a few places I've looked:
"Overall, the research shows that there may be some concern about glyphosate reducing availability of some minerals when the soil is deficient in those minerals. It is important to note that the stack of peer reviewed papers indicating glyphosate to be a problem with disease or yield is much smaller than the stack indicating there is no problem. We must look at the entire body of evidence, not just cherry pick one or a few papers, in order to get a clear understanding of what’s really happening. " – Anastasia Bodnar, Plant Geneticist http://geneticmaize.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/does…
"There is not any indication that these low levels of glyphosate are having an impact on the uptake of metal ion micronutrients into crops. All studies comparing GM crops to their non-GM counterparts to date have shown no biologically relevant differences in micronutrient levels." – Dr. Marian Bleeke, Crop Scientist http://gmoanswers.com/ask/i-dont-understand-how-y…
The reason I didn't respond fully to Madeleine is because when someone throws the shill accusation at me, I don't usually bother to entertain further ideas.
You use quotes from Dr. Marian Bleeke who is employed by Monsanto? You failed to mention that she worked for Monsanto.
Scientists don't lose credibility because they work for Monsanto. You don't seem to mind I didn't mention where Dr. Bodnar works. Have a good day.Sent from my iPhone
Mad: Your link is dead. http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/glyphotech.html
Well if you would just stop for a minute and quit guessing……..you would find that there is a whole lotta plant life that glyphosate doesn't even stunt, let alone kill……I'm guessing that you don't have much to do with agriculture. Sorry for the sarcasm but I couldn't resist….nothing personal.
There is also plant life that is adapting to glyphosate, and it no longer kills it, so in time you will get your wish of no more glyphosate…….you can start speculating how bad the next chemical down the pipeline will be…….bets please.
Maybe you can give the people who are studying direct organic some pointers and make the world a better place……
I would imagine, being able to just look out her window and see the farm, and married to a professional farmer, have a circle of professional farmer friends, Sarah Schultz is educated by professional experiences.
Thank you for an honest and straightforward post. I find it good to know the things you said about the authors of the study you are debating/responding to, and that the information being circulated is a summary, not new research.
That said, I'm still very skeptical of the amounts of Roundup (and other chemicals) being used on wheat and other crops. Although your info graphic says it affects the shikimic acid pathway (which humans do not have), I'm concerned that bacteria DO have that pathway. If roundup can and does kill some bacterias, it would be very possible for it to change the balance of a healthy soil and the healthy human who is filled with a balance of bacteria. Something that affects bacteria WILL affect humans.
Thanks for the comment. I will definitely look more into the bacteria in our guts thing, that as been coming up a lot. Did you click through my link to how much glyphosate we spray? It's really not that much, if timed properly (not all farmers are perfect) it will not absorb into the wheat kernels. MRLs are set and monitored and even if MRL is reached/tested/consumed, it's still not at a level to cause harm to us.
Check out: How Much Glyphosate Do We Spray on Our Crops?"
This might help, taken from David B. from GMO Skepti-Forum:
"Here is one study looking at in vitro treatment of bacteria from poultry guts. The minimum detectable effect was at 0.150 mg/ml which is orders of magnitude higher than would be found in the human gut given that glyphosate residues, when found, are in the ppm level and any food residues would be diluted in the gut. The other problem with this study is that they used roundup rather than glyphosate, so the effect might well be due to the surfactant.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23224412
One other point to add is that there is a wealth of human epi research on glyphosate and animal trials. These humans and animals have microbiomes in their guts and yet glyphosate had minimal effect. So if their is some hypothesized but undetected effect of ppm levels of glyphosate on the microbiome, that effect doesn't appear to in turn affect human or animal health."
If glyphosate isn't absorbed by the kernel, why does it render the seed infertile? Farmers shouldn't take these concerning comments as attacks. Rather, they should be a reason to stop and reflect on our practices.
Can you please elaborate on “render the seed infertile”? BTW I don't see this as an “attack” either.Sent from my iPhone
When crops are desicated with glyphosate germination is lowered, (this varies depending on crop stage, and uniformity when glyphosate is applied) Vigour , in my experience, drops even more sometimes to half the rate of germination.
