UK Bread and Cereal Bars Found to be Contaminated with Glyphosate

January 13, 2014

(NATURAL  NEWS) – The UK and EU populace doesn’t embrace Monsanto’s propaganda, and  their governments are somewhat less dominated by Monsanto minions than the US  government is. So traces of glyphosate in major British non-GMO food brands  should be a huge red flag for us here in America.

UK news site The  Ecologist featured a study performed by a British anti-GMO group called GM Freeze. Two major food brands contained traces of glyphosate. The research  disclosed that all four cereal bars produced by Jordans and 34 out of 40 bread  products sampled from Walburtons contained traces of glyphosate. These are both big name brands in the UK. Those traces were below the EU maximum  allowable glyphosate residue amounts for cereal products. But many disagree with  the maximum allowable amounts, pointing out that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor and thus shouldn’t be tolerated at any level. [1] [4]

PARSING THE GLYPHOSATE ROUNDUP ISSUE

untitledSo how does glyphosate show up in  those biscuits and breads where GMOs aren’t grown? Well, RoundUp is such a  popular herbicide that it’s used on non-GMO grain fields. Normally, RoundUp  destroys all plant life that’s not grown from RoundUp Ready GMO seeds that are  designed to keep the pesticide from killing those GMO corn or soy crops.  But farmers can use it on non-GMO fields before planting to  get rid of or prevent weeds from choking the new crops, and they can be used  just before harvesting to make combining easier. That’s how glyphosate can show up in foods from non-GMO grain sources.

ONLY ORGANIC CROPS WILL BE FREE OF ANY PESTICIDE RESIDUES

In Europe, GMO soy and corn is  allowed in most countries for livestock feed only. And that guarantees that the  Monsanto herbicide RoundUp gets sold abundantly to those farmers who sign extremely binding and limiting contracts with the evil corporation.  This  affects non-organic farm animals adversely. A Dutch pig farmer raised a stink  beyond even his large factory farm when he compared the differences in animal health and reproduction between GMO feeds and non-GMO  feeds.
With non-GMO feeds, he experienced far less still births or  spontaneous abortions and deformities among newly born piglets and less need for  antibiotics among the pigs, who clearly showed better health even within the  confines of a factory farm. [2]  This situation had occurred among Midwest  American livestock farmers also. Several of them had reported issues of an even  greater extent using GMO feed with their pigs, cows and cattle to retired Purdue  professor emeritus of plant pathology Dr. Don Huber. Huber investigated  and discovered that the RoundUp pesticide was creating soil and plant issues  that at least robbed the plants of nutrition and protection from disease. Huber  also hypothesized that a unique and novel pathogen was developed in the process.  [3]

HERE’S WHERE THE GLYPHOSATE ISSUE GETS DICEY

Glyphosate alone is not the most toxic pesticide ingredient, although it’s commonly considered as such.  But it’s the only substance used for testing by the EPA and government  agencies worldwide. So the EPA has allowed larger amounts of glyphosate  usage even as it has been showing up in human blood. RoundUp’s  extreme toxicity comes from combining glyphosate with chemical adjuvants to ensure rapid plant absorption of glyphosate. Glyphosate is considered  the “active ingredient,” while the adjuvants are considered “inert,” pretty much  like vaccines and their toxic adjuvants.

The RoundUp adjuvants aren’t  considered, while Monsanto claims proprietary rights to avoid revealing what  those “inert” ingredients are. But the two-year Seralini rat study that produced  premature deaths and horrific tumors after nine months did decipher what  those adjuvants are. [5]  Using scientific instrumentation, the  Seralini group isolated inert ingredients and noted their toxicity. RoundUp’s  glyphosate combination with certain chemical adjuvants create a toxic and  carcinogenic cocktail that makes it’s way up the food chain. [5a]
If the recent Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology retraction of Seralini’s  work has you confused, consider these two facts: Almost 800 scientists and  thousands of other professionals have petitioned objections to the journal’s  condemnation of Seralini’s work, and just prior to that journal’s retraction, a  former Monsanto scientist slithered into the journal’s editorial  staff.
David Schubert, Ph.D. biology professor with the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, offers an excellent write-up defending Seralini’s work here.

Also see [1] The Ecologist , [2]  Danish Pig Farmer , [3]  Video interview with Dr. Don Huber.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

You must be logged in to comment

Log in