Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

The weed killer Roundup has been linked to diabetes, autism, obesity, heart disease, and cancer

Posted by   + Show Post

 Roundup linked to diabetes, autism, obesity, heart disease, cancer and more

We have been led to believe that Roundup is minimally toxic to humans, but is that really true?
Thu, Apr 25 2013 at 4:03 PM
4  

Photo: Tobyotter/Flickr

One of the things that drives me crazy about living in the city is watching how city workers carelessly spray weeds in public parks, along the sidewalk, and anywhere else they deem weeds unacceptable. As a mother of young children, I don't appreciate the use of weed killers such as Roundup in public areas.

Granted, I have an aversion to chemicals in general, but a recent, peer-reviewed scientific paper that links Roundup to gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer's disease makes me feel that I'm right to voice my concerns
You can read the abstract and download the PDF of the study, which was published in the journal Entropy. Here are a few takeaways.
  • Glyphosate is the active ingredients in Roundup, the worlds' most popular herbicide.
  • While the industry claims that it is minimally toxic to humans, this study argues otherwise.
  • Residues of glyphosates are found in much of the Western diet.
  • Glyphosates inhibit cytochrome enzymes, which play crucial roles in the body, including the detoxification of xenobiotics. This is an overlooked toxicity issue of Roundup.
  • Because glyphosates have this effect on cytochrome enzymes, it enhances the damaging effects of other foodborne chemical residues and environmental toxins.
  • The harmful effects of glyphosates manifest slowly, and over time they damage cellular systems throughout the body.
  • The interference with cytochrome enzymes has a profound effect on our gut biosynthesis, and our serum sulfate transport, which has severe consequences such as gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer, and Alzheimer's disease.
In simple terms, the study is saying that traces of Roundup can be found in foods and that Roundup may make our bodies more susceptible to other environmental toxins.
This is sobering news.
If you have to, I recommend that you choose weeds over toxins in your yard. It breaks my heart to see weed killer sprayed in yards where young children will play. I am going to be looking into some natural weed killer solutions, and I'll let you know what I find.
by on Apr. 26, 2013 at 11:58 AM
Replies (31-37):
-JellyfishEgg-
by New Member on Apr. 27, 2013 at 3:32 AM
Just curious... what do you mean by reall science and how you're not worried about GMOs?

Quoting coronado25:

Goodwoman, I noticed that you "liked" my reply. Was this an accident? I am pro real science and have no worries about GMOs and really appreciate Linda's effort to help people here grasp some concepts pertaining to the concerns.




Quoting Goodwoman614:





Quoting kameka:

I had no problem with your main point, but citing incorrect data brings to question the validity of your other claims. I figured you might want to know that what you were saying is utterly unproven.





Quoting LindaClement:

Interestingly, toxicology research doesn't ever involve humans, so it's a ridiculous reference point.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:







"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."







From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html








Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom. 

Quoting kameka:

Nope









http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm










Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

Quoting GLWerth:

"Minimally Toxic" is still toxic. Just sayin'.




Yeah. B/c if it walks like, talks like...smells like a bunch of blustering bravado bullshit..it likely IS bullshit.





Posted on CafeMom Mobile
opinionatedmom
by on Apr. 27, 2013 at 3:36 AM
Can someone pm ne this story please.
turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on Apr. 27, 2013 at 5:27 AM

wowser...they managed to cover every major disease...good for them *insert eye roll* LOL

turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on Apr. 27, 2013 at 5:44 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Goodwoman614:

Here's what annoys me about articles like this: the vast majority of people reading it do not know what the hell cytochrome enzymes are, or wtf gut biosynthesis is...or serum sulfate...etcetcetc. 

The sad fact is, most Americans lack a working understanding of basic scientific principles that are necessary to understand anything that requires such.

And then there are the insufferable types who come into a post like this, throwing obscurities of their own, in an attempt to come across as oh-so-knowledgeable. 

Barf,

and barf.

