Subject: Re: Round Up, Hurting Soil?

From: [email-masked] (Ken Toews)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 20:47:08 GMT

In a previous posting, Thomas Mulally ([email-masked]) writes:
> I want to get rid of Bermuda grass that has taken over parts of my 
> vegetable gardem.  People have suggested Round Up.  My concern is that 
> this chemical will also kill the micro-organisms in my soil.  I have 
> spent alot of time with the composting threads and do not want to 
> destroy the work I have done.  Will Round Up kill the soil?
> 
> 
> Thanks  Tom M.

The following is from a Monsanto flyer
-Microbes break down the active ingredient of roundup in the soil.
>>>>>>>>>>>>note: active ingredient<<<<<<<<
-Roundup wont leach into the soil.....because it binds tightly to
soil particles
-Roundup does not give off fumes or odours.
-Roundup works by stopping the formulation of certain amino acids
(protein building blocks) found only in plants.
>>>>>>>>>>>Roundup is still readily absorbed thru the skin, and
excreted thru the urine. If you like roundup you will say it causes
no problems on the way, if you dont like roundup this will concern
you<<<<<<<<<
-Roundup is safe to humans, pets and wildlife when used as
directed.

The following problems warrant concern when Roundup is considered
for use: 
 
 1. PERSISTENCE.  Although the claim is often made that Roundup is
inactivated rapidly in soil, it is more accurate to say that it is
usually absorbed to soil components.  A sandy loam treated with
glyphosate at recommended application rates (e.g., 2, 5, and 10
ug/g soil) was found to drastically reduce nitrogen fixation,
growth, and nodulation of subterranean clover/Rhizobium trifolium/
planted 120 days after glyphosate treatment. 
Glyphosate clearly remains active in soils that do not adsorb it
readily. 
 
Damage to vine maple and bigleaf maple was found to increase during
the second year following treatment with glyphosate, indicating
that glyphosate persists for extended periods in plants. 
 
2. PHYTOTOXICITY.  Because glyphosate is a nonselective herbicide,
any desired vegetation must be completely protected from glyphosate
drive, mist, or drip.  As Monsanto notes in its Rounup label guide,
"...minute quantities of this herbicide can cause severe damage or
destruction to the crop, plants, 
or other areas on which treatment was not intended." 
 
3. TOXICITY OF 'INERT' INGREDIENTS. 

There is no way of knowing what you are applying when you use
roundup. According to the 1994 Solaris Product Label guide
published
by Monsanto available at 1-800-225-2883, its free, page 150
Round up weed and grass killer is 99.04% Inert ingredients.

For a complete rundown on what that 99.04% of the product could be
get: The Secret Hazards of Pesticides: Inert Ingredients. It is
available for free from the New York State Department of Law.
1-518-474-5481

4. TESTING. [The article explains that testing on glyphosate by
itself is inadequate since the inert ingredients are very important
to making Roundup work.  Most test results are "unpublished and
developed by Monsanto or laboratories hired by Monsanto."  
Other points are made about lack of cancer testing and links to
"human damage" including "conjunctivitis (inflammation oft he
eyelid and eyeball mucous membrane), dermatitis (inflammation of
the skin), and severe flu-like symptoms following exposure to
glyphosate.  Of 143 pesticides reported for causing human illness
in California in 1986, glyphosate was fourth in the number of
incidents reported."  No further details on this statistic are 
given.  

A "Roundup Information Packet" containing a series of articles on
Roundup is available for $10.50 postpaid from NCAP; P.O. Box 1393;
Eugene OR 97440.  A file of these and additional glyphsate/Roundup
articles is maintained at NCAP; these can be copied at 10
cents/page. 
 
>From  "Roundup, Vision, POEA, and 1,4-Dioxane: Why Full Formulations
Are the Problem." Written by Mary O'Brien--a staff scientist for
NCAP.  Vol. 9, No. 4 of the Journal of Pesticide Reform. 
 
When a letter by four Japanese emergency medicine professionals
appeared in the February 6, 1988 issue of the American medical
journal, The Lancet, a Washington toxicology consultant, David
Monroe, took note.  The Japanese authors were noting that an "inert
ingredient" in the herbicide Roundup (rather than the identified
"active" ingredient, glyphosate) accounts for the 
acute toxicity they had found in patients poisoned (some fatally)
by Roundup 

(JPR 8(1):30).  Symptoms included gastrointestinal ("GI" -ed) pain
and vomiting, swelling of the lungs and pneumonia, reduction of
blood pressure, clouding of consciousness, and red blood cell
destruction. 
 
