Renewable Farming

Opponents in glyphosate toxicity issue each claim they have “sound science”

If you have a little time to scan though a video recording of a Feb. 6 hearing by the Committee on Science, Space & Technology of the U.S. House of Representatives, you may come away with more determination than ever to protect the health of your family from potential glyphosate toxicity, you’ll have to rely on your own analysis and instinct.

You probably won’t want to rely on the EPA. Nor the FDA, USDA or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Or chemical companies that make and market glyphosate. As you scan the report below, scroll down for our updates, as we’re adding depth to this summary by attaching further evidence of the need for thorough review, not dismissal, of glyphosate toxicity.

Feb. 7, 2018 —  The hearing video linked above, available on YouTube, starts live at about minute 15. (You’ll have to slide the timer control forward to that point to hear Chairman Lamar Smith reading his opening statement.) Rep. Smith vigorously discredits the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) which has warned that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

In December 2017, the United States Environmental Protection Agency maintained that “Glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.” 

Rep. Smith accuses the IARC, a World Health Organization research body, of “cherry-picking studies. He says that only sound science can discern what’s safe for you. But who has the most impartial, well-documented science?

Years of industry-funded studies see only “reasonable risks” and safe tolerances for glyphosate in your body. (There’s a 90% chance that lab analysis would find glyphosate which has bioaccumulated in your tissues.) 

Over the years, independent researchers not paid by the major glyphosate manufacturers have been more likely to issue health warnings on glyphosate — not only regarding cancer, but a wide array of health threats.

Exercise the precautionary principle, which is the fundamental guide for U.S. chemical safety. And do your own research — which is exactly what a minority of the committee did before the hearing. An 18-page minority report documents how political influence has obscured the scientific facts. You can read the minority summary  at this link.

Minority chairperson,
Rep Eddie Bernice Johnson

The minority chairman, Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Tex.) speaks briefly at the hearing. Members of this committee are shown at this link

This is a developing report; check back for further updates. 

Update Feb. 9, 2018: We asked Dr. Anthony Samsel, a totally independent research scientist, for a brief comment on the hearing and its apparent purpose of discrediting the IARC conclusion. Dr. Samsel has conducted years of glyphosate physiology research in his own lab; plus having exclusive access to all of the commissioned research study results which Monsanto provided the U.S. government to achieve glyphosate registration. Here’s Dr. Samsel’s response, along with links he provided to further evidence:

The cohort study mentioned in the Congressional hearing is rubbish.  Cohort studies often belong in the trash as they are often based on questionnaires of poor design. Most of the cancers found by Monsanto in the animals were RARE types. A cohort study is not desirable for use with rare diseases. The latency period for this cohort was 4-5 years 1993-1997.

Disadvantages of Prospective Cohort Studies:
You have to follow large numbers of subjects for a long time.
They are not good for rare diseases.
They are not good for diseases with a long latency.
Differential loss to follow up can introduce bias. A very significant portion of the study members were eliminated skewing the numbers.

Last week the IARC position on glyphosate and cancer was viciously attacked by members of the US Congress Science, Space, Technology (SST) at a committee hearing. The chairman of the committee, along with an EPA representative and industry operatives gave delusional commentary against the IARC in preparation for the Trump administration to defund the agency and suspend all of its activities.

Dr. Robert Tarone gave false information to the committee during this hearing. Referring to Monsanto’s 1983 Glyphosate study in mice, he stated that they found ONE haemangio tumor in the low dose group. ONE haemangio tumor in the mid dose group and none in the high dose group.

This statement to the Congressional SST committee is blatantly false.

I have posted links to ResearchGate for the Haemangio-endothelioma data from that study. This is a nice companion to the Lymphoma data I posted after my appearance and testimony at the California OEHHA hearing against Monsanto in June of 2017. I identified Lymphoma tumors in 14 tissues. The lymphoma tumor type was found only in female rats and not the control animals of the Monsanto rat study of 1981.

Remember that the EPA toxicologist William Dykstra found kidney tumors in that same mouse study problematic and raised the issue definitively: “Review of the mouse oncogenicity study indicates that glyphosate is oncogenic, producing renal tubule adenomas, a rare tumor, in a dose-related manner.” These incidences of kidney tumors in mice exposed to glyphosate were significant to raise flags and they do have the potential to be harmful to other organs and tissues.