See also Roundup and Gut Bacteria
The exposure you get from fueling your car is significantly great risk than what these " clowns" do.
I'm a new follower here, and just wanted to say I appreciate your efforts to provide accurate information. We farm grain, oilseeds, and cattle in Kneehill County.
One county away! Thanks for stopping by and saying hi!
Even though I grew up on a farmi don't believe our food should be poisoned that's what causes cancer these clowns that spray need to be held accountable for their actions…that's all..!!
No name-calling is necessary, this is your warning. If you read my post, read my previous posts, click through the links, clearly we do not "poison" the food. We wouldn't be allowed to grow it if we did. Causes cancer? Can you please give a citation?
Here's one: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widely-…
My recent post House GOP Revives Bill To Block Late-term Abortions, Armed with New Preemie Viability Data
Hi Sarah. A ton of research has come forth showing Round-Up aka glyphosate to be a probable carcinogen. You could just claim it all to be junk science, but when the State of California has labeled something as such, you really cannot ignore that. How much do you know about glyphosate? Did you know that before 1970 glyphosate was used to clean the lime and water deposits out of industrial pipes? Then a Monsanto scientist discovered that it was a powerful weedkiller. The problem was that this weedkiller actually killed EVERYTHING. All the good micro bacteria in the soil, and all life really. So when they developed GMOs, they made these round-up ready crops so that they were not affected by the glyphosate. Everything dies when sprayed with glyphosate, except the crops that are round-up ready. When you spray it on wheat, the wheat will die eventually from the glyphosate – which is why you spray at a certain point in the wheat's life cycle. Another thing to note is that glyphosate is a known endocrine system disrupter. Your endocrine system regulates the hormones for your entire body. I certainly don't want something messing with my hormones – which control many of the functions that help me to be alive.
Hi Madeline,
No, there has not been a ton of research done, actually. It was no new data/research that the IARC decided that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen. My friend wrote all about it here and quotes "So, besides glyphosate, what other things are included in that classification? The following things have also been included in the 2A classification: manufacturing glass, burning wood, emissions from high temperature frying, and work exposure as a hairdresser." http://www.thefarmersdaughterusa.com/2015/03/glyp…
The State of California has warning labels for EVERYTHING. I couldn't believe all the nonsense I saw when we were in California at Disneyland warning me that the table made of plastic might give me cancer. What a waste of taxpayer's money.
Thanks for telling me how glyphosate works on our wheat, I wasn't aware until just this moment.
How do you know that it causes cancer without any studies? It's easy to draw a cause and effect conclusion while none actually exists. (Remember we used to think the earth was flat simply because we couldn't see over the horizon?) We easily make assumptions, but nothing about the human body is that black and white. There is an infinite number of variables, especially when it comes to cancer. Did you know that decades of research continues to point towards people who eat the most fruits, vegetables and whole grains have lower rates of cancer? Were all of those fruits, veggies and whole grains organic? No. Studies have been saying that long before there was an actual set of criteria defining what could be called organic and what could not. ( BTW, organic farming is a great idea on a small scale, but won't feed the world because it requires more land and water for less yield. )Not all research is created equally and without bias. Just because someone has strong credentials doesn't mean their research isn't flawed. So often we can't see the forest for the trees and get hung up on on assumptions like "natural is more healthy" (not true – sea salt is just as harmful as iodized regular salt, for example), whereas we seem to forget the big things that we KNOW, beyond reasonable doubt, do make a difference in our health (like exercising, not smoking, etc). We see what we want to see and believe what we want to believe. There is an incredible amount of junk science out there and people are making huge profits off of naive people who believe in their all too popular conspiracy theories. Don't you think that if glyphosate was as evil as you would suggest, wouldn't all the farmers out there that handle it be walking around with 3 arms and 5 eyes? Or not walking around at all because they are dead? Sarah, I feel your pain. I am not a farmer. I came upon your blog as a Registered Dietitian,(just south of the your borders and also wheat country, Montana) who is going nuts over the silly gluten-free fad! Well, I'll just have the double bacon cheeseburger without the whole wheat bun, because gluten is bad for me. And make that a large fry. And the 64oz sweet green tea because green tea is good for me! That's what I mean with the whole forest and tree thing
Great post…..there were some Monsanto reps used to drink roundup to show how safe it was…..to the best of my knowledge they are still ok.