The so-called "inert ingredient," polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA),
actually refers to a family of chemicals.  It is added to Roundup
and Vision herbicide formulations  as a surfactant, an ingredient
that will help evenly spread the active ingredient, glyphosate, on
target plants. 
 
The Japanese researchers noted that the acute lethal dose of POEA
is less than one-third (i.e., POEA is three times as toxic) that of
Roundup, and that POEA belongs to a class of surfactants that have
been reported to cause adverse GI and central nervous system
effects and damage to red blood cells. 
 
As POEA does not appear on the Roundup label (supposedly protected,
as an inert, from public disclosure under the U.S. pesticide
law...), Monroe first learned of its presence in Roundup through
the Lancet letter.  
 
Monroe recalled a U.S. EPA memorandum that discussed the presence
of 1,4-dioxane in two polyalkoxylated polyamine products ...
manufactured by the Henkel Corporation.  Knowing that POEA is a
polyalkoxylated amine, Monroe suspected that 1,4-dioxane might be
present as a contaminant of POEA.  
[ the article now describes the side effects of 1,4-dioxane, which
include liver and kidney damage, and cancer in laboratory animals. 
"The liver and kidney damage can occur regardless of the route of
1,4-dioxane exposure 
  (inhalation, oral ingestion, and/or skin application)."   This
section  concludes with this statement: 'The International Agency
for Research on   Cancer indicates that evidence is "sufficient" to
know that 1,4-dioxane  causes cancer in animals and the U.S EPA
regards 1,4-dioxane as a probable human carcinogen.'  
 
  Researchers in British Columbia went on to test Vision (Canada's
version of Roundup) checking for 1,4-dioxane contamination.  From
a 250ml sample, the  CANTEST lab detected 350 parts per million
1,4-dioxane using a purge and trap method.  That level is
equivalent to .35 percent.   now quoting again from the article: ] 
 
A 1982 EPA memo ... also discussed 1,4-dioxane as being present in
dichloroethyl ether.  The 1982 EPA memo ... had been prompted by
concern that 1,4-dioxane had been found in dichloroethyl ether at
0.42 percent and 0.55 percent.  Under "comments/recommendations" in
the memo, the EPA noted that 
the manufacturer of the contaminated dichloroethyl ether "reported
that its employees and customers were being notified of the
presence of 1,4-dioxane in dichloroethyl ether.  In addition, the
company reported that its current safety precautions include
'body-protective clothing and boots, eye protection, and monitoring
of air levels of dichloroethyl ether.'" 
 
Users of Roundup and Vision are not informed that the formulation
contains either POEA or 1,4-dioxane.  Roundup is widely used by
home owners wearing no particular protective clothing, and the
label merely states, "Avoid contact with eyes, skin, and clothing
because of possible (eye and skin) irritation." 
 
The presence of 1,4-dioxane in Vision (and presumably in Roundup)
is a classic example of the following: 
 
 1. Full formulations, "inert" ingredients, and contaminants, not
merely the so-called "active" ingredient, can cause cancer and
other adverse chronic effects; their exemption from testing for
chronic toxicity is indefensible.  
 2. The current classification by the EPA of POEA as a "List 3"
inert ingredient  ("inert of unknown toxicity"), subject neither to
listing on the label nor toxicological testing requirements, is
indefensible. 
  3. Estimating the toxicity of glyphosate alone is meaningless
when a full formulation (e.g., Roundup, Vision) containing POEA,
1,4-dioxane, and other unlisted ingredients and contaminants is the
mixture to which people and the environment will be exposed. 
 
What you don't know can hurt you. 
--
@-->----

---

From: [email-masked] (Ken Toews)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 20:47:08 GMT

---

From: [email-masked] (Ken Toews)
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 1994 19:34:04 GMT

In a previous posting, January ([email-masked]) writes:
>>...destroy the work I have done.  Will Round Up kill the soil?
>>
>>Thanks  Tom M.
> 
> As before mentioned, Roundup does consists of glycosate that rapidly
> breakup down.  It inhibits EPSP enzyme in the plant preventing it from
> making tryptophan and any phenolic.  The EPSP enzyme is non-existant
> in animals.  I hope this helps.
> 
> 	Jan

Very True Jan but bordering on irrelevant. What is significant
with the application of roundup and all pesticides is the
nature of not only the active ingredient but the Inert ingredient.

