This week I was featured on Fox News affiliate in Los Angeles for their morning show, Good Day LA. Now I’ve been on live television before, but it’s been something like 15 years since I’ve done live television working for the California State Assembly. So I was a little bit rusty, but it came back to me very quickly and I realized how much fun live television is. Fox News Los Angeles brought me on to discuss two topics: (1) how much glyphosate is inside oat products and cereals and (2) how can people at home test their food and themselves. I was joined by Brent Wisner who was the main attorney that took Monsanto to court and won a $289 MILLION award for his client. Monsanto lost this battle to a man dying of non-Hodgekins Lymphoma because they were able to prove that Monsanto knew that glyphosate causes cancer, but hid that information from the public for decades. Hmm…sounds a little bit like what they did in Anniston, Alabama, but I digress. The main point both Brent and I were making was that the way the Environmental Protection Agency is evaluating and approving chemicals is fundamentally flawed. And there are thousands of scientists and pediatricians all over the world that will back up that statement. You’ve trusted Mamamvation to cover topics like what popular cereals have too much glyphosate, how toxic are your tampons, and how the American Academy of Pediatrics cut ties with Monsanto, now join us as we explore how the Feds evaluate chemicals they put in our food.
Is This All Hype? Nope. Pediatricians & Scientists Demand Better Chemical Evaluation Policies Too.
Several weeks ago, the American Academy of Pediatrics announced that the way the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) evaluates food additives is fundamentally flawed and puts pregnant women and children at risk. Now they didn’t come out against pesticide levels…yet, but what they are attacking is the process by which the Feds evaluates and approves chemicals for commerce. This process doesn’t take into account the vulnerable hormonal system of pregnant women and children and puts them in harm’s way. Numerous food additives, approved by the FDA, have been later been shown through studies to cause harm.
Thousands of doctors in Europe got together this year to say that certain hormone-disrupting chemicals are also linked to obesity. Certain pesticides are also in that category. Obesity is also a modern-day disease with rates that have skyrocketed in recent years. And the problem really boils down to a lack of accountability within the system. Chemicals are not independently analyzed before they go to market. I talked about this in my book, Green Enough: Eat Better, Live Cleaner, Be Happier (All Without Driving Your Family Crazy!) and here is the excerpt from the book describing the process by which chemical additives are approved.
“Let’s pretend for a second that you are a chemical aching to become a useful and productive member of nation’s food supply. You need to get into one of three lines to receive approval under the GRAS program.
LINE NO. 1: Before you start, ask yourself if you were born before the year 1958. If you answered yes, congratulations! You are grandfathered into the system and zip right into the express lane, which puts you straight into the nation’s food supply. How very nice for you.
LINE NO. 2: If you love to do tons of paperwork, conduct legitimate scientific studies that are published in peer-reviewed science journals, hold a public comment period, and follow the spirit of the law, then this line is for you. What–no takers? Okay. Well, here’s the third option.
LINE NO. 3: Get in this line if you don’t want to bother with rigorous science. Just do up your own safety studies and notify the FDA that you want a review. You can involve legit scientists if you want but you don’t have to. The FDA has 120 days to do a complete review of whatever you give them, but it takes them about that long just to get ink into one of their printers, so chances are they won’t pull off a review in that time–and in that case, you’re good to go, because it means automatic approval is yours. And on the off chance the FDA gets their act together and denies your petition, don’t worry your pretty little chemical head because a) they are reviewing your safety studies that you did with people you paid to get the results you wanted, and b) even if they are about to reject your petition they will tell you beforehand so you can withdraw it before any news goes public. Then it’s like nothing ever happened–no one will ever know there were any questionable safety issues, not even when you try again and, one way or another eventually get approved.”
Now I know food additives are not pesticides and please don’t mix those two up, but what independent scientists are saying is the same is true for pesticides and the amounts that are inside the foods we eat. The system is set up in a way that they get approval without the information verified as true. And they use ancient technology and methods that hide trace amounts. In the 21st century, we have far more sophisticated testing. When you look into outer space for galaxies, you wouldn’t use binoculars. If you did, you wouldn’t see anything. That is how the FDA and EPA are evaluating chemicals. They use outdated technology and methods to look for chemical residue. When they don’t find it, they say no danger is present. But today we have the equivalent of the Hubble Telescope which shows us galaxies inside the body. Now if old technology is relied on to evaluate chemicals, the only people winning in that scenario are the chemical companies.
Did the Feds Let us Down? Well, Monsanto Secret Documents Revealed How Dangerous Chemicals Get Into The Food We Eat Via Burying Evidence & Colluding With Government Officials
A California court awarded $289 MILLION to a groundskeeper in Northern California because glyphosate, owned by the chemical company Monsanto, caused his nonhodgekins lymphoma. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in RoundUp Weed Killer and the most popular herbicide in the world. Glyphosate is not only sprayed on most “bioengineered” or GMO crops in the United States, but it’s also used heavily on conventional crops to kill weeds and again to force desiccation allowing for early harvesting. These uses make glyphosate incredibly ubiquitous and virtually impossible to avoid. In fact, chemical residues are routinely found in rainwater, food and water supplies, soil, air, breastmilk and urine samples. And it’s been proven the chemical can reside in the body of animals for up to one year or longer meaning it’s likely also ending up inside your food.
Glyphosate was originally patented as a chelator and an antibiotic, which means it has the ability to stop nutrient absorption and decimate delicate gut flora. These two simple facts explain why glyphosate is so damaging to the overall health of the body and has been linked to spreading antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Glyphosate has also been deemed a “probable carcinogen” by the World Health Organization and added to the Prop. 65 List of Carcinogens and reproductive toxins in California. In other words, this chemical is not something you want around your family or inside the food they eat. There’s lots of controversy on whether glyphosate is actually toxic though. The companies and partners profiting from the chemicals are very vocal about it being safe, however, independent scientists point to the clear conflict of interest present in the safety studies they rely on because most of them are internally funded.
Another glaring issue is that when glyphosate was approved as a pesticide, only the active ingredient was analyzed. They never presented information about the formulation with the additional chemicals that were used. Some of the latest independent science coming out of Europe is pointing to the formulation, including the adjuncts, dyes and surfactants make the product incredibly toxic to both animals, humans and the planet.
When Monsanto was on trial this year, secret documents were exposed that shed a light on how they were able to get away with selling a product that is dangerous to public health and the environment. This sums up what they were caught doing.
- Monsanto ghostwrote several publications submitted by “independent” scientists
- Monsanto violated standards of the peer review process
- Monsanto censored studies reaching the conclusion that glyphosate had adverse health effects
- Monsanto placed a paid consultant with an obvious conflict of interest in the role as editor of a journal publishing research on glyphosate. This editor later retracted a study published in the journal that glyphosate was a plausible human carcinogen.
- Monsanto organized a campaign to criticize the World Health Organization in anticipation of a general carcinogen causation classification.
- Monsanto was guilty of harassing independent scientists involved in research of glyphosate
- Monsanto ghostwrote articles submitted by “independent scientists” criticizing the World Health Organization
- Monsanto was involved in tons of studies published in scientific journals and their involvement was never disclosed. This points to the fact they have been able to populate scientific discourse with favorable coverage.
- Monsanto had several consultants on the payroll on an official panel supposedly “independent” critiquing the World Health Organization
- Monsanto lead studies that found that glyphosate was a carcinogen and never submitted them to the Environmental Protection Agency
- Monsanto used a laboratory that was later shut down for fraud. However, the EPA never forced Monsanto to repeat the studies done at that laboratory.
- Monsanto’s own experts confirmed that glyphosate was a probable carcinogen inside internal documents and emails and voiced concern that was ignored
- Monsanto was aware of the toxicity of glyphosate and continued to sell it without warning the public
- Monsanto coached witnesses to testify that glyphosate was not toxic
- Monsanto admits that the surfactants used in the formulation would cause the body to take in more of the chemical and could cause a toxic effect which was not stated to the EPA when evaluated by regulatory agencies
- Monsanto admits to using political influence to overcome regulatory hurdles
- Monsanto was colluding behind the scenes with the Environmental Protection Agency, reminding us all of the “revolving door” between the governmental agencies and the chemical industry
Monsanto maintains their innocence and states that their pesticide products are safe as proven by 800 safety studies and they will appeal the verdict. Interestingly, lead Monsanto toxicologist Donna Farmer seems to inadvertently indict the company while making a statement trying to distinguish glyphosate from RoundUp,
The trial jury also observed “clear and convincing evidence” that Monsanto’s officials acted with “malice or oppression” in failing to adequately warn of the risks. Not only that, but internal emails obtained the US Right to Know organization revealed that the Food and Drug Administration has repeatedly found a “fair amount” of glyphosate over two years of food testing, but has failed to release its findings. That means Monsanto likely knew the negative risks of human exposure and acted to purposefully suppress them from the public, and the FDA was fully aware of glyphosate residue contamination in our food supply.
This Has Actually Happened Before. Monsanto Paid Out $700 MILLION to People They Contaminated with PCBs in Anniston Alabama. Now They Are Dying.
History repeats itself. In Anniston, Alabama, Monsanto lost a court case and had to pay out $700 MILLION to citizens in Anniston, Alabama for polluting their town for decades causing cancer, birth defects, diabetes, and death. The plaintiffs were able to prove that Monsanto knew about the dangers and continued to dump the chemicals in the neighborhood anyway. PCBs were later banned in the late 70s but still showing up in the environment today. Most of us are exposed to it through animal fats and off-gassing from modern kitchen cabinets.
Residents of Anniston, Alabama are still in dire needs. The aftermath of cancerous contaminants, which found their way into their water supplies and ground samples mean more cancer and medical monitoring for years to come. CBS covered the story here below.
