The stories became far too frequent to ignore. Emails from folks with allergic or digestive issues to wheat in the United States experienced no symptoms whatsoever when they tried eating pasta on vacation in Italy.
Confused parents wondering why wheat consumption sometimes triggered autoimmune reactions in their children but not at other times.
In my own home, I’ve long pondered why my husband can eat the wheat I prepare at home, but he experiences negative digestive effects eating even a single roll in a restaurant.
There is clearly something going on with wheat that is not well known by the general public. It goes far and beyond organic versus nonorganic, gluten or hybridization because even conventional wheat triggers no symptoms for some who eat wheat in other parts of the world.
What indeed is going on with wheat?
For quite some time, I secretly harbored the notion that wheat in the United States must, in fact, be genetically modified. GMO wheat secretly invading the North American food supply seemed the only thing that made sense and could account for the varied experiences I was hearing about.
I reasoned that it couldn’t be the gluten or wheat hybridization. Gluten and wheat hybrids have been consumed for thousands of years. It just didn’t make sense that this could be the reason for so many people suddenly having problems with wheat and gluten in general in the past 5-10 years.
Finally, the answer came over dinner a couple of months ago with a friend who was well versed in the wheat production process. I started researching the issue for myself, and was, quite frankly, horrified at what I discovered.
The good news is that the reason wheat has become so toxic in the United States is not that it is secretly GMO as I had feared (thank goodness!).
The bad news is that the problem lies with the manner in which wheat is grown and harvested by conventional wheat farmers.
You’re going to want to sit down for this one. I’ve had some folks burst into tears in horror when I passed along this information before.
Common wheat harvest protocol in the United States is to drench the wheat fields with Roundup several days before the combine harvesters work through the fields as the practice allows for an earlier, easier and bigger harvest.
Pre-harvest application of the herbicide Roundup or other herbicides containing the deadly active ingredient glyphosate to wheat and barley as a desiccant was suggested as early as 1980. It has since become routine over the past 15 years and is used as a drying agent 7-10 days before harvest within the conventional farming community.
According to Dr. Stephanie Seneff of MIT who has studied the issue in-depth and who I recently saw present on the subject at a nutritional conference in Indianapolis, desiccating non-organic wheat crops with glyphosate just before harvest came into vogue late in the 1990s with the result that most of the non-organic wheat in the United States is now contaminated with it. Seneff explains that when you expose wheat to a toxic chemical like glyphosate, it actually releases more seeds resulting in a slightly greater yield: “It ‘goes to seed’ as it dies. At its last gasp, it releases the seed” says Dr. Seneff.
According to the US Department of Agriculture, as of 2012, 99% of durum wheat, 97% of spring wheat, and 61% of winter wheat have been treated with herbicides. This is an increase from 88% for durum wheat, 91% for spring wheat and 47% for winter wheat since 1998. Note that bulgur is commonly made from durum.
Here’s what wheat farmer Keith Lewis has to say about the practice:
I have been a wheat farmer for 50 yrs and one wheat production practice that is very common is applying the herbicide Roundup (glyposate) just prior to harvest. Roundup is licensed for preharvest weed control. Monsanto, the manufacturer of Roundup claims that application to plants at over 30% kernel moisture result in roundup uptake by the plant into the kernels. Farmers like this practice because Roundup kills the wheat plant allowing an earlier harvest.
A wheat field often ripens unevenly, thus applying Roundup preharvest evens up the greener parts of the field with the more mature. The result is on the less mature areas Roundup is translocated into the kernels and eventually harvested as such.
This practice is not licensed. Farmers mistakenly call it “desiccation.” Consumers eating products made from wheat flour are undoubtedly consuming minute amounts of Roundup. An interesting aside, malt barley which is made into beer is not acceptable in the marketplace if it has been sprayed with preharvest Roundup. Lentils and peas are not accepted in the market place if it was sprayed with preharvest roundup….. but wheat is ok.. This farming practice greatly concerns me and it should further concern consumers of wheat products.
Here’s what wheat farmer Seth Woodland of Woodland and Wheat in Idaho had to say about the practice of using herbicides for wheat dry down:
That practice is bad . I have fellow farmers around me that do it and it is sad. Lucky for you not all of us farm that way. Being the farmer and also the president of a business, we are proud to say that we do not use round up on our wheat ever!
