Looking into it for a while now, it appears it was developed as a water softener/ scale remover from tanks, what someone was trying to develop.
They noticed where they dumped the waste water from this the vegetation died.
So a team of scientists were set to see if it could make a weed killer, and their third try at it turned out to be glyphosate, the weed killer we know
today.
The water softener/tank cleaner wasn't exactly the same thing, but they are related to each other.
By the testing we are able to do, it appears glyphosate only acts on features plants contain, not on animal or human material. As well,
glyphosate binds onto clay particles very quickly and won't move into plants, water, or animals other than bound tightly onto the clay bits. So
they might be present in your stomach, but only passing through still attached to those clay bits.
Then, the glyphosate breaks down into other stuff fairly quickly, perhaps 30 days. This 'other stuff' appears to also test out as not harmful to
plants or animals.
Of the chemicals available to is for weed control, glyphosate tests out as much safer, shorter lasting, and less potential for harming the
environment than the other choices we have.
When used as a pre harvest spray, glyphosate has a window of application, is it 10 days between spraying and harvest, I've never used it that
way but it does have rules. As well, it is often 6 months between the harvest of a crop, until it is transported, stored, transported again, and
actually used in processing for food. So the wheat or soybeans have been sprayed long before turned into food, well past the 30 days to break
down and fade away.
As well the processing of grain into food generally involves heat and adding other chemicals (salt, vinegar, etc.) that will also break down the
glyphosate.
Then, we are talking about spraying perhaps 24-32 oz of glyphosate over an entire acre of wheat, so a box of Wheaties would have at most
been exposed to .003 oz of glyphosate.
We are not soaking the grain in chemicals, we are starting out with minute amounts.
Then time and processing makes that fed away to nearly nothing detectable.
Of a substance that so far sound science and controlled testing has found to be harmless to animal/humans.
There is a lot of scare stories and pop culture out there that is fond of hating on Monsanto and make their money off of that.
And it is wise to question and look into stuff.
But?
What happens without using glyphosate? We end up using older chemicals, which have greater risks to mammals and humans, or do poorer
jobs, or last longer in our environment.
Or, we ban all ag chemicals, and we become susceptible to weed and insect outbreaks, more cost and more expensive food in mechanical
weed control, and more erosion and soil loss with mechanical weed control. And more fuel used for such.
There are trade offs, which no one really considers or looks at.
Paul