I don't think I would go that far though….he, he. Its funny to me that when you call someone a clown, somehow you get made to look like one yourself……
As a person who has Celiac Disease, I too feel badly for farmers and the food industry as people take on wheat as the new dietary enemy. I lived in wheat country (west plains outside of Spokane, WA) for seven years and am awed at what wheat farmers do for a living. A person can have credentials in a certain field that are up to date, but one has to consider the source of their employment, who's signing their paychecks, and what gain there is from the information that's put out there. Science, sadly, has been tainted when it comes to statistics; especially when there's big money involved behind the outcome of studies. The average person who isn't knowledgeable or has a science degree should truly seek out both sides of an argument and use common sense. The independent farmers aren't out to harm anyone, because this is their reputation and livelyhood on the line. Knowing and talking to farmers about what they do is very helpful when it comes to deciding what's best. Too often people buy into the latest fad when it comes to what's good or bad to consume. However, it truly is a landmine these days for most people to find the truth; the only thing I can offer to this is seek out who's behind any study, or putting information out there. So many smaller farmers have been hurt by the flavor of the month disease or health issue related to food consumption. Case in point, so many people think that red meat is unhealthy these days, and yes, it can be depending on who raises it and how it's raised; but chicken, that a lot of people think is healthy is as bad, if not worse than beef if it comes from the large chicken farms, which seems to be happening more and more as the smaller farms are bought up, and some keep their original names, but the practices of larger chicken companies for profit only are implemented. I spoke recently with a person who used to work for a large producer of chicken, he doesn't have a grudge to bear with the company, but was speaking honestly, and what he told me changed what I think about chicken going forward, and not in a good way. These facts are being hidden from the general public. I now seek out local farmers for as many food sources as possible, asking questions and getting to know what they are about. It just makes me sad and frustrated that even though I have Celiac Disease, and now that it's becoming known to many that they have mistakenly jumped on the bandwagon that all wheat is bad. Not even understanding that wheat isn't the only culprit that Celiacs have to deal with. One just doesn't wake up with Celiac Disease, and it won't magically go away once the fad moves on to attacking another food source. Eggs, beef, fish, chicken, wheat, fats (even the good ones), cholesterol (even the good ones), dairy, have all suffered large attacks via the press, and pseudoscience. Sadly many medium and smaller farmers have been run out of business or are a casualty, due to public hysteria when it comes to a witch hunt fad. One truly needs to dig deeper to find out who's behind these studies that are put out there. Follow the money trail when it comes to who funds these studies, that will tell you a lot about the motive behind the results. Sadly science and scientific studies, and their results have been corrupted due to the sin of greed. Yes, there are still some legitimate studies out there, but if a study is funded by a group or company who has something to gain, then chances are the outcomes are skewed. This comment is for the average person who is reading these comments on here. Use common sense when deciding what is right for your family. Don't buy into the cause of the disease of the month, just because it's an easy answer, because it's never as simple as that. I have Celiac disease because genetically it comes from my heritage, not because of the way wheat is grown these days, or in the past.
we didn't need this poison years ago..why now? Monsanto Monopoly mentality.. that's why and it's evil and selfish
Can you expand upon how farmers didn't need it? Not sure how Monsanto has the monopoly, we actually don't buy any product from Monsanto, we use the Syngenta brand… If farmers didn't want to buy it, they wouldn't.
In a believable blog, you don't delete what you may believe is "Junk Science". That's up to the reader to research and make up their mind about. Maybe your statements are just as much "Junk Science" as others are!
You know, she deleted the link but she actually stated that she was doing it and left the comment itself. Nothing was hidden. UNLIKE the Healthy Home Economist who just won't approve any comment she doesn't like for no rhyme or reason.
