Skip to main content

What We Already Knew

A major study, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, found a significant reduction in cancer risk in those individuals who eat lots of organic food. If you want to be one of those individuals, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) suggests you refrain from eating oat-based cereals made by General Mills or Quaker. Here's why:

The EWG hired Anresco Laboratories to test samples of 28 different breakfast products made by Quaker and General Mills. In all but 2 of the products tested, the amount of Monsanto's weed killer Roundup was found at levels that endanger the lives of children, i.e., higher than 160 parts per billion (ppb)*. As you no doubt recall, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) deems the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, "probably carcinogenic to humans." This decision was reached after the review, in 2015, of U.S., Canadian, and Swedish epidemiological studies of glyphosate. Real-world exposures and genotoxicity were the basis for these studies. Genotoxicity is the damaging effect a chemical can have on DNA. The damage triggers mutations in DNA that can lead to cancer.

In contrast, the EPA has found the amounts of glyphosate in these oat-based breakfast products to be acceptable. Their research is based upon studies paid for by Monsanto that ignore independent research connecting Roundup with genotoxicity. Since the literature review of 2015, an additional 26 of 27 published studies report that glyphosate can be genotoxic. The FDA did not release its own glyphosate tests for more than a year, which were not conducted on oats or wheat. This oversight is unfortunate, because both constitute the main crops to which glyphosate is applied as a pre-harvest drying agent. Both the makers of the breakfast products in question defend the use of contaminated oats, stating the glyphosate found on them falls at or below federal standards.

It should be noted that the EPA's standards for pesticides are heavily influenced by lobbying done by the food industry. The government's standards do not change as often as they should, and are frequently outdated, rather than being based upon the best and most recent research. If your family has a proclivity for cancer, as mine does, you will want to take the advice of the authors of that major study cited at the beginning of this article to heart. Eat all the organic foods you can grow or lay your hands on!

*a standard established by the EWG

With thanks to the Environmental Working Group.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Truly, There's Nothing to be Afraid of

February 26, 2013 – The 1960s scared conservatives worse than I knew – worse than a lot of us knew, I guess.   Certainly I lived through that period.   Certainly young adults found their voices, and had the nerve to object to being put through the meat grinder called Vietnam.   Black Americans continued to seek justice and equality in their adopted homeland.   Change was inevitable.   It’s understandable that conservatives wanted a say in what those changes would be.   Their fearful reaction was – and is - badly overblown.   Others’ happiness is nothing to fear.     These longed-for changes cost conservatives nothing but their unearned, self-satisfied atrophy.   Young people went on dying, even so. It turns out all of that change scared the socks off market fundamentalists.   Determined to return the country to its previous perceived state of inertia, Lewis Powell wrote a memorandum for the US Chamber of Commerce, urging a sh...

A Rock and a Hard Place

October 8, 2012 - Such a pickle: we have the coal, but no longer want to burn it.  China wants the coal, but shouldn't burn it because of the resulting air pollution.  Coal mining companies in the U.S. are ready and waiting to ship their coal to China.  Citizens of the U.S. living on its west coast are adamant they want nothing to do with exporting coal.  That includes Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber.  Kitzhaber's April 25 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expresses his profound skepticism about shipping coal by way of Oregon's ports.  He has requested that a programatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) first be conducted for all five of the export projects currently being considered, as well as a comprehensive policy review.  Here is part of a press release announcing his letter: "I have concerns about proceeding in this direction [exporting coal to China via Oregon ports] in the absence of a full national discussion about the ramif...