The book I'm reading at present in called "A Philosophy of Gardening" by Wolf D Storl and is one of the texts recommended by the Biodynamic Agriculture practitioners.
The author points out many scientifically proven correlations related to the sun, moon, and planets (which cause electromagnetic & gravitational disturbances) which I thought were worth detailing on this blogsite. Here goes:
* 12.4 hour lunar impact on tides and oyster reproduction
* Human female conception correlation with each ones lunar phase when born
* Weather, rainfall and barometric pressure with the moon
* The full moon impact on the human psyche - increased crime and aggression, and mental patient reactions.
* 11 year sunspot cycle impact on icebergs off Iceland, good Vintage years for Bordeaux, Indian drought patterns, and shifting flowering dates of some plants
* 8 year precipitation cycle connected with movements of Venus
* 6 - 8 year beech nut harvest - correlated with movements of Jupiter, Mars, & Saturn in various constellations
* Rapidly growing herbaceous plants linked with nearer planets - monocots (whatever they are!) influenced by the Moon & Mercury, dicot herbs (ditto!) with the Moon and the sun
* Biennial shrubs connected with the two-year rhythm of Mars
* Perennial herbs and hardwoods connected with the 12-year cycle of Jupiter
* Most conifers connected to the long enduring (30 year) cycle of Saturn
Pretty weired, eh!
Friday, 29 December 2006
Wednesday, 20 December 2006
Myths of Safe Pesticides
On 9th November 2006 I posted a blog article titled "Are Organic Fruit and Vegetables Better for You?" At the time I also sent an email to Andre Leu, the current Chairperson of The Organic Federation of Australia, inviting him to provide me with his thoughts on this matter. He has today kindly sent me soft copies of 2 papers he was involved in drafting. The first is titled "The Benefits of Organic Food" and the second "The Myths of Safe Pesticides". Both are quite detailed and very informative, so I've decided to post their contents as 2 separate blogs. The first one has already been posted ... and here is the second ....
"The Myths of Safe Pesticides"
Andre Leu, Chair – Organic Federation of Australia
Conventional farming is dependent on synthetic biocides (pesticides, fungicides and herbicides). These poisons are used in food production to kill pests, diseases and weeds.
There are more than 7200 registered biocide products used in Australian agriculture.(1) This is similar in the USA and Europe. We are assured by our regulatory authorities that these poisons have been rigorously tested and that they are used safely on our foods and in our environment.
1. The Residue Myth
One of the major mythologies is the belief that most modern agricultural chemicals leave few residues. We are mislead into believing that they breakdown and do not persist in our food.
A typical claim states:“… Organophosphorous pesticides, carbamate pesticides are mostly biodegradable, and therefore do not concentrate in the food chain. Synthetic pyrethroids … are generally biodegradable and therefore tend not to persist in the environment.” (2)
These types of statements give the false impression that few agricultural pesticides persist in our food and environment.
1. Most agricultural and veterinary chemicals leave residues in food. That is the reason why residue tolerances called the Average Daily Intake (ADI) are set for these poisons.
The following are some of the poisons found in Australian foods in 2003: Acephate, Azinphos-methyl, Bifenthrin, Bioresmethrin, Captan, Carbaryl, Chlorfenvinphos, Chlorothalonil, Chlorpyrifos, Chlorpyrifos-methyl, DDT, DDE, Dimethoate, Diphenylamine, Endosulfan, Fenitrothion, Fenoxycarb, Fenthion, Iprodione, Maldison, Metalaxyl, Methamidophos, Methidathion, Methoprene, o-phenylphenol, Parathion-methyl, Permethrin, Piperonyl butoxide, Pirimicarb, Pirimiphos-methyl, Procymidone, Propargite, Propiconazole, Pyrimethanil, Tebufenpyrad, Tetradifon, Vinclozolin 2
The testing in Australia only looked at a small sample of the large number of chemicals used. The majority of agricultural chemicals are not included in residue testing. Some of the most widely used chemicals, including herbicides such as Atrazine, Glyphosate, 2,4-D, Diuron and Paraquat were not included in the testing.
2. Many of the current chemicals, including some of the Synthetic Pyrethroids, Organophosphates, Carbamates and Herbicides are as residual as banned Organochlorines such as Dieldrin, DDT, Chlordane, Heptachlor, Lindane and Aldrin.
2. The Breakdown Myth
One of the biggest myths is the assumption that once a chemical degrades it disappears and is harmless. Most agricultural poisons leave residues of breakdown chemicals when they degrade.(3,4)
1. A substantial number of agricultural pesticides such as organophosphates like Diazinon become even more toxic when they breakdown.
2. Where there is research, it shows that many of the breakdown chemicals from agricultural poisons cause health and reproductive problems.
3. There is virtually no testing to detect the residues of the breakdown chemicals of agricultural poisons in our food.
4. Very little research has been done to determine safe intake levels for the breakdown chemicals of agricultural poisons. Consequently there are virtually no safety levels to determine the Average Daily Intake (ADI) for the toxic breakdown chemicals that contaminate our food.
3. The Rigorously Tested Myth
One of the greatest myths is that all agricultural poisons are scientifically tested to ensure that they are used safely.
A: registered agricultural and veterinary products
The majority of agricultural poisons are mixtures composed of one or more chemicals that are defined as the active ingredient(s) and are mixed with other mostly toxic products, such as solvents or surfactants that are defined as “inerts”.
Only the active ingredient is individually tested to determine a safety level for the Average Daily Intake (ADI). The actual registered product, which is the mixture of chemicals used by farmers, is not tested for long term problems such as cancers, hormone disruption, birth defects, nervous system damage and immune system damage.
An example of this is Roundup, which is a mixture of the active ingredient Glyphosate, solvents and surfactants. Testing shows that this product is more toxic than the active ingredient Glyphosate. In fact Glyphosate barely works as a herbicide without the addition of these toxic so called ‘inert’ chemicals. (20)
The vast majority of the more than 7200 registered agricultural and veterinary products used in the production of Australian foods have no testing for health and reproductive problems. This is the same in most other countries. This means that there is no scientific data to determine a safety level for the actual products used on our food.
B: Chemical Cocktails in food and water
The other important issue is that several different toxic chemical products are applied in the production of most foods. These can be a combination of herbicide products, pesticide products, fungicide products and some of the synthetic fertilizer compounds.
Most foods have a cocktail of small amounts of these toxic chemicals and these are absorbed when we eat or drink them. A study by the U.S. Center for Disease Control found a cocktail of many toxic chemicals in the blood and urine of most Americans that they tested. (3,4, 5)
Regulatory authorities assume that because each of the active ingredients is below the ADI that the cocktail is also safe. They do not test for the safety of these combinations of chemicals – the chemical cocktails that we ingest everyday. Recent studies raise serious concerns. The emerging body of science demonstrates that many chemical cocktails act synergistically. This means that instead of 1+1= 2, the extra effect of the mixtures can mean 1+1= 60 or even 1000 in toxicity.
A study in the journal Toxicology and Industrial Health showed that combinations of low doses of commonly used agricultural chemicals can significantly effect health.
In the experiments conducted by Warren Porter et al at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, mice were given drinking water with combinations of pesticide, herbicide and nitrate, at concentrations currently found in groundwater in the USA. They exhibited altered immune, endocrine (hormone) and nervous system functions. The effects were most noticeable when single a herbicide (Atrazine) was combined with nitrate fertilizer. (6)
Atrazine is widely used in many agricultural industries including sugar cane and grain production. Atrazine is also one of the most persistent herbicides that pollutes much of the drinking water in the Midwestern USA, in parts of Europe and Australia. It is measurable in corn, milk, beef and other foods in the USA and Europe.
Porter’s studies show that the influence of pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer mixtures on the endocrine system may also result in changes in the immune system and affect fetal brain development. Of particular concern was thyroid disruption in humans. This has multiple consequences including effects on brain development, level of irritability, sensitivity to stimuli, ability or motivation to learn and an altered immune function.
A later experiment by Porter and colleagues found that very low levels of a mixture of the common herbicides 2,4-D, Mecoprop, Dicamba and inert ingredients caused a decrease in the number embryos and lives births in mice at all doses tested. Very significantly the data showed that low and very low doses caused these problems. (7)
4: The Very Small Amount Myth - ‘The residues are too low to cause any problems’
The current model of toxicology (science of poisons) works on the notion that the lower the dose the less the effect of the poison. When animal testing shows that a certain dose level of poison causes no observable ill effects, this dose becomes the basis that is used to determine the Average Daily Intake (ADI). Authorities then claim that any residue levels below the ADI are too low to cause health problems.