I would suggest that anyone who uses pesticides read
beyond the product monogram and start
with something like 

"The Secret Hazards of Pesticides: Inert Ingredients" it
is published by the New York State Department of Law.

Quite an interesting read, its free and available
from

Office of the Attorney General
The Capitol
Albany New York
12224

Phone 1-518-474-5481

--
@-->----

---

From: [email-masked] (Ken Toews)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 16:22:50 GMT

In a previous posting, L. R. Fortney ([email-masked]) writes:
>    Round-up comes in several concentrations.  The inert ingredient in the
> weaker ones is water.  I think the key word is "inert"...although come to
> think of it I guess there is plenty of documented proof on the hazards
> associated with too much water.
> 
> -- 
> Lloyd Fortney ---Opinions, just opinions---

Sorry but this is simply not true, now for the facts, just the facts.

Please take the time to reread my origional post

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
What you don't know can hurt you. 
--
Wisdom                                  *  
Knowledge<------offline                 *  Ken Toews
Information<----available online        *  Nepean Ontario Canada
Data<-----------commonly found online   *

---

From: Bob Klebba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 16:19:36 GMT

I don't like to flame, but Ken Toews' diatribe on Roundup
raised my dander:

>  1. PERSISTENCE.  Although the claim is often made that
Roundup is
. . . .
> Glyphosate clearly remains active in soils that do not
adsorb it

This is good information for those gardeners who have very
little clay in their soil.
  
> that glyphosate persists for extended periods in plants. 

So what?  Roundup is supposed to kill plants, isn't it?
  
> or other areas on which treatment was not intended." 

So what?  Roundup is supposed to kill plants, isn't it?
 
> roundup. According to the 1994 Solaris Product Label
guide

This is true, but a water-soluble pesticide should have
much safer inert ingredients than any organic non-polar
chemical.  The whole issue of not identifying inert
ingredients is a bit of a scam, but most consumers are
unwilling to pay more for their chemicals.

> 4. TESTING. [The article explains that testing on
glyphosate by
. . . . 
> in California in 1986, glyphosate was fourth in the
number of

Roundup should be respected as a toxic chemical.  Any
exposure a home gardener has is his or her own fault and
is also a violation of federal (US) law (read the label!).
 Put into perspective, the possible toxicity of suspected
inert ingredients in Roundup does not compare with that of
fungicides, fumigants and insecticides used in home
gardening and commercial agriculture.

> that will help evenly spread the active ingredient,
glyphosate, on

I believe POEA stands for polyoxyethylene alcohol, which
is a large family of nonionic surfactants with a large
commerical use.  Some POEAs are also US FDA-approved
cosmetic and pharmaceutic additives.

> present as a contaminant of POEA.  

Dioxane is indeed evil.  But is it in Roundup?

> equivalent to .35 percent.   now quoting again from the
article: ] 

350 ppm = 0.035%, which is still a high concentration.

> What you don't know can hurt you. 

Disinformation and hyperbole only distract.  Let's keep in
mind what our daily hazardous chemical exposure is. 
Anyone near an automobile (operating or not!) is breathing
highly poisonous and carcinogenic chemicals in the 1 to
10000 ppm range.   And what about the propellants in a
spray can of shoe dye?  The label on the can of dye I
bought last week didn't list anything in particular, but
it sure did reek of aromatic solvents.  Granted,
agricultural workers have more to worry about from
pesticide exposure than those of us who read Usenet (I am
assuming we don't pay enough for our food for farm workers
to afford access to the Internet).  But I think of all the
risks we take in our modern lives, using Roundup is pretty
low on the list.

Robert Klebba  USDA zone 4
Nicolet Instruments Corp.
Madison, WI  53744-4451 USA

telephone: +1-608-276-6374
fax: +1-608-273-5046
Inet: [email-masked]

---

From: Bob Klebba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 16:19:36 GMT

. . . .

  

. . . .