Honestly, Nick, a lot of innocent people have NO idea what good, reliable science is and I like to show them why junk science is junk science and how to decipher what to believe or not. This is a common request I get from my readers, no shame there.
I see several problems with both posts here (The healthy home economist's and yours). The problem with the first, is by applying glyphosate, the wheat does not yield more with in 7-14 day before it is harvested (a statement you also saw to be a problem). That being said, There are several problems with the your post as well. First of all, do not attack Seneff's credentials. Seneff has a degree in Biophysics – an interdisciplinary science using methods of, and theories from, physics to study biological systems. Biophysics spans all scales of biological organization, from the molecular scale to whole organisms and ecosystems. This is overlooked by you when you call Seneff an "electrical/computer scientist". She does have the credential/degree to be doing research on pesticides (and how they affect biology and ecosystems). Another problem I see with this is the quote – "There have been no legitimate studies linking glyphosate to any human health ailments." This is because there have been NO long term studies or studies on humans in general, regarding glyphosate and it's affects on health.
I do appreciate the references that you supplied at the bottom of your post. Thanks!
I don't attack her credentials as a whole, I "attack" them by using them to "research" agriculture practices. When we see those studies linking, long-term or not, I will happily share them. Thanks for the comment.
And being a nurse makes you an expert in toxicity and topology tests? I don't think so. What happened when glyphosate prices were cut in half? People used higher rates in Some cases double the rate . Economics don't point the way to higher moral standards to think so is ridiculous. We all know that we apply chemicals based on the rate of return of the investment (cost of chemical) even if it's a small gain. Sounds your brain washed .
Nope, not an expert, never claimed to be. Did a lot of reading and research and talked to farmers and agronomists. Are you an expert?Sent from my iPhone
No studies mean that glyphosate is safe long and short term. Wake up.! I think it's fair to say your biased! Not objective.
Does that make you biased too, Colter? Science isn't biased, usually I go with what science says.Sent from my iPhone
rachelsharp – “do not attack Seneff’s credentials. Seneff has a degree in Biophysics – an interdisciplinary science using methods of, and theories from, physics to study biological systems.
Let’s examine those credentials, OK?
According to her own bio page, ” For over three decades, her research interests have always been at the intersection of biology and computation “ developing a computational model for the human auditory system, understanding human language so as to develop algorithms and systems for human computer interactions, as well as applying natural language processing (NLP) techniques to gene predictions. ” Nothing in there about studying metabolic pathways, or even plants. She’s been working with computers and languages, not living systems.
She’s way out of her research area, way out of her degree area, and her last bio course may have been in 1968 or earlier … she received the B.S. degree in Biophysics in 1968, the M.S. and E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering in 1980, and the Ph.D degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in 1985.
1968 was like Model T era for biology compared to what is happening now … I can say that because my BS in a biological field was from 1970 and it was badly out of date in a decade.
I live in Saskatchewan (born, raised, and living on a wheat farm) and it was news to me that this was routine practice. It isn't around my area – we are pretty small, but the big guys don't do it here either. I'd never heard of it before. Anyhow, a very small amount of research and I concluded it does happen, but certainly not to the extent that people were being led to believe. Nor are the results anything like being were being led to believe…
I have tried to post multiple times on "that" blog regarding pre-harvest spraying and each and every comment has disappeared. Frustrating, at best. I wasn't there to name-call, but to share what I knew. Oh well….
Absolutely. The blogger from HHE really embellished and inflated the number of farmers who use this practice. I'm not here to say everyone does it or that it's the "best", just being transparent that it is done. She didn't publish my comment, she hasn't answered any tweets and didn't comment on Facebook.
I live in Saskatchewan and farm and 99% of people use glyphosate as a desiccant. Not sure what area your from!?
Southwest, and I've not seen it even once, and no one I've talked to does it. Desiccant is used regularly for lentils and peas here, but not wheat. What I'm hearing from talking to people is further North it's done more. Where are you?
Also…when you throw out statistics like "99% of people use glyphosate as a desiccant" it really tends to make what you say a bit unbelievable. Just take organic farmers out and you are already at less than that. If you are going to play numbers, make them real.
