When an article says "Don't let this go unshared," over and over again (five times - if we're counting,) I automatically have questions. When the main message of the article scares people with misinformation and flawed science, then I have an article for Monday morning.
The 'Food Babe' has a new article out on glyphosate that fits both of the descriptions above. She claims that there are new data to show that glyphosate used when crops are grown is making it into many of the foods that are in our cupboards.
She states that a "FDA-registered food safety laboratory tested iconic American food for residues of the weed killer glyphosate (aka Monsanto’s Roundup) and found ALARMING amounts." She then goes on to say that "independent research shows that probable harm to human health begins at really low levels of exposure – at only 0.1 ppb of glyphosate."
But - both of these pieces of information originate in the same place - Food Democracy Now! and The Detox Project - two groups have the same anti-GMO message as the Food Babe.
When anti-GMO data are produced and publicized by an anti-GMO organization, it is safe to say that that is not science. The work was done in the labs of Anresco Laboratories, which hardly seems like an unbiased place to do the testing. From an article this month in sustainablepulse.com,
- "Anresco Laboratories, working in coordination with The Detox Project, has started a new era of transparent, accurate and affordable glyphosate testing, which enables consumers to find out the truth about the levels of glyphosate in their food."
The Detox project focuses on how many chemicals are in our bodies with a focus on glyphosate. You would think that if they were interested on the impact of chemicals on people's health, the Lead crisis in Michigan would be all over their website. I'm guessing that they have figured out that there is a lot more money in anti-GMO propaganda than actually talking about people's health.
On top of the fact that it was funded by a group with an agenda, the data are 1) not peer reviewed and 2) terrible. When you look at the raw data or even the chart that was published on the Food Babe's website, and you have to look closely, there is a line at the bottom that reads...
Below the chart, at the asterisk, appear the words, "These samples exhibit very low recovery and/or response. The above amounts found are rough estimates at best and may not represent an accurate representation of the sample." In addition, these words appear many times on the original test reports.
Weak data notwithstanding, the lab is biased because they are testing for glyphosate in the first place. Because, whether they found 0.1ppb or 100,000 ppb, glyphosate has been classified as non-carcinogenic. We do not need 1) care or 2) find out about the levels of glyphosate in our food because glyphosate is not harmful.
Although there is a long history of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) flip flopping on the potential of glyphosate to cause cancer, it has recently stated, after extensive research, that it does not. Interestingly, on the 'glyphosate portal' of the detox project's website, they have posted the older IARC studies that were less decisive about the ruling on glyphosate, but, not the newer ones that clearly state that it is not a cancer causing agent.
If there is a hell for scientists - this is it. Biased groups producing data that are a 'rough estimate at best', about a chemical that IARC has ruled as non carcinogenic.
Oh - and please - don't let this go unshared.