# roundup is bad for your guts



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

This does not sound good, looks life roundup is hard on your guts. This from an open source per reviewed medical journal

http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416


Abstract: Glyphosate, the active ingredient in RoundupÂ®, is the most popular herbicide used worldwide. The industry asserts it is minimally toxic to humans, but here we argue otherwise. Residues are found in the main foods of the Western diet, comprised primarily of sugar, corn, soy and wheat. Glyphosate's inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes is an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammals. CYP enzymes play crucial roles in biology, one of which is to detoxify xenobiotics. Thus, glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins. Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body. Here, we show how interference with CYP enzymes acts synergistically with disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria, as well as impairment in serum sulfate transport. Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimerâs disease. We explain the documented effects of glyphosate and its ability to induce disease, and we show that glyphosate is the âtextbook exampleâ of exogenous semiotic entropy: the disruption of homeostasis by environmental toxins.


----------



## RWeThereYet (Aug 31, 2014)

Wow . . . I wish I could say I was shocked by the findings, but I think most with a degree of common sense could of told the masses that without any multi-million dollar study required.
Like this one: *Diet Soda May Alter Our Gut Microbes And The Risk Of Diabetes*



> The debate over whether diet sodas are good, bad or just OK for us never seems to end.
> 
> Some research suggests zero-calorie drinks can help people cut calories and fend off weight gain.
> 
> ...


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/20...ter-our-gut-microbes-and-the-risk-of-diabetes


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Did you read the paper (not the abstract but the actual paper)? Did you research who the two scientist are and their specialities/degrees? Did you check out just what "_Entropy" _is? Did you do anything other than find something which agreed with your way of thinking and post it?

You might want to read this about the 'study'.

http://www.examiner.com/article/bogus-paper-on-roundup-saturates-the-internet


Some highlights:

_recently published in Entropy, which. . . seems more to specialize on physics. It isn't even indexed by PubMed.

neither Samsel nor Seneff are biologists 

Seneff . . . has a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering.

Samsel. . . has done work that seems to be primarily chemical engineering.

important thing to realize is that the authors didnât conduct any research at all

they refer 5 times to Seraliniâs completely discredited paper that claims the GMO crops (and maybe glyphosate we think) cause rat tumors

they refer to autism spectrum disorder (ASD)as being associated with âdysbiosis of the gut,â even though the papers they refer to are based on the discredited and withdrawn papers by Wakefield._

I took me all of 10 minutes to skim the paper and see it had problems and to find out my thought that it was probably bull puckies was correct.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

One thing about the internet you can be surrounded by misinformation and misleading articles when it comes to such anti this and anti that kind of stuff.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9514851

My mistake, roundup is a healthy and taste drink


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Bad for your gut. AND it can treat cancer...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749059/


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

Never fear !!! 

There's a vaccine for that ! Of course, it's meant to protect kids from autism, but as the brilliant minds of men are finding out, destroying the immune system with yummy Round Up cocktails and copious doses of life saving vaccines can be saved !!!!!

Just add another line or three to Johnny's shot record and they'll get him all fixed up !!!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130424112309.htm

It's like the Calvary ! The biggest, baddest, bravest come riding in to save the day !!!


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

farmerDale said:


> Bad for your gut. AND it can treat cancer...
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749059/


Oh that's a GOOD one !! Of course it kills cancer. What *won't* it kill ?


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

You forgot to mention that you have to pay to have your paper published in "Entropy". That alone makes it suspect.

For those of you that think roundup is bad, explain what is better, and reasonable in cost and lets the farmer be as productive. If you lower production for the farmer, you will increase the cost to the consumer. What will happen to the poor and middle class, if the price of food goes dramatically higher? What will happen to our economy if the cost of food doubles or more. What will happen to the worlds poor if we don't have excess food crops to help feed them?

Roundup is relatively safe. While organic is fine as a choice, there are many who can't afford it and can't grow their own. Can we afford to let our crop yields go back to what they were before roundup? You are going to be starting a domino effect if it is pulled off the market without something to replace it, with the cost and effectiveness equal to roundup.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

PrettyPaisley said:


> Oh that's a GOOD one !! Of course it kills cancer. What *won't* it kill ?


GMO crops such as corn and soybeans.


----------



## Trainwrek (Aug 23, 2014)

At this point if you don't know that spraying your food with chemicals is bad for your health then no further studies are going to help. It's basically survival of the fittest, if you dont have the common sense to avoid danger then you volunteer to help thin the herd. Enjoy your glyphosate and thank you for your service!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Trainwrek said:


> At this point if you don't know that spraying your food with chemicals is bad for your health then it's pretty hopeless for you.


I have a feeling that not having any food is kinda rough on a fellers health too. But then I dont have a PHD behind my name so it makes little difference what I think.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

For anyone who is interested in facts vs hype... I dont think there is much roundup found on our nations wheat crops.... one of the four crops named by our very well eddycated authors. :nono:


----------



## MoonShadows (Jan 11, 2014)

I stopped using RoundUp years ago. If I want to kill weeds, I buy a gallon or two of vinegar, put it in my sprayer, and the weeds are wilting and on their way to dying by the end of the day. 

Jim


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

But how lONG will THAT last? I spray Roundup around fence lines etc. and it take over two YEARS before I have to treat some places. I Love it. LOL


----------



## RWeThereYet (Aug 31, 2014)

Eh, for every one study published saying Roundup is bad, two more pop up saying it is good.

Then there is this aspect:

http://www.biofortified.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/257.pdf

http://farmandranchfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/don-huber-may2011-acres.pdf

http://farmandranchfreedom.org/gmo-soybeans-less-nutritious-glyphosate-levels/

I am fine with it! Let more and more people eat GMO food that is more and more nutrient deficient leading to poorer and poorer health! A career in health care is where it is! Or Pharmaceuticals. 

I just wont be eating it.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

MoonShadows said:


> I stopped using RoundUp years ago. If I want to kill weeds, I buy a gallon or two of vinegar, put it in my sprayer, and the weeds are wilting and on their way to dying by the end of the day.
> 
> 
> 
> Jim


We do too. With two kids who play in the yard, a dog and soon to get chickens, I want no part of that stuff. Give me a few weeds any day of the week.


----------



## mrs whodunit (Feb 3, 2012)

MoonShadows said:


> I stopped using RoundUp years ago. If I want to kill weeds, I buy a gallon or two of vinegar, put it in my sprayer, and the weeds are wilting and on their way to dying by the end of the day.
> 
> Jim


Yep. And the very next week new leaves are pushing up and growing very healthy.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MoonShadows said:


> I stopped using RoundUp years ago. If I want to kill weeds, I buy a gallon or two of vinegar, put it in my sprayer, and the weeds are wilting and on their way to dying by the end of the day.
> 
> Jim


I have a feeling that cost effectiveness would be a problem if you were trying to control weeds on a thousand acres of corn or soybeans with vinegar... and it may even kill your crops. Roundup does have the advantage of being efficient as well as selective.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

RWeThereYet said:


> Eh, for every one study published saying Roundup is bad, two more pop up saying it is good.
> 
> Then there is this aspect:
> 
> ...


 And yet another misinformed. There is no difference in Nutrient levels in them. Both have just the same amount of nutrients that the body needs and can use.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

The unknowing are always going to be misled by such nonsense. Those that have taken the time to truly research and get an understanding of the science will see through it most times. Some saw the mention of wheat as a clue the story was cockeyed. When I saw that it was wrongly presumed that Glyphosate was in our food, I knew it was time to call "BS". 
Glyphosate is effective in small concentrations. Glyphosate has a low level toxicity. But my favorite part is that it breaks down quickly, into harmless elements. It isn't going to show up in our food.
Glyphosate replaces the toxic, long lasting, leachable herbicides previously used.
Using the bogus rat tumor study is another red flag.
I don't recommend you drink glyphosate. Unless you are a careless farmer, you won't get any on you. It is seldom, if ever, found in food or water.

I wish www.snopes.com had the time and expertise to dispel myths like the Roundup is evil garbage on various internet sites.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

nevermind. Let's just say "Give me spots on my apples, but leave me the birds and the bees..."


----------



## MoonShadows (Jan 11, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> But how lONG will THAT last? I spray Roundup around fence lines etc. and it take over two YEARS before I have to treat some places. I Love it. LOL


Lasts the whole season.


----------



## MoonShadows (Jan 11, 2014)

mrs whodunit said:


> Yep. And the very next week new leaves are pushing up and growing very healthy.



Nope...lasts the whole season...kills down to the route...just like RoundUp...and, a lot cheaper, too.

Jim


----------



## MoonShadows (Jan 11, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I have a feeling that cost effectiveness would be a problem if you were trying to control weeds on a thousand acres of corn or soybeans with vinegar... and it may even kill your crops. Roundup does have the advantage of being efficient as well as selective.


Sorry, but RoundUp will kill anything you spray it on, as will vinegar.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> But how lONG will THAT last? I spray Roundup around fence lines etc. and it take over two YEARS before I have to treat some places. I Love it. LOL


I guess we could go back to doing what we did when I was young. You use your used motor oil. Not only is it a good weed killer pouring along the foundation of your out buildings and on the base of wood post would make them last a lot longer.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MoonShadows said:


> Nope...lasts the whole season...kills down to the route...just like RoundUp...and, a lot cheaper, too.
> 
> Jim


I am not so sure as to the cost of vinegar compared to roundup.... what do you think it would cost to spray with vinegar.... say a ten acre patch?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MoonShadows said:


> Sorry, but RoundUp will kill anything you spray it on, as will vinegar.


That would be why it didnt kill the GMO wheat on that farm in Oregon that created all the fuss last year?


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

the stuff is found in rain and breast milk

I have heard people say " it's so safe you could drink it" but never heard of anyone giving it at try


----------



## MoonShadows (Jan 11, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am not so sure as to the cost of vinegar compared to roundup.... what do you think it would cost to spray with vinegar.... say a ten acre patch?


Don't know...never had to spray that much.


----------



## whistler (Apr 20, 2005)

haley1 said:


> the stuff is found in rain and breast milk


If it's found in rain wouldn't all the non-GMO plants be dying?


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

Vinegar is not a reasonable replacement for roundup. Roundup is inert in about 4 hours, when applied correctly.

If you think it is bad to use roundup and good to replace it with motor oil, you might want to check and see which is worse for the environment. Most of the problems with chemicals are due to city dwellers and suburban homeowners, not farmers. 
Farmers are trying to make a living and don't overuse chemicals that will simply waste money.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

Snopes ?

That speaks volumes.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

whistler said:


> If it's found in rain wouldn't all the non-GMO plants be dying?



It's a slow kill. Kind of like the babies drinking the breast milk. Read up on cancer rates in kids lately? Seen any recent info on the decline of pollinators ? 

Yes - there is an ignore button. It works semi-okay but he's hardly one to bother with.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Jax-mom said:


> nevermind. Let's just say "Give me spots on my apples, but leave me the birds and the bees..."


Are you confusing insecticides with herbicides? There is a difference, don't ya know?
If we are still discussing Glyphosate, give me a credible source where Glyphosate killed birds or bees or any other animal. BTW Pigweed and lambs quarters are not animals.:nono:


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

RWeThereYet said:


> And yet another fat lazy American who relies on a techo-fix.
> 
> Is there a ignore button?


Please review the web links you provided. In the third web link you posted, http://farmandranchfreedom.org/gmo-s...hosate-levels/
take a look at Figure 2. It lists a couple dozen nutrients found in soybeans and compares amounts between GMO, conventional and organic. Any nutritional scientist knows there are variations within a sample. Read it. GMO tops the other two in many categories. Your "proof" proves you wrong. You don't read and comprehend beyond the headlines and yet you want to call someone else fat and lazy?:nanner:


----------



## DaleK (Sep 23, 2004)

haley1 said:


> the stuff is found in rain and breast milk
> 
> I have heard people say " it's so safe you could drink it" but never heard of anyone giving it at try


Tell you what - we'll sit down and go shot for shot, you drinking vinegar and me drinking Roundup. I'll stop drinking when you're dead.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

But vinegar sounds so common, household-like. Doesn't sound like something evil like frankenfood or zombie wheat. But does anyone bother to research what it is?

*Vinegar* is a liquid consisting mainly of acetic acid (CH3COOH) and water. The acetic acid is produced by the fermentation of ethanol 

So you get this chain of chemicals in an acid form and it kills all plants. Comes from ethanol alcohol. Does it persist in the environment? Does it leach into the groundwater? 

Salt is safe and a salt brine will kill weeds. You want to spread it on your fields?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

watcher said:


> I guess we could go back to doing what we did when I was young. You use your used motor oil. Not only is it a good weed killer pouring along the foundation of your out buildings and on the base of wood post would make them last a lot longer.


 I have done that for years, and still do spread used oil on boards to keep horses from chewing the barn down.
And a few years ago when I was working part time at a horse boarding stable in Tempe, AZ, I did that all the time to keep horses from chewing the old dried out wood down. Works great and does work like a preservative at the same time. LOL


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Those anti everything that is a chemical, unless it is the chemical vinegar, I have a question. 

Pretend you have a quarter section of wheat. That is a tiny farm by todays standards, but for simplicity sake, bear with me. And if you are also against wheat, don't worry about it, substitute in oats.

