Glyphosate - related to bee decline

[California]

This is a research report that studied bee decline. Quick summary: glyphosate seems to reduce the gut bacteria that bees need to stay healthy.
Bee death: Scientists Warn Common Weed Killer Glyphosate Is Killing Honey Bees

===quote
"While bees with healthy microbiomes could fight off Serratia marcescens, a common pathogen which infects bees, those with depleted good bacteria were at greater risk of dying when they came in contact, the researchers found. Half of the healthy bees survived after exposure to the pathogen, compared with a tenth of bees given glyphosate. "


Related article - measurable amounts of glyphosate found in Cheerios and Quaker Oats products. Whether this is harmful is disputed.
What Is Glyphosate? Weed Killing Chemical Found In Children’s Breakfast Foods

 

[PJSprog]

I remember hearing a story on a news radio station recently about how common household cleaning products may be disrupting the gut bacteria in children, and may be a factor in childhood obesity.

No idea how solid the science is, but the theory seems viable.

 

[FatTire]

There is no free lunch, right? I use a limited amount of Round-Up on some particular non-natives around our place, I could (and should) quit doing that but some weed species are darn tough to control mechanically. Guess I'll re-evaluate my approach.

 

[RNeumann]

Round-up has been the greatest thing since sliced bread! Even better now that they have figured out how to modify some crops to be resistant to it.

 

[/pine]

Round-up has been the greatest thing since sliced bread! Even better now that they have figured out how to modify some crops to be resistant to it.

What's wrong with this picture...

 

[Jstpssng]

What's wrong with this picture...

Two different points of view. I use as few chemicals as possible, with one exception the strongest I've used on my property is Spinosad. Yet who's to say if I'm right?

 

[/pine]

Two different points of view. I use as few chemicals as possible, with one exception the strongest I've used on my property is Spinosad. Yet who's to say if I'm right?

Even though the product(s) have been around a long time there is still not enough information (health issue data etc.) to determine at what levels the product(s) are safe...
...Developing (and producing) food crops that are tolerable to a possibly harmful chemical is premature at best and just plain stupid at worst...

 

[RalphVa]

This is another piece of evidence showing that wide scale spraying of things like fence lines with it could be very harmful. It's already harmful in killing insect hiding places, and this has been instrumental in reducing greatly the bird population because we're eliminating their feeding spots.

You have to be very careful in use of this stuff. It's great stuff if we're wise in using it. I do not agree with genetic modification to allow the widespread spraying of this on soybeans and corn. Consumption of products from these crops, which contain some glysphosate, has been linked to gut disease such as ciliac. Of course, the recent court case linked it to cancer. Not sure about the science behind this. I can believe the ciliac link.

Ralph

 

[GirlWhoWantsTractor]

In 5 years or so we'll have to revisit all these glyphosate threads..... IMO the writing is clearly on the wall here.

There's a certain mindset that seems to almost *rejoice* in using the nastiest, most toxic chemicals possible. When the research finally becomes overwhelming that a certain pesticide is in fact highly carcinogenic, they will actually *stock up* on it while they can still get it. Yes, I have friends who did that.

I have had a varied life, among a great variety of folks, and have read widely to try to understand the world around me. But this to me is almost inexplicable.

Deep-seated distrust of science?

The need to be able to *do whatever you want* even if it harms you?

After a lifetime of careless exposure to chemicals, maybe this type of research is just too disturbing?

?????

 

[Industrial Toys]

Just one more of a GREAT many traps waiting in store for us.

I once got up to go to an auction back in the 90s. A few hours later I lost half my field of vision. Like having a jagged line running dawn the center of your monitor with just black on the one side. Eventually, I lost my ability to communicate or form thoughts and ended up in the ER. They could find nothing wrong and I recovered within hours.

Only years later, I was watching a Documentary about insectisides and associated health problems. It was focused on (DOW) DURSBAN. I remembered that I had a jug of KILLER that I had bought in COSCO in the states to battle the carpenter Ants in the Barn. I ran out, found the jug and sure as sheit, it had this DURSBAN stuff in there. Funny, how it took years to solve that mystery.

CRAZY, stupid sheit, us humans play with!

Oh, I still have the jug!

 

[PJSprog]

Deep-seated distrust of science?

With all the junk science around these days, it's easy to understand some people's distrust. In most cases, following the money behind the "science" can be quite revealing. Not all science is bad. But, there's entirely too much propaganda parading as science, and that benefits no one but the people funding it.

