MEC&F Expert Engineers : 03/20/15

Friday, March 20, 2015

GLYPHOSATE WEED KILLER DEEMED "PROBABLE CARCINOGEN" BY THE INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER. ROUNDUP WEED KILLER CONTAINS 41% GLYPHOSATE.




MARCH 20, 2015

LONDON, UK (AP)

Roundup (containing about 41% glyphosate), one of the world's most popular weed-killers — and the most widely used kind in the U.S. — has been labeled a probable carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

The decision was made by IARC, the France-based cancer research arm of the World Health Organization, which considered the status of five insect and weed killers including glyphosate, which is used globally in industrial farming.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which makes its own determinations, said it would consider the French agency's evaluation.

The French agency has four levels of risks for possible cancer-causing agents:

 known carcinogens, probable or possible carcinogens, not classifiable and probably not carcinogenic. Glyphosate now falls in the second level of concern.
The new classification is aimed mainly at industrial use of glyphosate. Its use by home gardeners is not considered a risk.  Glyphosate is in the same category of risk as things like anabolic steroids and shift work. The decision was published online Thursday in the journal, Lancet Oncology.

According to the French agency, glyphosate is used in more than 750 different herbicide products and its use has been detected in the air during spraying, in water and in food. Experts said there was "limited evidence" in humans that the herbicide can cause non-Hodgkins lymphoma and there is convincing evidence that glyphosate can also cause other forms of cancer in rats and mice. IARC's panel said glyphosate has been found in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, showing the chemical has been absorbed by the body.

Monsanto, which produces the glyphosate-containing herbicide, Roundup, strongly disagreed with the decision. "All labeled uses of glyphosate are safe for human health," said Phil Miller, a Monsanto spokesman, in a statement.

The EPA's 2012 assessment of glyphosate concluded that it met the statutory safety standards and that the chemical could "continue to be used without unreasonable risks to people or the environment."

The French agency's experts said the cancer risks of the weed killer were mostly from occupational exposure, i.e., the workers that use these chemicals are the ones who get the higher dose into their bodies and the most likely to get sick.

"I don't think home use is the issue," said Kate Guyton of IARC. "It's agricultural use that will have the biggest impact. For the moment, it's just something for people to be conscious of."

The determination is sure to alarm the agro-chemical industry and particularly Monsanto, the agribusiness giant that is the leading producer of glyphosate. 
Worldwide annual sales of the chemical are estimated at $6 billion annually. The company put out its own statement Friday: "All labeled uses of glyphosate are safe for human health," said Monsanto's Phil Miller, global head of regulatory and government affairs. 

“We don’t know how IARC could reach a conclusion that is such a dramatic departure from the conclusion reached by all regulatory agencies around the globe,” said Miller. Monsanto requested an urgent meeting with the World Health Organization to clarify the scientific basis of the ruling. 
A summary of the agency's findings were published in the British journal Lancet Oncology on Friday. 

Basically, whatever chemical humans have produced or any naturally-occurring compound that has been concentrated by humans could be dangerous to your health.  The key to remember is the dose of a certain chemical is what makes it benign or dangerous:  low dose most likely has no adverse effect; higher dose may have adverse effects.  As was indicated above, the workers who use the chemicals on a regular basis are the ones who receive the higher dosage and, therefore, are the ones who have a higher probability of getting sick.

//------------------------------------------------------//

Roundup and Glyphosate Toxicity Have Been Grossly Underestimated 

July 30, 2013

By Dr. Mercola

The true toxicity of glyphosate—the active ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup—is becoming increasingly clear as study after study is published demonstrating its devastating effects. In June, groundbreaking research was published detailing a newfound mechanism of harm for Roundup. 

This was immediately followed by tests showing that people in 18 countries across Europe have glyphosate in their bodies,1 while yet another study revealed that the chemical has estrogenic properties and drives breast cancer proliferation in the parts-per-trillion range.2

This finding might help explain why rats fed Monsanto’s maize developed massive breast tumors in the first-ever lifetime feeding study published last year. Other recently published studies demonstrate glyphosate’s toxicity to cell lines, aquatic life, food animals, and humans.

Glyphosate Toxicity Underestimated, Study Concludes

One such study, published in the journal Ecotoxicology,3 found that glyphosate is toxic to water fleas (Daphnia magna) at minuscule levels that are well within the levels expected to be found in the environment. 

According to regulators, glyphosate is thought to be practically nontoxic to aquatic invertebrates. The water flea is a widely accepted model for environmental toxicity, so this study throws serious doubt on glyphosate’s classification as environmentally safe. According to the study:

“To test the acute effects of both glyphosate and a commercial formulation of Roundup (hereafter Roundup), we conducted a series of exposure experiments with different clones and age-classes of D. magna.... Roundup showed slightly lower acute toxicity than glyphosate IPA alone... However, in chronic toxicity tests spanning the whole life-cycle, Roundup was more toxic. 