I dont understand the terminology...but IMO logic can reign supreme :-)

I dont think its sad that people dont have a working knowledge of these types of principals.  They are for the most part...useless and unnecessary in daily life.

I suffer from diabetes...it has been determined to be a genetic issue that stems from my ancestors inability to process refined sugar.

My grandmother had this problem and birthed 15 kids. No Roundup

10 kids got diabetes. No Roundup

They had in total 27 kids with diabetes Roundup exposure to approx 10 as young adults

They have in total had more than 60 kids

so far about 10 girls have had kids and whilst they were carrying were diagnosed with gestational diabetes...a precursor to Type 2 diabetes.

IMO...roundup has not contributed to diabetes, it is running its genetic course.



coronado25
by Silver Member on Apr. 27, 2013 at 1:58 PM
I can read and understand science papers and I check sources and references. The science I read on such things check out. When I follow the sources and references of articles like these, they do not...just reading the bulleted facts above tells me the journalist that wrote the article doesnt really understand what he/she is saying.


Quoting -JellyfishEgg-:

Just curious... what do you mean by reall science and how you're not worried about GMOs?



Quoting coronado25:

Goodwoman, I noticed that you "liked" my reply. Was this an accident? I am pro real science and have no worries about GMOs and really appreciate Linda's effort to help people here grasp some concepts pertaining to the concerns.






Quoting Goodwoman614:






Quoting kameka:

I had no problem with your main point, but citing incorrect data brings to question the validity of your other claims. I figured you might want to know that what you were saying is utterly unproven.







Quoting LindaClement:

Interestingly, toxicology research doesn't ever involve humans, so it's a ridiculous reference point.

Strangely, someone named Alan Van Dyke is routinely quoted as having studied pholcid venom, with absolutely no hint of it in any scholarly journal or publication of any kind. In fact, his name only comes up as a reference in marketing, not any scholarly field of research I can find anywhere.

But it appears to be true that of the 2000 varieties of spiders ever researched, pholcidae appears to be none of them, at least not in English.

Doesn't change the main point: toxin is in the dose, not the compound.

Quoting kameka:

Ok, how about this:









"Daddy-longlegs spiders (Pholcidae) - Here, the myth is incorrect at least in making claims that have no basis in known facts. There is no reference to any pholcid spider biting a human and causing any detrimental reaction. If these spiders were indeed deadly poisonous but couldn't bite humans, then the only way we would know that they are poisonous is by milking them and injecting the venom into humans. For a variety of reasons including Amnesty International and a humanitarian code of ethics, this research has never been done. Furthermore, there are no toxicological studies testing the lethality of pholcid venom on any mammalian system (this is usually done with mice). Therefore, no information is available on the likely toxic effects of their venom in humans, so the part of the myth about their being especially poisonous is just that: a myth. There is no scientific basis for the supposition that they are deadly poisonous and there is no reason to assume that it is true."









From http://spiders.ucr.edu/daddylonglegs.html










Quoting LindaClement:

Being able to 'harm a human being' has no bearing on the toxicity of the venom. 

Quoting kameka:

Nope











http://insects.about.com/od/noninsectarthropods/f/daddylongvenom.htm












Quoting LindaClement:

Actually... it's not.

In fact, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the term 'toxic.'

Toxin is in the dose. Period.

Water is toxic in high dosages. It is not 'still toxic' in reasonable doses.

The most toxic spider venom on the planet is from Daddy Long-legs. Which is hilariously irrelevant because they make so little of it they can't kill a gerbil with a bite.

Quoting GLWerth:

"Minimally Toxic" is still toxic. Just sayin'.




Yeah. B/c if it walks like, talks like...smells like a bunch of blustering bravado bullshit..it likely IS bullshit.







Posted on CafeMom Mobile
ElleAimeleVie
by on Apr. 27, 2013 at 2:02 PM
1 mom liked this
I like dandelions
LauraKW
by "Dude!" on Apr. 27, 2013 at 2:09 PM
Nothing has been confirmed as a cause / contributor to autism.
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN