In a recent study, a team of French researchers discovered that the way pesticides, herbicides and fungicides are currently evaluated for safety is entirely misleading.
Under current regulatory practice, only some of the ingredients are tested for toxicity, and the patented formula as a whole is not tested at all. When these researchers tested the whole formula, they discovered that some pesticides are, in fact, up to one thousand times more toxic to humans than they are commonly presumed to be.
The problem arises when only those ingredients assumed to be “active principles” are tested, and the manufacturer-declared “inert” ingredients are left out. However, many of those inert ingredients in combination with each other and the active ingredients, pose a far more toxic brew than the so-called active ingredient, tested alone. This makes sense when you consider that if inert ingredients didn’t serve a purpose, then they wouldn’t be in the formula to begin with.
In fact, one effect of some of the inert ingredients is to amplify or enhance the toxicity of the active ingredients, in some instances up to 1,000 times greater than the active ingredient by itself — which is what is being tested — and why the results are misleading. As it turns out, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, when it comes to pesticide toxicity.
Our practice of regulating the safety of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides is based on the results of studies of only part of the formulas. This would be like describing the nutrition value of chicken nuggets by only mentioning the chicken, but leaving out the other ingredients.
Roundup is commonly believed to be among the safest of herbicides. At least, that is how it is promoted by the manufacturer. However, this study’s results showed Roundup to be 125 times more toxic than its active ingredient, glyphosate, taken alone. In fact, Roundup was found to be the most toxic of any of the formulas looked at in this study.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates pesticides to ensure they do not harm humans or the environment. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) set the standards for the level of pesticide residue permitted on or in crops. They calculate the acceptable daily intake (the level of exposure that is claimed to be safe for humans over the long term). But clearly, they have been basing these regulations on incomplete analyses of the toxicity of pesticides, by the practice of only studying certain isolated ingredients, and ignoring others. This means that the true toxic effects of approved pesticides, herbicides and fungicides on humans and the environment are unknown. And therefore, the standards we have in place are meaningless, if not downright dangerous.
The researchers attribute the inconsistency between scientific fact and the claims of manufacturers to huge economic interests, which have been found to falsify health risk assessments and delay health policy decisions.
Link to the research study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666/
Well if they told you how deadly it was, you might not buy it. They’re not performing a public service. They exist to take your money, and that’s usually all they’re interested in.
That would depend on believed by who.
Not me.