It always cracks me up when someone goes stomping off because the thread did not progress as he or she desired. I can hear the slamming door echoing in my head. Oops, no, that’s the horses banging their feed tubs for the afternoon meal. Happy Saturday!
1 Like
There is nothing that’s been said here that hasn’t been said in one way or another in countless in-person discussions. Are they not a necessary part of life either?
Studying anything strictly on you own is a great way to fall into the confirmation bias trap we’re all on the verge of on a regular basis.
Anyone who really wants to get to the truth will welcome all sides of things. You never learn enough in a bubble.
2 Likes
:rolleyes: Oh, yeah, and Dr. Bush will also sell you a magic elixir that is a “unique blend of all-natural soil extracts” and will help repair all the damage glyphosate does to your tight junctions. Only $69.95 for a 2 month supply. He has no credible scientific publications. I found only one publication, in JNFS, which is a pay-to-publish open access journal.
I think saying he’s “from” the University of Virginia is inflating his credentials. He was, as best I can tell, a Chief Resident in the university hospital at one point, but was never a researcher there. And he has since departed the halls of traditional medicine to open up his own alternative medicine money machine.
And I never said glyphosate was “benign.” Nothing is benign. One of the first things you learn in Toxicology 101 is this quote from Paracelsus, who is considered to be the founder of modern toxicology:
“Poison is in everything, and no thing is without poison. The dosage makes it either a poison or a remedy.”
As Bluey already noted, even water can be toxic at high enough doses.
But, it’s a matter of assessing the risks and benefits. The risks associated with the use of glyphosate are very low. The benefits are huge.
6 Likes
And because I’m old, and have been at this for a long time, I’ve gotten really cranky over the whole thing.
Just in case everyone hasn’t already noticed. :lol:
3 Likes
So after you got what seemed at the time to be invaluable information on diet and hoof care for the elderly horse you were struggling to keep well, and after you learned alot about horse nutrition and medical issues that was completely new to you, you take your toys and go home in a huff because there’s a difference of opinion on the role of verifiable scientific evidence in evaluating health risks?
5 Likes
Thank you for being the voice of science/reason. GMOs and pesticides are such a lifesaver, given the population of the world.
i don’t spray my fruit trees at all, I just prune them. Most people won’t eat pesticide-free apples and pears. They want no spots or worms. Excuse me, that is reality…real fruit is inefficient and ugly. I choose that for myself because we have a lot of trees, but first priority is getting people to eat less processed food, well washed.
6 Likes
In theory, fresh food is wonderful, in reality, it’s a hard standard to hit. Reality is that food travels long distances and picky buyers don’t want to buy imperfect food, and don’t want to have to shop every few days for fresh food.
4 Likes
It’s refreshing to read posts on here that are from people who actually trust science above the hysteria producing blabberings of some groups.
I can use little to no pesticides on the produce I grow in my garden because I can go to the local supermarket and buy fruit and veg if mine gets eaten by bugs or destroyed by some fungus.
Its a small enough area for me to keep relatively weed free but has anyone seen how fast weeds will take over a patch of ground and out compete the crop for water and nutrients?
Does anyone know how labor intensive it is to keep a field free of those weeds?
How many of the anti pesticide brigade have ever actually tried working on a large organic food production farm that has a decent yield per acre and is able to sell its produce at a realistic price?
How many actually understand how many hoops pesticide companies have to jump through to get a product registered for sale
The most problems are caused by incorrect use, idiots not following the instructions.
8 Likes
Suffice it to say that you all can count me in on this opinion 
:encouragement:
3 Likes
Right on. Married to the President of the Ugly Vegetables Club here. Helluva lot of work for maybe $200 worth of fruits and veggies.
2 Likes
Glyphosate was first synthesized in 1950 by Swiss chemist Henry Martin, who worked for the Swiss company Cilag. The work was never published.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP]:1[/SUP]Stauffer Chemical patented the agent as a chemical chelator in 1964 as it binds and removes minerals such as calcium, magnesium, manganese, copper, and zinc.[SUP][16][/SUP]
Somewhat later, glyphosate was independently discovered in the United States at Monsanto in 1970. Monsanto chemists had synthesized about 100 derivatives of aminomethylphosphonic acid as potential water-softening agents. Two were found to have weak herbicidal activity, and John E. Franz, a chemist at Monsanto, was asked to try to make analogs with stronger herbicidal activity. Glyphosate was the third analog he made.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP]:1–2[/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] Franz received the National Medal of Technology of the United States in 1987 and the Perkin Medal for Applied Chemistry in 1990 for his discoveries.[SUP][20][/SUP][SUP][21][/SUP][SUP][22][/SUP]
Scribbler, What do you mean that Glyphosate is a Antibiotic but it does not kill Bacteria. I think you missed the definition of Antibiotic.