Research shows that the toxicology used by our authorities is inadequate in determining the safety of chemical compounds. (3,4)
A significant numbers of studies show that compounds that are considered to have very little toxicity in parts per million (ppm) have a range of adverse effects in parts per billion (ppb). These compounds disrupt our hormone systems at levels 1000 times lower than previous research stated was safe. Agricultural chemicals have been shown to mimic hormones such as estrogen, block the receptors for the hormones or actively negate the effect of hormones. These chemicals have been implicated in lower sperm counts, increases in breast, uterine, testicular and prostate cancers and deformities in the genital-urinary tracts. (4)
An example of this is Atrazine – one of the worlds most commonly used herbicides. Two peer reviewed studies conducted by Tyrone Hayes shows that levels 1000 times lower than currently permitted in our food causes severe reproductive deformities in frogs. (8,9)
Sara Storrs and Joseph Kiesecker of Pennsylvania State University recently confirmed Hayes’ research. They exposed tadpoles of four species of frogs to Atrazine. ‘Survival was significantly lower for all animals exposed to 3 ppb compared with either 30 or 100 ppb… These survival patterns highlight the importance of investigating the impacts of contaminants with realistic exposures and at various developmental stages.’ (10)
5. The Regulatory Authorities Myth
The greatest myth is that government regulatory authorities ensure that agricultural poisons are used safely and that there are no adverse health or environmental problems from these chemicals.
History shows that there has been a consistent failure of regulatory authorities to prevent the contamination of the environment and human health by products previously said to be safe such as Asbestos, Lead, Mercury, Dioxins, PCBs, DDT, Dieldrin and other Persistent Organic Pollutants. These products were not (and are still not in many cases) withdrawn until decades after good scientific evidence was presented to demonstrate that they are harmful.
Regulatory authorities around the world seem to be ignoring a large body of published science showing that the current methods of determining the safety of the agricultural poisons are grossly inadequate.
A: Environmental Fate
Pesticides do not just pollute our food; they poison our drinking water and air.
Research in Switzerland has demonstrated that some of the rain falling on Europe contains such high levels of pesticides that this rainwater would be illegal if it were supplied as drinking water.(11) Rain over Europe is laced with atrazine, alochlor, 2,4-D and other common agricultural chemicals sprayed onto crops. A 1999 study of rainfall in Greece found one or more pesticides in 90% of 205 samples taken. Atrazine was measurable in 30% of the samples.(12)
Atrazine interferes with the hormone systems.(8) It causes tumors of the mammary glands, uterus, and ovaries in animals.(13) Studies suggest that it is one of a number of agricultural chemicals that cause cancer in humans.(14, 15)
European regulatory authorities have decided that Atrazine will be banned in 2006 because of the recent science showing widespread contamination at levels that cause serious health problems. Authorities around the world including the USA and Australia have decided to ignore the overwhelming body of science about the adverse effects of this chemical.
B: Epidemiology and Scientific Testing
Most of the biocides used in farming are synthetic chemicals that have never existed before. Scientists are finding that they are having serious unintended consequences on the environment and human health. There is an abundance of published scientific research linking commonly used pesticides such as Malathion, Diazinon, Chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates as well as the carbamates, synthetic pyrethroids and herbicides to disruptions the hormone, nervous and immune systems. They are linked to cancers such as pancreatic, colon, lymphoma, leukemia, breast, uterine and prostate. Scientific research also links these chemicals to autoimmune diseases such as asthma, arthritis and chronic fatigue syndrome. (3,4,16,17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,24)
This article is not intended to detail them all as it would be thousands of pages long. A few examples have been selected using two of the most common so-called ‘safe’ herbicides.
A case-controlled study published in March 1999 by Swedish scientists Lennart Hardell and Mikael Eriksson showed that non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) is linked to exposure of a range of pesticides and herbicides.(17) Hardell and Eriksson published an earlier study linking phenoxy herbicides to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) in 1981. These are widely used herbicides such as 2,4-D – part of the infamous Agent Orange.
Prior to the 1940’s non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was one of the world’s rarest cancer. Now it is one of the most common. Between 1973 and 1991, the incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma increased at the rate of 3.3% per year in the U.S., making it the third fastest-growing cancer.(18) In Sweden, the incidence of NHL has increased at the rate of 3.6% per year in men and 2.9% per year in women since 1958.
One of the biocides linked to NHL by the Hardell study is Glyphosate. A previous study in 1998 implicated Glyphosate to hairy cell leukemia.(19) Several animal studies have shown that Glyphosate can cause gene mutations and chromosomal aberrations.(20) Denmark banned Glyphosate on September 15th 2003 because it was so persistent that it polluted most of the water table.
The response of many regulatory authorities is to ensure that use of Glyphosate is increased substantially around the world with the approval of "Roundup Ready" genetically modified crops.
C: Children and the Unborn
The greatest concern about these pesticides in our food and water is for the unborn and children. The 20th Australian Total Diet Survey found pesticide residues in infant food. The regulatory authorities ignored the data by stating “These results confirm that although infant foods contain pesticide residues, these are at very low levels.”
The fact is that children have the greatest exposure in terms of the amount of biocides they absorb in proportion to their size. According to the 20th Australian Total Diet Survey. “In general, the dietary exposure to pesticide residues was highest for the toddler age group. This is due to the high food consumption relative to body weight.”(2)
However because this dietary exposure is below the ADI, many regulatory authorities continue with the belief that this exposure does not cause any problems.
The research by Porter et al at the University of Wisconsin-Madison showed that children and the developing fetus are at risk from common agricultural chemical mixtures found at levels below those that the authorities regard as safe. The studies shows that the influence of these low dose mixtures on developing neurological, endocrine and immune systems can cause changes in the ability to learn and in behavioral patterns of aggression. (6,7)
Research conducted independently by Hayes et al and Storrs et al showed that exposure to amounts more than 1000 times lower than previously regarded as safe caused serious health and developmental problems to the fetus and juveniles. (8,9,10)
Dan Qiao et al of the Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center found that the developing fetus and the newborn are particularly vulnerable to amounts of pesticide far lower than currently permitted by most regulatory authorities around the world. Their studies show that the fetus and the newborn possess lower concentrations of the protective serum proteins than are found in adults. (25) A major consequence is developmental neurotoxicity. This is where the poison damages the developing nervous system of the unborn and children. (16,21, 25)
The scientists stated: “These results indicate that chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates such as diazinon have immediate, direct effects on neural cell replication... In light of the protective effect of serum proteins, the fact that the fetus and newborn possess lower concentrations of these proteins suggests that greater neurotoxic effects may occur at blood levels of chlorpyrifos that are nontoxic to adults.” (25)
Apart from Europe banning Atrazine and Denmark banning Glyphosate, regulatory authorities have made no effort to remove toxic chemicals from food. They continue to perpetuate the myths of safety.
Avoiding Pesticides and other Biocides
It is time to dispense with the myths that food from conventional farming is safe to eat. The lack of rigorous testing and the blatant disregard of current science confirm that there is a lack of credible science to back claims that the poison residues in food are safe to consume.
The only way to avoid these poisons is to eat certified organically grown food as it is produced without these toxic compounds.
A detailed scientific analysis of organic fruits and vegetables in the USA, published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Additives and Contaminants, showed that organic foods have significantly less pesticide residues than conventionally grown foods. (26)
A similar study in Australia by Ruth McGowan for the Victorian Department of Primary Industries conducted 14000 tests on 300 hundred samples of certified organic produce. The study concluded that: “The results demonstrate that Victorian organic produce is virtually ‘chemical free’.” (27)
Both of these studies showed that vast majority of organic foods have no residues. Where residues were found these were due to the widespread contamination caused by several pesticides used in conventional farming. Even then, these residues were substantially lower in organic foods than in conventionally produced food.
Most importantly scientific studies are beginning to show that eating organic food results in lower levels of these pervasive chemicals in humans, particularly children.
A study published in the peer reviewed journal, Environmental Health Perspectives, found that children who eat organic foods have lower levels of one class of agricultural pesticides in their bodies. The University of Washington researchers who conducted the study concluded ‘The dose estimates suggest that consumption of organic fruits, vegetables, and juice can reduce children's exposure levels from above to below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's current guidelines, thereby shifting exposures from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk. Consumption of organic produce appears to provide a relatively simple way for parents to reduce their children's exposure to OP [organophosphate] pesticides.’ (28)
References
1 Infopest (2004). Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries.
2 20th Australian Total Diet Survey. (2003) Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ)
3 Short K. (1994), Quick Poison, Slow Poison, 1994, ISBN 0 85881 127 8
4 Colborn T, Dumanoski D. and Myers J. P., (1996) Our Stolen Future, www.OurStolenFuture.org, March 1996
5 Higgins Margo, Toxins are in most Americans' blood, study finds, Environmental News Network, Monday, March 26, 2001
6 Porter W, et al. (1999), "Endocrine, immune and behavioral effects of aldicarb (carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate (fertilizer) mixtures at groundwater concentrations," Toxicology and Industrial Health (1999) 15, 133-150.
