The Byron Environment Centre is holding it’s chemical-free bush regen and boardwalk maintenance next Wednesday 27th March from 9.30 to 12.30 at the Cumbebin Wetland Sanctuary (next to the toilet block of the Byron Market site) weather permitting. We will be removing weeds from around native plantings on the far NE side and sown in the shade close to the wetland. We will also be removing leaves from the boardwalk and replacing decking as required. A cool drink will be provided. Please wear sturdy shoes and protective clothing from sun and mosquitoes. See map attached. Hope to see you there – come anytime even for an hour or two. Let Sharon (securry@outlook.com) know if you can come and please pass the word around. If the weather is not suitable and we need to postpone I will contact you at 8 am on the day.
The Federal Government’s long-awaited foreign ownership of water entitlement register reveals investors from China and the United States have the biggest stake in foreign-owned water entitlements in Australia. Key points: The majority of foreign-held water entitlements are in the northern part of the Murray-Darling Basin Agriculture Minister David Littleproud says the figures are not alarming The register does not reveal where foreign government investors own entitlements The register, compiled by the Australian Tax Office, shows one in 10 water entitlements is foreign-owned at 10.4 per cent. Chinese and US investors each own 1.9 per cent followed by the UK owning 1.1 per cent. More than 1,800 gigalitres of foreign-held water entitlements are within the Murray-Darling Basin, which is 9.4 per cent of the total Murray-Darling Basin water entitlement on issue. The findings show the majority of foreign-held water entitlements are in the Northern Basin at 21.9 per cent, followed by 5.5 per cent in the Southern Basin.
A hot (35 degrees some days) and humid week which coincided with the tragedy in Christchurch and NSW election day yesterday.
Re elected the Liberal woman leader, the first female leader elected in her own right. Impressive via the media in her confident performances.
Because that’s all our election campaigns are, performances.
The Green Party did well in inner city Sydney and Manly. Here too Tamara Smith was returned as our Green Rep.
Sadly though, Sue Higginson running in Lismore as the Green candidate lost to Janelle Saffin for Labor. Both outstanding candidates’ and I hope we don’t lose Sue Higginson from the area.
Her role in the Environmental Defenders office was inspiring.
Within a week everything will continue and I fear the environment will be at the bottom of the heap.
Stormy evenings, giving us spectacular light shows and rolling thunder but dumping little rain.
Busy week ahead with the arrival of visitors for a couple of days. Establishing a new garden near the humpy. Fences to keep the wallabies and bush turkeys out.
Hi all, this has being the longest break we had since we start in 23rd of March 2010. However Byron Shire Chemical Free Landcare will be back on the dunes this Saturday, the 23rd of March, from 9 am to 1 pm, at the New Brighton site. Meet at the North Head Road carpark, located on the first curve towards the left. Walk along the beach heading South and you should spot us weeding on the first 50 m of dune. We will be removing Bitou bush and Glory Lily seedling.
Please wear boots, long sleeve shirt and long pants, a hat, gloves and bring water, and some morning tea. Tools and first aid kit will be provided. Looking forward to seeing you on Saturday and when we finish New Brighton, we will return to Brunswick in two weeks.
A federal jury in San Francisco found Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide was a substantial factor in causing the cancer of a California man, in a landmark verdict that could affect hundreds of other cases.
Edwin Hardeman of Santa Rosa was the first person to challenge Monsanto’s Roundup in a federal trial and alleged that his exposure to Roundup caused him to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), a cancer that affects the immune system.
In the next phase of the case, the jury will weigh liability and damages, and Hardeman’s lawyers will present arguments about Monsanto’s influence on government regulators and cancer research.
During the trial, the 70-year-old Santa Rosa man testified that he had sprayed the herbicide for nearly three decades and at one time got it on his skin before he was diagnosed with cancer. He used the chemical to control weeds and poison oak on his properties, starting in 1986.
Hardeman’s case is considered a “bellwether” trial for hundreds of other plaintiffs in the US with similar claims, which means the verdict could affect future litigation and other cancer patients and families. Monsanto, now owned by the German pharmaceutical company Bayer, is facing more than 9,000 similar lawsuits across the US.
Glyphosate is the most used herbicide in human history. 18.9 Billion pounds (8.6 Billion Kilograms) of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) have been sprayed worldwide since 1974. Glyphosate use has also increased 15-fold since genetically modified crops were introduced in 1996 (6).
In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen” (7). The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), following the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) evaluation, has since stated that glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans” (8) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) stated that “the available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria to classify glyphosate as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or as toxic for reproduction” (9). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) still has a new evaluation of glyphosate pending (10).
The scientific uncertainty surrounding glyphosate and GBHs has also led to political uncertainty, with a shortened 5-year re-approval for glyphosate having been granted by European Union Member States in November 2017.
The Ramazzini Institute and their partners have walked into this unclear situation so as to supply valuable and independent data to enable regulators, governments and the general public of every country to answer the question: Are glyphosate and GBHs safe at real-world levels of exposure?
The pilot study, which is vital for the long-term comprehensive study, aimed to obtain general information as to whether GBHs are toxic at various stages of early life (newborn, infancy and adolescence), and to identify early markers of exposure and effect. Glyphosate and one of its formulates (Roundup Bioflow, MON 52276) were both tested in Sprague Dawley rats, starting from prenatal life until 13 weeks after weaning, exposed to a dose of glyphosate in drinking water corresponding to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s acceptable daily dietary exposure (11), referred to in the U.S. as the chronic reference dose (cRfD) – 1.75 mg/kg/day.