Scribbler, The Horse Journal article does not discuss Glyphosate in Horse feed. It talks about how Glyphosate is only used on pure stands of Alfalfa. There have been no studies on Gut Health. The FDA and the USDA rely on the companies to study safety. The same way the FAA relied on Boing to say the Super Max was safe to fly.
Bluey,
This is the time line I have.
Glyphosate was first synthesized in 1950 by Swiss chemist Henry Martin, who worked for the Swiss company Cilag. The work was never published.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP]:1[/SUP]Stauffer Chemical patented the agent as a chemical chelator in 1964 as it binds and removes minerals such as calcium, magnesium, manganese, copper, and zinc.[SUP][16][/SUP]
Somewhat later, glyphosate was independently discovered in the United States at Monsanto in 1970. Monsanto chemists had synthesized about 100 derivatives of aminomethylphosphonic acid as potential water-softening agents. Two were found to have weak herbicidal activity, and John E. Franz, a chemist at Monsanto, was asked to try to make analogs with stronger herbicidal activity. Glyphosate was the third analog he made.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP]:1–2[/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] Franz received the National Medal of Technology of the United States in 1987 and the Perkin Medal for Applied Chemistry in 1990 for his discoveries
yeah, except that the meta-analysis article linked to above is not by the company, and the various studies cited in it are not by the company, either. I realize that any company wanting to market a new thing has to provide proof it is safe, meaning they have to do the research. That’s true of everything. But once it’s out in use, then any researcher can investigate it. And they have been.
4 Likes
Bluey,
Dr. Don Huber is a Professor Emeritus at Purdue University in Plant Pathology. He has done a very extensive study of the on the effect of Continual use of Glyphosate on the soil and how it effects the life of plants. You can google multiple articles and videos where he explains his findings. I invite all of you to listen to what he has to say. Glyphosate ties up minerals in the soil and shuts down the plant own immune system. Glyphosate is a antibiotic, it also chelates minerals making them not available to your horse. Many adjustments have been made to try to over come this in horse feed. Probiotics, Live Yeast and enzymes have all been add to feed in the last 20 years. New minerals compounds that are tied to amino acids such as Zinpro 4 Plex to help with the mineral availability problem. This all treat the problem not find the root source. This is like coming home and finding smoke in your house. Instead of trying to find the fire. You go to the store buy fans and put them in the windows in hopes that this will solve the problem. Diabetes in America is rampant as is Insulin Reliance in Horses. How many of you that are 30 or older remember so many horses with metabolic problems. Glyphosate was meant to kill weeds not to be consumed. Once again. Glyphosate is a antibiotic. This has and effect on the digestive system. Which then effects the Immune system and the endocrine system. Please pay attention to the Pharmaceutical commercials on the television. They all talk about Digestive problems, Insulin problems. Products that suppress the immune system. Yes, we would starve if Glyphosate was determined not safe for consumption. Because it is in everything we eat that contains Grains, Beet sugars.
Is wonderful how chemistry works, is it, all that we can do thru it, in fact, is what makes life possible.
Everything we are around and work with is based on how different elements combine and recombine, that is true and a given when you study any and all around us.
When it comes to Roundup, just one of so, so many out there, as you say, boy, that is the devil, is it, how terrible, appalling, really.
Now you forgot to also name the worst of it, some that get a sniff of Roundup may wake up one morning with purple polka dots all over them, the horror, clear to the end of their nose too and if that was not bad enough, really hairy knees, oh, my!
Now think about that, no more shorts for you.
Hairy knees are definitely something no one should be seen with.
Yep, Roundup is at the root of all evil that befalls mankind.
Good of you to keep us so well informed, thank you.
2 Likes
Bluey,
It is a simple thing really. Glyphosate is a great Weedkiller. I use it myself. I choose not to drink it or any weed killer for that matter. I think, I and my Horses are healthier for that.
Again, if nobody can replicate his research, it cannot be taken as the factual truth about something.
As far as being Professor Emeritus, that means you are retired and no longer teaching or researching at your former place of employment. He has been retired since 2002 (17 years) and he is now 86.
Sometimes we get outlier claims from intellectuals and academics who are no longer actively part of a research community, and don’t need to work in tandem with colleagues to verify their results. This can happen after people retire (and become Professor Emeritus), and it can happen to younger academics who don’t find a job, and sometimes start their own thing, website or cause or whatever, with their Dr. Phd status.