This practice is not just widespread in the United States either. The Food Standards Agency in the United Kingdom reports that the use of Roundup as a wheat desiccant results in glyphosate residues regularly showing up in bread samples. Other European countries are waking up to the danger, however. In the Netherlands, the use of Roundup is completely banned with France likely soon to follow.
Using Roundup on wheat crops throughout the entire growing season and even as a desiccant just prior to harvest may save the farmer money and increase profits, but it is devastating to the health of the consumer who ultimately consumes the glyphosate residue laden wheat kernels.
The chart below of skyrocketing applications of glyphosate to US wheat crops since 1990 and the incidence of celiac disease is from a December 2013 study published in the Journal Interdisciplinary Toxicology examining glyphosate pathways to autoimmune disease. Remember that wheat is not currently GMO or “Roundup Ready” meaning it is not resistant to its withering effects like GMO corn or GMO soy, so the application of glyphosate to wheat would actually kill it.
While the herbicide industry maintains that glyphosate is minimally toxic to humans, research published in the Journal Entropy strongly argues otherwise by shedding light on exactly how glyphosate disrupts mammalian physiology.
Authored by Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff of MIT, the paper investigates glyphosate’s inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, an overlooked component of lethal toxicity to mammals.
The currently accepted view is that ghyphosate is not harmful to humans or any mammals. This flawed view is so pervasive in the conventional farming community that Roundup salesmen have been known to foolishly drink it during presentations!
However, just because Roundup doesn’t kill you immediately doesn’t make it nontoxic. In fact, the active ingredient in Roundup lethally disrupts the all important shikimate pathway found in beneficial gut microbes which is responsible for the synthesis of critical amino acids.
Friendly gut bacteria, also called probiotics, play a critical role in human health. Gut bacteria aid digestion, prevent permeability of the gastrointestinal tract (which discourages the development of autoimmune disease), synthesize vitamins and provide the foundation for robust immunity. In essence:
Roundup significantly disrupts the functioning of beneficial bacteria in the gut and contributes to permeability of the intestinal wall and consequent expression of autoimmune disease symptoms.
In synergy with disruption of the biosynthesis of important amino acids via the shikimate pathway, glyphosate inhibits the cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes produced by the gut microbiome. CYP enzymes are critical to human biology because they detoxify the multitude of foreign chemical compounds, xenobiotics, that we are exposed to in our modern environment today.
As a result, humans exposed to glyphosate through the use of Roundup in their community or through the ingestion of its residues on industrialized food products become even more vulnerable to the damaging effects of other chemicals and environmental toxins they encounter!
What’s worse is that the negative impact of glyphosate exposure is slow and insidious over months and years as inflammation gradually gains a foothold in the cellular systems of the body.
The consequences of this systemic inflammation are most of the diseases and conditions associated with the Western lifestyle:
- Gastrointestinal disorders
- Obesity
- Diabetes
- Heart Disease
- Depression
- Autism
- Infertility
- Cancer
- Multiple Sclerosis
- Alzheimer’s disease
- And the list goes on and on and on …
In a nutshell, Dr. Seneff’s study of Roundup’s ghastly glyphosate, which much of the wheat crop in the United States is doused with annually, uncovers the manner in which this lethal toxin harms the human body by decimating beneficial gut microbes with the tragic end result of disease, degeneration, and widespread suffering.
Got the picture yet?
Even if you think you have no trouble digesting wheat, it is still very wise to avoid conventional wheat as much as possible in your diet!
You Must Avoid Toxic Wheat No Matter What
The bottom line is that avoidance of conventional wheat in the United States is absolutely imperative even if you don’t currently have a gluten allergy or wheat sensitivity. This includes bypassing food products made with it such as the popular meat substitute seitan also called vital wheat gluten. The increase in the amount of glyphosate applied to wheat closely correlates with the rise of celiac disease and gluten intolerance. Dr. Seneff points out that the increases in these diseases are not just genetic in nature, but also have an environmental cause as not all patient symptoms are alleviated by eliminating gluten from the diet.
The effects of deadly glyphosate on your biology are so insidious that lack of symptoms today means literally nothing.
If you don’t have problems with wheat now, you will in the future if you keep eating conventionally produced, toxic wheat!
How to Eat Wheat Safely
Obviously, if you’ve already developed a sensitivity or allergy to wheat, you must avoid it. Period.
But, if you aren’t celiac or gluten sensitive and would like to consume this ancestral food safely, you can do what we do in our home. We source organic, naturally low in gluten, unhybridized Einkorn wheat for breadmaking, pancakes, cookies, etc. Please note that einkorn is not to be confused with the more general term farro, which includes emmer and spelt, which are both hybridized. You can learn more about the scientific research on the “good” gluten in einkorn in this article.
When we eat out or are purchasing food from the store, conventional wheat products are rejected without exception. This despite the fact that we have no gluten allergies whatsoever in our home – yet.
I am firmly convinced that if we did nothing, our entire family at some point would develop sensitivity to wheat or autoimmune disease in some form due to the toxic manner in which it is processed and the glyphosate residues that are contained in conventional wheat products.
What Are You Going to Do About Toxic Wheat?
How did you react to the news that US wheat farmers are using Roundup, not just to kill weeds, but to dry out the wheat plants to allow for an earlier, easier and bigger harvest and that such a practice causes absorption of toxic glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and other herbicides, right into the wheat kernels themselves?
Did you feel outraged and violated as I did? How will you implement a conventional wheat-avoidance strategy going forward even if you haven’t yet developed a problem with gluten or wheat sensitivity?
What about other crops where Roundup is used as a pre-harvest desiccant such as barley, sugar cane, rice, seeds, dried beans and peas, sugar cane, sweet potatoes, and sugar beets? Will you only be buying these crops in organic form from now on to avoid this modern, man-made scourge?
UPDATE: The Soil Association in July 2015 called for an immediate ban on the use of glyphosate for wheat ripening and desiccation purposes. The nonprofit reports that glyphosate residues are widely found in nonorganic wheat samples and the use of the herbicide on wheat crops has increased 400% in the past two decades.
Dr. Robin Mesnage of the Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics at Kings College in London, revealed new data analysis showing Roundup, the most common brand of Glyphosate based herbicides, is 1,000 times more toxic than genotoxic glyphosate alone due to the inclusion of other toxic chemicals in its mix.
Peter Melchett, Soil Association policy director said; “If Glyphosate ends up in bread it’s impossible for people to avoid it unless they are eating organic. On the other hand, farmers could easily choose not to use Glyphosate as a spray on wheat crops – just before they are harvested. This is why the Soil Association is calling for the immediate ending of the use of Glyphosate sprays on wheat destined for use in bread.”
References
Glyphosate now commonly found in human urine
Study: Glyphosate, Celiac and Gluten Intolerance
The Glyphosate, Celiac Disease Connection
Pre-harvest Application of Glyphosate to Wheat
Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases
Yield and quality of wheat seeds as a function of desiccation stages and herbicides
Wheat farmer weighs in on the use of Roundup as a wheat desiccant
More Information
Roundup: Quick Death for Weeds, Slow and Painful Death for You
Hybrid Wheat is Not the Same as GMO Wheat
The Dutch Ban Roundup, France and Brazil to Follow
How to Mix and Use Gluten Free Flour
Can Celiacs Eat Sourdough Bread?
The Dirty Little Secret About Gluten-Free
I was under the impression that Roundup killed wheat as well unless it is Roundup resistant wheat which is a strain developed by Monsanto so that they could spray the crops with Roundup and kill just the weeds. If they sprayed the wheat just before harvest to kill it then surely they could not use it to kill weeds in the crop. It doesn’t make any sense to me that they would want to harvest a crop full of dead wheat but also containing weeds.
Rae, you are right this could not be roundup ready wheat. In fact, there is no commercially available roundup ready wheat as far as I know. Maybe because of the reasons outlined in this article. There are other methods to control weeds, like field cultivation and the use of herbicides that only affect dicots (broadleaves) or monocots (grasses).
There’s always weed seeds in the harvested products. That’s why there are machines in use at grain elevators and some farms whose job is to clean the grain of other seeds, rocks, and other foreign materials. My hubby used to own a feed mill, and we always cleaned grain when it came in. If this practice is going on, then I’m really glad that we only dealt with small, local Mennonite and Hutterite farmers who do not engage in this practice.
