Roundup weed killer, will be added to list of chemicals known to cause c

[Roses]

This is getting worse & worse all the time.  Now Wine & beer are affected.  Who knows what else this stuff is in.

You know I often wonder about my dad who passed from cancer all through him.  He was a landscaper for 30 plus years back in the

 1960's, 70s, 80s .  And he worked with so many different banned chemicals & Round Up was one of them.  He never wore a mask or any

 protection while using those dangerous chemicals.  Cancer wasn't in his family that I know of.  The doctors found that the cancer

was all through him & 1 month later he died.  He was 85 & always very healthy otherwise.  

I really do think it's possible that these horrible chemicals may have caused the cancer he had.  


I'm a gardener & many years ago I used Round Up sometimes & I didn't use precautions.  Linville is the one who really made me aware as

 to what this stuff can do to people. This just sucks....

[magnet1153]

I am guilty of being lazy in regard to weeding my rather small vegetable garden and using Roundup.  Last year, for the first time ever, I couldn't get anything but tomatoes to grow.  I thought squash was a no-brainer, but my plants wouldn't mature.  They sprouted and bloomed, but  the small fruits eventually rotted and died.  I even replanted but had the same results.  I now believe Roundup may be at least partially to blame.  I was going to mulch in manure this year, but after reading this, I'm rethinking it.  It's hard to trust simple thing anymore.  

[MoJim]

Ya, I have used Round Up over the past three decades without proper protection and yes I have a form on Non Hodgkins's Lymphoma, there are 25-60 subtypes. I was also exposed, minimally, to a hazmat spill at work 20 yrs ago. That chemical also was known to cause cancer. At the time I didn't experience any symptoms and was checked out by doctors. I really wan't concerned at the time, but now that I think back.................

These chemicals are most likely in most of our foods, especially since corporate farming has taken over. People think that the amount of a chemical or exposure has a lot to due with negative health outcomes, but many chemicals are not dose dependent. It can be .00000001 or 1% of chemical xyz and the outcome can be the same.

I've tried recently to use vinegar and lemon juice when killing weeds, though I found out the vinegar found in grocery stores are not acidic enough to do the job. You can buy vinegar weed killer, but I've yet to see it at the major hardware stores.

Not, Tsingtao!! I always order this when dining out at a Chinese restaurant.

Eating healthy is so difficult in our society, especially for working people. I'm retired, so I can grow some of my own and be more selective and use organic, though organic carries a price tag.

Stay safe everyone and use all the safety precautions when using ANY type of chemical.

[Linville]

Interesting post MoJim.

Thanks for adding ur thoughts.

Here is more news to add as I thought it was banned in the EEU currently but apparently not.

I am trying to find the dates for these actions.

---

EU Votes To Ban Potentially Harmful Chemical Found In Roundup
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.65098)][img=736x0]https://cdn.iflscience.com/assets/site/img/ifls-placeholder.png?v=1.3.4[/img][/color]
The days of Roundup in Europe are numbered. 

The EU Parliament voted on Tuesday for the controversial herbicide glyphosate, the main component of the omnipresent Roundup, to be banned by 2022. 

There are serious concerns about the impact the chemical has on human health, particularly considering its near ubiquity in agriculture today.

Despite the legislation being non-binding, the prohibition of the substance was passed by 355 votes to 204, with 111 abstentions. 

The impact of this vote has already been felt, as when it came time for the European Commission to renew the license for glyphosate, they did so for between five and seven years – a shorter-than-usual length of time.

The executive body of the EU was initially expected to extend the license for another decade, but backtracked after strong opposition from within the European Parliament as well as from the public.

The lead up to the vote this week has been particularly bitter. The weed killer is widely used, not only in Europe but in many other parts of the world. 

A recent study found that 45 percent of Europe’s topsoil contained the residue of the substance, while another that came out on the same day as the vote found that levels of glyphosate has doubled in Americans over the two decades it has been used on crops.

Unsurprisingly, the largest manufacturer of glyphosate, Monsanto, have been attempting to push back against the ban. 

However, the attempt backfired somewhat for the company. In the lead up to the vote, MEPs decided to ban Monsanto lobbyists from even entering the European Parliament after the representatives of the company failed to show up at an inquiry looking into whether or not Monsanto had been interfering with scientific research on the health impacts of glyphosate.

Clearly, there has been much controversy over what glyphosate may or may not do to our health. The World Health Organization found in 2015 that the substance is “probably carcinogenic to humans”, and yet the weed killer is still one of the most heavily used. 

It is thought that in the UK alone, at least 60 percent of all bread consumed has traces of the chemical, 

while three-quarters of Germans tested had five times the legal limit of the stuff in their pee.

As a result, over a million people signed a petition delivered to Brussels asking for an immediate ban. 

While the EU has not gone that far, they are building in time for replacements to be found and then brought into use.

[folken]

Guilty as charged......

Admit to using Roundup -- even have a big jug out in the shed.

Indiscriminate use is the issue....IMO

Treated as a dangerous chemical it has it's use.............come from farming background.



Folken

[Froggy]

In my area there was a big problem a few years ago with a large composting project. They collected manure from surrounding horse farms as well as scraps from restaurants. Then they sold it as “all natural” compost. Unfortunately, the grain fed to the horses (or what was made into the grain) was treated with one of these chemicals and remained in the compost. It killed hundreds of peoples gardens.

It was eventually blamed on the beet pulp from sugar beets that is added to grain. It is amazing to me the number of times that stuff was “processed” from the time it was sprayed & still there was enough to poison people’s soil! How in the world do we get it out of our food once it has been used on a crop?