Tell me how you would farm the 160 acres effectively. How would you maintain fertility? How would you keep the weeds from stealing 40-60% of your yield? How would you keep the soil healthy, the soil fertile, and increasing in organic matter?

Now multiply that acreage by oh, around 10, which is closer to the average sized grain farm now a days. 

How are you gunna do it? I am all ears. Sadly, I believe most on here have absolutely no clue about how to grow grain, which makes me all the more excited, and all the more curious as to the answers we will see here! 

Let me guess: Tillage which destroys the soil? vinegar? Adding manure? Using legumes which add but one nutrient? 

So, what is the answer? Don't be shy, this farmer would love to know how we should be doing it, because we obviously have no clue!!! lol!


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> Snopes ?
> 
> That speaks volumes.


Here is a volume you might have missed:
http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp

I stand corrected, www,snopes.com does dispel GMO myths.
For someone latching onto an article that warns us about ZOMBIE WHEAT, don't too snooty about snopes.:nono:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

farmerDale said:


> Those anti everything that is a chemical, unless it is the chemical vinegar, I have a question.
> 
> Pretend you have a quarter section of wheat. That is a tiny farm by todays standards, but for simplicity sake, bear with me. And if you are also against wheat, don't worry about it, substitute in oats.
> 
> ...


Tilling the soil really doesnt hurt it. Its been done that way for centuries. First you plow the field, then drag a heavy wooden beam over it to bust of the big clods, then run over it again with a harrow to prepare a seed bed. Next you plant, then get in there once a week and cultivate, go back in with a hoe to cut out the weeds between the individual plants. cultivate again to kill the weeds twixt the rows and one more time by hand. Of course this only works with row crops, not so well with grains which are way to thick for rows. It also involves about 10 trips over the field with equipment and a couple times on foot. But hey, fuel is cheap and time has no value whatsoever. Around here farmers go across their fields exactly one time in the spring... spraying that nasty roundup as they go, adding fertilizer and planting the seeds all in one fell swoop. They come back in the fall, harvest a weed free crop and let all that organic matter (corn stalks, soy bean vines etc) fall back on the field to naturally decompose and build the soil. According to them they are saving both time, and huge amounts of money in fuel and equipment, plus combatting soil erosion by using this new fangled "no till" process. Just because they are getting a 50 percent higher yield with half the expense... I just cant see how they are coming up ahead of the game. Grain farmers should be letting half their land lay fallow to two years and go over it with rod weeders to keep weeds under control so there will be no weed seed to germinate on that third years when they do plow, drag, fertilize, harrow and plant. After all whats a few weed seeds in our bread wheat? Even if it does cost twice as much to produce a half a crop? Its not like they are competing with anyone else for a market share.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Anyone who thinks we farmers are wrecking the earth going to chime in on how it should be done, or??????

What should we be doing? I really am curious. The silence is deafening. The silence is well, quite telling. Like me actually, if someone told me to give a medical diagnosis on a sick individual. I would be unsure what to say as well, because I really have no idea about most things in medicine. I leave it to the experts. The experts who use the tools at their disposal, including gm medications. Including chemicals which make life more livable for us all. 

Most of us do not even blink when told by a doctor to take a certain medication that will make us well. A medication that is made of "gasp" CHEMICALS!!!! We injest the medicine directly into our gullets. Yet a farmer may spray a couple ounces of herbicide on an acre of land (2 000 000 pounds of soil in the top six inches), to control weeds, and the consumers panic. They have no idea what actually happens to herbicides, what rate it is applied, how poisonous they are: But by gum those farmers are feeding us poisons, dangit!

Sure, I can google and find fault with the doctors' tools. The internet is like that. But I trust and appreciate them for what they do to make humankind healthier, safer. I respect their choices in how they go about their business, because they have studied their business, and know what they are doing for the most part. There are quacks out there, extolling the virtues of untested, "natural" medicine. 

Deafening is the silence regarding my simple question, but really quite understandable. I too am less than expert in many fields. Without trying to sound smug, however, I consider myself an expert as a farmer. Like a teacher would consider themselves a highly certified, trained individual. Like a nurse, a Policeman, a plumber. I have studied in university, in the field, in my easy chair. I have done on farm trials, learned my soil, rebuilt my soil that had been wrecked, mined, and worn out by "organic" farming methods.

I am all ears, though, for ideas on how to do this career better. Let me know what I should be doing to farm cleaner, more efficiently, greener.

Cheers,

Dale


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Farmer dale, your post is peppered with words which seem like you're itching for a fight. You'll get none from me so stop reading if you want. 

I'm no farmer but I know that organic farming is not feasible on a large scale. Long ago when each family had a farm and provided for themselves, it worked. Organic bread and items made with organic flour are more expensive due to the smaller crop size and added expense and labor. I pay for it, gladly. I cut back in other ways to afford it. 

If I had to grow wheat myself, I imagine a type (if one exists) would be one with a big root system and a short stem. I don't know if there's such a thing as an old heritage type wheat but I imagine that would do better with an organic method?

Editing to add- we were typing at the same time so the silence you thought you heard was actually me clicking away.  and I don't believe in telling anyone how to do their job better. Read my posts..I vote with my wallet. To each their own.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

haypoint said:


> Are you confusing insecticides with herbicides? There is a difference, don't ya know?
> If we are still discussing Glyphosate, give me a credible source where Glyphosate killed birds or bees or any other animal. BTW Pigweed and lambs quarters are not animals.:nono:



And you realize your attempt to discredit her opinion is pathetic ? She quotes a song that was written before you people used Round Up as salad dressing...ignoring the sentiment. Tit for tat - she doesn't want crap on her food. Period.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

Jax-mom said:


> Farmer dale, your post is peppered with words which seem like you're itching for a fight. You'll get none from me so stop reading if you want.



It gets better. Soon you'll be getting nasty messages in your inbox and the threads will still be all "cheers" and "gosh golly gee I just don't know why you're so hostile". Next thing you know you'll be written off as delusional. All because you don't sip the Round Up or crawl back in your corner.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

haypoint said:


> Here is a volume you might have missed:
> http://www.snopes.com/food/tainted/monsantocorn.asp
> 
> I stand corrected, www,snopes.com does dispel GMO myths.
> For someone latching onto an article that warns us about ZOMBIE WHEAT, don't too snooty about snopes.:nono:



So sharing is "latching" on?