7 Cavieres M, Jaeger J, and Porter W, Developmental Toxicity of a Commercial Herbicide Mixture in Mice: I. Effects on Embryo Implantation and Litter Size, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 110, Number 11, November 2002
8 Hayes, T.B., et al. (2002). "Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99:5476-5480, April 16, 2002,
9 Hayes, T.B., et al. (2003), Atrazine-Induced Hermaphroditism at 0.1 ppb in American Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens): Laboratory and Field Evidence Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 4, April 2003
10 Storrs, Sara I. and Kiesecker, Joseph M. (2004), Survivorship Patterns of Larval Amphibians Exposed to Low Concentrations of Atrazine, Environmental Health Perspectives 112: No10.1054-1057 (2004).
11 Pearce F and Mackenzie D, "It's raining pesticides; The water falling from our skies is unfit to drink," NEW SCIENTIST April 3, 1999, pg. 23.
12 Charizopoulos E. and Papadopoulou-Mourkidou E. (1999), "Occurrence of Pesticides in Rain of the Axios River Basin, Greece," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY [ES&T] Vol. 33, No. 14 (July 15, 1999), pgs. 2363-2368.
13 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REVISED HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT Atrazine April 16, 2002 Reregistration Branch 3 Health Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs
14 Mills P et al, Cancer Incidence in the United Farmworkers of America (UFW) 1987-1997, 2001, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40: 596-603, 2002
15 International Agency for Research on Cancer "Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity to Humans 6-Chloro-N-ethyl-N¢-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine" VOL.: 73 (1999) (p. 59)
16 Aldridge J, Seidler F, Meyer A, Thillai I, and Slotkin1 T, Serotonergic Systems Targeted by Developmental Exposure to Chlorpyrifos: Effects during Different Critical Periods, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 14, November 2003
17 Hardell L. and Eriksson M. (1999), "A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and exposure to Pesticides," CANCER Vol.85, No. 6 (March 15, 1999), pgs. 1353-1360.
18 Harras A.et al, editors, (1996), CANCER RATES AND RISKS 4TH EDITION, NIH Publication No. 96-691, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, 1996, pg.17.
19 Nordstrom M. et al, (1998), "Occupational exposures, animal exposure, and smoking as risk factors for hairy cell leukaemia evaluated in a case-control study," BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 77 (1998), pgs. 2048-2052.
20 Cox Caroline, Glyphosate (Roundup) JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM, Fall 1998, Vol.18, No. 3 Updated 01-02, Northwest Coalition Against Pesticides, Eugene, Oregon.
21 Buznikov G A, et al (2001), An Invertebrate Model of the Developmental Neurotoxicity of Insecticides: Effects of Chlorpyrifos and Dieldrin in Sea Urchin Embryos and Larvae, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 7, July 2001.
22 Cabello G, et al, (2001), A Rat Mammary Tumor Model Induced by the
Organophosphorous Pesticides Parathion and Malathion, Possibly through Acetylcholinesterase Inhibition, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001
23 Garry V F, et al, (2001), Biomarker Correlations of Urinary 2,4-D Levels in
Foresters: Genomic Instability and Endocrine Disruption, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001.
24 Steingraber S (1997), LIVING DOWNSTREAM; AN ECOLOGIST LOOKS AT CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT, New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997.
25 Qiao D, Seidler F, and Slotkin T, (2001) Developmental Neurotoxicity of Chlorpyrifos Modeled in Vitro: Comparative Effects of Metabolites and Other Cholinesterase Inhibitors on DNA Synthesis in PC12 and C6 Cells, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 9, September 2001
26 Baker B, Benbrook C.M, Groth III E, and Lutz Benbrook. K. (2002), Pesticide residues in conventional, IPM-grown and organic foods: Insights from three U.S. data sets, Published in: Food Additives and Contaminants, Volume 19, No. 5, May 2002, pages 427-446.
27 McGowan Ruth, (2003),“Government test prove…”: Results of Victorian Government chemical residue survey substantiates ‘clean’ claims for organic produce. Published in the proceedings of the Organic Futures for Australia, 2nd National Organic Conference, Adelaide 2-3 2003. Organic Federation of Australia 2003.
28 Curl, C. L, Fenske F.A, Elgethun K, Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 3, March 2003
"The Myths of Safe Pesticides"
Andre Leu, Chair – Organic Federation of Australia
Conventional farming is dependent on synthetic biocides (pesticides, fungicides and herbicides). These poisons are used in food production to kill pests, diseases and weeds.
There are more than 7200 registered biocide products used in Australian agriculture.(1) This is similar in the USA and Europe. We are assured by our regulatory authorities that these poisons have been rigorously tested and that they are used safely on our foods and in our environment.
1. The Residue Myth
One of the major mythologies is the belief that most modern agricultural chemicals leave few residues. We are mislead into believing that they breakdown and do not persist in our food.
A typical claim states:“… Organophosphorous pesticides, carbamate pesticides are mostly biodegradable, and therefore do not concentrate in the food chain. Synthetic pyrethroids … are generally biodegradable and therefore tend not to persist in the environment.” (2)
These types of statements give the false impression that few agricultural pesticides persist in our food and environment.
1. Most agricultural and veterinary chemicals leave residues in food. That is the reason why residue tolerances called the Average Daily Intake (ADI) are set for these poisons.
The following are some of the poisons found in Australian foods in 2003: Acephate, Azinphos-methyl, Bifenthrin, Bioresmethrin, Captan, Carbaryl, Chlorfenvinphos, Chlorothalonil, Chlorpyrifos, Chlorpyrifos-methyl, DDT, DDE, Dimethoate, Diphenylamine, Endosulfan, Fenitrothion, Fenoxycarb, Fenthion, Iprodione, Maldison, Metalaxyl, Methamidophos, Methidathion, Methoprene, o-phenylphenol, Parathion-methyl, Permethrin, Piperonyl butoxide, Pirimicarb, Pirimiphos-methyl, Procymidone, Propargite, Propiconazole, Pyrimethanil, Tebufenpyrad, Tetradifon, Vinclozolin 2
The testing in Australia only looked at a small sample of the large number of chemicals used. The majority of agricultural chemicals are not included in residue testing. Some of the most widely used chemicals, including herbicides such as Atrazine, Glyphosate, 2,4-D, Diuron and Paraquat were not included in the testing.
2. Many of the current chemicals, including some of the Synthetic Pyrethroids, Organophosphates, Carbamates and Herbicides are as residual as banned Organochlorines such as Dieldrin, DDT, Chlordane, Heptachlor, Lindane and Aldrin.
2. The Breakdown Myth
One of the biggest myths is the assumption that once a chemical degrades it disappears and is harmless. Most agricultural poisons leave residues of breakdown chemicals when they degrade.(3,4)
1. A substantial number of agricultural pesticides such as organophosphates like Diazinon become even more toxic when they breakdown.
2. Where there is research, it shows that many of the breakdown chemicals from agricultural poisons cause health and reproductive problems.
3. There is virtually no testing to detect the residues of the breakdown chemicals of agricultural poisons in our food.
4. Very little research has been done to determine safe intake levels for the breakdown chemicals of agricultural poisons. Consequently there are virtually no safety levels to determine the Average Daily Intake (ADI) for the toxic breakdown chemicals that contaminate our food.
3. The Rigorously Tested Myth
One of the greatest myths is that all agricultural poisons are scientifically tested to ensure that they are used safely.
A: registered agricultural and veterinary products
The majority of agricultural poisons are mixtures composed of one or more chemicals that are defined as the active ingredient(s) and are mixed with other mostly toxic products, such as solvents or surfactants that are defined as “inerts”.
Only the active ingredient is individually tested to determine a safety level for the Average Daily Intake (ADI). The actual registered product, which is the mixture of chemicals used by farmers, is not tested for long term problems such as cancers, hormone disruption, birth defects, nervous system damage and immune system damage.
An example of this is Roundup, which is a mixture of the active ingredient Glyphosate, solvents and surfactants. Testing shows that this product is more toxic than the active ingredient Glyphosate. In fact Glyphosate barely works as a herbicide without the addition of these toxic so called ‘inert’ chemicals. (20)
The vast majority of the more than 7200 registered agricultural and veterinary products used in the production of Australian foods have no testing for health and reproductive problems. This is the same in most other countries. This means that there is no scientific data to determine a safety level for the actual products used on our food.
B: Chemical Cocktails in food and water
The other important issue is that several different toxic chemical products are applied in the production of most foods. These can be a combination of herbicide products, pesticide products, fungicide products and some of the synthetic fertilizer compounds.
Most foods have a cocktail of small amounts of these toxic chemicals and these are absorbed when we eat or drink them. A study by the U.S. Center for Disease Control found a cocktail of many toxic chemicals in the blood and urine of most Americans that they tested. (3,4, 5)
Regulatory authorities assume that because each of the active ingredients is below the ADI that the cocktail is also safe. They do not test for the safety of these combinations of chemicals – the chemical cocktails that we ingest everyday. Recent studies raise serious concerns. The emerging body of science demonstrates that many chemical cocktails act synergistically. This means that instead of 1+1= 2, the extra effect of the mixtures can mean 1+1= 60 or even 1000 in toxicity.