...Significant reduction of juvenile size was observed even in the lowest test concentrations of 0.05 mg a.i./l, for both glyphosate and Roundup. At 0.45 mg a.i./l, growth, fecundity and abortion rate was affected, but only in animals exposed to Roundup. 

At 1.35 and 4.05 mg a.i./l of both glyphosate and Roundup, significant negative effects were seen on most tested parameters, including mortality. D. magna was adversely affected by a near 100% abortion rate of eggs and embryonic stages at 1.35 mg a.i./l of Roundup. 

The results indicate that aquatic invertebrate ecology can be adversely affected by relevant ambient concentrations of this major herbicide. We conclude that glyphosate and Roundup toxicity to aquatic invertebrates have been underestimated and that current European Commission and US EPA toxicity classification of these chemicals need to be revised.”

Herbicide Formulations Far More Toxic Than Glyphosate Alone
An article published on Greenmedinfo.com4 last year reviewed several interesting studies relating to the profound toxicity of Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup: 

“Back in Feb. of 2012, the journal Archives of Toxicology5 published a shocking study showing that Roundup is toxic to human DNA even when diluted to concentrations 450-fold lower than used in agricultural applications.
This effect could not have been anticipated from the known toxicological effects of glyphosate alone. The likely explanation is that the surfactant polyoxyethyleneamine within Roundup dramatically enhances the absorption of glyphosate into exposed human cells and tissue,” Sayer Ji writes.
“If this is true, it speaks to a fundamental problem associated with toxicological risk assessments of agrichemicals (and novel manmade chemicals in general), namely, these assessments do not take into account the reality of synergistic toxicologies, i.e. the amplification of harm associated with multiple chemical exposures occurring simultaneously.”

'Inert' Ingredients Does NOT Mean They Are Inactive...
Similarly, another study published that year in the journal Toxicology6, 7 revealed that inert ingredients such as solvents, preservatives, surfactants and other added substances are anything but “inactive.” They in fact contribute to toxicity in a synergistic manner, and ethoxylated adjuvants in glyphosate-based herbicides were found to be "active principles of human cell toxicity." 

(On a side note, an “ethoxylated” compound is a chemical that has been produced using the carcinogen ethylene oxide.8 The ethoxylation process also produces the carcinogenic byproduct 1,4-dioxane. It’s also worth noting here that the term “inert ingredient” does NOT actually mean that it is biologically or toxicologically harmless! When you see “inert” or “inactive ingredients” listed on the label of a pesticide or herbicide, it only means that those ingredients will not harm pests or weeds. This is how federal law classifies “inert” pesticide ingredients.)9

The study found that liver, embryonic and placental cell lines exposed to various herbicide formulations for 24 hours at doses as low as 1 part per million (ppm), had adverse effects.10 According to the authors:11

“Here we demonstrate that all formulations are more toxic than glyphosate, and we separated experimentally three groups of formulations differentially toxic according to their concentrations in ethoxylated adjuvants. Among them, POE-15 clearly appears to be the most toxic principle against human cells, even if others are not excluded. It begins to be active with negative dose-dependent effects on cellular respiration and membrane integrity between 1 and 3ppm, at environmental/occupational doses. We demonstrate in addition that POE-15 induces necrosis when its first micellization process occurs, by contrast to glyphosate which is known to promote endocrine disrupting effects after entering cells.

Altogether, these results challenge the establishment of guidance values such as the acceptable daily intake of glyphosate, when these are mostly based on a long term in vivo test of glyphosate alone. Since pesticides are always used with adjuvants that could change their toxicity, the necessity to assess their whole formulations as mixtures becomes obvious. This challenges the concept of active principle of pesticides for non-target species.” [Emphasis mine] 

Perhaps most disturbing of all, the researchers claim that cell damage and even cell death can occur at the residual levels found on Roundup-treated crops, as well as lawns and gardens where Roundup is applied for weed control. They also suspect that:12

“Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.”
Birth Malformation Skyrocketing in Agricultural Centers of Argentina
Indeed, miscarriages, fertility problems and abnormal fetal development are all problems that are skyrocketing in Argentina, where many are exposed to massive spraying of herbicides. More than 18 million hectares in Argentina are covered by genetically engineered soy, on which more than 300 million liters of pesticides are sprayed. In the village of Malvinas Argentinas, which is surrounded by soy plantations, the rate of miscarriage is 100 times the national average, courtesy of glyphosate. 