You should go back and read about the washed up Clinton supporting Snopes folks. You need to brush up on your sources. Or maybe from an independent thought. Buying into hype in the internet is delusional at best.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Oh yep, "big yellow taxi" is the song. Originally sung by Joni Mitchell but also by counting crows. Sorry if that was confusing. You can look up the full lyrics. I often think of it when I'm at the farmers market eyeing the perfectly imperfect organic apples.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Jax-mom said:


> Farmer dale, your post is peppered with words which seem like you're itching for a fight. You'll get none from me so stop reading if you want.
> 
> I'm no farmer but I know that organic farming is not feasible on a large scale. Long ago when each family had a farm and provided for themselves, it worked. Organic bread and items made with organic flour are more expensive due to the smaller crop size and added expense and labor. I pay for it, gladly. I cut back in other ways to afford it.
> 
> ...


To each their own precisely. My post is not aimed to start a fight, my post is aimed at making us all think harder. Thanks for your input!


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> And you realize your attempt to discredit her opinion is pathetic ? She quotes a song that was written before you people used Round Up as salad dressing...ignoring the sentiment. Tit for tat - she doesn't want crap on her food. Period.


We share that desire. I don't want crap or chemicals on my food. It matters not that it is a quote from a song, it is at best misleading.
Strange that the vinegar you use on your salad is more toxic than what comes out of my monster spraying machine.
Sentiment is for funerals, this is a discussion and it works best when facts are used.
Don't call me pathetic and then complain when someone has a tone you don't like. Look who sounds like "itching for a fight". Come on, keep it civil.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

PrettyPaisley said:


> It gets better. Soon you'll be getting nasty messages in your inbox and the threads will still be all "cheers" and "gosh golly gee I just don't know why you're so hostile". Next thing you know you'll be written off as delusional. All because you don't sip the Round Up or crawl back in your corner.


If you are talking about me, what you are saying is false. If you are talking about someone else, kindly disregard. For what it's worth, I am sorry if someone sends you nasty private messages. That is uncalled for. 

I do not sip roundup, and would not really recommend it. I do wish to have dialogue.

If my post was threatening, condescending, cruel; It was not meant to be. I just think if I as a farmer am so dirty, so nasty, and so poisonous, explanations are in order as to why. And please, offer suggestions on farming methods that are greener than what I practice. That is what my posts are hoping for.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

I've been doing some research on einkorn wheat because I have weird issues with gluten and apparently this has a different makeup that makes it easier to digest. It's supposedly an old wheat and I wonder how that would fare on a large scale grown with organic methods?


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

I am as civil as they come until backed into a corner. Having fingers wagged in my face about needing the "brush up" on info, provide a source you approve of only (while you rely on the likes of Snopes), being called delusional, being stalked because I don't back down like you people have forced others to do, lies about being a high school drop out spread, being called a child abuser because I don't sit down and shut up ... the list doesn't end. 

You, sparky, have ZERO place to tell ME to keep it civil. You would know civil if it slapped you upside the head.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

PrettyPaisley said:


> I am as civil as they come until backed into a corner. Having fingers wagged in my face about needing the "brush up" on info, provide a source you approve of only (while you rely on the likes of Snopes), being called delusional, being stalked because I don't back down like you people have forced others to do, lies about being a high school drop out spread, being called a child abuser because I don't sit down and shut up ... the list doesn't end.
> 
> You, sparky, have ZERO place to tell ME to keep it civil. You would know civil if it slapped you upside the head.


Am I sparky or what? I feel like I missed something? lol!


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

"Long ago when each family had a farm and provided for themselves, it worked."

Sort of. But the reality is that our farmers were growing crops on new fields. Land that had either thousands of years of forest decay or tons of decomposing prairie grasses. So when their farming methods caused tons of top soil to wash away, it didn't matter. There were few choices. It was not sustainable agriculture, far from it.

"If I had to grow wheat myself, I imagine a type (if one exists) would be one with a big root system and a short stem. I don't know if there's such a thing as an old heritage type wheat but I imagine that would do better with an organic method?"

If there were a demand for a shorter wheat, one could be bred. Shorter wheat would be less susceptible to being blown down (lodging), but would be less able to suppress weeds by limiting the sunlight that weeds need. A larger root system might be superior in a drought, but couldn't increase grain production if extra nutrients were needed to supply the super sized root system. An organic method would need to supply the nutrient demands of a crop. Generally, compost only adds decaying plant matter and very limited amounts of the three basic nutrient needs, NPK. Compost increases the soils ability to hold water, improving growth, but a yield still demands adequate amounts of NPK.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> I am as civil as they come until backed into a corner. Having fingers wagged in my face about needing the "brush up" on info, provide a source you approve of only (while you rely on the likes of Snopes), being called delusional, being stalked because I don't back down like you people have forced others to do, lies about being a high school drop out spread, being called a child abuser because I don't sit down and shut up ... the list doesn't end.
> 
> You, sparky, have ZERO place to tell ME to keep it civil. You would know civil if it slapped you upside the head.


I am sorry that you were abused, verbally or whatever. Must have been difficult, But when I engage in a discussion, I am not all those people from your sad and difficult past. I'm just a person trying to have a discussion.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Jax-mom said:


> I've been doing some research on einkorn wheat because I have weird issues with gluten and apparently this has a different makeup that makes it easier to digest. It's supposedly an old wheat and I wonder how that would fare on a large scale grown with organic methods?


I have a friend who grows organic einkorn. It is indeed an ancient wheat like grain. I have an old jar of wheat from the 1950's my dad had kept. I really do need to grow some of it and try to multiply it. A goal of mine is to try a "heritage" wheat in a side by side, replicated, field scale trial, to see how these old wheats may perform under more modern farming methods and vice versa. Maybe I then can sell this wheat as a "heritage" grain, for three times the price!!! lol.

Typically in small grains, and indeed with my friend, she uses a LOT of tillage and burns A LOT of diesel to grow organic crops on a medium to large scale. She mostly relies on summerfallow, that is, leaving the land idle for a year, to control some weeds, and to break down organic matter which in turn provides some nutrients. In the spring, seeding is delayed to allow a flush of early weeds, then it is tilled yet again to kill off those early weeds. After planting, a new flush of weeds come, and it is often very hard to tell what crop has been planted for the entire season because of low fertility and massive weed issues. Her yields are probably about a third of surrounding farms, and she probably gets twice the price as conventional farmers for her product.

She has much less risk in terms of financial input, because she does not spend much relatively to grow her crops. But she wonders about her future. She has such nasty weed issues after years of seeding out. Weed seeds which will be an issue for 20, 30, 60 years to come, depending on dormancy. Her soil fertility is dropping, from the inability to efficiently add nutrients. Her soil organic matter is dropping by its constant tillage and exposure to air. She burns four to five times the diesel fuel I do per acre. She loses money on expensive land the year it is left fallow. She herself does not see it as a sustainable option. We agree that the word sustainable is not attainable in reasonable scale farming.

Yes she uses forages, but so do I. Yes she uses cover crops: So do the rest of us. Sure she rotates crops, so do the rest of us. But she does not have the ability to put back into the soil all that is harvested. So her soil slowly dies.