Glyphosate in Oatmeal & Cereals in Dangerous Levels For Pregnant Women & Children
Glyphosate has been something Mamavation has been tracking for some time. And recently some news has hit of a study commissioned by the Environmental Working Group–Iconic products from companies like Quaker Oats and Cheerios contain enough pesticide residue, glyphosate, to be dangerous to children. Here’s a complete list of what was published online. And we’ve done you the favor of linking up how you can get safer brands.
Granola Brands Tested for Glyphosate
- Nature’s Path Organic Honey Almond granola— Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 Non-detectable
- Back to Nature Classic Granola–Test #1 620 ppb, Test #2 170 ppb
- Quaker Simply Granola Oats, Honey, Raisins & Almonds–Test #1 430 ppb, Test #2 400 ppb
- Back to Nature Banana Walnut Granola Clusters–Test #1 30 ppb, Test #2 30 ppb, Test #3 340 ppb
- Nature Valley Granola Protein Oats ‘n Honey–Test #1 220 ppb, Test #2 170 ppb
- KIND Vanilla, Blueberry Clusters with Flax Seeds–Test #1 50 ppb, Test #2 60 ppb
Instant Oats Brands Tested for Glyphosate
- Giant Instant Oatmeal, Original Flavor–Test #1 760 ppb
- Simple Truth Organic Instant Oatmeal, Original–Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 Non-detectable
- Quaker Dinosaur Eggs, Brown Sugar, Instant Oatmeal–Test #1 620 ppb, Test #2 780 ppb
- Great Value Original Instant Oatmeal–Test #1 450 ppb
- Umpqua Oats, Maple Pecan–Test #1 220 ppb, Test #2 220 ppb
- Market Pantry Instant Oatmeal, Strawberries & Cream–Test #1 120 ppb, Test #2 520 ppb
Oat Breakfast Cereal Brands Tested for Glyphosate
- Kashi Heart to Heart Organic Honey Toasted cereal–Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 Non-detectable
- Cheerios Toasted Whole Grain Oat cereal–Test #1 490 ppb, Test #2 470 ppb
- Lucky Charms–Test #1 400ppb, Test #2 230 ppb
- Barbara’s Multigrain Spoonfuls, Original, Cereal–Test #1 340 ppb, Test #2 300 ppb
- Kellogg’s Cracklin’ Oat Bran oat cereal–Test #1 250 ppb, Test #2 120 ppb
Snack Bars Brands Tested for Glyphosate
- Cascadian Farm Organic Harvest Berry, granola bar–Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 Non-detectable
- KIND Oats & Honey with Toasted Coconut–Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 120 ppb
- Nature Valley Crunchy Granola Bars, Oats ‘n Honey–Test #1 340 ppb, Test #2 120 ppb
- Quaker Chewy Chocolate Chip granola bar–Test #1 120 ppb, Test #2 160 ppb
- Kellogg’s Nutrigrain Soft Baked Breakfast Bars, Strawberry–Test #1 30 ppb, Test #2 80 ppb
Whole Oats Brands Tested for Glyphosate
- 365 Organic Old-Fashioned Rolled Oats–Test #1 Non-detectable, Test #2 Non-detectable
- Quaker Steel Cut Oats–Test #1 530 ppb, Test #2 290 ppb
- Quaker Old Fashioned Oats–Test #1 390 ppb, Test #2 1100 ppb, Test #3 1300 ppb
- Bob’s Red Mill Steel Cut Oats–Test #1 300 ppb, Test #2 Non-detectable
Today General Mills is being sued by a woman in Florida stating if she would have known about the levels of toxic glyphosate that were in Cheerios she would never have purchased them and fed them to her family. We expect similar lawsuit to hit other companies producing products with oats, wheat, and legumes with high levels of glyphosate.
Testing–The New Frontier. Detox Project Launches Pesticide Home Testing Kids for Glyphosate & Other Pesticides
This can be a little overwhelming, but some smart people have figured out a way how you can take control of your family’s health with lab testing. The Detox Project is working alongside Pennsylvania-based Abraxis, Inc to provide the global public with a uniquely developed and packaged home test kit for glyphosate: The GlyphoCheck™ Home Test for Glyphosate in Food and Water. Built on the same immunoassay lateral flow device test kits that laboratories and governmental agencies have used for glyphosate analysis, a simplified test kit for analyzing foods and water in your home for the presence of glyphosate is now available. You don’t need a science degree to get lab test results, you can do it right in your kitchen! This was the same test I used in my kitchen to validate that Quaker Oats indeed does have more than 200 ppb glyphosate in their product. The implications of what I can test and show you are endless.
And sophisticated testing for personal use has also come out. If you are interested in purchasing a laboratory test that will give you the results of 120 days worth of pesticide exposure, the Detox Project has a kit you can purchase to submit a hair follicle to a laboratory in France for analysis. There are several options, including just having an analysis of glyphosate OR glyphosate and other pesticides. We recommend the “Combined Pesticide” test that gives you everything at the bottom. Click here to view a sample report.