I do have to cirrect one thing. Roundup is not applied to sugar beets to kill and dessicate them. 98 percent of ALL sugar beets in the US are GMO “Roundup Ready”, which means they can be sprayed with Roundup and have no damage inflicted to the plant. Yes, folks, that means what you think it does. Sugar Beets (what they make thd cheap table sugar from) are genetically laced with herbicide. Sugar cane isn’t. I don’t see how you could desiccate Sugar cane for harvest, since they need the juice to make sugar, but I wouldn’t put anything past Monsanto.
Would love to see the prez of Monsanto drink some Roundup…
@Crys. Cane sugar is a desiccated crop. Better to get Organic. Florida Crystals is good.
Nice catch. Made me look that one up. Looks there isn’t any Roundup-ready wheat. Monsanto developed it but farmers didn’t want to lose European and Asian markets where the public won’t buy it. Guess Monsanto didn’t like losing those sales of Roundup.
“when you expose wheat to a toxic chemical like glyphosate, it actually releases more seeds resulting in a slightly greater yield: “It ‘goes to seed’ as it dies. At its last gasp, it releases the seed” says Dr. Seneff. – See more at: https://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its-not-gluten/#sthash.X1R6Mmcs.dpuf“
The whole point of spraying the wheat with round-up right before harvest would be to kill it so that it would dry out faster and allow for an earlier harvest. Wheat isn’t ever really harvested alive, but at the end of the season when it’s already dead and dry. The idea is relatively ingenious if it weren’t for the need of toxic chemicals to do it. It disgusts me to think that some farmers (I would guess huge corporate farms) would do this.
The round up is sprayed on the what to kill the wheat so it will dry sufficiently to be harvested. It is only used by a small fraction of farmers in areas where the growing season is very short. Primarily in Canada. Obviously this technique doesn’t work on Roundup resistant wheat.
You should read the article again if you think it’s not to kill the wheat..
I’ve read that with non-GMO/non-“Roundup-Ready” wheat they use Roundup between crops to kill everything. That’s how they can tell if a GMO seed got on the field; because the seeds left on the ground from those plants will still grow after the Roundup. See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/unapproved-genetically-modified-wheat-from-monsanto-found-in-oregon-field/2013/05/30/93fe7abe-c95e-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_story.html
You would be correct. Monsanto has not produced a Roundup Ready strain of wheat, so the use of Glyphosate would ruin the entire crop. On top of that, crop dusting is hella expensive and dusting just to be able to ‘harvest earlier’ probably isn’t a worthwhile expense. Spraying ripe/close to ripe wheat with anything greatly increases the risk of fungal takeover, as well.
I thought Roundup was only used in Canola fields.
It’s used everywhere … even on crops that are not GMO like wheat.
Not to mention most gardens in the US, most garden paths, driveways, parks, public open spaces, sidewalks, golf courses, farms, ranches – anywhere that grass and “weeds” will grow. This is Monsanto Land.
This is the reason they wait until the last weeks of growth. It would kill the plants if they do it earlier.
Rae,
When wheat is harvested normally, most of the plants are dead already. What you are harvesting is the seeds, which are dormant, not dead. Wheat is not a crop normally plagued with lots of weeds, so there is really only a minimal need for herbicides, usually applied early in the season. Later in the season, the wheat plants are so dense in the field that weeds can’t really compete with them. The farmers are not using late-season Roundup as weed control – they are using it to “accelerate ripening” – in other words they are deliberately killing the plants so that all the wheat is at the same stage of ‘ripeness’ when harvested. I think it’s a shameful practice, it goes with the mindset that you need to extract every kernel from the field to be profitable. As an organic farmer, I use no herbicides whatsoever and never will, even though, because I mainly grow vegetables, my weed problems are much greater than most wheat farmers.
Hi Rae,
You are completely correct! RoundUp does kill wheat! All wheat that is being planted here in the United States is developed through practices that have been used and improved since the 1860s. This is why we have seen an increase in yeilds!
the weeds will not grow whilst the dead wheat dries
It doesn’t kill the kernels. The idea is to kill the still growing stalk and leaves of the wheat plant, thus leaving the kernels to ripen more uniformly and to increase the harvest.
Thank you.
