Cancer-causing Glyphosate Herbicide Found in Urine of 93% of Americans.

The Detox Project, using laboratories at the University of California San Francisco, has found the presence of glyphosate, the most used herbicide in the world, in the urine of 93% of the American public during a unique testing project that started in 2015.

From the project’s public statement on their website:

Glyphosate, labeled a ‘Probable human carcinogen’ by the World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC in 2015, has now been revealed to be ubiquitous in the first ever comprehensive and validated LC/MS/MS testing project to be carried out across America. Glyphosate-containing herbicides are sold under trademarks such as Monsanto’s ‘Roundup.’

In a unique public testing project carried out by a laboratory at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), glyphosate was discovered in 93% of urine samples during the early phase of the testing in 2015. Glyphosate was found in 93% of the 131 urine samples tested at an average level of 3.096 parts per billion (PPB). Children had the highest levels with an average of 3.586 PPB.

The regions with the highest levels were the West and the Midwest with an average of 3.053 PPB and 3.050 PPB respectively. Glyphosate has been linked to cancer by the World Health Organization, and lawsuits against companies using the herbicide, which is prevalent in most conventional foods, have begun.

LINK

This is not only a USA problem but as the report states.... a worldwide issue. The numbers in Europe are similar. So who uses this deadly herbicide? Children had the highest concentrations within their urine.

Lawsuits are now beginning in the United States against Monsanto's herbicide Roundup, the number one herbicide in the world used in modern agriculture. The active ingredient glyphosate, found in most of our foods, has been linked to cancer by the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). As reported by EcoWatch, four Nebraskan agricultural workers have now filed a lawsuit against Monsanto Co. alleging that Roundup gave them non-Hodgkin lymphoma after many years of exposure. The plaintiffs have also accused Monsanto of purposely misleading consumers about the safety of its agricultural product, which contains glyphosate as its main ingredient. The plaintiffs allege that Monsanto mislabeled the product in defiance of the “body of recognized scientific evidence linking the disease to exposure to Roundup.” Could this be the beginning of many more lawsuits? Glyphosate is used so heavily in the U.S. that it has been found in human breast milk, feeding tube liquids given to babies and children with cancer in hospitals, and 75% of the air and rain samples tested in the Mississippi delta region. In 2014, Tropical Traditions tested some of the USDA certified organic products they were selling, and found glyphosate residue in organic food as well. They have now begun testing all of their products for the presence of glyphosate.

Become aware, we need to protect our children. Take your time and thoroughly wash your produce with clean water. IMO I do not think any lawsuit will be successful when fighting Monsanto. The only solution I see is to find a local producer who does not use herbicides on his land. Me and my family buy our produce locally who uses green houses and use safe biodegradable fertilizers.

As a family we are in the same boat, all of our food is organic and we have a good relationship with the grower. My 17 month old son has never had anything but local fresh fruit and veg and he is coming along beautifully.. The days of not being able to source local fresh produce are in the past, we have a number of local stores to buy from. You just need a bit more time to source and prepare foods but the benefit to one's well being is really worth it...


RA

Glyphosate was found in 93% of the 131 urine samples tested at an average level of 3.096 parts per billion (PPB).

Link
One hundred thirty-one samples does not equal a representative sample of all Americans.

Just sayin'.

Does that mean that 93% of people are going to get cancer? I wonder what the sensationalized headline was supposed to make people think?...

originally posted by: superman2012
Does that mean that 93% of people are going to get cancer? I wonder what the sensationalized headline was supposed to make people think?...

npic.orst.edu...

Exactly as you said. Nothing conclusive has ever been found that Glyphosate CAUSES cancer.

I swear with all the crap that is supposed to be killing us, poisoning us, and controlling the population we shouldn't be seeing higher life expectancy, far less world hunger, and a healthier overall and increasing world population.

originally posted by: superman2012
Does that mean that 93% of people are going to get cancer? I wonder what the sensationalized headline was supposed to make people think?...

You do not seem concerned so disregard the message. I don't care what you feed your family.

Ignore this thread and feed your family this stuff.....

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Maybe people don't take kindly to sensationalist, poorly written, pseudo-scientific dribble doled out by websites who tell people vaccines will kill their children(even though pertussis and polio have a higher chance of killing your kids), anti-GMO garbage(as we know thousands of studies have proven GMOs safe, but who the hell needs facts), and I'm willing to bet all the sites linked to it are probably selling something..Like Oh yeah the 2 LBS 10 dollar bag of corn that is "tested for GMOs"(Good luck with that one).

Science, actual science, is the reason I remain unconcerned over your sensationalist garbage.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Glyphosate was found in 93% of the 131 urine samples tested at an average level of 3.096 parts per billion (PPB). Children had the highest levels with an average of 3.586 PPB.

Parts per billion? All I can find is second hand data on the allowable safe-level residue from glyphosate which is parts per million, and even that is, depending on the food source, from 2+ ppm.