Sorry for the novel. IMO, there is no right or wrong way to farm. There are simply misconceptions, lies, and fallacies that need to be shared about farming.

We all have our choices.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Jax-mom said:


> I've been doing some research on einkorn wheat because I have weird issues with gluten and apparently this has a different makeup that makes it easier to digest. It's supposedly an old wheat and I wonder how that would fare on a large scale grown with organic methods?


I have had good luck growing Spelt. Quite a bit like wheat. There are some ancient varieties as well as some "improved" varieties. It has gluten, but is better tolerated by some folks. Spelt has been around a long while. Mentioned in the Christian Bible. Specialty stores stock Spelt flour. If you like it you might try growing some.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

So do I get an A for effort? . I have limited knowledge but feel I was *somewhat* on the right track.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

PrettyPaisley said:


> she doesn't want crap on her food. Period.


Then she needs to cut down on food being sold in the average markets, and find food stores that sell nothing but organics. Or maybe grow her own, that way she will know exactly what is on it.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Lol, yh, I do. 99% of what my family eats is organic. Some things are impossible to buy but when given the choice I do. We even moved out of an hoa so we can now have a garden and chickens will be next spring. I pay for it $ but the health of my family is not something I compromise on. I stick to my co op, farmers markets, csa and even my honey is local within 30 miles. I have developed relationships with those I get the food from and when at the store I read labels and do research. I can't live on a true farm nor do I want to but I give my $ to folks who raise animals and crops in the way I feel works for us. I will do everything in my power as a mom to pass along the good eating habits and good food I had as a child. We are very healthy and just as importantly happy in our little place in this world. (And on that note, time for bed).


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

DaleK said:


> Tell you what - we'll sit down and go shot for shot, you drinking vinegar and me drinking Roundup. I'll stop drinking when you're dead.


Wow, sorry you would think that roundup is safer then vinegar. I would think after a cup or 2 of vinegar a person would have a hell of a stomach ache but after a few shots of roundup would be on the way to the ER or maybe the morgue.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

For those of you that buy local & buy organic, I have something to tell you. Unless you personally go to that person's house & see how things are done, you are only taking their word for it that they are raising things the way they say they are. There is one guy that sets up at our local market & I know for a fact that he is not selling things he grew himself. He buys flats of strawberries at Kroger, takes them home & repackages them in his pretty little baskets & then re-sells them as locally grown. This happens a lot. People go to produce auctions & then sell it as locally grown. 

I try to do things as naturally as I can. However, farmers could NEVER produce enough to feed everyone if they did not do things the way they do.

Sure, free range eggs are better tasting & better for you. Milk from pastured cows or goats is awesome. Pasture raised chickens can't be beat, I raise them myself. The people that do it that way just can't supply what is needed for the mass amounts of people. 

I'm with FarmerDale, for those of you complaining about how things are being done, how should it be done? How can enough food be raised for everyone in the world if modern farming techniques aren't used? Groceries are already sky high in price. Think of how expensive things would be if we didn't have the ability to grow in mass quantities like we do. I think we'd all be a little hungry.


----------



## whistler (Apr 20, 2005)

PrettyPaisley said:


> It's a slow kill.


So at some point in the future all perennial plants will die? What will happen to annuals? Presumably the slow death takes longer than one growing season.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

haley1 said:


> Wow, sorry you would think that roundup is safer then vinegar. I would think after a cup or 2 of vinegar a person would have a hell of a stomach ache but after a few shots of roundup would be on the way to the ER or maybe the morgue.


Vinegar is brutal. It causes cancer. It is poisonous to pets and humans.

http://dherbs.com/news/4800/4669/Vicious-Vinegar/d,ai.html#.VBuxWvRDtrU

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2454464/?page=1


http://www.kentucky.com/2012/02/10/2063752_boy-5-dies-from-ingesting-vinegar.html?rh=1


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

You better stop eating anything pickled then


----------



## DaleK (Sep 23, 2004)

haley1 said:


> Wow, sorry you would think that roundup is safer then vinegar. I would think after a cup or 2 of vinegar a person would have a hell of a stomach ache but after a few shots of roundup would be on the way to the ER or maybe the morgue.


And that shows what thinking will do for you. Simple math and science shows that vinegar with 5% acetic acid, which is normal household vinegar, is roughly 10 times more toxic by volume than Roundup.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Tilling the soil really doesnt hurt it. Its been done that way for centuries.


Tilling the soil can hurt us. It was tilling soil which was a major contributor to this:











and this


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> And you realize your attempt to discredit her opinion is pathetic ? She quotes a song that was written before you people used Round Up as salad dressing...ignoring the sentiment. Tit for tat - she doesn't want crap on her food. Period.


Then should she not eat organic? After all isn't one of the things they use to "improve the soil" animal crap? 

I say that to bring up a point. There are dangers in everything. The eggs I get out of my coop from my free range chickens can be dangerous. I know the dangers and willing take the risk of eating them w/o following the USDA rules which are in place to reduce this risk in store bought eggs.

I know the risk involved in driving my truck into town, using my chainsaw to fell a tree and I know the risks involved in using chemicals. I have determined that rewards vastly outweigh the risk.

I know the risk of all this because I check all the FACTS not just look for anything which supports what I want. Think about it, if I wanted to be car free I could come up all kinds of data and studies and anecdotal stories of how dangerous cars are and scream about how we have to get rid of these killer machines. But the facts are around the world billions of trips are made safely everyday and the actual odds of an individual being involved in a fatal accident in the US are very, very small.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Jax-mom said:


> Lol, yh, I do. 99% of what my family eats is organic.


Thats great. Its always good to see people supporting their local small producers.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> I am as civil as they come until backed into a corner. Having fingers wagged in my face about needing the "brush up" on info, provide a source you approve of only (while you rely on the likes of Snopes), being called delusional, being stalked because I don't back down like you people have forced others to do, lies about being a high school drop out spread, being called a child abuser because I don't sit down and shut up ... the list doesn't end.
> 
> You, sparky, have ZERO place to tell ME to keep it civil. You would know civil if it slapped you upside the head.


If we can use any sources we like then I'm willing to bet I can find something to support anything you wish.

IIRC, in the late 70s(?) there was a "study" done showing that adult-child sex didn't harm the child emotionally nor psychologically and could actually benefit them. The fact it was done by a group which supported legalizing such actions would have NO effect on its validity, right?

Anyone with even a high school level statistics education can take data and set the parameters to get the results they wish.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

Wendy said:


> For those of you that buy local & buy organic, I have something to tell you. Unless you personally go to that person's house & see how things are done, you are only taking their word for it that they are raising things the way they say they are. There is one guy that sets up at our local market & I know for a fact that he is not selling things he grew himself. He buys flats of strawberries at Kroger, takes them home & repackages them in his pretty little baskets & then re-sells them as locally grown. This happens a lot. People go to produce auctions & then sell it as locally grown.
> 
> I try to do things as naturally as I can. However, farmers could NEVER produce enough to feed everyone if they did not do things the way they do.
> 
> ...


We have a very large number of eastern European immigrants in our area. They sell a lot of organic products, including hay. They, and others, have noticed the big difference in prices between organic and non-organic. So they sell organic, but many don't grow organic. You figure it out.

If someone can explain how farmers can grow all organic, stay in business and support their families, and feed the numbers of people that need food, please explain it. What do you say to those who can't afford organic food?

If vinegar kills everything, it certainly won't work on crops. You have to have practical ideas to change things. Dead wheat or corn doesn't feed the world. 
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Tilling the soil really doesnt hurt it. Its been done that way for centuries. First you plow the field, then drag a heavy wooden beam over it to bust of the big clods, then run over it again with a harrow to prepare a seed bed. Next you plant, then get in there once a week and cultivate, go back in with a hoe to cut out the weeds between the individual plants. cultivate again to kill the weeds twixt the rows and one more time by hand. Of course this only works with row crops, not so well with grains which are way to thick for rows. It also involves about 10 trips over the field with equipment and a couple times on foot. But hey, fuel is cheap and time has no value whatsoever. Around here farmers go across their fields exactly one time in the spring... spraying that nasty roundup as they go, adding fertilizer and planting the seeds all in one fell swoop. They come back in the fall, harvest a weed free crop and let all that organic matter (corn stalks, soy bean vines etc) fall back on the field to naturally decompose and build the soil. According to them they are saving both time, and huge amounts of money in fuel and equipment, plus combatting soil erosion by using this new fangled "no till" process. Just because they are getting a 50 percent higher yield with half the expense... I just cant see how they are coming up ahead of the game. Grain farmers should be letting half their land lay fallow to two years and go over it with rod weeders to keep weeds under control so there will be no weed seed to germinate on that third years when they do plow, drag, fertilize, harrow and plant. After all whats a few weed seeds in our bread wheat? Even if it does cost twice as much to produce a half a crop? Its not like they are competing with anyone else for a market share.


The no till process has been a huge advancement in my area. You can see the significant amount of soil erosion in areas where conventional farming was practiced for decades and the wind can be so bad at times that our topsoil ends up on farmerDale's land.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

haley1 said:


> You better stop eating anything pickled then


I eat plenty of things pickled but I can't remember ever sitting down and drinking a jar of pickle juice and realistically, anything I eat pickled, is usually a condiment or a side so I don't make a full meal of it. 

I do remember sitting down one time and eating a good sized jar of pickled beans one time and having a fairly significant belly ache when I went to bed.


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

watcher said:


> If we can use any sources we like then I'm willing to bet I can find something to support anything you wish.
> 
> IIRC, in the late 70s(?) there was a "study" done showing that adult-child sex didn't harm the child emotionally nor psychologically and could actually benefit them. The fact it was done by a group which supported legalizing such actions would have NO effect on its validity, right?
> 
> Anyone with even a high school level statistics education can take data and set the parameters to get the results they wish.


That works both ways. Especially when you don't even allow studies to be done. It's always a benefit to your cause when you can say "no credible studies have ever been done to link blahblahblahblahblahblah" knowing full well your well compensated lawyers covered your butt before hand.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

PrettyPaisley said:


> That works both ways. Especially when you don't even allow studies to be done. It's always a benefit to your cause when you can say "no credible studies have ever been done to link blahblahblahblahblahblah" knowing full well your well compensated lawyers covered your butt before hand.


I know of no law that prevents anyone from studying anything. :shrug:


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

More studies have been done on conventional food crops than on organic crops. That is a sad fact.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

PrettyPaisley said:


> And you realize your attempt to discredit her opinion is pathetic ? She quotes a song that was written before you people used Round Up as salad dressing...ignoring the sentiment. Tit for tat - she doesn't want crap on her food. Period.


If she doesn't want crap on her food, she should probably avoid organics because it is my understanding they use that as fertilizer pretty regularly :rotfl:


----------



## PrettyPaisley (May 18, 2007)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I know of no law that prevents anyone from studying anything. :shrug:



Well that's it. If you know of no law then case closed. End of story.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

PrettyPaisley said:


> Well that's it. If you know of no law then case closed. End of story.


Actually no, its not "end of story", its an invitation to become better educated... If there is such a law, I would love to hear about it... at this point in time I have not. A year ago I had not heard about the farmer in Oregon who discovered some GMO wheat growing on his farm either... but I do now. Learning new stuff is my primary reason for coming on HT.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> Well that's it. If you know of no law then case closed. End of story.


Huh???? That makes no sense.
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/


----------



## sniper69 (Sep 23, 2007)

Jax-mom said:


> I've been doing some research on einkorn wheat because I have weird issues with gluten and apparently this has a different makeup that makes it easier to digest. It's supposedly an old wheat and I wonder how that would fare on a large scale grown with organic methods?





farmerDale said:


> I have a friend who grows organic einkorn. It is indeed an ancient wheat like grain. I have an old jar of wheat from the 1950's my dad had kept. I really do need to grow some of it and try to multiply it. A goal of mine is to try a "heritage" wheat in a side by side, replicated, field scale trial, to see how these old wheats may perform under more modern farming methods and vice versa. Maybe I then can sell this wheat as a "heritage" grain, for three times the price!!! lol.
> 
> Typically in small grains, and indeed with my friend, she uses a LOT of tillage and burns A LOT of diesel to grow organic crops on a medium to large scale. She mostly relies on summerfallow, that is, leaving the land idle for a year, to control some weeds, and to break down organic matter which in turn provides some nutrients. In the spring, seeding is delayed to allow a flush of early weeds, then it is tilled yet again to kill off those early weeds. After planting, a new flush of weeds come, and it is often very hard to tell what crop has been planted for the entire season because of low fertility and massive weed issues. Her yields are probably about a third of surrounding farms, and she probably gets twice the price as conventional farmers for her product.
> 
> ...





haypoint said:


> I have had good luck growing Spelt. Quite a bit like wheat. There are some ancient varieties as well as some "improved" varieties. It has gluten, but is better tolerated by some folks. Spelt has been around a long while. Mentioned in the Christian Bible. Specialty stores stock Spelt flour. If you like it you might try growing some.


If looking for older varieties of wheat, then I would suggest http://www.ancientcerealgrains.org/seedandliteraturecatalog1.html


----------



## sammyd (Mar 11, 2007)

> That works both ways. Especially when you don't even allow studies to be done. It's always a benefit to your cause when you can say "no credible studies have ever been done to link blahblahblahblahblahblah" knowing full well your well compensated lawyers covered your butt before hand.


nobody is preventing any studies. It is an old stand by in the long line of myths in the anti gmo repertoire. 
There is a database of over 2000 studies that have been done world wide by independent agencies and other governments concerning gmo crops. It can be found here http://genera.biofortified.org/
The bottom line is that gmo food and crops are just as safe and nutritious as non gmo food and crops.
A new study has just been released that looks at 29 years of animal health and productivity, both before and after the advent of gmo feeds. Guess what, no difference.
The data covers more than 100 billion animals and 29 years. (edited to add a link) http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/early/2014/08/27/jas.2014-8124
Here is a list of studies that all conclude gmo feed is safe, and yes there are independent studies in there.
http://www.fass.org/page.asp?pageID=52&autotry=true&ULnotkn=true

Give up on the old "nobody can research this" line, it is a lie. The research has been done and it points to the anti gmo crowd being dead wrong.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

sammyd said:


> nobody is preventing any studies. It is an old stand by in the long line of myths in the anti gmo repertoire.
> There is a database of over 2000 studies that have been done world wide by independent agencies and other governments concerning gmo crops. It can be found here http://genera.biofortified.org/
> The bottom line is that gmo food and crops are just as safe and nutritious as non gmo food and crops.
> A new study has just been released that looks at 29 years of animal health and productivity, both before and after the advent of gmo feeds. Guess what, no difference.
> ...


That post can simply NOT be quoted enough... Good job Sammy!

:cowboy:


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> That works both ways. Especially when you don't even allow studies to be done. It's always a benefit to your cause when you can say "no credible studies have ever been done to link blahblahblahblahblahblah" knowing full well your well compensated lawyers covered your butt before hand.


Care to point out one case when anyone has forced a study to not be done? 

For the most part anyone who wishes can get access to almost any data he wishes to study. Usually all it takes is time and/or money. And I can tell you right now if ANYONE thought there was a physical danger linked to a chemical as widely used as glyphosate you can bet your entire bank account there would be people ready to toss all kinds of money and time into proving it because there'd be hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars to be made in court cases, for the lawyers that is. 

The same thing applies to anything. If you can prove that using a specific brand of hair spray causes a percentage of people to grow warts on their left big toe you've hit the lawyer lottery. You find a bunch of people who have said warts and sue the maker for millions upon millions. Each person gets say $100 but you, the lawyer, gets 10-50% of the entire take.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

PrettyPaisley said:


> Well that's it. If you know of no law then case closed. End of story.


You stated the 'fact' its up to you to provide the evidence to back it up. Please give us cases where specific studies have been prevented.


----------



## pointer33 (Oct 15, 2008)

Well, I suppose this and many other topics shall never pass until something of higher magnitude comes along. I know for some time glyphosate has been looked as as an endocrine disruptor, you can look it up in the journal toxicology, and a few other places. I personally used it for a short while on weeds in my driveway, but seeing it was not the magic bullet I thought it would be I quit using it. Like morphine as a manner of controlling pain, I had expectations that were too high so I was disappointed. I think it is something I do not want to select in my food chain if I can avoid it, but do to the proliferation it is difficult. I am not the idealist to think I will change how we conduct farming...and yes folks organic farmers could feed the world, we might have to adjust human nature...ie certain systems of subsidies, and sets of values.....just think about how everything by in large is a choice. We could probably have cars that were far more economical if we did not value certain factors of performance. I think looking through this thread makes me sad. It feels divisive. I do not think I have a stellar education but getting to discussions of drinking this acid or that chemical and who will die first seems schoolyard like. I mean slow death by low level radiation or a car accident....hardly an effective argument for cars vs careless nuke usage. Reminds me of the MSDS sheet for how dangerous dihydrogen monoxide (or something like that is)...oh it's water H2O....many things depend on many factors.....I hope in your hearts you are not as angry with each other as you seem. Personally I hope to retain the freedom to grow some food and make some of my own choices in this world. Peace out homies


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

I think with issues like this, it's very personal (to me included) so naturally you'll see strong opinions. I think people have polar opposite stances (safe versus not safe) and there's really no gray areas.  

I do like the fact that studies are being done but I always like to look at things over the long haul, longer than these studies have shown. In my heart I'm suspcious of long-term effects so naturally I buy organic items because I just don't want to take the chance, especially on my kids. I like having the choice, which is why I like items to be labeled. 

I'm not a farmer. I'm not a scientist. I'm your average mom who studies and researches in the best ways I can and makes what I feel are the best choices for my family, scrimping and pinching everywhere so that I can buy organic items. We don't have many luxuries compared to most because I like a simple life which affords me the ability to spend a little more on food. For those who say organic is out of reach, I think a closer look at finances/spending/priorities might go a long way. More often I think it's the lack of access - which is a whole other thread!!- rather than lack of money. We are NOT rich by any means.  And there are days like today when I was $1 short and had to buy the regular milk. 99% of what we eat is, but there are times it's not feasible or I just can't afford it.

So while I see these reports that GMOs are safe as is Roundup, I take the let's wait and see approach. But I do read them. I'm smart enough to admit I don't know everything and always am ready to listen/read the oppositing viewpoint.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

MoonShadows said:


> I stopped using RoundUp years ago. If I want to kill weeds, I buy a gallon or two of vinegar, put it in my sprayer, and the weeds are wilting and on their way to dying by the end of the day.
> 
> Jim


Only thing is, acetic acid (CH3COOH) is pretty closely related to (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid.


In other words, vinegar is related to 2,4-D.

So, to get away from Roundup, you are using one of the other common weed killers. You just don't know it......

Then, the acid in vinegar lowers the ph in your soil, which is a chronic problem on much of our good land - too low of a soil ph. And you are adding to that problem.

Then, the acid of vinegar modifies a persons gut quite a bit too, when you consume it. Makes a lot of changes to what going on in your guts. Now, our guts are designed to deal with these changes - but if the concern is one product causes changes, why not be concerned about the changes vinegar also creates?


Of course, the big difference here is that you are used to having vinegar sitting in the kitchen when you were growing up, you are used to handling it and consuming it, your parents had it.

So, you just don't worry about it. Its a common every day thing to you.

You don't mind that it lowers your soil ph a little - hell you drink the stuff!

You don't mind that it is related to one of the earliest and most common weed killer that's been around since the 1940s. Because - you don't know. No one bothered trying to scare you about vinegar.

And you aren't concerned about the effects of vinegar on your guts, and the bugs in your tummy. Because - well you never thought about it, and it's just been a common part of the food chain since before biblical times. You never really ever thought about it did you?