A study in the journal Toxicology and Industrial Health showed that combinations of low doses of commonly used agricultural chemicals can significantly effect health.
In the experiments conducted by Warren Porter et al at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, mice were given drinking water with combinations of pesticide, herbicide and nitrate, at concentrations currently found in groundwater in the USA. They exhibited altered immune, endocrine (hormone) and nervous system functions. The effects were most noticeable when single a herbicide (Atrazine) was combined with nitrate fertilizer. (6)
Atrazine is widely used in many agricultural industries including sugar cane and grain production. Atrazine is also one of the most persistent herbicides that pollutes much of the drinking water in the Midwestern USA, in parts of Europe and Australia. It is measurable in corn, milk, beef and other foods in the USA and Europe.
Porter’s studies show that the influence of pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer mixtures on the endocrine system may also result in changes in the immune system and affect fetal brain development. Of particular concern was thyroid disruption in humans. This has multiple consequences including effects on brain development, level of irritability, sensitivity to stimuli, ability or motivation to learn and an altered immune function.
A later experiment by Porter and colleagues found that very low levels of a mixture of the common herbicides 2,4-D, Mecoprop, Dicamba and inert ingredients caused a decrease in the number embryos and lives births in mice at all doses tested. Very significantly the data showed that low and very low doses caused these problems. (7)
4: The Very Small Amount Myth - ‘The residues are too low to cause any problems’
The current model of toxicology (science of poisons) works on the notion that the lower the dose the less the effect of the poison. When animal testing shows that a certain dose level of poison causes no observable ill effects, this dose becomes the basis that is used to determine the Average Daily Intake (ADI). Authorities then claim that any residue levels below the ADI are too low to cause health problems.
Research shows that the toxicology used by our authorities is inadequate in determining the safety of chemical compounds. (3,4)
A significant numbers of studies show that compounds that are considered to have very little toxicity in parts per million (ppm) have a range of adverse effects in parts per billion (ppb). These compounds disrupt our hormone systems at levels 1000 times lower than previous research stated was safe. Agricultural chemicals have been shown to mimic hormones such as estrogen, block the receptors for the hormones or actively negate the effect of hormones. These chemicals have been implicated in lower sperm counts, increases in breast, uterine, testicular and prostate cancers and deformities in the genital-urinary tracts. (4)
An example of this is Atrazine – one of the worlds most commonly used herbicides. Two peer reviewed studies conducted by Tyrone Hayes shows that levels 1000 times lower than currently permitted in our food causes severe reproductive deformities in frogs. (8,9)
Sara Storrs and Joseph Kiesecker of Pennsylvania State University recently confirmed Hayes’ research. They exposed tadpoles of four species of frogs to Atrazine. ‘Survival was significantly lower for all animals exposed to 3 ppb compared with either 30 or 100 ppb… These survival patterns highlight the importance of investigating the impacts of contaminants with realistic exposures and at various developmental stages.’ (10)
5. The Regulatory Authorities Myth
The greatest myth is that government regulatory authorities ensure that agricultural poisons are used safely and that there are no adverse health or environmental problems from these chemicals.
History shows that there has been a consistent failure of regulatory authorities to prevent the contamination of the environment and human health by products previously said to be safe such as Asbestos, Lead, Mercury, Dioxins, PCBs, DDT, Dieldrin and other Persistent Organic Pollutants. These products were not (and are still not in many cases) withdrawn until decades after good scientific evidence was presented to demonstrate that they are harmful.
Regulatory authorities around the world seem to be ignoring a large body of published science showing that the current methods of determining the safety of the agricultural poisons are grossly inadequate.
A: Environmental Fate
Pesticides do not just pollute our food; they poison our drinking water and air.
Research in Switzerland has demonstrated that some of the rain falling on Europe contains such high levels of pesticides that this rainwater would be illegal if it were supplied as drinking water.(11) Rain over Europe is laced with atrazine, alochlor, 2,4-D and other common agricultural chemicals sprayed onto crops. A 1999 study of rainfall in Greece found one or more pesticides in 90% of 205 samples taken. Atrazine was measurable in 30% of the samples.(12)
Atrazine interferes with the hormone systems.(8) It causes tumors of the mammary glands, uterus, and ovaries in animals.(13) Studies suggest that it is one of a number of agricultural chemicals that cause cancer in humans.(14, 15)
European regulatory authorities have decided that Atrazine will be banned in 2006 because of the recent science showing widespread contamination at levels that cause serious health problems. Authorities around the world including the USA and Australia have decided to ignore the overwhelming body of science about the adverse effects of this chemical.
B: Epidemiology and Scientific Testing
Most of the biocides used in farming are synthetic chemicals that have never existed before. Scientists are finding that they are having serious unintended consequences on the environment and human health. There is an abundance of published scientific research linking commonly used pesticides such as Malathion, Diazinon, Chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates as well as the carbamates, synthetic pyrethroids and herbicides to disruptions the hormone, nervous and immune systems. They are linked to cancers such as pancreatic, colon, lymphoma, leukemia, breast, uterine and prostate. Scientific research also links these chemicals to autoimmune diseases such as asthma, arthritis and chronic fatigue syndrome. (3,4,16,17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,24)
This article is not intended to detail them all as it would be thousands of pages long. A few examples have been selected using two of the most common so-called ‘safe’ herbicides.
A case-controlled study published in March 1999 by Swedish scientists Lennart Hardell and Mikael Eriksson showed that non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) is linked to exposure of a range of pesticides and herbicides.(17) Hardell and Eriksson published an earlier study linking phenoxy herbicides to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) in 1981. These are widely used herbicides such as 2,4-D – part of the infamous Agent Orange.
Prior to the 1940’s non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was one of the world’s rarest cancer. Now it is one of the most common. Between 1973 and 1991, the incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma increased at the rate of 3.3% per year in the U.S., making it the third fastest-growing cancer.(18) In Sweden, the incidence of NHL has increased at the rate of 3.6% per year in men and 2.9% per year in women since 1958.
One of the biocides linked to NHL by the Hardell study is Glyphosate. A previous study in 1998 implicated Glyphosate to hairy cell leukemia.(19) Several animal studies have shown that Glyphosate can cause gene mutations and chromosomal aberrations.(20) Denmark banned Glyphosate on September 15th 2003 because it was so persistent that it polluted most of the water table.
The response of many regulatory authorities is to ensure that use of Glyphosate is increased substantially around the world with the approval of "Roundup Ready" genetically modified crops.
C: Children and the Unborn
The greatest concern about these pesticides in our food and water is for the unborn and children. The 20th Australian Total Diet Survey found pesticide residues in infant food. The regulatory authorities ignored the data by stating “These results confirm that although infant foods contain pesticide residues, these are at very low levels.”
The fact is that children have the greatest exposure in terms of the amount of biocides they absorb in proportion to their size. According to the 20th Australian Total Diet Survey. “In general, the dietary exposure to pesticide residues was highest for the toddler age group. This is due to the high food consumption relative to body weight.”(2)
However because this dietary exposure is below the ADI, many regulatory authorities continue with the belief that this exposure does not cause any problems.
The research by Porter et al at the University of Wisconsin-Madison showed that children and the developing fetus are at risk from common agricultural chemical mixtures found at levels below those that the authorities regard as safe. The studies shows that the influence of these low dose mixtures on developing neurological, endocrine and immune systems can cause changes in the ability to learn and in behavioral patterns of aggression. (6,7)
Research conducted independently by Hayes et al and Storrs et al showed that exposure to amounts more than 1000 times lower than previously regarded as safe caused serious health and developmental problems to the fetus and juveniles. (8,9,10)
Dan Qiao et al of the Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center found that the developing fetus and the newborn are particularly vulnerable to amounts of pesticide far lower than currently permitted by most regulatory authorities around the world. Their studies show that the fetus and the newborn possess lower concentrations of the protective serum proteins than are found in adults. (25) A major consequence is developmental neurotoxicity. This is where the poison damages the developing nervous system of the unborn and children. (16,21, 25)
The scientists stated: “These results indicate that chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates such as diazinon have immediate, direct effects on neural cell replication... In light of the protective effect of serum proteins, the fact that the fetus and newborn possess lower concentrations of these proteins suggests that greater neurotoxic effects may occur at blood levels of chlorpyrifos that are nontoxic to adults.” (25)
Apart from Europe banning Atrazine and Denmark banning Glyphosate, regulatory authorities have made no effort to remove toxic chemicals from food. They continue to perpetuate the myths of safety.