[Linville]

Yeah good question Froggy!

---

Too bad about that compost

[Froggy]

Froggy, Linville, don't worry, a chemist (researcher) friend tells me that the glycophosphates eventually break down, after (an estimated) 1,000 years or so.

(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes, again.)

It most certainly does!

[Linville]

ha ha maddy, yeah 1000 years.

Good one .

I am not against things of this sort but when they uncover problems with continued use etc. then they should halt the use of it.

no matter how much profits are being made.

And I hope I would feel the same way if I was employed at a facility mfg this , my job would be lost.

[Linville]

UPDATE;

.
Jury Finds Bayer’s Roundup Weedkiller Caused Man’s Cancer
[color=rgba(27, 27, 27, 0.65098)]Second phase of the trial will weigh Monsanto’s liability[/color]

By 
Sara Randazzo and 
Ruth Bender 

Updated March 19, 2019 6:08 p.m. ET

SAN FRANCISCO—A jury found that a man developed cancer from exposure to Roundup weedkiller he used in his yard, in the second case to go to trial over the alleged harms of the popular Bayer AG BAYRY 2.50% product.

The six-person jury in U.S. District Court in San Francisco now is set to begin hearing evidence to separately weigh whether Bayer’s Monsanto unit should be held liable, a decision that could bring substantial financial damages against the company.

The initial verdict marks another setback for Bayer, which has come under intense pressure since a jury in August reached a $289.2 million verdict in the first case over the weedkiller to go to trial. That verdict came down soon after Bayer finalized its acquisition of Monsanto Co.


Tuesday’s verdict is likely to add to pressure to Bayer’s share price, which has suffered sharp losses since August.
Analysts and investors saw Bayer at an advantage in this second trial after U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria agreed to split the evidence into two phases, 

with the first focusing solely on whether Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, are carcinogenic.

Bayer faces lawsuits from about 11,200 farmers, home gardeners and landscapersclaiming its glyphosate-based herbicides cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other cancers. Six more trials are due to start this year in federal and state courts.

Bayer said in a statement it is disappointed with the decision but “we continue to believe firmly that the science confirms that glyphosate-based herbicides do not cause cancer” and that the second phase of the trial “will show that Monsanto’s conduct has been appropriate.”

Aimee Wagstaff and Jennifer Moore, attorneys for plaintiff Edwin Hardeman, said their client is pleased with the jury’s unanimous decision. “Now we can focus on the evidence that Monsanto has not taken a responsible, objective approach to the safety of Roundup,” they said.

During the nine days of trial, the San Francisco jury heard competing scientific evidence over whether Roundup has been shown to cause cancer.

Attorneys for Mr. Hardeman say he developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after 26 years of regularly using Roundup to control weeds and poison oak on his rural properties in Northern California.

“We’ve showed you the evidence that Monsanto refuses to analyze,” Ms. Wagstaff told jurors during closing arguments. She argued that Monsanto disregards studies on animals and cell structures that, along with studies of human populations, prove Roundup’s dangers. 

“Do not ignore the data that Monsanto is asking you to ignore,” she said.

Bayer attorney Brian Stekloff countered in his closing remarks that the science jurors have been shown was made for court and that the expert witnesses aren’t warning anyone about the alleged harms of Roundup in their day jobs. “They’re telling you, real-world medical practice doesn’t matter,” he said of the plaintiff’s position.

The jury deliberated over parts of five days, at one point asking to re-hear testimony from Mr. Hardeman, before reaching its decision.

Bayer argues that some 800 studies and regulatory decisions across the globe assert that glyphosate is safe and not carcinogenic. Bayer Chief Executive Werner Baumann said last month that the two-phase trial would allow Bayer to put a strong focus on scientific data that confirms the product’s safety.

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a World Health Organization branch, designated glyphosate as probably carcinogenic to humans. That kicked off a wave of litigation and regulatory scrutiny around the world.
Ahead of the first trial, attorneys for plaintiff Dewayne Johnson, a former school groundskeeper, released internal Monsanto emails they said showed the company’s inappropriate role in shaping studies on glyphosate. Bayer argues those emails were taken out of context.
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.65098)]
A jury found that a man developed cancer from exposure to the Roundup he used in his yard to kill weeds like dandelions and poison oak. Photo: Antonio Pisacreta/Ropi/Zuma Press[/color]





Lawyers for Mr. Johnson argued in court that Monsanto knew the testing of glyphosate was insufficient and that employees ghostwrote favorable scientific articles and paid outside scientists to publish the articles under their names. The jury in state court in San Francisco found Monsanto knew or should have known of potential risks and failed to warn consumers. Bayer has appealed the verdict, which the trial judge cut down to $78.5 million.

The trial under way in San Francisco will now move into the second phase, probing Monsanto’s conduct and whether it was negligent.

Drawing the line on what evidence could come into the first phase prompted clashes in court, including $500 sanctions against the lead plaintiff’s lawyer for what the judge called obvious violations of his orders on what jurors could see.
Mr. Hardeman’s case is the first of three bellwether trials scheduled to take place in federal court to help assess the claims. Hundreds of federal cases have been consolidated in front of Judge Chhabria.
Mr. Baumann in February cautioned that the glyphosate legal fight was “only at the beginning.” Analysts say they will need to see at least a handful of verdicts before they can make more precise estimates of the potential liabilities for Bayer. Until that happens, shares are likely to remain depressed, they say.
Write to Sara Randazzo at sara.randazzo@wsj.com and Ruth Bender at Ruth.Bender@wsj.com