In North east Saskatchewan I would say that 99% of conventional wheat is desicated with glyphosate except of course wheat that is being saved for planting seed( because it lowers germination and destroys vigour) Common sense would tell you that hopefully organic wheat is not being sprayed (wouldn't qualify as organic then would it?) and that I wouldn't include those acres with the 99% of wheat acres that are being desicated. I've also talked to numerous grain buyers that wouldn't disagree with my claim (at least in the NE which by the way is a huge growing area) It is widely used on pretty much all crops up here- wheat, oats barley flax peas , now even canola. When farmers can use it they do.
That's fine, you just didn't qualify your statement with those details before. You said 99% of people, which is very different than 99% of conventional farmers in the NE portion of the province. Given some of the crazy made up statistics I've seen in the last few days on this topic (and I bet you've seen them too), I am all about real facts. What you're saying aligns with what I've been hearing, that it's more common the further north you go. It's not common here. I won't say it's not done, because I'm sure someone somewhere does it, but it would be pointless to even guess a percentage.
I've spoke with farmers on line that state they only "occasionally" use this practice. I wonder what items at the store are "occasionally' sprayed with glyphosate preharvest? I stick to organic for that reason. I'm just not into playing this game with my families health. All this mistrust… who's bright idea was it to choose to mislead the public this way? Shame on you.
Hi Nikki,
In what way does this cause mistrust and how am I misleading the public by being open and honest about a practice that we use on our farm. I'm very confused by your entire comment. You have the choice to buy organic, exercise that right.
Hello Sarah and others! I'm not here to tell
You I right and your wrong, you have done
Lots of reading and have made your own
Opinion based on that. Can you agree how
Ever that as a whole, we as farmers seem
To need more acres to stay viable? I farm
Near Millet AB, approx 1500 acres, also run
250 cow/calf pairs. Honestly after all my
Expenses there ain't much left to live on:(
I've come to realize that it's not about
Making more per acre, it's making more by
Farming more land! Farmers around me
Are going crazy, paying up to $100/acre
In rent and buying land in the $4-5000 range
So what happens now? I'm not quiting, but
A lot of farmers are:( maybe I'll have no option
But to quit aswell someday? Why should
You and the others even care? What
happens when the biggest farms swallow
up all the smaller? Maybe they get so big
that a foren investors buy them out! Haha
I'm just the devils advocate here, my bad!
So yes, we don't "drench" our wheat, and
we do the best practices in farming that we
can, as long as it makes business sence.
I'm just like the rest of you and use all those
products. I just don't spray my crops pre-
harvest with round-up. I don't feed my cattle
Barley or oats that have been sprayed and
I don't spray my wheat intended to feed the
people! I have great respect for you and your
family, and I know your working hard to make
a living! Monsanto, BASF, Bare,DuPont etc
don't pay me or put food on my table, in fact
they are very clever at taking food off my
table and putting it on there own:( What's
your thoughts on that? All the best.
Hi James,
I'm not sure if farmers need more acres. That would be a question for my husband to answer. Our yields have increased significantly over the years with new practices of no-till, crop rotation, pesticide rotation, seeding between the rows, etc. We don't get paid by chemical or seed companies either….we pay them. Not sure what the question was?
Thanks for the comment.
I think the point here is that the bigger ag gets, the more dependent upon the chemicals they become. Of course, the chemical companies want farmers to use their products, and they want them to be used in ways that will maintain the existence of the chemical companies. They care nothing about any individual farmer or any damage they are actually doing to the food produced. Whether it is people food or animal food, it will eventually become people food. I, personally, take issue with your logic that an engineer who got their training in computer science and artificial intelligence is incapable of doing sound research in food/chemical safety. Using that as a valid argument would then automatically disqualify you, a nurse, from making any sound and solid analyses about chemical engineering. The fact that comes blaring forward for me is that you have simply restated what the chemical companies have put forth as "fact" based solely on internal "research." I quite frankly do not know what the truth is, but I can assure you, you don't either. I choose to err on the side of caution, and that means I do not allow anything but local and organic to cross my lips. As far as I'm concerned, all your well meant intentions are worthless to me, and I believe, at least in this part of the world that I call home, is becoming more and more the way I am. Have a good harvest.