Another thing to scan for in outlier claims from academics is whether the person making the claim has actual credentials in the field they are discussing. It’s not unheard of for an academic to be trained in one field, and then develop an interest in a related or even totally different field, and to become a “public intellectual” in that field through self-promotion and use of their Dr Phd title. When I was an undergrad, we had a psychology professor who got interested in the paranormal, and I think some of his claims in that direction were somewhat unverifiable. Just because he was a professor of psychology at a good university, with a PhD, doesn’t mean UFOs actually exist. I call this “working off the side of your desk,” taking on another area or cause in addition to your regular work.
In this case, Dr. Huber is indeed still making claims within his field of lifelong training and expertise, so that doesn’t apply to him.
Anyhow, my point is that if one researcher, especially one no longer embedded in the checks and balances of a discipline, starts to make “outlier” claims, those claims are really only credible if other researchers can replicate them.
I’m not a person who is fervently pro-GMO and pro-Roundup. Indeed, these developments make me a little nervous. But I am not going to have a panic over this until I see verifiable and clear evidence.
The person I know that is most freaked out about Roundup also believes in contrails. I rest my case.
4 Likes
The problem here is not the science behind those that are against most anything that smells like science or chemicals on principle don’t really know what they are talking about.
Science is trying to figure how to explain to the general public those processes, how science determines what has more or less advantages to being used and why and get that public educated enough to at least follow the debates, so they can decide with a more educated eye these questions:
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/9/eaau8462
Once the general public can see why science is for something, what all has already been discussed and passed tests and, knowing what good AND bad may come of it, if and where and how to use it, people seem to feel a bit more appreciative.
That is fine, in the Information Age, if the ones doing the work don’t also pay attention to presenting that work in a way everyone may understand it, well, others with different goals will rush in to lead those that don’t know to do their bidding fighting against what science presents, like here.
1 Like
You just keep repeating the same falsehoods. Saying them over and over again does not make them true. Repeatedly citing one guy who has a bee in his bonnet on this topic does not make him or his research correct. Even his own former colleagues at Purdue think he’s a nut.
Here are a few snips for you:
Iowa State University Extension: Use Facts to Make Glyphosate and Glyphosate Resistant Crop Decisions
By Bob Hartzler and Mike Owen, Department of Agronomy
Information presented recently on the Web and in seminars across the Midwest has portrayed devastating consequences due to the widespread use of glyphosate and glyphosate resistant crops. It is important to recognize that there is little data published in refereed journals to support these claims. Data that are available have been taken greatly out of context to support the accusations. The issues and claims have been brought forward by Dr. Don Huber, retired professor of Plant Pathology at Purdue University. Recently, Purdue University faculty members have responded to these claims and using peer-reviewed science, have refuted the statements made by Dr. Huber…
Don Huber, a retired scientist from the Plant Pathology faculty of Purdue University and a favorite on the anti-GMO lecture circuit, claims he discovered years ago a novel pathogenic microbe caused by agricultural genetic engineering–a GMO time bomb of sorts that is wreaking havoc on humans and animals. It not only causes plant disease, he alleges, but also spontaneous abortions at the rate of 20-50% in animals fed the “Roundup Ready” crops and can destroy our stomachs. He describes the organism as fungal but with a size in the range of a plant virus.
One problem: there is not a shred of empirical evidence to back up his scare claims, no peer reviewed paper, and he has refused to make this ‘explosive’ data available to any other scientist in the world to confirm–or debunk.
The mainstream consensus is that Huber has no data to back up his questionable claims–scientists at his former university have challenged him, writing that there is no evidence to support his allegations, but that’s not stopped activists from featuring Huber at events and promoting his patented scare talk on websites when there is no respectable scientists to engage him.
Don M. Huber (born 1935) is a former Purdue University professor who goes on publicity tours sponsored by organic, alternative health, and anti-GMO interest groups claiming glyphosate and herbicide tolerant GM crops are causing health problems in people and animals. He also claims he discovered years ago a novel pathogenic microbe caused by agricultural genetic engineering–a GMO time bomb that is wreaking havoc on humans and animals.
Huber maintains glyphosate and GMO herbicide tolerant crops are linked to human and animal health risks. He says animals fed GM crops are dying in record numbers and that their is a correlation between GM soy and GM corn with inflammatory bowel disease in humans in the United States. He alleges glyphosate is linked to alzheimer’s disease, gout, diabetes, Parkinson’s, allergies and fertility issues. To support his claims, he cites research by a Maharishi movement expert in yogic flying Jeffrey M. Smith and debunked activist researcher Gilles-Eric Séralini.
This is my favorite part: “To support his claims, he cites research by a Maharishi movement expert in yogic flying Jeffrey M. Smith…”
6 Likes
