Glyphosate discussion and links

The man who beat Monsanto: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/sep/25/monsanto-dewayne-johnson-cancer-verdict

"Overall, in accordance with evidence from experimental animal and mechanistic studies, our current meta-analysis of human epidemiological studies suggests a compelling link between exposures to Glyphosate-Based Herbicides and increased risk for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383574218300887

Dear Andrea
Very many thanks for drawing attention to the cancer and to the microbiological issues in relation to glyphosate. I am trying to attach a reply. The attachments seems to be too big for Loomia so I shall send my comments by email TonyA

You might like to read the piece about this latest research on the safety of glyphosate in tomorrow's Farmers Weekly, available on the website here: https://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/crop-management/glyphosate-exposure-increases-cancer-risk-up-to-41-study-reports

Our old sprayer driver died of Lymphoma, I don't know if Hodgkin was involved or not, but it was a nasty way to go. He was adamant it was nothing to do with sprays, but he'd been spraying for a good thirty years and the health and safety protocols were pretty basic when he started and chemicals were less understood. Most of what we used then has since been banned. If damage was done, it's more likely it was sheep dip or something hideous from way back when.

We only use glyphosate to clean the ground ready for the new crop (as I've said above). Joanna went to a talk at one of the Conferences we went to in the USA before Christmas, which was all about how awful glyphosate was. She came out and told me we have to stop using it. Just then a world renowned microbiologist came round the corner, so we asked her what she thought. She told us that what we were doing was way better for the environment and the soil than cultivating. Coupled with that, the healthier your soil, the quicker it can process and deactivate glyphosate, so it won't leach out. I know we only hear what we want to hear, but that cheered me up. The real problem with glyphosate is that it is used many times a year on GM crops abroad, so that residues will appear in the food produced and in runoff from the soil.

That said, we are keen to find an alternative, as it will be banned one day. We will still wish to avoid cultivations...

John

Thanks Karl. Interesting

Dear John
Thank you for your response to Karl's message.
Best TonyA

Thanks Andrea and Karl and John for your comments.
I think its a useful discussion, both here and in the wider media environment. And its a discussion that seems to be maturing. Where previously many articles have been more one-sided it now appears to be a more balanced perspective, as Karl’s link to some extent goes to show.

The use of any tool comes with risks of unintended consequences. I believe that the use of heavy ploughing and heavy tractors is anthema to sustainable food production. And so too is heavy and widespread use of chemical compounds especially without due care and attention. Worth noting that there are issues with products such as those using glyphosate not only with the glyphosate itself but the other ingredients too, the adjuvants or wetters for instance.

And all these tools impact on the environment we all depend upon for our food. And that environment, the soil, the air and the water, indeed the entire biosphere that nurtures us is an area we still are struggling to understand and still working out how better to observe and to measure to more fully comprehend key biotic interactions.

The key word for me, is relationships. Our soils are host to a plethora of living organisms that have long established relationships with minerals and vegetative material and with each other and the health of these soils is reliant on those relationships coexisting in a mutually beneficial way.
Some have a job to do that they cannot achieve until other organisms perform their functions and so on. Its the same with the microbiome in our guts. And one can widen the perspective to human relations too.

Surely the issue is not simply whether a set of tools equals another on the day. We must also ask how much can be done during the season, at a certain place, in order to produce food and to nourish not just the populace but the producer too. So that they can repeat the process at least annually.

And so the farmer sends the produce to market. And the price that food can be sold for is fundamental to the array of tools a farmer will be able and willing to purchase and to use.

Just wanted to throw that in there. The path to understanding agro-economics is not perhaps only within the domain of smallholders on one side and multi-nationals on another.
We all eat and drink daily and what we choose to stick in our bodies and how much we’re prepared to pay for those comestibles has enormous impact on how they are produced and how they are produced can affect our purchasing decisons, when we choose to question such as origin and quality.

Of course things are further complicated by the motivations of private enterprise. And there the plot thickens.

As a footnote I want to add a few personal words. I've been working for and with farmers for quite a long time. John Cherry is not only one of the most caring farmers I have met he is also one of the most engaging.
John, and his family, have opened their door to all of us and I congratulate them for doing so and for us in being so curious.
Clearly for many of us lifting a packet of food off a shelf and then parting with some hard-earned cash is not a wholly satisfying transaction, and barely whets the appetite.
- Cheers, Steven

Dear Steven
Thank you for your wonderful and immensely readable comments on where we are. What you say about the privilege of relating to the Cherry projects is especially apt.

Just to add a couple of thoughts. You identify the very numerous complex relationships that need to be in good shape if we are to have a safe and sustainable food system.

On the science side there are a number of things happening that are new in the past 5 o 10 years. The first is a revolution in microbiological sciences in relation to soil and human health. The second is the new ways that it is possible to capture, handle and apply data for farm and environmental management.

One wishes there could be a similar revolution in the way the too politicised food system works. This last is the area where I try to contribute.

Thank you again for your very important and very timely comments. TonyA

Thank you Tony, I am grateful for your words.