Avoiding Pesticides and other Biocides
It is time to dispense with the myths that food from conventional farming is safe to eat. The lack of rigorous testing and the blatant disregard of current science confirm that there is a lack of credible science to back claims that the poison residues in food are safe to consume.
The only way to avoid these poisons is to eat certified organically grown food as it is produced without these toxic compounds.
A detailed scientific analysis of organic fruits and vegetables in the USA, published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Additives and Contaminants, showed that organic foods have significantly less pesticide residues than conventionally grown foods. (26)
A similar study in Australia by Ruth McGowan for the Victorian Department of Primary Industries conducted 14000 tests on 300 hundred samples of certified organic produce. The study concluded that: “The results demonstrate that Victorian organic produce is virtually ‘chemical free’.” (27)
Both of these studies showed that vast majority of organic foods have no residues. Where residues were found these were due to the widespread contamination caused by several pesticides used in conventional farming. Even then, these residues were substantially lower in organic foods than in conventionally produced food.
Most importantly scientific studies are beginning to show that eating organic food results in lower levels of these pervasive chemicals in humans, particularly children.
A study published in the peer reviewed journal, Environmental Health Perspectives, found that children who eat organic foods have lower levels of one class of agricultural pesticides in their bodies. The University of Washington researchers who conducted the study concluded ‘The dose estimates suggest that consumption of organic fruits, vegetables, and juice can reduce children's exposure levels from above to below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's current guidelines, thereby shifting exposures from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk. Consumption of organic produce appears to provide a relatively simple way for parents to reduce their children's exposure to OP [organophosphate] pesticides.’ (28)
References
1 Infopest (2004). Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries.
2 20th Australian Total Diet Survey. (2003) Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ)
3 Short K. (1994), Quick Poison, Slow Poison, 1994, ISBN 0 85881 127 8
4 Colborn T, Dumanoski D. and Myers J. P., (1996) Our Stolen Future, www.OurStolenFuture.org, March 1996
5 Higgins Margo, Toxins are in most Americans' blood, study finds, Environmental News Network, Monday, March 26, 2001
6 Porter W, et al. (1999), "Endocrine, immune and behavioral effects of aldicarb (carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate (fertilizer) mixtures at groundwater concentrations," Toxicology and Industrial Health (1999) 15, 133-150.
7 Cavieres M, Jaeger J, and Porter W, Developmental Toxicity of a Commercial Herbicide Mixture in Mice: I. Effects on Embryo Implantation and Litter Size, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 110, Number 11, November 2002
8 Hayes, T.B., et al. (2002). "Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99:5476-5480, April 16, 2002,
9 Hayes, T.B., et al. (2003), Atrazine-Induced Hermaphroditism at 0.1 ppb in American Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens): Laboratory and Field Evidence Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 4, April 2003
10 Storrs, Sara I. and Kiesecker, Joseph M. (2004), Survivorship Patterns of Larval Amphibians Exposed to Low Concentrations of Atrazine, Environmental Health Perspectives 112: No10.1054-1057 (2004).
11 Pearce F and Mackenzie D, "It's raining pesticides; The water falling from our skies is unfit to drink," NEW SCIENTIST April 3, 1999, pg. 23.
12 Charizopoulos E. and Papadopoulou-Mourkidou E. (1999), "Occurrence of Pesticides in Rain of the Axios River Basin, Greece," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY [ES&T] Vol. 33, No. 14 (July 15, 1999), pgs. 2363-2368.
13 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REVISED HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT Atrazine April 16, 2002 Reregistration Branch 3 Health Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs
14 Mills P et al, Cancer Incidence in the United Farmworkers of America (UFW) 1987-1997, 2001, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 40: 596-603, 2002
15 International Agency for Research on Cancer "Overall Evaluations of Carcinogenicity to Humans 6-Chloro-N-ethyl-N¢-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine" VOL.: 73 (1999) (p. 59)
16 Aldridge J, Seidler F, Meyer A, Thillai I, and Slotkin1 T, Serotonergic Systems Targeted by Developmental Exposure to Chlorpyrifos: Effects during Different Critical Periods, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 14, November 2003
17 Hardell L. and Eriksson M. (1999), "A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and exposure to Pesticides," CANCER Vol.85, No. 6 (March 15, 1999), pgs. 1353-1360.
18 Harras A.et al, editors, (1996), CANCER RATES AND RISKS 4TH EDITION, NIH Publication No. 96-691, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, 1996, pg.17.
19 Nordstrom M. et al, (1998), "Occupational exposures, animal exposure, and smoking as risk factors for hairy cell leukaemia evaluated in a case-control study," BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 77 (1998), pgs. 2048-2052.
20 Cox Caroline, Glyphosate (Roundup) JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM, Fall 1998, Vol.18, No. 3 Updated 01-02, Northwest Coalition Against Pesticides, Eugene, Oregon.
21 Buznikov G A, et al (2001), An Invertebrate Model of the Developmental Neurotoxicity of Insecticides: Effects of Chlorpyrifos and Dieldrin in Sea Urchin Embryos and Larvae, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 7, July 2001.
22 Cabello G, et al, (2001), A Rat Mammary Tumor Model Induced by the
Organophosphorous Pesticides Parathion and Malathion, Possibly through Acetylcholinesterase Inhibition, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001
23 Garry V F, et al, (2001), Biomarker Correlations of Urinary 2,4-D Levels in
Foresters: Genomic Instability and Endocrine Disruption, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001.
24 Steingraber S (1997), LIVING DOWNSTREAM; AN ECOLOGIST LOOKS AT CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT, New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997.
25 Qiao D, Seidler F, and Slotkin T, (2001) Developmental Neurotoxicity of Chlorpyrifos Modeled in Vitro: Comparative Effects of Metabolites and Other Cholinesterase Inhibitors on DNA Synthesis in PC12 and C6 Cells, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 9, September 2001
26 Baker B, Benbrook C.M, Groth III E, and Lutz Benbrook. K. (2002), Pesticide residues in conventional, IPM-grown and organic foods: Insights from three U.S. data sets, Published in: Food Additives and Contaminants, Volume 19, No. 5, May 2002, pages 427-446.
27 McGowan Ruth, (2003),“Government test prove…”: Results of Victorian Government chemical residue survey substantiates ‘clean’ claims for organic produce. Published in the proceedings of the Organic Futures for Australia, 2nd National Organic Conference, Adelaide 2-3 2003. Organic Federation of Australia 2003.
28 Curl, C. L, Fenske F.A, Elgethun K, Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 3, March 2003
The Benefits of Organic Food
On 9th November 2006 I posted a blog article titled "Are Organic Fruit and Vegetables Better for You?" At the time I also sent an email to Andre Leu, the current Chairperson of The Organic Federation of Australia, inviting him to provide me with his thoughts on this matter. He has today kindly sent me soft copies of 2 papers he was involved in drafting. The first is titled "The Benefits of Organic Food" and the second "The Myths of Safe Pesticides". Both are quite detailed and very informative, so I've decided to post their contents as 2 separate blogs. Here is the first one ....
"The Benefits of Organic Food"
Andre Leu
Introduction
Many people purchase organic food because they believe it is healthier than conventionally grown food. The organic industry is constantly told that there is no evidence to support these claims. This article looks at published information that shows that organic food is substantially healthier than conventional food.
Nutrition
Research published in 2001 showed that conventionally grown fruit and vegetables in the USA have about half the vitamin content of their counterparts in 1963. This study was based on comparing published US Department of Agriculture figures.
A scientific study published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition in 1993 clearly showed that organic food is more nutritious than conventional food. Organically and conventionally grown apples, potatoes, pears, wheat, and sweet corn were purchased in the western suburbs of Chicago, over two years, and analysed for mineral content. The organically grown food averaged 63% higher in calcium, 73% higher in iron, 118% higher in magnesium, 178% higher in molybdenum, 91% higher in phosphorus, 125% higher in potassium and 60% higher in zinc. The organic food averaged 29% lower in mercury than the conventionally raised food.
A recently publish review of scientific research by Charles Benbrook, Ph.D. reveals that on average organic foods contain about one-third higher in antioxidants than comparable conventional produce.
These phyto-nutrients have been shown to have major roles in preventing and reversing diseases such as heart disease and arterial diseases. They are important for preventing and reducing inflammatory and auto-immune diseases such as asthma and arthritis. Most significantly they are shown to have anti cancer and other protective properties for our health and well being.
A study by the Danish Institute of Agricultural Research and the University of Newcastle's showed that cows raised on an organic diet produce milk with 50% more Vitamin E and 75% more beta carotene than conventionally farmed cows. The organic milk has two to three times more zeaxanthine and lutein, which are powerful antioxidants. Higher levels of omega 3 essential fatty acids, that provide protection from heart and other diseases, are also found in organic milk.
A scientific article published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry stated that organically grown corn, strawberries and marionberries have significantly higher levels of cancer fighting antioxidants than conventionally grown foods.
The European Journal of Nutrition published a study by Dr John Paterson from the University of Strathclyde, UK. The study found that organic vegetable soups contain almost six times as much salicylic acid as non-organic vegetable soups. Salicylic acid is produced naturally in plants as a protective compound against stress and disease. It is responsible for the anti-inflammatory action of aspirin, and helps combat hardening of the arteries, heart disease and bowel cancer.
Two comprehensive studies have been published that compared the differences between organic and conventional foods. Both studies analyzed around 40 previously published studies, each independently of the other. One study was conducted in the UK by nutritionist Shane Heaton and the other in the USA by Virginia Worthington as a peer reviewed university graduate thesis. Both studies came up with similar conclusions showing that there is overwhelming evidence that organic food is more nutritious than conventional food. Heaton stated: ‘On average our research found higher vitamin C, higher mineral levels and higher phytonutrients – plant compounds which can be effective against cancer.’
Pathogens
In the past there have been a number of media stories claiming that organic foods contain higher levels of dangerous pathogens. All of these stories were proved to be false and most of the media presenters apologised publicly for promoting inaccurate and misleading stories.
It is a requirement of organic certification systems that animal manures are composted, or that two non-food rotations are grown on a manured site before it can be used for crops. A United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) report concluded that the superior management practices of organic agriculture reduce E. coli and mycotoxin infections in food.
Food Additives
The use of antibiotics, anti-microbials, hormones and other growth promotants are prohibited in organic production. Where animals are treated with veterinary chemicals, they are not allowed to be sold as organic. Similarly the use of synthetic chemicals as preservatives, colourings, antioxidants etc are prohibited in the processing of organic foods. There is an increasing body of concern about these synthetic compounds in the diets of humans and animals used for human food.
Chemical Residues
Many studies show that most conventionally farmed foods have pesticide and other chemical residues. Repeated tests show that many of these foods can carry a cocktail of synthetic poisons.
A study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found a cocktail of many toxic chemicals in the blood and urine of most Americans that they tested. Studies show that most living organisms carry a cocktail of synthetic man made chemicals.
A growing body of science is showing that repeated exposures, to cocktails of minute amounts of synthetic chemicals, have a range of adverse health effects. A recently published study shows that as little a one tenth of a part per billion of a common herbicide can damage reproductive systems.
Peer reviewed published research has demonstrated that many of these types of chemicals are known to disrupt the hormone, nervous and immune systems. The escalating increase of certain types of cancers such as lymphoma, leukemia, breast, uterine and prostate cancers are linked to agricultural and other synthetic chemicals. Similarly, a good body of scientific research also links these chemicals to the dramatic increases in auto-immune diseases such as asthma and chronic fatigue syndrome. Cancers such as Non Hodgkin’s lymphoma have gone from being one of the rarest cancers to one of the fastest growing cancers amongst people exposed to agricultural chemicals.
Several studies analyzing organic foods showed that they have significantly less pesticide residues than conventionally grown foods. Most importantly scientific studies are beginning to show that that eating organic food results in lower levels of these pervasive chemicals in humans.
A study published in Environmental Health Perspectives found that children who eat organic foods have lower levels of pesticides in their bodies. The University of Washington researchers who conducted the study concluded ‘The dose estimates suggest that consumption of organic fruits, vegetables, and juice can reduce children's exposure levels from above to below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's current guidelines, thereby shifting exposures from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk. Consumption of organic produce appears to provide a relatively simple way for parents to reduce their children's exposure...’
Conclusion
The United Nations FAO states the case very succinctly. ‘It has been demonstrated that organically produced foods have lower levels of pesticide and veterinary drug residues and, in many cases, lower nitrate contents. Animal feeding practices followed in organic livestock production, also lead to a reduction in contamination of food products of animal origin.’
The facts show that organic foods have significant health benefits because of higher nutritional values. They excel in the antioxidants that prevent heart disease, cancers, anti-inflammatory and auto-immune diseases.
References:
Baker B, Benbrook C.M, Groth III E, and Lutz Benbrook. K. (2002), Pesticide residues in conventional, IPM-grown and organic foods: Insights from three U.S. data sets, Published in: Food Additives and Contaminants, Volume 19, No. 5, May 2002, pages 427-446.
Buznikov G A, et al (2001), An Invertebrate Model of the Developmental Neurotoxicity of Insecticides: Effects of Chlorpyrifos and Dieldrin in Sea Urchin Embryos and Larvae, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 7, July 2001.
Cabello G, et al (2001), A Rat Mammary Tumor Model Induced by the
Organophosphorous Pesticides Parathion and Malathion, Possibly through Acetylcholinesterase Inhibition, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001
Charizopoulos E. and Papadopoulou-Mourkidou E. (1999), "Occurrence of Pesticides in Rain of the Axios River Basin, Greece," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY [ES&T] Vol. 33, No. 14 (July 15, 1999), pgs. 2363-2368.
Colborn T., Dumanoski D. and Myers J. P., (1996) Our Stolen Future, www.OurStolenFuture.org, March 1996
Curl, C. L, Fenske F.A, Elgethun K, Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 3, March 2003
Faloon W. (2001) Vegetables Without Vitamins, Life Extension Magazine, Florida March 2001
FAO (2000) Twenty Second FAO Regional Conference for Europe, Porto, Portugal, 24-28 July 2000 Agenda Item 10.1, FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY AS AFFECTED BY ORGANIC FARMING
Garry V F, et al, (2001), Biomarker Correlations of Urinary 2,4-D Levels in
Foresters: Genomic Instability and Endocrine Disruption, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001.
Hardell L. and Eriksson M. (1999), "A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and exposure to Pesticides," CANCER Vol.85, No. 6 (March 15, 1999), pgs. 1353-1360.
Harras A.et al, editors, (1996), CANCER RATES AND RISKS 4TH EDITION, NIH Publication No. 96-691, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, 1996, pg.17.
Hayes, T.B., et al. (2002). "Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99:5476-5480, April 16, 2002,
Hayes, T.B., et al. (2003), Atrazine-Induced Hermaphroditism at 0.1 ppb in American Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens): Laboratory and Field Evidence Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 4, April 2003
Heaton, S (2001), Organic Farming, Food Quality and Human Health, Soil Association, Bristol House, 40-56 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6BY, United Kingdom
Journal of Applied Nutrition (1993); 45:35-39. Organic Food is More Nutritious Than Conventional Food
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, (2003) February 2003
Nordstrom M. et al, (1998), "Occupational exposures, animal exposure, and smoking as risk factors for hairy cell leukaemia evaluated in a case-control study," BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 77 (1998), pgs. 2048-2052.
Paterson, J (2002) European Journal of Nutrition (vol. 40, p 289)
Pearce F. and Mackenzie D, (1999), "It's raining pesticides; The water falling from our skies is unfit to drink," NEW SCIENTIST April 3, 1999, pg. 23.
Porter W, et al. (1999), "Endocrine, immune and behavioral effects of aldicarb (carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate (fertilizer) mixtures at groundwater concentrations," Toxicology and Industrial Health (1999) 15, 133-150.
Short K. (1994), Quick Poison, Slow Poison, 1994, ISBN 0 85881 127 8
Steingraber S (1997), LIVING DOWNSTREAM; AN ECOLOGIST LOOKS AT CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT, New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997.
Worthington, V (2001) ‘Nutritional Quality of Organic Versus Conventional
Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains’ THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE Volume 7, Number 2, 2001, pp. 161–173"
"The Benefits of Organic Food"
Andre Leu
Introduction
Many people purchase organic food because they believe it is healthier than conventionally grown food. The organic industry is constantly told that there is no evidence to support these claims. This article looks at published information that shows that organic food is substantially healthier than conventional food.
Nutrition
Research published in 2001 showed that conventionally grown fruit and vegetables in the USA have about half the vitamin content of their counterparts in 1963. This study was based on comparing published US Department of Agriculture figures.
A scientific study published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition in 1993 clearly showed that organic food is more nutritious than conventional food. Organically and conventionally grown apples, potatoes, pears, wheat, and sweet corn were purchased in the western suburbs of Chicago, over two years, and analysed for mineral content. The organically grown food averaged 63% higher in calcium, 73% higher in iron, 118% higher in magnesium, 178% higher in molybdenum, 91% higher in phosphorus, 125% higher in potassium and 60% higher in zinc. The organic food averaged 29% lower in mercury than the conventionally raised food.
A recently publish review of scientific research by Charles Benbrook, Ph.D. reveals that on average organic foods contain about one-third higher in antioxidants than comparable conventional produce.
These phyto-nutrients have been shown to have major roles in preventing and reversing diseases such as heart disease and arterial diseases. They are important for preventing and reducing inflammatory and auto-immune diseases such as asthma and arthritis. Most significantly they are shown to have anti cancer and other protective properties for our health and well being.