Do you feel farmers are irresponsibly using these chemicals, or that they don't have a choice in how or when they use them? No one forces a farmer to purchase or use a chemical, the onus is on the farmer. I'm not sure why a farmer would abuse using chemicals, though clearly it could happen, because these chemicals can cost a lot of money—we don't get them for free.
I'm not doing research here, JLFogo, that is the major difference. I'm not making extraordinary claims that 1 in 2 children will have autism related to glyphosate by the year 2025 as MIT researcher Seneff has. I share the evidence-based facts on this blog. I "report" them, I do not collect my own data and report my own personal research—that is not my area of expertise, nor have I ever claimed it to be. If all of this is worthless, I'm not sure why you are wasting your energies discussing this with me. Regardless, take care.
Instead of growing bigger we specialize and grow smarter. with such a large operation it is harder to remain on top of everything.
Great, easy to understand and very informative post!! Great job.I really had to laugh when that toxic wheat post stated that spraying round up produced more seeds….ha ha.
Thanks for the comment, Ashley. Yes, the spray = more seeds thing made me roll my eyes 🙂 If that were the case, I'm sure it would be a practice used everywhere!
Here is another look at it, it appears that glyphosate is ok on it's own but once embedded with a pesticide is no longer as safe. End of the day more serious studies need to be undertaken to fully understand the impacts of what we are doing. http://nutritionfacts.org/video/is-monsantos-roun…
More research, more science is always needed. If one day scientific consensus tells us glyphosate is not safe, we wont'use it. It's been used since the 70's, one of the safest, least toxic herbicides out there.
Sarah I marvel at your commitment to continue to share this valuable information with all of your other tasks. Oh and by the way please note Dr. Mercola fans or any other celebrity used car salesman. Sarah is not asking you to buy anything at the end of her lesson. Keep keeping on. Trent Loos
Thank you so much! I've had lots of Mercola and even Seralini thrown in my face over this! Just trying to give the bigger picture here.
Sarah is selling wheat, just not directly. If international markets dry due to "toxic wheat", it will prove any positive testing here to be seller and monsanto orientated, not consumer healthy.
Sarah is producing the essentials of life needed to survive it is called food. Amazing what well fed people worry about.
I will pay more for food not purposefully sprayed with toxins. My kid will not eat chemicals by choice. You are polluting the entire ecosystem. Why not choose a crop that is more suited to your environment.
What is your definition of a toxin? Salt is chemically more toxic than glyphosate, yet we directly sprinkle that on our food. Water is made up of two chemicals. The crops we grow on our farm are perfectly suited to our environment. What do you recommend we start growing (and how) in Alberta?
It's also important to note that the farm-related sources used on the Healthy Home Economist post were from Brazil and the UK, and her link to back up something she claims a farmer said goes to the for-profit page of the author of Wheat Belly, who didn't give identifying information about the "farmer."
Yes, good point. There is absolutely no proof that the "wheat farmer" who left a comment on the Wheat Belly blog, is actually a farmer. I could go on her blog and claim to be the Queen of Canada!
Why roundup?. Are you applying mainly for weed control? This practice is not used in KY as weeds are not a problem.
Hi Rich,
Thanks for the question. Mainly for weed control but it also does act as a desiccant to dry out and even out the green spots in low-lying areas for us, it just takes a really long time, up to 21 days. An agronomist friend of mine says this:
"When Glyphosate is used on a crop near harvest it is for weed control. We use it at that time for weeds that are really devistating to crop yield by competing for water, sunlight, and nutrients. Typical weeds are Canada thistle, quackgrass (which naturally releases allelochemicals that it makes into the soil around its roots to keep other plants from growing around it), toadflax, to name a few. The glyphosate is applied when the crop is already ripe. That means less than 20% moisture content in the seed. The 'hard dough' stage we call. Plants at this stage have essentially already stopped growing because their job is done. They've made seeds and they can die. These plants no longer have green leaves or stalks or glumes. No green means no photosynthesis or nutrient transport. The weeds however at this time of year are still green. So the crop doesn't absorb glyphosate but the weeds do. The reason we apply glyphosate on those weeds at that time is because they are creeping perennials. They propagate year after yet not only with seed but by the rhizomes (roots). In the fall they are taking nutrients into their roots to store over winter to regrow again in the spring. It is the best time of year to control them. They grow earlier in the spring than the crop and tillage does not do an effective job at controlling because when you disc through the rhizome they regrow from that rhizome and start more plants. So preharvest glyphosate applications are only on few select fields where there is need to control weeds that are difficult to control. The rate of glyphosate per 43560 sq ft is approx (depending on brand) 0.67-0.78 ml."
