Herbicides containing glyphosate are the most heavily used worldwide. A comprehensive account of the use of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) is available in an article published by Environmental Sciences Europe in February 2016 (1).

This article examines the last 40 years of GBH use. Data sources on US applications of glyphosate include the US Department of Agriculture, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the US Geological Survey. Reported data focus on the weight of the active ingredient glyphosate in all end-use formulations of GBH.

Major facts reported:

  • GBH use has risen remarkably over time, 300 fold between 1974 and 2014
  • GBHs are the most heavily applied pesticide in history, by a wide margin
  • Genetically engineered crops are the major cause of the huge increase since 1996 in the US and globally,
  • By 2010, agriculture accounted for 90% of the total yearly use of GBH, and
  • 66% of all GBH used in the US since 1974 was used in the last 10 years – there has been no time for long term effects (such as lymphoma) to appear, let alone be detected, analyzed and reported.

Uses for GBH include:

  • Traditional use to destroy growing weeds (either before planting or after harvest),
  • As broadcast, post-emergent herbicide on RoundupReady® crops (these crops vastly increased in acreage and diversity throughout the time period examined),
  • “Green burndown” uses to speed up harvest operations (used on wheat, barley, edible beans, and others, and resulting in significant glyphosate residue in the harvested foodstuffs), and
  • Home garden and landscape uses, wildlands, rights-of-way, industrial facilities etc., which used to account for 34-42% of total use now account for less than 10%.

GBH, and the main metabolite of glyphosate, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), have known and suspected adverse impacts:

  • on soil microbial communities and earthworms,
  • on insects (Monarch butterflies and honeybees),
  • on web of life in waterways, including crustaceans at the base of the feeding chain,
  • on pesticide applicators, their families, and communities (see our article),
  • on livestock, and
  • on the general population: through air, water, rain, and food.

Conclusion

The introduction of RoundupReady® crops is the main factor that led to a massive increase in the use of GBH (300 fold increase in 40 years). While GBHs may have replaced problematic practices such as tillage and more dangerous herbicides, it is now itself the source of major harms to environmental and human health caused by agriculture, in part because of the massive scale of use over time and across the agricultural landscape.

REFERENCE

  1. Benbrook, CM. Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally. Environmental Sciences Europe (2016) 28:3, access free of charge at http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/s12302-016-0070-0.pdf

V-Symposium Recordings:

GMOScience is offering these 2 days of recordings from April 2023 free of charge, featuring five of the top doctors, scientist, and attorney who are on the front lines, working with people experiencing adverse effects and injury from vaccine exposure and Long Covid. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation of any amount to support our work.

Contact Us

Contact

Related Posts

Why Study Toxic Metals in Infant Formula? An Overview of the Results

Why Study Toxic Metals in Infant Formula? An Overview of the Results

Why Study Toxic Metals in Infant Formula?
An Overview of the Results
May 2024
Michelle Perro, MD
CEO, GMOScience.org
Article 3 in the Got Real Milk Series
The presence of toxic metals in infant formula is a critical issue that demands immediate action.
Public education is crucial to raise awareness among parents and caregivers about the potential risks and safety measures. Regulatory action by Congress is necessary to empower the FDA and other agencies to enforce stringent safety standards. Additionally, formula companies must take corrective actions to ensure their products are safe.
To address this issue, we are initiating a petition to urge Congress to remove any barriers preventing the FDA from enforcing these necessary regulations. In the meantime, parents can consider various supplements that may help offset the toxicity, although this should be done in consultation with healthcare professionals.
By working together—regulators, companies, and consumers—we can ensure that infant formula products are safe and healthy for our most vulnerable population, our babies.

read more
Toxic Metals in Babies’ Formula Overview

Toxic Metals in Babies’ Formula Overview

Toxic Metals in Babies’ Formula Overview:
An Introduction to our Research
April 2024
Michelle Perro, MD
CEO, GMOScience.org
Article 2 in the Got Real Milk Series
Given the critical importance of ensuring the safety of baby food, the involvement of citizen scientists in testing for toxic metals cannot be overstated. Baby food, a primary nutritional source for infants, must be free from contaminants that could impair their health and development. Recent investigations have revealed concerning levels of toxic metals like arsenic, lead, cadmium, aluminum, and mercury in various baby food products. These findings underscore the need for vigilant monitoring.

read more
Genetic Engineering and Babies

Genetic Engineering and Babies

Genetic Engineering and Babies
ONE-AND-DONE

April 2024

Editorial, CEO, Michelle Perro, MD

Photo Credit Children’s Medical Center www.npcmc.com

Small Interfering RNA (siRNA)

As a children’s specialist, I want to caution parents regarding the emerging use of small interfering RNA (siRNA) technology, particularly in therapeutic contexts potentially applicable to infants and young children. This technology, which manipulates RNA to silence specific genes, is still in its infancy and carries significant unknowns. Early research indicates that siRNA can unintentionally impact off-target genes, leading to unpredictable biological outcomes.

read more