According to Dr. Medardo Vasquez, a neonatal specialist at the Children’s Hospital in Cordoba, featured in the documentary film People and Power — Argentina: The Bad Seeds:

“I see new-born infants, many of whom are malformed. I have to tell parents that their children are dying because of these agricultural methods. In some areas in Argentina the primary cause of death for children less than one year old is malformations.”

But even if you don’t live in an agricultural area where you might be exposed to Roundup directly, you’re still getting it through your diet if you’re eating non-organic foods. A report given to MomsAcrossAmerica13 by an employee of De Dell Seed Company (Canada's only non-GM corn seed company) shows that GM corn contains as much as 13 ppm of glyphosate, compared to zero in non-GM corn. 

The EPA standard for glyphosate in American water supplies is 0.7 ppm. In Europe, the maximum allowable level in water is 0.2 ppm. Organ damage in animals has occurred at levels as low as 0.1 ppm, and in the study on cell lines discussed above, liver, embryonic and placental cell lines were adversely affected at doses as low as 1 ppm. The fact that genetically modified corn can contain as much as 13 ppm of glyphosate has staggering implications for Americans who eat an average of 193 pounds of genetically engineered foods each year!14
 
Glyphosate Predisposes Cattle to Botulism

A German study15 published earlier this year looked at glyphosate’s role in the rise of toxic botulism in cattle. This used to be extremely rare, but the incidence has become increasingly common over the past 10-15 years. Normal intestinal microflora is essential for keeping Clostridium botulinum and other pathogens in check, and researchers are now finding that the beneficial gut bacteria in both animals and humans is very sensitive to residual glyphosate levels. This has been discussed previously by both Dr. Don Huber and Dr. Stephanie Seneff.
In this study, the researchers explain that certain intestinal bacteria produce bacteriocines that are specifically directed against C. botulinum, as well as other dangerous pathogens. According to the authors, lactic acid producing bacteria that help defend against Clostridium pathogens are destroyed by glyphosate, suggesting that the rise in C. botulinum associated diseases may be due to glyphosate-tainted animal feed. 

The Overlooked Component of Toxicity in Humans

As for its effects on humans, the Samsel - Seneff study published in June suggests that glyphosate may actually be the most important factor in the development of a wide variety of chronic diseases, specifically because your gut bacteria are a key component of glyphosate’s mechanism of harm. Monsanto has steadfastly claimed that Roundup is harmless to animals and humans because the mechanism of action it uses (which allows it to kill weeds), called the shikimate pathway, is absent in all animals. However, the shikimate pathway IS present in bacteria, and that’s the key to understanding how it causes such widespread systemic harm in both humans and animals. 

The bacteria in your body outnumber your cells by 10 to 1. For every cell in your body, you have 10 microbes of various kinds, and all of them have the shikimate pathway, so they will all respond to the presence of glyphosate!
Glyphosate causes extreme disruption of the microbe’s function and lifecycle. What’s worse, glyphosate preferentially affects beneficial bacteria, allowing pathogens to overgrow and take over. At that point, your body also has to contend with the toxins produced by the pathogens. Once the chronic inflammation sets in, you’re well on your way toward chronic and potentially debilitating disease... 

The answer, of course, is to avoid processed foods of all kinds, as they’re virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, and center your diet around whole, organic foods as toxic pesticides are not permitted in organic farming. Supporting GMO labeling is also important if you value your health, and that of your family and friends, in order to be able to make informed shopping decisions.

Help Support GMO Labeling 

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)—Monsanto’s Evil Twin—is pulling out all the stops to keep you in the dark about what’s in your food. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture. 

Finally public opinion around the biotech industry's contamination of our food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We're fighting back. 

The insanity has gone far enough, which is why I encourage you to boycott every single product owned by members of the GMA, including natural and organic brands. More than 80 percent of our support comes from individual consumers like you, who understand that real change comes from the grassroots. 

Thankfully, we have organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) to fight back against these corporate giants. So please, fight for your right to know what’s in your food and help support the GMO labeling movement by making a donation today.

Together, Let's Help OCA Get The Funding They Deserve

Let’s Help OCA get the funding it deserves. I have found very few organizations who are as effective and efficient as OCA. It’s a public interest organization dedicated to promoting health justice and sustainability. A central focus of the OCA is building a healthy, equitable, and sustainable system of food production and consumption.
Please make a donation to help OCA fight for GMO labeling.

THE TRUCK FUEL TANKS ARE SO EASY TO PUNCTURE AND SPILL FUEL IN THE ENVIRONMENT: DEBRIS PUNCTURES TRUCK'S FUEL TANK, PROMPTS HAZMAT RESPONSE




MARCH 20, 2015

CHARLOTTE, N.C.

Debris in the roadway led to a fuel spill and HazMat situation on a Charlotte highway Friday morning.

First responders were called to I-85 Northbound near US Highway 29, Exit 42, in the 8 o'clock hour Friday morning on reports of a HazMat situation.

NBC Charlotte's crew on the scene says a tractor trailer ran over something in the roadway that punctured a tire and the truck's fuel tank. Authorities say fuel spilled out of the tractor trailer and onto the roadway, and eventually made its way into a drain.

Crews are now working to pump out some 60 gallons of fuel.

The right lane of I-85N was closed while the cleanup was underway.

Truck Fuel Tank Design a Safety Concern

Trucking accident cases often focus on vehicle maintenance, the driver’s hours of service and crash reconstruction.  However, there are occasions where a product design defect is a key cause or contributing factor to the cause of a trucking crash injury or death.  Truck fuel tank design presents such safety concerns given that the current design standard is inherently susceptible to puncture that can lead to a leak and/or explosion.

We have all seen the gleaming aluminum tanks mounted along each side of the semi-truck, out where they dress up the truck.  They might look nice, but such an exposed position is not where 100-200 gallons of diesel fuel should be stored.  In any truck accident, this open location risks exposing the truck fuel tanks to high-density explosions and make it susceptible to punctures, just like the case described above.  At other occasions, we have seen trucks hitting fire hydrants and rupture their fuel tanks.




Truck Fuel Tanks puncture and/or Explode

In the United States, there are 80 to 100 burn deaths every year for occupants of heavy trucks or other vehicles involved in crashes with semi tractor trailers. Most of these deaths are caused by a truck’s fuel tank either exploding on impact or leaking fuel. In both situations, the result is an intense explosion of heat and flame.

Important Truck Fuel Tank Study

In 1989, the United States Department of Transportation published a Heavy Truck Fuel System Safety Study. That study published detailed recommendations along with a Failure Modes Effect Analysis (FEMA) and a fault tree analysis that is suitable as a basis for any manufacturer to design a safer product.

Some of the recommendations from that study include the following:

Reducing the susceptibility of tank mounts to failure by impact from highway structures or other vehicles

Increasing the distance to be traverses by displaced components before they reach fuel tanks, providing protective barriers between fuel trans and nearby components, to increase the puncture resistance of the fuel tank.

Of particular note, the Department of Transportation study also maintained that the objective of fuel tank design and fuel tank systems should be to reduce the likelihood of impact or puncture under typical crash conditions.




We believe we can improve safety and avoid environmental damage by relocating the fuel tanks inboard so that they are less exposed, and are shielded from potential damage due to collision or ground contact. This allows adequate space for all accessories and systems as well as provisions for energy absorbing materials surrounding the fuel tanks to further reduce intrusion and prevent fuel tank rupture.

By demanding that truck manufacturers work harder to improve safety, perhaps we can make a change in an industry that has always done it that way.  If we’re successful there, we’ll be successful in making our roads that much safer too.

WAVERLY, TN WOMAN KILLED IN TRAIN COLLISION WHEN SHE TRIED TO DRIVE ACROSS THE TRACKS IN HUMPHREYS COUNTY





MARCH 20, 2015 EST 


UPDATE
FORMER MRS. AMERICA KILLED AFTER HER SUV IS STRUCK BY CSX TRAIN IN TENNESSEE

WAVERLY, TENNESSEE

A former Mrs. America was killed after her SUV was struck by a train while trying to cross the tracks in Humphreys County.

The crash involved a CSX train and Ford Explorer around 12:45 p.m. Friday at the Consoler Road crossing in Waverly.

Officials said Susan Goodman, winner of Mrs. America in 1983, was killed. She was the Executive Director of the United Way in Humphreys and Benton counties.

Officials with the Waverly Police Department said she was trying to cross the tracks when it was struck by the train. Goodman was ejected from the vehicle and died at the scene.

Sheriff Chris Davis knew Goodman for many years and said she was a good friend. Davis said her death is a great loss to the county. 

CSX spokesperson Kristin Seay said the train was made up of 2 locomotives and 31 rail cars. It was headed to Savannah, Georgia from Memphis. 
 
//-----------------------------------//

WAVERLY, TN (WSMV)


Family and friends are mourning a woman who was killed when her car collided with a train in Humphreys County on Friday.


Authorities are trying to figure out why the woman, who was well known in the community, was trying to cross the tracks.


Susan King Goodman, executive director of United Way of Humphreys and Benton counties, was killed in the collision.


Police said the train hit Goodman's vehicle and spun it around into a ditch. Goodman was ejected and died at the scene.


Investigators said it is unclear why Goodman was trying to cross the tracks in the rural area of Humphreys County.


Source: www.wsmv.com