Guys, wheat is dead when it is harvested. It dies in mid summer. There isn’t any reason to ‘kill’ it again with Roundup. Plus Roundup is not cheap.
I can’t see where a pre-harvest application would add any value to a wheat crop at all.
Can the author cite any articles that show the presence of Roundup in wheat products?
I did … didn’t you read the article? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/
Rae, AS the wheat grows to maternity it dries down and the seed or kernel must be 12% moisture or less to harvest and store or else be damaged in storage (mold, fungus etc). So Spraying roundup pre harvest, ( 30% or less) is spraying it in wheat that is about 99% dead. 4 or 5 95 degree summer days will dry the wheat down from 30% to 12 %. Yet weeds can be growing very fast during that time. Green weeds harvested with the wheat will add moisture to the seed and cause storage damage and also cause the combine harvester to not work right, or even plug up. Dried wheat thrashes better.
Just some information from wheat grower of over 40 years
@Rae. The round up sprayed on the wheat, discussed in the article, is for drying purposes. It’s to make it easier on the farm machinery going into the fields. Many crops that are not resistant to round up are desiccated with herbicides. It’s done in such a way to not ruin the crop. Pesticide residues remain though…
Monsanto has been given free license to poison Americans while turning over obscene profits, thanks to U.S. politicians whose campaigns are funded by this giant. They have spent billions of dollars fighting propositions in many states to force labeling of GMO “foods”. Americans are being lied to by their so-called representatives and the media that this Frankenstein company controls. U.S. farmers that don’t drink the kool-aid are being sued by Monsanto for “stealing” GMO seeds due to cross-pollinization” of franken seeds with natural seeds. They are going under left and right because none have the money to fight the Devil that is Monsanto. This company needs to be force-fed their own poison food and dismantled by the People.
Thank You! I’ve been saying this same thing and writing to my state representatives continuously!
I have only one question. What is the determining factor with regard to profit, that designates it as being ” obscene”? Is it a percentage? Is it the fact that monsatan is so fun and easy to hate? Or do you think that any corporation with business plans and practices which differ from your own ideas automatically rate the moniker?
Corporate general attitude to the population-at-large = try Bhopal, India, and apply to all they touch. That is what designates it ‘obscene’.
We are the frog, and Monsanto (and its brethren) are the boiling pot. Smart of them to put us in cold water to start and turn up the heat slowly until it boils. Soon we’ll all be boiled frogs, and we will have taken it with a smile on our faces.
Thanks for mentioning Autoimmune Disease, (of which MS is a part.) By focusing on it as a group we can affect positive change through awareness, and the sheer shock of how many people it hits.
Autoimmune disease affects 1 in 5 people, and has 140+ diseases under its umbrella. Out of those affected 75-80% are female. MS is one of them, Lupus, RA, Celiac, Crohn’s, Type 1 Diabetes, Vasculitis, Eczema, and on and on. Some kill, some maim, some are highly disruptive and unpleasant, but all are costly, not just to the patient but to society. I think if we started grouping this disease together people might pay more attention to what big Agriculture and big Pharma (same dudes) are doing to our planet and our species.
Autoimmune disease also has links to cancer, heart and stroke, mental health, and can lead to answers and improvements in the treatment of AIDS, infectious disease, transplantation, and so much more. These chemical concoctions along with the rampant genetic fiddling are an important piece of the puzzle and fall in line chronologically with the increase in chronic illness. The great thing about chronically ill patients is they make great return customers at the pharmacy. Autoimmune Disease patients are actually the best customers of all. If we survive past diagnosis, chances of our untimely demise by drug side effects is much higher than by disease activity. So we’ll be popping pills till we go horizontal. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but it’s hard not to sound like one when you talk about these guys.
Why are we so under their thumb in North America. Europe is burning fields and kicking them out like crazy, yet we allow them to destroy our side of the planet. Hawaii is completely overtaken by open air experiments by Monsanto and the gang.
We are the frogs for dinner, and we’re almost at boiling temperatures.
There’s money in sick people….
It’s becoming ever more clear that Big Ag makes you sick with a disease that hardly existed 50 years ago and Big Pharma comes to the rescue with very expensive drugs that treat the symptoms but don’t get you well. These 2 entities are joined at the hip and we are the mice in the lab.
Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist,
While I partially agree with your concerns about the chemical glyphosate to human health (there are a whole lot of unknowns with glyphosate and human health risks currently), I don’t agree with this blog that you have posted about glyphosate being used on small grains. The practice of spraying glyphosate containing herbicides on small grains shortly before harvest is not as common of a practice as you say it to be. In the northwestern part of Virginia where I live, I have never known of local farmers spraying glyphosate on small grains when they are harvested for grain. They don’t do this for a couple of reasons: 1) It is an extra cost in growing the crop that is not needed-the sun will preform the same task for free. 2) Travelling over the small grain crop with a spray rig when the crop is close to harvest will cause crop yield loss due to running the crop down with the tires on the spray rig and will also contribute to crop lodging (falling over)! Now, with that being said, I do know of several farmers here who have sprayed glyphosate on small grain crops that they harvest for straw only about 10-14 days prior to them cutting and baling the straw. This practice allows for quick and even dry down of the crop and is in line with what you stated in your blog. I am associated with a farm operation that grows small grains and I also work with farmers and their operations daily as a part of my profession-I know the ins and outs of hundreds of farm operations in this part of the world. Lastly, in reading your blog and some of your replies to other people’s comments, it gives me heartburn to see how you repeatedly suggest and state that farmers are dishonest by claiming that they are completing the practice of spraying glyphosate on small grains and not being truthful about it. A vast majority of the farmers that I know are more than honest (sometimes they are too honest) and above board with their farming practices and have nothing to hide with their farming practices. Besides, farmers have to keep records on pesticide usage on their farm operations and have to follow label instructions for all chemicals used in crop production. They are subject to spot checks on their records by various state and federal agencies from time-to-time. If they lie on their records, there are various ways for an auditor to find out.
Do we eat the animals that eat the hay that was sprayed? And can the round up be passed on to us that way?
that commenter mentioned _Straw_.
Straw is the stalk of grains that put all their energy & nutrients into the seeds (the grains). This includes wheat, oats, rice, & rye. (possibly others too, I dunno).
Hay on the other hand, is dried grasses which do contain nutrients. Hay is indeed used for food for animals.
STRAW is the empty dried stalks that do _Not_ contain nutrients. Straw is only used as bedding for those animals.
When homeowners are looking for a decorative bale of dried plant stems to set their fall outdoor decorations on beside the porch, they don’t care which they use — straw or ha will do equally well. But for the animals it does make a difference.
that commenter mentioned _Straw_.
Straw is the stalk of grains that put all their energy & nutrients into the seeds (the grains). This includes wheat, oats, rice, & rye. (possibly others too, I dunno).
Hay on the other hand, is dried grasses which do contain nutrients. Hay is indeed used for food for animals.
STRAW is the empty dried stalks that do _Not_ contain nutrients. Straw is only used as bedding for those animals.
When homeowners are looking for a decorative bale of dried plant stems to set their fall outdoor decorations on beside the porch, they don’t care which they use — straw or hay will do equally well. But for the animals it does make a difference.
@Tom. A lot of people think so. I know I do. What do you think?
Hey, just a question about the bailing for straw that you mentioned. Would this straw that was sprayed shortly before bailing be used for animal feed? If so, would that not end up back in our diets?
Animals eat straw? Who knew!
I think you are being naïve to say the least. I believe some farmers are fed a lot of ‘sales pitches’ and truly are as honest about what they are doing – since they have been fed a line of crap. Spraying even a little is too dangerous. The spray doesn’t stay in the field….it is carried through the air currents – the same as the dangerous nuclear radiation that has found its way to the US Coast from Japan. The glyphosate is in the ground and it stays there and contaminates the ground for years and any future crops planted are soaking it up. It is washed into the water tables in which people and livestock are drinking. It is spread on the ‘feed’ that is given the livestock, so humans and other animals are ingesting it via meats. Not only that, the grains that are fed to the livestock make the animals sick and now you give them antibiotics. That is the reason people don’t respond to antibiotics when they are sick – we’ve developed an immunity to them. Now we need more drastic antibiotics!!!! And honestly….you believe the Monsanto’s and the government are looking our for your best interest??? Your comment about audits and state and federal agencies reviews is comical. At one point in time…the person in charge of the Food & Drug Administration was previously the CEO of Monsanto…..
.. uh .. do your ‘net research cited from reputable studies, starting here .
It is well known in the N. American farming community, that Round-Up has been found in over 62% [and rising] of wheat soil samples .. and now .. precipitations studies show that rpercentage is rapdily increasing as well. I do not know specifically about the eastern seaboard, but in the bread-basket, this is standard practice on argribiz operations.
Where I live in Manitoba, Canada, ‘kill down’ or ‘pre-harvest’ spraying is routine.
(I’ve also seen them spray soybean and canola then harvest. Spraying the wheat makes sense, as it desiccates, but the others I don’t understand.)
Thanks, ChickenFarmer, for posting this side of the honest, hard working farming community. I have friends who are farmers, and I can only applaud them for their honesty (even too honest, as you write). The question that begs to be asked is, exactly what is going on with the US crops that have gluten? We MUST ACCEPT that there is a problem with certain US crops and/or the products that are sprayed on them that are somehow creating the severity and large increase in health disorders related to gluten in the US. There are many, myself included, who know first hand that they have GI tract disorders (“leaky gut” syndrome) from eating US crops with gluten, yet have absolutely no problem with eating wheat in Europe, for example. Wishing you the best.
These comments remind me of David Blume, Alcohol Can Be a Gas. It is perfectly legal to make alcohol in the US and burn it in your own tractor or auto. He gives workshops and when he goes to TN to teach he learns from the “moonshiners”. Yet when I spent most of 7 months there in 2010 I found no one who knew anybody who made alcohol. They must keep it a secret from “strangers”, just like a farmers would never tell anyone (including family) that they spray toxins on food.
You can’t “keep secret” what farmers do. It happens out there in front of god and everybody. You would be seen driving the big spray rigs through the fields just before harvest.
Not true! I’ve been married to a wheat farmer in Washington State for over 22 years and never once has he sprayed a wheat field with Round Up or any other chemical prior to harvesting the crop.
.. uh .. do your ‘net research cited from reputable studies, starting here .
It is well known in the N. American farming community, that Round-Up has been found in over 62% [and rising] of wheat soil samples .. and now .. precipitations studies show that rpercentage is rapdily increasing as well. I do not know about WA, but this is standard practice on argribiz operations. So .. it IS true.
Anthony, could you please send me the link to the data and test results from the soil samples showing the 62%
Well I lived amongst wheat fields in Washington for around 5 years and the two farmers next door ALWAYS sprayed before harvest. Sounds like you’re just married to a good farmer, why do you think that just because your husband doesn’t do it that this whole thing is bullshit?
Sarah, your statement that gluten and wheat hybrids have been consumed for thousands of years is the first tip off that this is not a conclusion derived from personal research. If it was, you would learn that hybridization is a relatively new practice, begun in the 20th century. Wheat hybrids are not even sold on the market in the U.S. today. And, only two genetics companies are currently engaging in research in wheat hybrids.
Care to quote your sources on your claim?
BTW, I am still waiting the publication of an earlier response.
Kansas farmer
Actually, wheat hybrids were first developed centuries ago. What you think is “unhybridized” wheat is actually hybridized. Einkorn wheat is the only unhybridized wheat on earth today and it has 2 sets of chromosomes. Emmer wheat was created by the hybridization of 2 wild grasses. Consequently, emmer has 4 sets of chromosomes. Kamut and Durum wheat are both descendents of emmer. Spelt is the result of hybridization between cultivated emmer and another wild grass and so contains six sets of chromosomes. Modern wheat is a descendent of spelt.
There is some confusion here because though wheat was initially created by the hybridization of different species, hybridization also refers to the crossing of inbred lines that are self-pollinated generation after generation. That breeding practice is what the poster is referring to, and it is a modern invention as they said. But there is nothing wrong with hybrid seed in that context anyways, other than letting companies exert control because farmers must purchase hybrid seeds year after year to maintain the same fields and decreasing diversity because hybrids are encouraged over other types. They are right that wheat hybrids (in this breeding context) are not very common because wheat naturally self-pollinates so they are hard to cross.
I cried when I read your article. I quit wheat this last year because I was having breakouts of psoriasis and it seemed to help. In September I visited a wheat farm on the Prairies in Canada and got to ride in a harvester (like in your picture). I had grown up on a farm and it was a good trip down memory lane. I commented on the good yield and healthy looking wheat with no weeds. Imagine my shock as I was told that the increase in yield from years ago is more than tripled because roundup is sprayed on the fields prior to planting, after planting and just before harvesting. I have been thinking a lot about this and then a friend sent me your article.
You see I was not sure at the time that I could link round to my skin condition. I ate some wheat the other day and I now have raw fingers. For a few years now I have had bowel problems, I have systemic pain in my muscles, I have psroriatic arthritis, fibromyalgia and it has all led to a very debilitating lifestyle. Could this really all be due to roundup? I think so…….
Paul is technically correct. This is often a very confusing area. Most people cannot tell the difference between an inbred and a hybrid. A hybrid is technically formed as the last cross in the breeding process it is common in corn. It is easier to make the analogy to dogs. Pure bred dogs like Poodles and Golden Retrievers are bred only by maintaining the pedigree and breeding within the families and often the term inbred is applied. These dog families could have started from the same dog, but then certain characteristics were selected for giving us these particular combination of traits. These families are referred to as heterotic groups within breeding. When you cross a Poodle and Golden Retriever you get a Goldendoodle which is a hybrid for that specific generation. What Sarah is referencing is an earlier lineage of hybridization would be, still using the dog analogy, the goldendoodle that was then bred with. The germplasm then starts to get muddy and sometimes a new heterotic group can form such as the one around Emmer wheat.
Sarah, that is not how genetics work, even in plants. If it were, then every time a plant or animal was bred, they would add a set of chromosomes. So, you and I would have different numbers of chromosomes, and there would literally be thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of pairs. We have 23. Einkorn and Emmer have different numbers of chromosomes, because they are not the same species.
If you do your research, you will see that emmer is the hybridization of goat grass and wild wheat that occurred around 8000 BC. Around 4000-5000 BC, emmer was hybridized into today’s durum and spelt into soft wheat.
I think you are getting confused between the words Hybridized and Genetically modified. Humans have been cross breeding and “hybridizing” all sorts of different plants, foods and animals for thousands of years. Genetic modification has only been around since the middle of the last century. All wheat in the US is hybridized UNLESS it is an ancient grain or specifically marked heritage.
@Paul. Wheat is probably the most heavily hybridized crop out there. It has been since the 40’s. It was one of the first crops to be experimented with as part of the “Green Revolution” spearheaded by the Rockefellers. They wanted it short and manageable and that is what they produced, wheat that grows about knee to mid thigh high and doesn’t blow around in the wind and snap off.
Here is an extremely applicable video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bufTna0WArc
I think this is an interesting hypothesis but it only good if it works for people. I do try to listen to my body and tend to avoid wheat altogether but will eat it sometimes when out, for a treat. This may discourage me even more from doing that. But I am curious about the big argument between posters on whether this is common practice or not. The comment that they are lying or are Monsanto in disguise just didn’t resolve it for me. But as Sarah seems to have put all her eggs in the USDA basket, the comment that you can’t trust the USDA got me wondering. Could the government be beefing up the percentages to get the rest of the farmers to go along with this practice? As in, in bed with Monsanto? 97% and 99% are pretty big numbers. We need to get a second source.
A reply to this article on another blog from Dr. Joe Schwarcz, office of Science and Technology at McGill University and world-renowned chemist who constantly battles against Dr. Oz, the Food Babe and other charlatans follows: “It is true that glyphosate is sometimes used on wheat just before harvest. There is a reason for this. At full maturity wheat is easily attacked by the fusarium fungus that produces highly toxic metabolites. This is prevented with the use of glyphosate. All wheat is sampled for pesticide residues and maximum tolerance levels must be adhered to These have a huge safety factor built in. There is also a wealth of epidemiological data on glyphosate with no evidence of harm to farmers who use it all the time. The MIT scientist behind the scary outburst is actually a computer scientist who is not any sort of expert on agriculture or toxicology. The real truth is that wheat is not toxic. But that statement doesn’t get you publicity. Scare-mongering does.”
Do you see a conflict of interest on who’s setting the limits and doing the, ”official,” studies?
.. sounds like you’ve been drinking the ‘santo-aide too. shm.