Global Glyphosate Study: Crowdfunding
The Ramazzini Institute, with the support of other independent Institutes and Universities in Europe and the United States, has now launched a crowdfunding campaign for the most comprehensive long-term study ever on GBHs. A longterm study is now necessary to extend and confirm the initial evidence that has emerged in the pilot phase of the Study.
The total budget for this study is € 5 Million and it is already receiving support from the public, politicians and NGOs around the world.
The Ramazzini Institute
The Ramazzini Institute, in over 40 years of activity, has studied more than 200 compounds from the general and occupational environment and many of its results have provided a solid scientific base for regulating and limiting the exposure of a number of substances. Examples include: Vinyl Chloride, Benzene, Formaldehyde, Trichloroethylene and Mancozeb.
Quotes from Scientists:
Prof. Philip J. Landrigan, Schiller Institute for Integrated Science and Society, Boston College
“This very important study from the Ramazzini Institute indicates that glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, has negative effects on reproductive development in mammalian species even at exposure levels that are currently considered safe and legally acceptable. Although these findings are not definitive, they are very worrisome, and need to be followed closely by national and international regulatory agencies.
Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute
“A long-term study on GBHs encompassing intrauterine life through to advanced adulthood is needed to confirm and further explore the initial evidence of endocrine-related effects and developmental alterations emerged in this pilot study.”
Prof. Jia Chen, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City
“GBHs are of significant public health concern because of their widespread and sharply increased usage and we still do not know enough about their noncancerous effects, in particular in developing children.”
Dr. Alberto Mantovani, Italian National Institute of Health
“A relevant feature of the findings for risk assessors are the definitely stronger endocrine-reproductive effects induced by the product GBH compared to an equivalent dose level of the pure substance glyphosate. The suggestion that other components of GBH may significantly enhance glyphosate toxicity definitely deserves further investigation.”
Prof. Melissa J Perry, George Washington University
“Although glyphosate has been around for decades, its global use has increased rapidly and we know surprisingly little about the human health effects of such widespread use. This study in rats uses doses that compare to what humans are exposed to in their everyday environments including from the food they eat.
“These most recent findings demonstrate important impacts on hormone production that shouldn’t be ignored. The study findings as a whole are providing valuable original information to more clearly assess the health risks to humans.”
Prof. Anderson Joel Martino Andrade, Federal University of Paraná
“This pilot study shows that the development of the reproductive system seems to be particularly sensitive to glyphosate and that formulated pesticides may have a different profile of toxic effects than isolated active ingredients.”
References: (1) Manservisi F, Lesseur C, Panzacchi S, Mandrioli D, Falcioni L, Bua L, Manservigi M, Spinaci M, Galeati G, Mantovani A, Lorenzetti S, Miglio R, Andrade AM, Kristensen DM, Perry MJ, Swan SH, Chen J, Belpoggi F. The Ramazzini Institute 13-week pilot study glyphosate-based herbicides administered at human equivalent dose to Sprague-Dawley rats: effects on development and endocrine system. Environmental Health 2019;18:15. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-019-0453-y (2) Swan SH, Sathyanarayana S, Barrett ES, Janssen S, Liu F, Nguyen RH, Redmon JB; TIDES Study Team. First trimester phthalate exposure and anogenital distance in newborns. Hum Reprod. 2015 Apr;30(4):963-72. (3) Levine H, Jørgensen N, Martino-Andrade A, Mendiola J, Weksler-Derri D, Mindlis I, Pinotti R, Swan SH. Temporal trends in sperm count: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2017 Nov 1;23(6):646-659. (4) Dalsager L, Christensen LE, Kongsholm MG, Kyhl HB, Nielsen F, Schoeters G, Jensen TK, Andersen HR.Associations of maternal exposure to organophosphate and pyrethroid insecticides and the herbicide 2,4-D with birth outcomes and anogenital distance at 3 months in the Odense Child Cohort. Reprod Toxicol. 2018 Mar;76:53-62. (5) https://glyphosatestudy.org/global-glyphosate-study-pilot-phase/ (6) Benbrook CM. Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally. Environ Sci Eur. 2016;28:3. (7) IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). Some Organophosphate Insecticides and Herbicides. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Volume 112 (2017). (8) EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate. EFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4302, 107 pp. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4302. (9) European Chemical Agency (ECHA). Glyphosate not classified as a carcinogen by ECHA. ECHA/PR/17/06, 15 March 2017. (10) US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Draft Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments for Glyphosate. Accessed May 9th, 2018: https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/draft-humanhealth-and-ecological-risk-assessments-glyphosate (11) US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Glyphosate: Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment for the Section 3 Registration Action. 2006. Accessed May 9th, 2018: https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/cleared_reviews/csr_PC103601_8-May-06_a.pdf
Post navigation
Previous:Global Glyphosate Study Pilot Phase Shows Adverse Health Effects at ‘Safe’ DosesThe pilot study was a single-dose study on glyphosate based herbicides in rats, using the the U.S. EPA’s acceptable daily dietary exposure level of glyphosate.
Copyright 2017-2018, Ramazzini Institute Privacy Policy & Terms and Conditions.We use cookies to collect and analyse information about the users of this website. We use this information to enhance the content and other services available on the site. Please click ‘OK’ to consent to the use of cookies on this site. You can find out how to manage your preferences at any time by visiting our Privacy Policy.
