Cleveland For Congress
Cleveland For Congress

Idaho Dispatch

Your Local Media Ally

Op-Ed: Grave Concerns About Glyphosates in Farming

By • March 10, 2024

Frankly, I am disappointed. Farmers are saying they must have poison in our daily bread because they get incentives and financial subsidies from the government.

This article states that glyphosates must be allowed to continue.

An article in Food Engineering led me to ask more questions.

I am a survivor of Vietnam and agent-orange (glyphosates). I have been and am plagued by cancers of various types.

After reading the detailed document “The Poison in Our Daily Bread,” I was struck by the fact that almost all industrial farming operations (possibly all) use glyphosate-based defoliants for various uses and reasons, as are described in the documents.

Other products/byproducts I know are also, or potentially, contaminated by the use of glyphosates are the following:

Beer, wine, whiskey, alcohol, and other byproducts, among others I am unaware of.

Have there been studies of these and other products to assess the levels of glyphosates?

Another risk to manufacturers and potential liability is their lack of lot tracking to identify the field, grower, dates, and components received and issued to the job to make a particular component, sub-part, and end-product. If and when a recall is mandated, the entire list of lot-to-lot in and out, including the final products, will be unaccountable if this is not the case. As with the grains referenced in your report, these suppliers and growers have significant liability for passing on these poisons without regard to results.

I appreciate that you took the time to read it. Please let me know your thoughts. I have spoken with local wineries and find no justification to manage lot tracking details, as there seems to have not been an issue. I contend it is not because the needs do not exist.

Beer, wine, and all spirit raw ingredients get sprayed. To my knowledge, they do not use lot tracking or lot numbers on any wine or alcohol product. In my interviews with the wine commission members, they all said there has never been a wine recall, which is their justification for not using lots. I suggested they use lots, but none thought it was worth it. Liabilities may say otherwise.

I read many food, beverage, manufacturing, and supply chain newsletters. In the latest from Food Engineering, I was struck by the glyphosate infusion in foods due to the spraying and usage on all sorts of harvested products. I suspect there is a liability chain that may be exploitable as well. In these article links and documents, as I read them, I see that wine, beer, and other spirits may contain glyphosates, too.

Has a study been done by any FDA, or another group to assess the impact? Also, I never see a lot-number on bottles of wine. Does this leave the supply chain for wine in jeopardy because the field and grower are not tracked and in recalls, the entire supply chain is brought into the recall of all ingredient participants?

Here is the article link. The links at the end of the article are essential to dig into. Thank you for listening. I hope the information is helpful and instructive.

As suspected, it is a fact…

From the detox project director, Taylor Johnson:

“We totally agree that a lack of tracking the supply chain for contaminants could be a major liability concern for brands.”

Regarding beer and wine, here are a couple of reports on glyphosate testing:”

Popular Brands of Beer and Wine Found to Contain Glyphosate Weedkiller

German Beer Industry in Shock over Glyphosate Contamination

The worm turns, no, convulses.

All/most: Grains, beer, wine, spirits, etc.

Dr. Mercola: 11-3-2022:

Monsanto to Pay $275 Million for Children’s Brain Damage

A Washington court recently awarded 13 adults and children $275 million for neurological damage caused by PCBs produced by Monsanto.

The Dark Side of Wheat Why Glyphosate Should Be Banned - A Review of its Hazards to Health and the Environment - The Permaculture Research Institute Glyphosate Contamination a Factor in Push to List Manatees as Endangered Species • Children's Health Defense

GlyphosateFactsheet Wheat Belly Page 152-153 - LDL and Triglycerides - Highlighted EXCLUSIVE_ Natural News releases lab test results of Tractor Supply “Producer’s Pride” chicken feed (and five other chicken feed products) –

This Op-Ed was submitted by Gerry Poe. Op-Eds do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of those at the Idaho Dispatch.

Amazon Outlet

Tags: Agent Orange, Agriculture, alcohol, Beer, Brain Damage, Cancer, Children, Farming, Glyphosate, Grains, Idaho Farmers, Monsanto, PCBs, Round Up, Vietnam, Washington court, whiskey, wine

36 thoughts on “Op-Ed: Grave Concerns About Glyphosates in Farming

  1. Thank you for blowing the horn on glyphosates. I had been researching this topic since 2012. The government doesn’t give a rats ass about glyphosate, and just like so many other toxic poisons (like fluoride in city water systems), they just keep spraying the fields here in rural Idaho. So just do without processed and refined foods – which is how I got rid of glyphosates in my own temple. Are there other poisons in vegetables and meats. Sure. But you gotta eat so you do the best you can to avoid life threatening substances. I’ve asked people from MacGregor who do alot of the spraying in my area. “no, we don’t use glyphosates to spray the crops on the camas prairie”. Then you see the former director and the current director whispering and looking at me. You see, I was a beekeeper, but the bees kept dying, even though they had plenty of honey and a dry environment. So I’m currently out of the beekeeping lifestyle until something stops, glyphosate spraying and chemtrails. Anyway, its all true. Glyphosates are responsible (from my 10 years of research) for the explosion of celiac disease. I’m convinced. Thanks again. I’m sharing this to my telegram channel.

    1. Your claims are incorrect. There is no evidence
      Of glyphosate causing celiac disease. The biggest problem facing bee keepers is varroa mites and the viruses they spread. The chemtrail and fluoride claims are ludicrous.

      1. If you believe chemtrail and fluoride claims are ludicrous, then you haven’t done your homework. The science around both of those issues is overwhelming.

        1. It isn’t science. We’ve all seen it. All those conspiracies follow the same patterns and use the same types of pseudoscience to fool people. Antivax, 5g, flat earth, anti-GMO, anti-glyphosate, chemtrails, fluoride, etc all use the same gospel and the first thing they say is to not trust the experts, govornments, corporations, or anyone that works with them. That means that you can only trust people that don’t know what they are talking about and/or are trying to scam you in some way.
          It is big business. Look at Joe Mercola for example. In 2017 he was worth 100 million and I’m sure after all his covid conspiracies he has increased much more.

  2. The People also must have a reliable, non GMO seed source in order to produce crops that are healthy for consumption.

    1. Wrong, GE developed crops are as safe or safer than other new varieties. As they are the only ones safety tested..

    2. There is no benefit to non-GMO food. Biotechnology never increases risks and brings many health benefits depending on the traits.
      Organic certification never gives any benefit and often increases risks.

  3. An excellent writing, thank you! I am also a Vietnam War Veteran and fighting cancer(s) from my AO exposure. On my base this toxin was everywhere and was primarily waterborne. Everything we did daily it was present, in our drinking water, in our food, we bathed in it, it was in our bedding, our uniform clothing, and often in the airborne dust raised by aircraft engines as they taxied.

    Twice during my tour there we were ordered to NOT drink the water, bathe in it, or otherwise come in contact with the “potable” water. We were never told the reason for these avoidance orders. 38 years later we were notified by the VA that our based had indeed deployed AO (as we call it) or Tactical Herbicides as the VA bureaucracy prefers. 48 years after my tour there, my cancer developed and will be the reality for the rest of my life.

    As a landowner and habitat manager of same, I refuse to use Glyphosates by brand, name, or any form because of the health threats involved not only immediately but long termed. Yet, government agencies (at all levels) encourage the deployment of this toxin in the management of my land and habitat development. This toxic material is a silent and constant threat to everything it touches. Thank you for the excellent article and truths.

    1. My husband died from Agent Orange cancers. It was a slow horrible way to die. We pulled out of South Viet Nam leaving their land and waters poisoned for generations. Deformed children were born throughout S. Viet Nam. Documented nightmare! A story that is not shared but documented everywhere.

    1. There’s nothing wrong with it on the food. It is safe to spray right up until harvest, but uncommon. Other herbicides have pre harvest intervals usually for a couple weeks.

  4. The author Gerry Poe, does not have credentials or a background of knowledge to speak on this subject. Most of what he says is wrong, misleading and poor guessing. Glyphosate under the brand name Roundup has been used for 40 years and is one of the most tested herbicides in the world. There is no scientific evidence Roundup causes cancer. In fact, it is proven to be one of the safest chemicals used in agriculture. It is not chemically related to agent orange as he claimed. Roundup is required for more environmentally friendly no-till or minimum till farming practices that reduce the use of more dangerous herbicides. Dr. Mercola mentioned in this article has been proven to be a scammer. When someone claims that glyphosate is harmful, ask them to provide scientific evidence.

    1. Plenty of evidence and lawsuits that round-up/glyphosate causes cancer. And plenty of historical evidence that the manufacturing company has no safety considerations for people or the environment other than to make money off poisoning us all. Stop drinking the kool-aid of corporate propaganda. And Dr Mercola is not a scammer. That is more corporate propaganda. Before you accuse people of scams and belittle years of scientific evidence, why don’t you check yours? And quoting the company propaganda webpage doesn’t count.

      1. There is actually no scientific evidence that indicates that glyphosate causes cancer. It has all been made up and promoted by organic and their tort attorneys. Even the IARC classification was an inside job done without evidence.