Hope that helps. All the best!
What a fantastic article and response to so much mistruth out there. I am a Celiac wheat farmer from southern Alberta and yes I also use glyphosate in the exact manner in which you described on my crops. I take great pride in providing the entire world with a quality product that they can afford to eat, and that is safe. More and more people are getting nut allergies, wonder if the nut farmers are "drenching" our nuts in glyphosate as well, or who is spraying all our shellfish with glyphosate, there must a patern here somewhere. Your response was the most honest and accurate I have read, Thankyou.
Thanks for the support, Stan. I know this isn't a widely used practice ALL over the world, but the point is we use it here and farmers do use it. Not to the degree that the other blogger said, but it is true that it is done and we need to be transparent. Good points about nuts, shellfish, etc. It's easy to wanna point the finger at *something* and that something in this case is glyphosate for the wheat haters.
Nut allergies are being triggered by inclusion of nut germplasm in crops for helping correct the abnormal amino acid balances which result from gene splicing technology to create various traits such as Bt events and herbicide tolerance. The first feeding trials of GMO soy made this very clear in the results experienced with hogs. All reported in Jeffrey Smith's book Seed of Deception.
Much of the "gluten intolerance" or at least "I feel better when I don't eat wheat" reported in the general US population is a result of the gut inability to properly digest the gluten and other substances contained in the gluten such as various forms of gliadin. Visit http://www.safegluten.com or Google for Heritage Grains, LLC. for more detailed studies on gliadin.
Glyphosate is patented as a bacteriacde. This is a terrible article, Stan. A complete distortion of the most dangerous food contaminant in history because it attacks the microbiome foundation of all life whether soil, plant or animal. I am raising three generations in perfect health now in Asia where our food is GMO and glyphosate free. Wheat farmers like Sarah's husband need to go back to swathing their wheat instead of spraying more glyphosate into the bio-sphere. That was the common practice that produced vomitoxin free wheat historically. TOday I will put money on sarah's husband needing to use fungicides to control vomitoxin, which of course you get to eat too. Vomitoxin was not a plant health issue until glyphosate came on the scene. The natural predators of this fungal organism are no longer present in sufficient numbers to control the Fusarium Graminearum causing the very serious problem. Since 2000 hundreds of scientists (plant pathologists and plant breeders from all over NA met together to try to figure out a solution to the problem. I attended the COnference in 2014. The USDA representative said that ZERO progress had been made thru plant breeding efforts since the inception of the effort. All of the major bio-tech firms were in attendance pushing for GM techniques. Not a good idea if one wants to export wheat. Russia just banned all US exports because of GMO contamination. South Korea and Japan did that on wheat over three years ago.
My recent post Hello world!
There’s a new one.
Another point of view, from Dr. Mercola.
(Link deleted by Nurse Loves Farmer)
Joe Mercola is a sensationalist fear monger; he is almost as bad as Mike Adams from Natural News. He uses his bullshit site to hock his ridiculous 'medical' products. Seriously lousy source on anything health related.
Dr. Mercola is the kind of doctor that makes me glad i'm not sick! Just check out his Himalayan Salt claims. One of in which he proudly proclaims it contains all 84 elements found in the human body. Now pull up a periodic table and see how many heavy metals and radioactive elements it must contain to have 84 elements.
Sorry, Kenny. I gotta delete that Mercola link, it's junk science.
Why would Nurse Sarah delete a link that was contrary to her ideals? Makes me wonder what she doesn't want me to know!
