Mary,
I appreciate your research on this topic! But you seem still to step
around two key facts in Frank Chance's report on Roundup. First, most of
the malign findings in human beings occur with agribusiness
applications, which can be up to 20 times more concentrated than dilute
commercial solutions. Second, while the half-life of glyphosate, the
active ingredient in Roundup, varies widely in the soil, it does usually
break down swiftly. That's why most harmful effects are associated with
its handlers, not with food consumers or bypassers in a treated field
months later. There was a reason, in other words, why this construction
site was fenced off from the public for 75 days after this soil
treatment, which was applied early, before the new sod was laid down.
You are certainly right that further consideration should be paid to
research into potential risks of glyphosate and other pesticides, and
society should not rely on research paid for by manufacturers alone.
You are also right that neither Friends of Clark Park nor UC-list has
any scientific authority to judge these issues or make decisions on
application. This is a consideration that rests on the contracting
agencies -- in this case, the Dept. of Parks & Recreation, and perhaps
Capital Projects as well. It is a citywide issue which has nothing in
particular to do with Clark Park. There will never be a situation in
which Parks & Rec employs one herbicide in a project in Park X and
another in Park Y, based on local input.
So readers with a (commendable, in my eye) concern about this subject
should direct the fruits of their research toward people who write
contracts for the City of Philadelphia. In the end, it is the City that
must decide which construction practices are safe and which construction
practices are affordable.
--Tony West
On 6/16/2011 1:55 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Frank Chase's reassurances that the pesticide Roundup is safe to
humans and animals, are, I am sure, well-intentioned. But the very
latest research, done by independent, university-based scientists,
makes a strong argument that the dangers of this product have been
grossly underestimated . Numerous studies have now demonstrated the
toxicity of Roundup (not just its main ingredient glyphosate) to
amphibians, mammals and humans.
In Ontario, a dramatic increase in miscarriages and premature births
occurred in farm families where the farmer fathers were using
Roundup. In Argentina, a region newly-planted in RoundupReady soy and
frequently sprayed with Roundup saw a significant increase in certain
birth defects. Researchers in France and Argentina, alarmed at this
association between Roundup use and harm to humans, undertook research
aimed at testing whether there was a cause and effect relationship at
work. They concluded that Roundup, at concentrations well below those
commonly employed in agriculture, produced birth defects in
amphibians, reduced fertility in rodents, and was lethal to human
fetal, embryonic and placental cells. Other researchers have observed
an association between exposure to Roundup and increases in lymphoma
in humans.
Apparently, the position that Roundup is harmless is based largely on
research that 1) was performed by scientists in the employ of its
manufacturer, much of it never published in any peer-reviewed
journals, and with evidence that negative findings were suppressed and
2) investigated the toxicity of glyphosate alone, ignoring the fact
that the additives in the Roundup compound greatly increase the toxic
effect.
Two just-published reports address the relationship between Roundup
and birth defects and the safety of crops genetically modified to
tolerate spraying with Roundup (the plants store Roundup, which thus
enters the food supply either directly through human consumption, or
indirectly, as animal feed that then is stored by the animals,
eventually consumed by humans). They are both excellent reviews of
the status of research on Roundup and a good source for the most
important scientific literature on the topic.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/57277946/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5
http://www.gmwatch.org/files/GMsoy_SustainableResponsible_Sept2010_Summary.pdf,
Reading these reviews, as well as articles on the toxic effects of
incredibly small doses of Roundup on human fetal and placental cells,
certainly shakes one's faith in Monsanto's claims of its being harmless.
In any case, neither Frank Chance nor the FOCP are the pesticide
police. They are not responsible for its application in Clark Park,
nor are they scientists equipped to judge its safety. Clearly, the
responsibility lies with the city and its agents (UCD, landscape
contractors, etc). How much Roundup was used in Clark Park is only
part of the story. How much of this pesticide has been spread around
the city at large? Perhaps that question should be posed to the Parks
and Rec people. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that this
is a potential public health concern. After all, the city of Boulder,
CO has banned its use.
Roundup and the crops genetically modified to tolerate it are now
hugely controversial in Europe and it is likely that the debate about
its safety will go on for some time - there is billions at stake. At
this point, I don't think any one can say definitively whether the
application of Roundup in Clark Park does or does not pose a risk to
children, to pregnant women, or to couples hoping to become parents.
For now, people will have to decide for themselves, I guess, how much
uncertainty they can tolerate when it comes to their health and their
children's.
Mary