 

[rekees4300]

Vinegar with a dash of Dawn dish soap is an effective organic replacement for Glyphosate. Works well on my gravel driveway to kill ALL vegetation. Dunno what effect (if any) it has on bees?

 

[Diggin It]

I spray fencelines, but only close to the fence so I don't have to weed trim. I leave lots of brush for birds and small critters. I try not to use Monsanto products when doing it, but I can't say if the others are any safer. I avoid Monsanto in a large part due to the Monsanto Protection Acts.

One thing I noticed recently. They came through and sprayed power line right of ways about a month or so back. 30 feet or so each side is now brown, totally dead. Everything from scrub brush to 20' and taller trees. Yeah, it's nice for trees not to fall on power lines and knock our power out. But they left the 50' and taller trees that are within 30' feet, so there is still a significant chance of disruptions. I don't see scrub brush as being a threat to utility lines either.

I have no idea what they sprayed with, or how concentrated, but the stuff is dead .... quick.

 

[LouNY]

Lots of maybe scientific research on GMO's and chemicals.
I consider roundup to be one of the milder herbicides available for use, supposedly it breaks down in seven days after application.

For all those that complain of chemical and GMO's, stop and consider what food costs and food productivity would be today without the
huge advances in yields in the 70 years.

We may not like chemicals but I'm also not a fan of "organic" the production and yield is much less per acre and the cost of production is much higher.
And many times the quality of the product decreases.

Without chemicals you could and would easily triple your food bill, it would also be great for the small farm and hurt so many of the large agri-business farms.
That in my mind is the only benefit of restricting chemicals and research.

Also GMO is really just an accelerated hybrid crop.

You all have a good day

 

[NorTracNY]

Yes, "science" is wonderful when politics and money get involved. I learned about the history of lead use in this country a few years back. The US, because of industry money, was almost 100 years behind the rest of the world!!!

I wonder how many years we'll be behind the world of this. As for organic farming production/yield being less that industry farming, again follow the money. I heard about a "study" where they took a dead field that had been used with industry farming for many years. They planted organic seeds and nothing else. They called that organic gardening and reported how the world would starve if we didn't do industry farming. Yes, organic gardening is more labor intensive and food cost will be higher. Bring on the real food with higher cost.

My grandfather was a farmer. He couldn't believe how cheap food at Aldis was. He also couldn't believe what passed for "farming" these days.

 

[cqaigy2]

I use both organic and non organic foods. Most of the organic taste better to me, and i even go so far as to say better "quality". The things i use to determine the "quality" are probably different from Lou's, say for instance blemishes in the product, taste is very important to me.

I use both GMO and non-GMO products, but i wouldn't characterize GMO as fast forward Mendel process. GMO actually more like adding plant and animal or created DNA together to create new products.

 

[Diggin It]

Without chemicals you could and would easily triple your food bill,

And with them, what are we doing to our health and medical costs?

 

[Gary Fowler]

I agree, and consider GMOs to be a major threat to our food supply worldwide.

I agree, lack of GMO products would greatly decrease the supply of food Worldwide. Every living thing has been genetically modified by mother nature or it is no longer in existence. Scientist simply speed things up. If plants (and animals including humans) didn't change to meet the environment, then they become extinct which has been happening for millions of years. We cant change nature and save all the species that are declining.

 

[Jstpssng]

Lots of maybe scientific research on GMO's and chemicals.
I consider roundup to be one of the milder herbicides available for use, supposedly it breaks down in seven days after application.

Actually the half-life is anywhere from 2-147 days. It does bind to the soil though, so it isn't in free form for that length of time.

For all those that complain of chemical and GMO's, stop and consider what food costs and food productivity would be today without the
huge advances in yields in the 70 years.

I've never bought that argument. Granted the more necessary something is the less we are willing to pay for it; however, the human population has grown almost 10 fold since 1900 and at some point we need to acknowledge the toll that is causing.

We may not like chemicals but I'm also not a fan of "organic" the production and yield is much less per acre and the cost of production is much higher.
And many times the quality of the product decreases.

Without chemicals you could and would easily triple your food bill, it would also be great for the small farm and hurt so many of the large agri-business farms.
That in my mind is the only benefit of restricting chemicals and research.

I'm not necessarily an organic fan either, yet there's a happy medium between the two extremes.

Also GMO is really just an accelerated hybrid crop.

You all have a good day

Not really. Whereas hybridization is combining two different strains through ****** reproduction, GMO is actually tampering with the plant's DNA. Reproducing a hybrid needs to be done by cloning, whereas the GMO does it naturally; if there are unforeseen problems down the road it's almost impossible to stuff the genie back into the bottle.