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