A study by the Danish Institute of Agricultural Research and the University of Newcastle's showed that cows raised on an organic diet produce milk with 50% more Vitamin E and 75% more beta carotene than conventionally farmed cows. The organic milk has two to three times more zeaxanthine and lutein, which are powerful antioxidants. Higher levels of omega 3 essential fatty acids, that provide protection from heart and other diseases, are also found in organic milk.
A scientific article published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry stated that organically grown corn, strawberries and marionberries have significantly higher levels of cancer fighting antioxidants than conventionally grown foods.
The European Journal of Nutrition published a study by Dr John Paterson from the University of Strathclyde, UK. The study found that organic vegetable soups contain almost six times as much salicylic acid as non-organic vegetable soups. Salicylic acid is produced naturally in plants as a protective compound against stress and disease. It is responsible for the anti-inflammatory action of aspirin, and helps combat hardening of the arteries, heart disease and bowel cancer.
Two comprehensive studies have been published that compared the differences between organic and conventional foods. Both studies analyzed around 40 previously published studies, each independently of the other. One study was conducted in the UK by nutritionist Shane Heaton and the other in the USA by Virginia Worthington as a peer reviewed university graduate thesis. Both studies came up with similar conclusions showing that there is overwhelming evidence that organic food is more nutritious than conventional food. Heaton stated: ‘On average our research found higher vitamin C, higher mineral levels and higher phytonutrients – plant compounds which can be effective against cancer.’
Pathogens
In the past there have been a number of media stories claiming that organic foods contain higher levels of dangerous pathogens. All of these stories were proved to be false and most of the media presenters apologised publicly for promoting inaccurate and misleading stories.
It is a requirement of organic certification systems that animal manures are composted, or that two non-food rotations are grown on a manured site before it can be used for crops. A United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) report concluded that the superior management practices of organic agriculture reduce E. coli and mycotoxin infections in food.
Food Additives
The use of antibiotics, anti-microbials, hormones and other growth promotants are prohibited in organic production. Where animals are treated with veterinary chemicals, they are not allowed to be sold as organic. Similarly the use of synthetic chemicals as preservatives, colourings, antioxidants etc are prohibited in the processing of organic foods. There is an increasing body of concern about these synthetic compounds in the diets of humans and animals used for human food.
Chemical Residues
Many studies show that most conventionally farmed foods have pesticide and other chemical residues. Repeated tests show that many of these foods can carry a cocktail of synthetic poisons.
A study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found a cocktail of many toxic chemicals in the blood and urine of most Americans that they tested. Studies show that most living organisms carry a cocktail of synthetic man made chemicals.
A growing body of science is showing that repeated exposures, to cocktails of minute amounts of synthetic chemicals, have a range of adverse health effects. A recently published study shows that as little a one tenth of a part per billion of a common herbicide can damage reproductive systems.
Peer reviewed published research has demonstrated that many of these types of chemicals are known to disrupt the hormone, nervous and immune systems. The escalating increase of certain types of cancers such as lymphoma, leukemia, breast, uterine and prostate cancers are linked to agricultural and other synthetic chemicals. Similarly, a good body of scientific research also links these chemicals to the dramatic increases in auto-immune diseases such as asthma and chronic fatigue syndrome. Cancers such as Non Hodgkin’s lymphoma have gone from being one of the rarest cancers to one of the fastest growing cancers amongst people exposed to agricultural chemicals.
Several studies analyzing organic foods showed that they have significantly less pesticide residues than conventionally grown foods. Most importantly scientific studies are beginning to show that that eating organic food results in lower levels of these pervasive chemicals in humans.
A study published in Environmental Health Perspectives found that children who eat organic foods have lower levels of pesticides in their bodies. The University of Washington researchers who conducted the study concluded ‘The dose estimates suggest that consumption of organic fruits, vegetables, and juice can reduce children's exposure levels from above to below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's current guidelines, thereby shifting exposures from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk. Consumption of organic produce appears to provide a relatively simple way for parents to reduce their children's exposure...’
Conclusion
The United Nations FAO states the case very succinctly. ‘It has been demonstrated that organically produced foods have lower levels of pesticide and veterinary drug residues and, in many cases, lower nitrate contents. Animal feeding practices followed in organic livestock production, also lead to a reduction in contamination of food products of animal origin.’
The facts show that organic foods have significant health benefits because of higher nutritional values. They excel in the antioxidants that prevent heart disease, cancers, anti-inflammatory and auto-immune diseases.
References:
Baker B, Benbrook C.M, Groth III E, and Lutz Benbrook. K. (2002), Pesticide residues in conventional, IPM-grown and organic foods: Insights from three U.S. data sets, Published in: Food Additives and Contaminants, Volume 19, No. 5, May 2002, pages 427-446.
Buznikov G A, et al (2001), An Invertebrate Model of the Developmental Neurotoxicity of Insecticides: Effects of Chlorpyrifos and Dieldrin in Sea Urchin Embryos and Larvae, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 7, July 2001.
Cabello G, et al (2001), A Rat Mammary Tumor Model Induced by the
Organophosphorous Pesticides Parathion and Malathion, Possibly through Acetylcholinesterase Inhibition, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001
Charizopoulos E. and Papadopoulou-Mourkidou E. (1999), "Occurrence of Pesticides in Rain of the Axios River Basin, Greece," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY [ES&T] Vol. 33, No. 14 (July 15, 1999), pgs. 2363-2368.
Colborn T., Dumanoski D. and Myers J. P., (1996) Our Stolen Future, www.OurStolenFuture.org, March 1996
Curl, C. L, Fenske F.A, Elgethun K, Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 3, March 2003
Faloon W. (2001) Vegetables Without Vitamins, Life Extension Magazine, Florida March 2001
FAO (2000) Twenty Second FAO Regional Conference for Europe, Porto, Portugal, 24-28 July 2000 Agenda Item 10.1, FOOD SAFETY AND QUALITY AS AFFECTED BY ORGANIC FARMING
Garry V F, et al, (2001), Biomarker Correlations of Urinary 2,4-D Levels in
Foresters: Genomic Instability and Endocrine Disruption, Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 109, Number 5, May 2001.
Hardell L. and Eriksson M. (1999), "A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and exposure to Pesticides," CANCER Vol.85, No. 6 (March 15, 1999), pgs. 1353-1360.
Harras A.et al, editors, (1996), CANCER RATES AND RISKS 4TH EDITION, NIH Publication No. 96-691, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, 1996, pg.17.
Hayes, T.B., et al. (2002). "Hermaphroditic, demasculinized frogs after exposure to the herbicide atrazine at low ecologically relevant doses." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 99:5476-5480, April 16, 2002,
Hayes, T.B., et al. (2003), Atrazine-Induced Hermaphroditism at 0.1 ppb in American Leopard Frogs (Rana pipiens): Laboratory and Field Evidence Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 111, Number 4, April 2003
Heaton, S (2001), Organic Farming, Food Quality and Human Health, Soil Association, Bristol House, 40-56 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6BY, United Kingdom
Journal of Applied Nutrition (1993); 45:35-39. Organic Food is More Nutritious Than Conventional Food
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, (2003) February 2003
Nordstrom M. et al, (1998), "Occupational exposures, animal exposure, and smoking as risk factors for hairy cell leukaemia evaluated in a case-control study," BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 77 (1998), pgs. 2048-2052.
Paterson, J (2002) European Journal of Nutrition (vol. 40, p 289)
Pearce F. and Mackenzie D, (1999), "It's raining pesticides; The water falling from our skies is unfit to drink," NEW SCIENTIST April 3, 1999, pg. 23.
Porter W, et al. (1999), "Endocrine, immune and behavioral effects of aldicarb (carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate (fertilizer) mixtures at groundwater concentrations," Toxicology and Industrial Health (1999) 15, 133-150.
Short K. (1994), Quick Poison, Slow Poison, 1994, ISBN 0 85881 127 8
Steingraber S (1997), LIVING DOWNSTREAM; AN ECOLOGIST LOOKS AT CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT, New York: Addison-Wesley, 1997.
Worthington, V (2001) ‘Nutritional Quality of Organic Versus Conventional
Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains’ THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE Volume 7, Number 2, 2001, pp. 161–173"
Tuesday, 12 December 2006
Adapting to the Environment
Chris Henggeler from Kachana recently sent an email to a group of us who are working on a project aimed at accelerating the adoption of regenerative land management in Australia. Attached to his email were the following series of images that I thought were worth sharing more widely. Unfortunately we do not know the name of the names of the people who developed the concepts and artwork.
.... and the moral of the story is:
.... and the moral of the story is:
Fire & Drought Impact At Ochre Arch
Last week Jan and I were staying on Ochre Arch, and the effects of both the current drought and fires were very evident. There was a storm which provided some brief relief through 5 mm of rain however this event was immediately preceded by extreme winds that stirred up a dust storm – evident in the accompanying picture. 