Read my comment policy, Nick. My blog, my rules.
its not against 'her views', its against science, truth, and rationality.
Exactly!
This is why Mercola links are not allowed on my blog: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Mercola
Also? He's ranked #1 on quackwatch.org
I am also frustrated by the recent "toxic wheat" blog circulating on facebook. I was born and raised in a farming family, and have spent the last 12 years working and teaching in the landscape/ gardening industry. The "backyard" gardener is a bigger threat to our earth due to the misuse of herbicides and pesticides. The farmer is better trained and has more at stake.
This info about wheat isn't just "circulating Facebook!" I've seen tutorials on line from farmers. And one from Monsanto!! Go ahead and keep eating this "wheat' I'll pass. Thanks. Also, isn't glyphosate patented as an antibiotic? And a biocide? oops and also a demineralizer?
Hi again, Nikki,
To be more accurate glyphosate is classified as an antimicrobial, you can read more here if you would like: http://goo.gl/E6Yyot
Remember: many of the most dangerous chemicals found in your food aren't labeled at all: Pesticides,herbicides,heavy metals,BPA and more. Did you know,by the way,that a lot of today's non-organic wheat products are contaminated with cancer-causing glyphosate? Did you also know that most gluten-free foods are loaded with GMOs?
Can you show me some studies that prove glyphosate definitively causes cancer? If so, we should definitely read them too. How do you think they load the gluten-free foods with extra GMOs?
Hmm. I didn't know that wheat was grown in Canada. I thought it was too cold. I learned a lot from this post. Thank you.
Big crop in Canada, glad you learned something 🙂
Great Article. Thank-you!
Yes thank you for this article. I was about to buy some Einkorn from a heritage grains site that hosted your blog, but now I'm buying my Einkorn from Jovial. You all keep eating that Round Up now. Monsanto says it's good to the last drop.
Stumbled across your blog on Facebook. I'm also a nurse who is dating a farmer. Thanks for sharing accurate info!
Nurses and farmers make great couples 🙂 Thanks for reading and stopping by!
Thanks for writing this! As the daughter of a wheat farmer from New Mexico, I've also been disturbed about the inaccurate information circulating on Facebook regarding "Toxic Wheat". I just spoke with my father about this again earlier today, so your blog is very timely! I'll be sharing it with my friends … 🙂
Oh thanks so much, Marcia! I imagine your farm doesn't use this practice, but the important thing is that it is a legal, safe practice and the "toxic wheat" article needs to be debunked.
So if wheat is so "safe" pray tell us why people are affected by gluten toxicity syndrome when twenty years ago there was no such ailment known to the health industry? Back then we
were only concerned with the difference between whole wheat and bleached wheat.
Hi Hanale,
I've actually never heard of "gluten toxicity syndrome". Could you please link me to some science-based articles regarding this? Thanks!
Easy to find science based articles on Gluten Syndrome and Gluten Toxicity…just google it: https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=gluten+toxici…
I'd honestly never heard that term before.
You are all sadly and sorely mislead. Come on farmers- get educated here. You are what you eat. Check out the interview Vimeo Jeff Smith and Dr. Stephanie Seneff. You will never eat wheat again unless it’s organic.
Laura, telling the people who grow food for a living to "get educated" is not a very productive comment. You have the choice (as I can see you do) to buy organic food, so buy organic food. Smith and Seneff are well-known fear-mongers to the agriculture world and they both benefit from their pro-organic agenda.
The part in the GMO activists paper where she states that plants throw out a bunch more seeds at the last minute,,wow…..i just about fell off my chair, seed set is determined very early on in cereals for example, 2.3 leaf stage, the fruit count has been determined, and people listen to this negligent information!
If that fact RIGHT THERE doesn't discredit her entire argument against glyphosate/GMO etc…I don't know what will. I felt the exact same way reading her blog post the same time. If that were true…of course everyone would use it for that purpose — to increase yield!
If glyphosate was that much of a poison we would all be dead by now, this kind of information drives me nuts as a former seed analyst, and Ag. research technician . Sharing this post everywhere