#OpMurderForHire – expert group had found “strong evidence” that glyphosate found in bread and other foods is ‘genotoxic’, meaning it damages DNA, a precursor of cancer

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Glyphosate: Scientists urge caution over experts’ claims pesticide is ‘probably’ carcinogenic

Small traces of the chemical have been found in bread and other foods

It is described as the world’s safest pesticide, used so pervasively that it shows up in human breast milk and urine. For years, regulators believed glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and other weed killers, poses little or no risk to human health despite small traces being found in bread and other foods.

However, after world-leading experts at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded that it is “probably” carcinogenic, an almighty row has erupted involving multinational corporations, scientists, bakers, brewers and farmers – leaving consumers struggling to work out if they are in danger.

Countries including Sri Lanka, El Salvador and Colombia have either banned or restricted the use of glyphosate. This week, the UK Soil Association – champions of organic agriculture – called for its use on wheat just before harvesting to be outlawed in accordance with the “precautionary principle” – better safe than sorry. However, few of the experts contacted by The Independent said they were planning to give up their daily bread for fear they might get cancer and European regulators have reacted with scepticism to  the IARC’s findings.
A combine harvester gathers wheat in fields at the start of harvesting on August 9, 2010 in Chebsey near Stafford A combine harvester gathers wheat in fields at the start of harvesting

The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, which leads on the chemical within the EU, said an over 30 studies had concluded there was “no validated or significant relationship” between glyphosate and cancer among humans.

But Dr Kurt Straif, head of the IARC’s monographs section stressed the expert group had found “strong evidence” that glyphosate is ‘genotoxic’, meaning it damages DNA, a precursor of cancer. “In terms of hazard identification, this is a concern if there is widespread exposure and particularly widespread exposure through our daily food,” he said.

“I think with the genotoxicity, it is probably not a good idea… to have glyphosate residues in food or using glyphosate for food production, but this is my personal opinion, nothing that is a conclusion of the [IARC] monograph.”

Read more: Bread ‘may contain carcinogenic weed killer’
Use of carcinogen puts funeral directors at risk of MND
‘Dangerously high’ levels of carcinogens found at fracking sites

He said he expected European and US regulators to take action as a result of their findings, noting it was “kind of unusual to see such quick and widespread action” by the countries that have already restricted glyphosate use.

However Dr Straif added that the IARC working group could not “clearly say that it [glyphosate] is causing cancer in humans”. While a summary of IARC’s findings was published in Lancet Oncology in March, it will only reveal its full reasoning in a major report this month.
Brown bread Brown bread

Perhaps predictably, an “outraged” Monsanto, the company that makes Roundup, has accused IARC of “agenda-driven bias” and “cherry-picking” data. “We disagree with their conclusions certainly. Our position is glyphosate is not a carcinogen,” insisted a Monsanto spokesman, although he added it had set up an “independent” body of scientists to examine IARC’s findings.

Peter Melchett, the Soil Association’s policy director, said there had been a surge in the use of Roundup to make harvesting cereal crops easier in the last 10 to 15 years.

By spraying crops late in order to stop them growing, there was more chance that pesticide residues would show up in food, he said, particularly bread as the wheat is simply ground and then baked, whereas beer, for example, goes through several processes.

While he admitted the science couldn’t give “an absolute answer” to whether glyphosate was carcinogenic, Mr Melchett added: “If you want to avoid any risk of eating products with glyphosate, then you should buy organic bread.”

David Coggon, a professor of occupational and environmental medicine at Southampton University, said the opinions of Monsanto and the Soil Association should be treated with “a pinch of salt” because of their respective interests.

Other ‘carcinogens’

Toast: contains acrylamide, a genotoxic carcinogen produced as a result of cooking starch-rich food at high temperatures.

Coffee: a byproduct of roasting coffee beans is acrylamide. There have been attempts to force coffee companies in California to add a label warning of cancer.

PVC plastic: emits a carcinogenic gas called vinyl chloride, better known as that not so lovely ‘new-car smell’.

Broccoli, onions and strawberries: natural foods containing acetaldehyde, a carcinogen.

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/glyphosate-scientists-urge-caution-over-experts-claims-pesticide-is-probably-carcinogenic-10397787.html

——————————————————————————————————————————–

The Nuremberg Code

1) The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2) The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3) The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4) The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5) No experiment should be conducted, where there is an apriori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6) The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7) Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

8) The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9) During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible.

10) During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

“Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10″, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.]

Source: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Learn more about the British police https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/01/21/how-much-do-you-think-you-can-trust-the-british-police/

Learn more about people trying to murder you and your family https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/proof-someone-is-trying-to-damage-the-human-body-brain-and-cause-cancer-to-kill-people-slowly/

Learn more about Freemason paedophile rings https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/international-freemason-paedophile-rings-america-britain-france-holland-jersey/

Learn more about the paedophile ring thats been operating inside the British and American intelligence agencies https://jewishpaedophilia.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/opilluminatuspiedpiper-northamptonshire-police-helping-cover-up-unitarian-paedosadist-with-satanic-royal-connections-mp-cyril-smith-scandal-because-of-his-royal-connections-force-said-secur/

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s