On November 27th I presented to the Council Forum information (including credible research) regarding the need for some parameters around the spraying of chemical sprays in public places. Click on the documents to read:
Of the twelve Councilors, two are interested in this issue. Clearly convincing people of the authenticity of the independent research is a hard sell. People will either not look at the research or they just don’t believe it … even the long term research of Scientists, Doctors and Professors in their respective fields … unmoved by the obvious conflict of interest that exists in Monsanto testing their own product. The product is not safe. Please read the expanded information on Professor Seralini’s two year long experiment on rats on the Glyphosate page. Monsanto tested their product prior to release for the required 90 days. Further to this, the following information offered by Dr Meriel Watts from Auckland (see PANANZ website & also link at the end) highlights quite explicitly the problem with the initial approval of glyphosate and Roundup. It follows a govt submission she has recently made regarding very high pesticide levels found in NZ’s baby food (800 times higher than the EU’s). She states that the testing of pesticide levels including Glyphosate, are industry funded, and therefore subject to a conflict of interests. I cite that info here:
1) No critical study in these vital toxicity assessment areas, that form the parameters used to approve our daily consumption, our RfDs / ADI’s, are ever supplied by an independent organisation like, say a university or public interest group.
2) Every animal study for glyphosate (the pesticide commonly known as Roundup) that the USA EPA and the WHO use to apply the ‘non-carcinogenic to humans’ rating, is sponsored and paid for by an agrichemical company.
3) The toxicity studies for glyphosate (Roundup) are all private, obtained directly from contracted laboratories that only work with industry – Product Safety Laboratories, Dow, ABC and Covance. They are unpublished and unavailable for review by public sector health representatives or individuals.
4) The very studies that provide the parameters that end up being residue levels, within toxicity assessment, are only ever supplied by the very organisations that require the toxicity assessment to be declared safe. In the case of glyphosate, the studies for proving non-carcinogenicity are only ever provided by Syngenta, Monsanto and Cheminova.
5) Furthermore, no study ever uses the stronger, more effective complete formulation of Roundup, (only the weaker active chemical glyphosate is used). And I believe this ‘policy’ has profound ramifications for our health.
This is precisely why the lack of parameters around spraying Glyphosate and any other chemical sprays concerns me.
Full article & references go here: http://www.rite-demands.org/make-it-safer-blog/
A book by Dr Watts on pesticides and the vulnerability of children is now in our local Marton library or can be found on the pananz website. The title is ‘Poisoning our Future: Children and Pesticides’ http://www.panap.net/sites/default/files/Poisoning-Our-Future-Children-and-Pesticides.pdf