Given that our farm is located over 530 km from Melbourne and 300 km from Sydney ‘as the crow flies’ and that the prevailing weather patterns are from the north west it would be reasonable to assume we would not be impacted by the remnants of fires in Victoria or the Blue Mountains to the west of Sydney. The reality is quite different. On the first day we were on the farm there’d been easterly winds leaving us in the midst of smoke from the east. Several days later the winds were from the south and south east, bathing us in smoke from the fires in Victoria. The attached image shows just how thick this smoke was, creating what to some might appear impressive sunset affects
Friday, 1 December 2006
What Plants Can Tell Us about the Soil
It is quite widely accepted that the most appropriate plants will germinate and grow naturally in the soil to match the full range of conditions (soil health, mineral content & organic matter, ground cover, climate, aspect, parent body material etc.) that apply at that particular point in time.
Last week Pauline Roberts and John Polglase and from Divstrat Pty Limited were visiting Ochre Arch to help us try and locate some bore sites to drill for underground water. John is currently studying geology and commented at one point that the greatest emerging threat to soil health is acidity, driven in part to the application of some chemical (inorganic) fertilisers.
It’s curious how things can ‘connect’ closely together at times. I’m presently reading the book titled “Culture and Horticulture: A Philosophy of Gardening” by Wolf D Storl ISBN 0-938250-01-9 and came across the following text, strongly reinforcing John’s comments:
“Acidity or Alkalinity (Percentage Base Saturation, pH)), or sweetness or sourness of the soil is indicated by the pH scale ranging from 1 to 14. Soils range from very acid soils of about a pH of 4, which is about the acidity of tomatoes, beer, or grass silage, to a pH of 8, which is about as alkaline as sea water or eggs. Most plants prefer to grow in earth that has a pH of 6 or 7. Humus buffers the soil between 6 and 7. Wet soils are usually sour; they have low base saturation because the bases (Ca, Mg, Na, K, etc.) usually leach out in the rain, leaving an excess number of hydrogen ions that are the indicator of acidity. Sandy soils, peat-moss formations and the podsols of northern, wet climates furnish examples of this happening. In dry climates, as in southern California, the opposite happens – alkalinity increases and salts are deposited on the surface of the soils. Before indicator tests for pH came about, farmers could tell by looking at the weeds whether a soil was sweet or sour. The presence of sorrel, sour dock, buttercups, tussocks, hawkweeds, horsetails, knotweeds, cinquefoil and daisies indicates an acid soil; whereas alfalfa, sweet clover, burdock, coltsfoot, chamomile, and others indicate a sweet soil.
The application of chemical fertiliser tends to acidify the soils so that the addition of large quantities of lime is concomitant with their use. Humus derived from careful composting, on the other hand, has such a buffering effect that the organic gardener does not have to worry about the pH at all. Humus and microorganisms buffer the soil by letting excess H ions go when the soil is too acid, and letting Ca ions go when the soil is too base. If … the gardener wishes to increase the pH he can sweeten the soil by the addition by the addition of ground limestone or dolomite; or he can make the soil more acid by adding pine needle mulch, coffee grounds, oak leaf mulch, cotton seed meal etc.”
The book goes on a bit later to say ….
“…. plants actively work at creating for themselves the soil they need. Some plants function as accumulators and change the soil in one direction or another, e.g. daisies collect calcium in acid soils, horsetail collects silicon even in silicon-poor soils, orache collects salt etc. Upon their death, these plants will enrich the soil with these elements and change it accordingly.”
Personally reflecting on the above for a moment ….
I’ve observed on many occasions that one of the main weeds that seem to emerge underneath and around winter cereal crops sown with chemical fertilisers is Capeweed (Arctotheca calendula). These plants have “masses of yellow, daisy-like flowers with dark, almost black centres” (see http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/RPIO-4ZZ48E?open) and it makes me wonder whether Capeweed is related in some way to daisies and if so whether they are thus indicating acids soils.
Another observation is with Patterson’s Curse. The conditions for growth are bare and in some cases compacted soils that I’m reliably informed will also be deficient in copper. Patterson’s Curse accumulates copper, and horses which graze in paddocks that are heavily infested with these plants have been known to suffer from copper poisoning.
Just about every grazier will have observed Stinging Nettles growing in stockyards and under stock camps. This is an indicator of high nitrogen levels, associated with the breakdown of concentrated amounts of animal urine and manure.
Broadleaf plants emerge rapidly on some bare soils as nature’s way of providing protection and assisting in the build up of litter and organic matter.
Taproot generating plants such as thistles grow on compressed soils as a mechanism for ‘opening up’ the soil, allowing aerobic (air based) processes and decomposition to work effectively.
So it’s all very interesting stuff, this ‘reading’ the sign-posts of nature.
Oh, and by the way, both Pauline and John are both amazing people and I’d encourage anyone who is searching for underground water or is looking to do farm mapping to get in touch with them. There contacts are on the Divstrat Pty Limited website.
Last week Pauline Roberts and John Polglase and from Divstrat Pty Limited were visiting Ochre Arch to help us try and locate some bore sites to drill for underground water. John is currently studying geology and commented at one point that the greatest emerging threat to soil health is acidity, driven in part to the application of some chemical (inorganic) fertilisers.
It’s curious how things can ‘connect’ closely together at times. I’m presently reading the book titled “Culture and Horticulture: A Philosophy of Gardening” by Wolf D Storl ISBN 0-938250-01-9 and came across the following text, strongly reinforcing John’s comments:
“Acidity or Alkalinity (Percentage Base Saturation, pH)), or sweetness or sourness of the soil is indicated by the pH scale ranging from 1 to 14. Soils range from very acid soils of about a pH of 4, which is about the acidity of tomatoes, beer, or grass silage, to a pH of 8, which is about as alkaline as sea water or eggs. Most plants prefer to grow in earth that has a pH of 6 or 7. Humus buffers the soil between 6 and 7. Wet soils are usually sour; they have low base saturation because the bases (Ca, Mg, Na, K, etc.) usually leach out in the rain, leaving an excess number of hydrogen ions that are the indicator of acidity. Sandy soils, peat-moss formations and the podsols of northern, wet climates furnish examples of this happening. In dry climates, as in southern California, the opposite happens – alkalinity increases and salts are deposited on the surface of the soils. Before indicator tests for pH came about, farmers could tell by looking at the weeds whether a soil was sweet or sour. The presence of sorrel, sour dock, buttercups, tussocks, hawkweeds, horsetails, knotweeds, cinquefoil and daisies indicates an acid soil; whereas alfalfa, sweet clover, burdock, coltsfoot, chamomile, and others indicate a sweet soil.
The application of chemical fertiliser tends to acidify the soils so that the addition of large quantities of lime is concomitant with their use. Humus derived from careful composting, on the other hand, has such a buffering effect that the organic gardener does not have to worry about the pH at all. Humus and microorganisms buffer the soil by letting excess H ions go when the soil is too acid, and letting Ca ions go when the soil is too base. If … the gardener wishes to increase the pH he can sweeten the soil by the addition by the addition of ground limestone or dolomite; or he can make the soil more acid by adding pine needle mulch, coffee grounds, oak leaf mulch, cotton seed meal etc.”
The book goes on a bit later to say ….
“…. plants actively work at creating for themselves the soil they need. Some plants function as accumulators and change the soil in one direction or another, e.g. daisies collect calcium in acid soils, horsetail collects silicon even in silicon-poor soils, orache collects salt etc. Upon their death, these plants will enrich the soil with these elements and change it accordingly.”
Personally reflecting on the above for a moment ….
I’ve observed on many occasions that one of the main weeds that seem to emerge underneath and around winter cereal crops sown with chemical fertilisers is Capeweed (Arctotheca calendula). These plants have “masses of yellow, daisy-like flowers with dark, almost black centres” (see http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/RPIO-4ZZ48E?open) and it makes me wonder whether Capeweed is related in some way to daisies and if so whether they are thus indicating acids soils.
Another observation is with Patterson’s Curse. The conditions for growth are bare and in some cases compacted soils that I’m reliably informed will also be deficient in copper. Patterson’s Curse accumulates copper, and horses which graze in paddocks that are heavily infested with these plants have been known to suffer from copper poisoning.
Just about every grazier will have observed Stinging Nettles growing in stockyards and under stock camps. This is an indicator of high nitrogen levels, associated with the breakdown of concentrated amounts of animal urine and manure.
Broadleaf plants emerge rapidly on some bare soils as nature’s way of providing protection and assisting in the build up of litter and organic matter.
Taproot generating plants such as thistles grow on compressed soils as a mechanism for ‘opening up’ the soil, allowing aerobic (air based) processes and decomposition to work effectively.
So it’s all very interesting stuff, this ‘reading’ the sign-posts of nature.
Oh, and by the way, both Pauline and John are both amazing people and I’d encourage anyone who is searching for underground water or is looking to do farm mapping to get in touch with them. There contacts are on the Divstrat Pty Limited website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)