Well, I now raise the issue of Haemangio- tumors. In fact 14 of them.

The EPA, IARC, European agency, Tarone, Portier and others all missed the significance of these data. If the kidney cancer data was significant to raise warning flags and rightly classify it a probable carcinogen, then certainly these statistically significant tumors will, too.

These data show that glyphosate and not Roundup cause these cancers. In my humble opinion, these tumors may have more specifically been caused by the N-nitrosamines of glyphosate, but glyphosate is certainly at the root of progression.

Malignant Haemangio-endotheliomas found in mice administered glyphosate



 The indented section above is the unabridged commentary from Dr. Samsel, provided at our request. We also invite observations from other totally independent, highly capable researchers with expertise in medical studies and responses to glyphosate. These would be equally technical and also expose the highly selective “studies” used to defend the safety of glyphosate. 

Another analysis of this facade, as used to defend the GMO industry which is essential to glyphosate use, is attorney Steven Druker’s recent book, “Altered Genes, Twisted Truth.” It’s reviewed on our website at this link.


Update Feb. 13, 2018: Here’s the unabridged report assembled by Dr. Don Huber and Iowa farmer Howard Vlieger for presentation to U.S. lawmakers during their visit to more than a dozen senators and representatives in Washington.  Howard, who has done extensive first-hand research on glyphosate toxicity with livestock on his own farm, is trying to educate lawmakers to look at the full range of scientific data on glyphosate’s impacts — not just the short-term trials claimed by the chemical/seed industry as confirming glyphosate “safe.”

Howard says that the reception among lawmakers and their staff members was often surprisingly positive and welcomed. One point that drew close attention, Howard says, is the alarming rise of childhood autism in America. 


Protect the future of Americans’ health – and our economy –

by addressing the danger in our food supply

Chronic disease affects nearly 50% of the US population, according to 2012 CDC numbers. The growing epidemic of chronic health problems in children in particular threatens to cripple our economy due to the cost of care and loss of productivity as these children become adults. Consider a few statistics:

  • Type II diabetes accounts for 45% of adolescent-onset diabetes case, up ten-fold in just ten years.  
  • Nearly 9% of children have asthma.
  • More than 1.6 million Americans have Crohn’s disease or colitis, 10% are children.
  • Approximately 1 in 140 Americans has celiac disease — a rate that has increased 4.5 times over the past fifty years, with rates increasing among children in particular
  • 1 in 41 boys and 1 in 68 children have a diagnosis of autism spectrum (ASD).
  • 1 in 5 children either currently or at some point during their life will have a seriously debilitating mental disorder.
  • Nearly 60% of children experience chronic headaches, with 7% being chronic migraines.
  • The nations annual health care cost is $2.7 trillion.

What will be the cost of health care in the future? What will be the education costs for all of the special needs children? What will the work force be like? How will our economy survive?

 Much of the blame for these and other growing illnesses can be attributed to the food supply and how it is being produced, in particular the use of the systemic, water soluble, glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs). A large percentage of American-grown commodity crops are sprayed with GBHs during the growing season, having been genetically engineered to withstand this herbicide. In addition, even many conventional crops are sprayed with GBHs just before harvest, as a desiccant to make the harvest easier.

This extensive use of GBHs for what is effectively convenience in weed control and harvest comes at a heavy price in health damage. Glyphosate was classified in March of 2015 by the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) as a probable carcinogen to humans. In addition, glyphosate is a broad-spectrum, powerful chelator, which means it makes many minerals unavailable to the plants, creating nutritional deficiencies. Glyphosate also functions as a very potent antibiotic, damaging the beneficial microorganisms in the soil and in animal’s and human’s digestive tracts. This combination of carcinogenic impact, nutritional deficiencies, and damage to the digestive tract contributes to the illnesses listed above, as well as many others.

 Some Key References of Documented Health Risks of Glyphosate

  • CDC and USDA data of emerging health conditions of the U.S. population

Swanson, NL, Leu, A., Abrahamson, J., and Wallet, B. 2014. Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America. Journal of Organic Systems 9:6-37.

ENSSER. 2014.Statement: No scientific consensus on GMO safety. European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility. 19 May 2014.

Krimsky, S. 2015. An illusory consensus behind GMO health assessment. Science, Technology, and Human values 1-32.

