How to pronounce“glyphosate”in English

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup, is also an antibiotic, but it's an antibiotic of the worst kind because it

Glyphosate, which is a carcinogen-- why would you want to eat carcinogens?

Glyphosate and the other obsolete chemicals are the perfumes we keep spraying.

But glyphosate was different, if you were to modify the molecule in any way, its herbicidal properties were completely gone, so Monsanto could rest easy knowing that until the year 2000,

So glyphosate essentially selects for the species you don't want.

The glyphosates?

so that glyphosate couldn't bind to it and block the Shikimate pathway.

IARC's classification of glyphosate as a probable carcinogen.

both claimed that glyphosate posed no carcinogenic risk to humans and animals.

higher doses of glyphosate were developing rare kidney tumors.

They tried to change glyphosate cancer classifications at different agencies.

Just that overall glyphosate is a probable carcinogen.

And Bayer actually removed glyphosate from commercial products.

We overused glyphosate. See, since the 1970s, more than 60 species of weed have become resistant to glyphosate, just like that first salmonella sample found near the factory.

But there was a little problem with glyphosate.

but here it was thriving in glyphosate.

This was the landmark paper on glyphosate safety, which concluded that Roundup herbicide does not pose a health risk to humans.

I do not believe that glyphosate in Argentina is causing increases in cancer.

So if you ingest trace amounts of glyphosate, for example, through your food, it could disrupt your gut's microbiome.

to us after we've been microdosing glyphosate for the past 20 years?

Can you say anything about glyphosates and the impact on the gut and implications of that?

However, if glyphosate is present during this reaction, it will begin to mimic PEP because they have a very similar geometry.

And because of that, glyphosate actually binds first to EPSPS blocking it from acting as a catalyst.

And research was also showing that after you spray glyphosate, the microorganisms in the soil break it down into safe byproducts.

Glyphosate was perfect, so they wasted no time in getting it on the market.

If there's enough of the enzyme then glyphosate can't block all of it, and so the plant can still survive.

But all of the confusion Monsanto tried to create around glyphosate wasn't enough.

Some studies have shown that if you get overexposed to glyphosate, like many farmers would, then the chemical might substantially damage the DNA in your cells,

You said something like 50% of the papers that were about glyphosate safety and research and toxicity were probably industry funded.

So this bottle of Roundup here doesn't even have glyphosate in it anymore.

We never eat genetically modified foods because they have glyphosate and BT toxin, both of which have microbiome implications.

This miracle compound was glyphosate, a phosphonic acid group on one end and a carboxyl group on the other with a nitrogen,

Farmers loved it because unlike 2,4-D, glyphosate killed every weed, not just broad-leaved ones, but grassy too.

Monsanto's idea was this, if glyphosate blocks the EPSPS enzyme in plants then they could edit the plant's DNA so that the cells just create more EPSPS.

Monsanto had a ton of these factories where they were converting phosphate into glyphosate, and they had a lot of sludge leaching out of these factories,

And by 1998, they had patents for glyphosate resistant canola, corn, and cotton.

See, the IARC paper that came out saying glyphosate is a probable carcinogen actually pointed out that the strongest evidence was for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

In 1983, Monsanto submitted a glyphosate toxicology study to the EPA to get it classified as safe, but the data was showing that mice receiving

And it was considered then by regulators of the foundational research paper to say that glyphosate was safe, this independent paper.

You remember the five independent papers that came out bashing the IARC decision to call glyphosate a probable carcinogen?

Now, IARC never specified at what dose glyphosate actually becomes dangerous.

From the data I've seen, glyphosate doesn't seem to be a particularly potent carcinogen, but high exposure to glyphosate is certainly associated with a

Today, Bayer still denies that glyphosate is a carcinogen.

And today, a million tons of glyphosate is sprayed every year.

But for Monsanto, this was good news because they could market that glyphosate targets an enzyme found in plants, but not in humans or pets.

Now, to be clear, this herbicide wasn't glyphosate itself, it was Monsanto's other herbicide product called Dicamba, but it was still packaged in this Roundup and Roundup Ready system.

came out with this, a paper saying, "Glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans."

They claimed IARC chose to disregard dozens of studies, and that conclusions on glyphosate must be non-biased, thorough, and based on quality science.

The EPA was obviously worried with this, and they wanted to classify glyphosate as a possible human carcinogen.