If this is trying to say parts per billion is significant when it's measured in ppm something is not right with their conclusion, or it's a huge typo/editing error.

a reply to: Liquesence

I did not write the report. You would have to contact the author.

I only published it here at ATS.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

But you started the thread. Is the article in the OP accurate, or are you just posting hyped up stuff without looking into it?

Even if it is a typo, 2-3.5ppm still falls within the safe-level, it appears. If it's not a typo, then ppb is even less significant than ppm.

In either case, it's hyped up.

You think the lazy farmers could visualize their land being taken over when they were sold the less-tilling miracle spray and seed?

Roundup is proven safe during the test.lol

They didn't exactly test long term intake.

The field workers don't do to good short term

There wasn't a big enough problem that we need to poison the entire plant and soil.

It reduced tilling for weeds.

We don't get supercrops because of it, I would put cash on it slowing growth.

Special seeds, special plant poison, special soil now, special crop, special food, and kids in special ed.

a reply to: Liquesence

Parts per billion? All I can find is second hand data on the allowable safe-level residue from glyphosate which is parts per million, and even that is, depending on the food source, from 2+ ppm. If this is trying to say parts per billion is significant when it's measured in ppm something is not right with their conclusion, or it's a huge typo/editing error.

It's saying that the residue on the food we eat is safe(?) at 2+ ppm...not that the concentrations in our urine(after our bodies have digested the food) is safe at that level. I think that any glyphosate in concentrations of ppb or ppm is too much to be in my urine.

considering roundup has been used since 1974, when is the world's end coming?
is this possibly the slowest and most ineffective, whatever kind of conspiracy supposedly concocted?

a reply to: jappee

I understand that.

These safe levels exist for a reason. One is: on food. For consumption. That is why they are called "safe-levels."

They then end up in our bodies (along with other chemicals, poisons, heavy metals, etc which are, unfortunately part our our environment), and we only metabolize so much.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I believe the study, have an organic garden, hate Monsanto, and think that Glyphosate and all Organophosphate pesticides are greater threats to humanity than nuclear war, natural disasters, terrorism and TLC shows combined, but from the quoted material:

Glyphosate "is prevalent in most conventional foods"?? I thought it killed everything except for those few "Roundup Ready" GMO crops on the market? (Soy, corn, canola, sugar beets.) I guess it's probably prevalent in most processed foods because most contain at least one of either corn syrup or some form of soy. Maybe that's what they're referring to. I can't imagine it would be prevalent in any other produce besides those few.

That said, Monsanto, burn in hell.

a reply to: jappee

Actually, in your urine is a good place to find it. That means it's not collecting in your body, or digesting and converting into some other, worse chemical. If you're peeing it out, that means it's passing through your kidneys & bladder, and out the Peetube®.

Of course, none of it in your body is good, but chemicals which come out in your pee the same as they went in are usually less of a concern than the ones which stay in your body, or change into something worse (the way chemicals like Splenda™ do.)

I posted this in another thread but it's apropos here as well.

Monsanto also encouraged farmers to use Roundup as a dessicant, to dry out all of their crops so they could harvest them faster. So Roundup is now routinely sprayed directly on a host of non-GMO crops, including wheat, barley, oats, canola, flax, peas, lentils, soybeans, dry beans and sugar cane.

It's important to know how non-GMO crops are handled after harvesting.

originally posted by: stinkelbaum
considering roundup has been used since 1974, when is the world's end coming?
is this possibly the slowest and most ineffective, whatever kind of conspiracy supposedly concocted?

Nope. Fluoride in drinking water wins that prize!

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: superman2012
Does that mean that 93% of people are going to get cancer? I wonder what the sensationalized headline was supposed to make people think?...

You do not seem concerned so disregard the message. I don't care what you feed your family.

Ignore this thread and feed your family this stuff.....

Cool.
Good rebuttal.

I'm not concerned about monsters under the bed, reptoids taking over my body, or fluoride in drinking water either. I usually don't concern myself with "conspiracy theories" made up around items taken out of context, or by people that read one internet meme or article and decide they know better.

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: jappee

I understand that.

These safe levels exist for a reason. One is: on food. For consumption. That is why they are called "safe-levels."

They then end up in our bodies (along with other chemicals, poisons, heavy metals, etc which are, unfortunately part our our environment), and we only metabolize so much.

I don't know that you're thinking about this correctly.

There's a mass that has a certain level of a substance. We intake this in a short period of time. It takes much longer to digest, a part of which is stored in tissues, the rest is eliminated over time in yet another chunk of mass.

There's quite a few factors there. If I eat a b-vitamin 50, my pee will remain with an neon-green/yellow tinge all day long. I'm not peeing it all out in one go. Furthermore, if I dilute that pee by drinking copious amounts of water, the tinge will remain not as long, and not be as pronounced.

It's not quite as simple as you're making it out to be.