        1. Yep, remember that one of the insiders on the fraudulent iarc classification, Chris Portier took $160,000 from tort attorneys.

      1. It was a financial decision. It was cheaper than doing 100,000 trials even if they won all. Many of those cases were tissed out and much of that money has only been set aside.
        It is good to see that Bayer is winning most of those fraudulent trials. Hope it goes to the Supreme Court.

    2. Thanks much for your accurate comment. The primary cancer the errant at best ones like to blame on glyphosate is Non Hodgkins Lymphoma. According to the CDC the rates for that have remained level or dropped ever so slightly since glyphosate use rose a lot in the mid 90s.

  5. Most Americans don’t understand the dangers of using Glyphosates in agriculture and unfortunately many have already been harmed by this chemical and many more will continue to be harmed until it is taken off the market. The chemical industry carries a lot of political weight which begs the question why hasn’t the EPA done something to curb the use of this dangerous chemical. We have this herculean effort to stop “Fake Climate Change” but we permit the spraying of harmful chemicals that are injuring Americans every day. The majority of the 86,000 consumer chemicals registered with the EPA have never received vigorous toxicity testing. I ask you to do some homework on where sodium fluoride comes from and you might start filtering your drinking water as it is an industrial waste byproduct in the manufacture of aluminum. Do some homework and take a look at this site. . Anyone who thinks the government is looking out for your welfare should think again. Corporations have enormous influence in government decisions when it comes to the safety of chemicals and believe me they wield that power and influence for their benefit not for the public’s. It’s all about the money.

    1. Most people are aware that such information is false and created with malice.
      Glyphosate is harmless, unless you are a weed.
      Your fluoride conspiracies come from the same gospel.

  6. Great article. Sadly, we get the government (and food) we deserve . Why doesn’t America ban the sale of these toxins like Europe and most of the rest of the World does? We have been programmed to accept whatever we’re given, like cattle. Obviously education and activsm are important – the only problem is there are so few willing to acknowledge the need for change. I am sadly pessimistic about our future. We are not united and we will not stand as a Nation, but some of us fight to preserve a Remnant.

    1. Europe just did two extensive investigations of glyphosate and they both confirmed ..again, that glyphosate is safe and doesn’t cause cancer so the extended it’s approval another 10 years.

  7. Don’t eat the Idaho fish…. Why?
    Circle of death. Many moons ago, farmers sprayed their fields. The water source with chemicals seeped into the ground coming into contact with under ground water…some underground “springs” or falls spray out into our rivers and streams.
    You catch the fish…eat it and sometime later die of cancer. JS

  8. This is an ignorant collection of organic promoted conspiracies.
    It is glyphosate, not glyphosates.
    Agent orange was 2,4,5-T a totally different chemical that glyphosate which is an herbicide, not a defoliiant. Just because Monsanto was one of nine who manufactured it doesn’t mean it is the same chemical.
    Monsanto was the first to sell LEDs. You better go burn that screen you are staring at.
    Glyphosate is not a health risk nor does it cause cancer.
    Glyphosate has been off patent for 24 years and is cheap, but anti-glyphosate has become a multi-billion dollar fraudulent industry.
    I’m glad to see that Bayer has been winning most of the lawsuits because it isn’t a carcinogen.
    The anti-glyphosate campaign is an attack on us american farmers which is why most of what the author wrote was started by russian sources. As a Vietnam vet I would think that he wouldn’t join in a fight against our country. Russia and organic have hijacked the mexican administration now to push this same campaign.

    1. Thanks much for your largely accurate statements. AO was a combination of 24D and the 245T. That you mentioned. It has been banned since sometime in the 70s. Several companies were required to make it according to the military’s specifications. Which required the higher processing temperatures that produced the unwanted byproduct dioxin. Which is what caused the problems. Dow even warned the military to no avail.

  9. The studies that claim that glyphosate harms aquatic life and bees purposley avoided using pure glyphosate or formulations made for aquatic areas. Regular Roundup has surfactant (soap) which of course isn’t good for insects and fish. That is fraud, not science. Also studies that show that it causes tumors in rats used Sprague Dawley rats which get tumors no matter what they eat. Again, that is fraud, not science.
    If glyphosate were really harmful they wouldn’t have to lie and falsify studies to show anything negative.