 Perro, M. and V. Adams. 2017. What’s Making Our Children Sick? Exploring the Links Between GM Foods, Glyphosate, and Gut Health. Chelsea Green Publishing, Vermont.

  • Birth defects:

Antoniou M., et al. (2012).  Teratogenic Effects of Glyphosate-Based Herbicides: Divergence of Regulatory Decisions from Scientific Evidence.   Journal of Environmental &  Analytical Toxicology S4:006.

 Kruger, M., et al. (2014).  Detection of Glyphosate in Malformed Piglets.  Environmental & Analytical Toxicology 2014, 4:5.

  • Cancer

Guyton, K.C., et al. 2015. Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate. World Health Org.-IARC, Lyon France DOI:

Samsell, A. and Seneff, S. 2015. Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases IV: cancer and related pathologies. J. Biol. Physics Chem 15: 121–159.

Seralini, G-E, Clair, E., Mesnage, R., Gress, S., Defarge, N., Malaesta, M., Hennequin, D., and de Vendomois, JS. 2014. Republished study: long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Environmental Sci. Europe 26:14-31

Thongprakaisang, S., et al. 2013.  Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors.  Food and Chemical Toxicology 59 (2013) 129-136.

World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), (2015).  IARC Monographs Volume 112.

  • Damage to Gut Microbiome

Shehata, A., Schrodl, W., Aldin, AA, Hafez, HM., Krueger, M. 2012. The effect of glyphosate on potential pathogens and beneficial members of poultry microbiota in vitro. Current Microbiology DOI 10.1007/s00284-012-0277-2.

Samsell, A. and Seneff, S. 2012. Glyphosate’s suppression of cytochrome P450 enzymes and amino acid biosynthesis by the gut microbiome: pathways to modern diseases. Entropy 15:1-x manuscripts; doi: 10.3390/el40x000x.

 Samsell, A. and Seneff, S. 2013. Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases II: Celiac sprue and gluten intolerance. Interdiscip. Toxicol. 6:159-184.

  • Endocrine Disruption

Young, F. Ho, D., Glynn, D., & Edwards, V., (2015).  Endocrine disruption and cytotoxicity of glyphosate and roundup in human JAr cells in vitro.  Integrative Pharmacology, Toxicology and Genotoxicology

  • Infertility

Romano, M., et al. (2011).  Glyphosate impairs male offspring reproductive development by disrupting gonadotropin expression.  Reproductive Toxicology

  • Kidney Disease

Jayasumana, C., Gunatilake, S., & Senanayake, P. (2014).   Glyphosate, hard water and nephrotoxic metals: are they the culprits behind the epidemic of chronic kidney disease of unknown etiology in Sri Lanka?  International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ISSN 1660-4601.

  • Neurodegenerative Disease (e.g. Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s)

Cattani, D., et al. (2014).  Mechanisms underlying the neurotoxicity induced by glyphosate-based herbicide in immature rat hippocampus:  Involvement of glutamate excitotoxicity.  Toxicology 320 (2014) 34-45.

Samsell, A. and Seneff, S. 2015. Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases III: Manganese, neurological diseases, and associated pathologies. Surg. Neurol. Int. 6:45-70.

  • Toxic levels of glyphosate contaminating Food

Mitra, T. 2017. Poison Foods of North America: Guide to navigating the glyphosate mine field in our food web (ebook).

So what is the solution to this epidemic to the health of the people in our country?

  1. Ban the use of glyphosate-based herbicides as a late season and pre-harvest desiccant, since such use leaves extremely high levels of residue in the food that will be consumed.
  2. Implement a 3-year phase out of the use of glyphosate-based herbicides and related compounds.
  3. Appoint a special Ag Advisory Committee of scientists, including a majority of scientists who have no financial ties to genetically engineered crops or their associated chemicals, to provide independent life-cycle research on the effects of GMO crops and their associated chemicals, to include GBHs.

 We can provide expert witness assistance in setting up such a program as well as provide names of highly credible scientists, field investigators, veterinarians and medical doctors who have identified these problems in crops, fields, animals and humans.

Contact Information:

Howard Vlieger                                              Don M. Huber

4947 US 75 Avenue                                       Professor Emeritus, Purdue Univ.

Maurice, Iowa 51036                                     COL(Ret.) AUS (Med.Intel.)

712-567-4151 (office)                                                9322 Big Foot Road

712-441-3911 (cell)                                        Melba, Idaho 83641                        208-615-1710