Myself, if you look at the real facts, study up on it, and look at the amounts of each used per bowl of cereal or per acre or whatever, I think it would actually be quite clear that your vinegar is far, far, far more harmful to the environment and humans than the Roundup is.

But, you won't bother even looking into it.

Because, you just already know.

I get that. Human nature.

Too bad tho.

We do ourselves a dis service when we hold on to ideas without ever challenging them, researching them, looking for new answers.

I ain't going to change anyone's mind here. I know.

Just interesting that you choose to use a very harmful product in place of one that is better suited for the job. And think you are so much the better for it.

Human nature is a funny thing.

Paul


----------



## sniper69 (Sep 23, 2007)

Oh no we better get the government to ban vinegar - it is evil. Banning it is for the children. :facepalm::facepalm::banana::banana:


(and please take my comment as the joke it is intended to be, and not serious.)

Now for a serious comment - if one decides to ingest vinegar (I do like a nice salad with vinegar and oil), or if one decides they want to use round up for weeds - let it be there choice. Just don't ask me to make a round up and oil dressing for my salad. :yuck:


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

pointer33 said:


> Well, I suppose this and many other topics shall never pass until something of higher magnitude comes along. I know for some time glyphosate has been looked as as an endocrine disruptor, you can look it up in the journal toxicology, and a few other places. I personally used it for a short while on weeds in my driveway, but seeing it was not the magic bullet I thought it would be I quit using it. Like morphine as a manner of controlling pain, I had expectations that were too high so I was disappointed. I think it is something I do not want to select in my food chain if I can avoid it, but do to the proliferation it is difficult. I am not the idealist to think I will change how we conduct farming...and yes folks organic farmers could feed the world, we might have to adjust human nature...ie certain systems of subsidies, and sets of values.....just think about how everything by in large is a choice. We could probably have cars that were far more economical if we did not value certain factors of performance. I think looking through this thread makes me sad. It feels divisive. I do not think I have a stellar education but getting to discussions of drinking this acid or that chemical and who will die first seems schoolyard like. I mean slow death by low level radiation or a car accident....hardly an effective argument for cars vs careless nuke usage. Reminds me of the MSDS sheet for how dangerous dihydrogen monoxide (or something like that is)...oh it's water H2O....many things depend on many factors.....I hope in your hearts you are not as angry with each other as you seem. Personally I hope to retain the freedom to grow some food and make some of my own choices in this world. Peace out homies


A nice message, pointer.

All chemicals, even vinegar, have their good and bad sides. Some folks say we should just salt weeds, not use ag sprays. But - salt the earth? That seems so much worse that roundup!

Today I guess Dr Oz is going to have some folks on talking about a new gmo trait coming out. He is going to have some 'experts' that have produced several bad reports in the past, that are proven to be false. But it makes no matter. They will get another 15 minutes of fame, and can sell more of their books, and they will scare all of you more and more with their 'information'.

I know, over the next year, we will be quoted from this show here and other places.

And it will be from people who are lying to us.

To sell more books. They will use fear to scare you, to buy their books.

And you will stand up behind them, in fear, and lead us down their path - a path of greed and money and no concern for the truth.

And that is what makes me sad.


In general, farmers will spray one to three quarts of glyphosate on an acre of ground (about a football field) when the crop is a few inches to knee high - in May through June mostly.

The crop itself typically doesn't form seeds until Late July, and is not harvested until late September through October.

How does such a small amount of something that's been tested so very much, and is applied so early in a crops life so as to be very removed from the seeds, cause such a passion and hatred in people?

One spills far more toxins directly on your skin when you refuel your law mower, than you will ever get from the use of roundup on corn and soybean fields.

Well I rambled on, sorry pointer33. I enjoyed your message, one of moderation. It would be great if we didnt need gasoline, weed sprays, vinegar, and all the other stuff we use every day. But don't see how that would work out.

Paul


----------



## sammyd (Mar 11, 2007)

> but I always like to look at things over the long haul,


glyphosate has been around for 44 years
GMO has been around since the 80's.
Study after study has shown neither to have any real sort of problems.
The endocrine disruptor label is pretty iffy and based on some tests using cultured cells which may or may not reflect any real life problems. It still isn't labeled a disruptor by any real agency.


> In conclusion, the available literature shows no solid evidence linking glyphosate exposure to adverse developmental or reproductive effects at environmentally realistic exposure concentrations.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22202229

How long is long enough?


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

How long? Well, I plan to be around for a long time and I'm very patient. I can get away with continuing down the same path I am. 

In the meantime I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd put the little emoticon of two people shaking hands here but I'm on my phone and all I can give you is a .


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

Jax-mom said:


> How long? Well, I plan to be around for a long time and I'm very patient. I can get away with continuing down the same path I am.
> 
> In the meantime I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd put the little emoticon of two people shaking hands here but I'm on my phone and all I can give you is a .


I generally agree with the messages you have written here in this thread.

Folks growing a 100 foot square garden are probably better off not using gmo, aside from any chemical fears at all. That is how I would grow a small garden anyhow.

It is good you and all have choices. I want that to continue.

I don't need for you to have to buy anything that I grow.

The only part of this that bugs me - if you want to follow science, then use some science in the research!

Time and again, the anti- folk use hearsay and outright false info to support their views.

I want you to be able to actually do good sound research on these issues. And then buy whatever you want to buy, grow whatever you want to grow anyhow, no matter what the science proves or disproves.

But I would like to see real science.

I automatically discount anything the companies make the products have to say. Sure they can supply some basic info, but I'd kinda guess they would shine a good light on their products. Don't cha think.....

Unfortunately we can't trust the other side either. They want to use fear to manipulate us, sell us books, sell us seminars, sell us seeds and magic juice at 3x its worth.... They are just as evil, just as greedy as the chemical companies. Their 'studies' are based on the results they want to find, not based on a set of research and learning good info from that research.

So we are left lacking a lot. I understand that.

I'm fine with you growing or buying the products you want.

I just react to really bad science, or people making up stuff that is totally unfounded.

So far, that has been, over and over, these anti-gmo findings. If one looks into them, they are always hot air.

All typically to sell some books, or get some 15 minutes of fame.

What I fear is that these people will fool you, and create fear in you, and lead you down a wrong path.

Healthy skepticism is good.

Mindless unthinking fear is bad.

Stay healthy. 

Paul


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Both,Roundup   

And vinegar,


  

*HAVE THEIR OWN IMPORTANT ROLL TO PLAY IN THIS HERE GREAT BIG WORLD,AND THEY BOTH PLAY IT TO PERFECTION.* If You Don't Mind,Would You Please Pass Me Another Rib? 

 :nana: Pay me no mind.I was born this way. Carry On


----------