  10. How did you folks ever manage
    To find such a poorly educated person to write this editorial. He calls glyphosate poison. Yet the LD 50 indicates it is less toxic than table salt. He failed to mention the AHS which found no causation and was paid for by us taxpayers. He seems to know nothing of the MRL system. That governs residues on crops. Glyphosate is not in any way related to AO. The mode of operation is entirely different. Glyphosate works on the shikimate pathway. Which mammals do not have.

  11. We can’t assume that since Bayer Cropscience has paid out millions of dollars that they are guilty of producing a herbicide that gives people cancer or diseases -they purchased Monsanto after the lawsuit went into affect.I have worked directly for Bayer for years and produce many of there Pesticide and herbicides. Before a chemical can be put on the market there has to be much data collected and proven that the chemical doesn’t harm the environment nor people at the recommended applied rate, Growing up in in the farming community I sprayed glyphosate a whole summer with a back pack sprayer using the proper PPE with no ill effects nor has my buddies had any cancers from glyphosate that sprayed with me. These are liberal states with liberal judges ordering these decisions and there is no data showing that glyphosate is causing cancers if used according to the label other than by those wanting them banned without scientific reason. GMO is a totally different ballgame-modifying what God put here on earth for you to eat and you alter it- why ? There are consequences for doing so. To our great vets who were exposed to agent orange- you have every right to be compensated for your exposure there is much evidence including scientific evidence that internal organs are damaged when over exposure occurs-and our government did this intentionally. If agent orange is applied according to the label with the proper PPE you would be fine to use this product’s and the environment would be okay as well. Forty years in the manufacturing business and have one exposure and it was due to my own lack of being irresponsible to an OP. There are many left wing studies out there attempting and convincingly-convincing people based upon their own thinking. Check out who they are tied in with and see if it’s good science they are feeding you. Lawsuits do not mean guilt American.

  12. Glyphosate is toxic and we should not put it in our food. It was originally used as descaling agent for pipes and boilers, so it dissolves and flushes minerals including the ones our bodies need. Monsanto also patented glyphosate as an antibiotic, so it disrupts the gut microbiome that our bodies need to stay healthy. Glyphosate is an estrogen mimicker and disrupts the hormonal balance in our bodies. You wonder why male sperm counts are plummeting and man boobs are so common now? You are what you eat. Glyphosate is also linked to cancer and other chronic diseases. If you haven’t noticed, our entire regulatory system is captured and corrupted including the FDA, and they are allowing toxins like glyphosate into our food and medical supply. This needs to stop.

    1. Toxicity is measured and classified. Glyphosate has a very low toxicity. Chocolate is more toxic than glyphosate.
      It was patented for anything ir could potentially be used for, but was never used for any of them. It is a weak acid. Coca Cola works better for descaling. Few microbes are affected by it, so it is not a useful antibiotic. In fact, soil bacteria feed on glyphosate and that is where we got the RR gene.
      Every accusation that claims that it is a health risk is nothing more than accusations from big organic. There is no scientific evidence and they have all been debunked.
      What is your stake in this?

  13. Today’s browser search: ‘chatgpt _potential dangers of glyphosate’:


    “I’m not a doctor, but I can provide some general information on the potential dangers of glyphosate from a medical perspective. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in many herbicides, including the well-known product Roundup. While it is designed to target and kill weeds, there are concerns about its potential impact on human health. Some potential dangers include:
    1. Cancer risk: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified glyphosate as a Group 2A carcinogen in 2015, meaning it is “probably carcinogenic to humans.” This classification was based on limited evidence from human studies and sufficient evidence from animal studies. However, other agencies like the U.S. EPA and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) have concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.
    2. Endocrine disruption: Some studies have suggested that glyphosate might have endocrine-disrupting effects, which means it could interfere with the normal functioning of hormones in the body. This could potentially lead to reproductive issues, developmental problems, and other health concerns.
    3. Kidney and liver toxicity: Some animal studies have indicated that glyphosate exposure might cause damage to the kidneys and liver, although the risk to humans is still uncertain.
    4. Microbiome disruption: Glyphosate might have negative effects on the gut microbiome, which is the community of microorganisms that live in the digestive tract. This could lead to gastrointestinal problems and potentially affect immune function.
    5. Other health concerns: Some research has suggested links between glyphosate exposure and other health issues such as neurodegenerative diseases (e.g., Parkinson’s), birth defects, and respiratory problems, although more research is needed to confirm these associations.
    It’s important to note that the potential dangers of glyphosate exposure depend on the level and duration of exposure, as well as individual susceptibility. Additionally, the scientific consensus on the safety of glyphosate is not uniform, and more research is needed to fully understand its potential impact on human health.
    As always, consult with a medical professional for personalized advice on this topic.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *