Jack king the environmentalist agenda o goshi judo


The ladies state: “We are particularly concerned about the extensive use of the herbicide glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup), as it is the most commonly used herbicide, and its negative health and environmental impacts are now well known.” I agree that the dangers of Roundup are well known and getting more so every day. What they don’t say and what is not so well known is that their claims are all wrong. So wrong as to be absurd, or dare I say, disingenuous?

I knew the minute I saw their headline they would fall back on the feeble IARC, under the banner of the World Health Organization as the scientific basis for their criticisms of Roundup. We’ll talk about that later but first let’s look at a few agencies more familiar to the average guy. The following national and international agencies have given Roundup a clean — an absolutely clean — bill of health, having studied it up and down, inside and out going on 40 years now:

Here are a few random comments on the subject. The Guardian — yes that Guardian — says: “Glyphosate has been given a clean bill of health on pesticides residues by the U.N. World Health Organization.” And: Co-analysis by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization found that Glyphosate was “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.

Carl Winter, Ph.D. Professor, Food Toxicology, UC Davis: “The tiny levels of glyphosate measured in wine pose no risk to wine drinkers. An adult would have to drink 2,500 glasses of wine a day containing the highest glyphosate residue measured every day for 70 years just to reach the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary level of health concern.

Science writer Matt Ridley says, “Pound for pound coffee is more carcinogenic than glyphosate, with the big difference that people pour coffee down their throats every day, which they don’t glyphosate. Ben & Jerry’s ice cream was recently found to contain glyphosate at a concentration of up to 1.23 parts per billion. At which rate a child would have to eat more than three tons of ice cream every day to reach the level at which any health effect could be measured.”

From the Huffington Post: The city of Petaluma and its biggest school district stopped using roundup and went to organic replacement chemicals. The cost has increased by 1,700 percent and the workers now have to wear hazmat suits and gas masks when Roundup does not require special equipment.

So who are these yahoos anyway? What is this IARC that our writers depend so heavily on for their “scientific analysis? The IARC is a little known, mostly ignored group deep in the bowels of the United Nations, one step below significance. They have investigated nearly a thousand chemicals in their 40-year history and have found just one that was not carcinogenic, an ingredient in nylon used in stretchy pants.

Matt Ridley again: Glyphosate has huge environmental benefits for gardeners and farmers. In particular, it is an alternative to the destructive practice of plowing to control weeds. It allows no-till agriculture, a burgeoning practice that preserves soil structure, moisture and carbon content, enabling worms and insects to flourish, improving drainage and biodiversity while allowing the high-yield farming that is essential if we are to feed humanity without cultivating more land. Organic farmers rely on frequent tillage.

The Environmental Defense Fund, the Sierra Club and all the rest wrap themselves in the pseudo-religious cloak of environmentalism to hide their goal of stopping worldwide economic progress in its tracks. I wrote some time ago of these same groups intentionally putting up road blocks to progress in the undeveloped world. What you see here is part of that same agenda of starving millions of people; consigning them to near stone age existence though out the under-developed world in the name of saving a resilient and still strikingly healthy planet.