Glyphospate (Roundup) and Gluten Sensitivity

Gigi · Post by **Gigi** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:19 am

I read this with great interest this morning and not only wanted to share it with this community but am wondering your thoughts. This is a link to the PDF transcript of Dr.
Mercola's interview with a MIT scientist and her research into the use of glyphospate and the effect on human health.

http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Expert ... script.pdf

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:21 am

Hi Gigi

This is a topic that comes up for discussion about once or twice each year. If you do a search of the archives of this discussion board for either glyphosate or roundup, you will get either 10 or 20 hits (depending on which key word you use), dating back as far as 8 years. Dr. Mercola has a flair for the dramatic, and he (and of course many others) makes a lot of money playing on people's concerns and fears, but for the most part the science on this theory is relatively thin. Gluten sensitivity has existed since the dawning of the neolithic period (when the first wheat was cross-bred from wild ancestors to wheat), so it has been a part of the medical problems of our species for roughly 10,000 years before salt of glyphosate was even invented.

Though it appears that the prevalence of celiac disease has been steadily increasing in recent decades, this is mostly an illusion due to increased consumption of gluten, improved public awareness, and public pressure for doctors to stop ignoring the issue and do a better joy of diagnosing the problem. The average time from first symptoms to an official diagnosis of celiac disease is still approximately 9.7 years in this country, according to the latest published figures. Only approximately 1 in 20 cases is ever officially diagnosed.

Tex

Gigi · Post by **Gigi** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 10:37 am

Tex, absolutely I read anything originating from dr. Mercola with a strong filter. I really wasn't focusing on what the idea that the use of roundup has increased the incidence of gluten intolerance. But I did find especially interesting her comments about how the glycophospate interrupts sulfur metabolic pathways. I should have said that in the first post. I need to go back and read all that was said very carefully but it seemed there was something to that.

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:20 am

Gigi,

I've been a fan of Stephanie Seneff's research for years. Her theories about the origins of Alzheimer's disease interest me more than anything else she has done. She is a bit like me in that instead of medicine, her background is in engineering (she's an electrical engineer), but she apparently spends most of her time researching medical issues. Have you checked her home page? There are links to many of her research articles, and in the last couple of years, she's added a bunch of videos and powerpoint presentations (apparently she's learning more about the PR end of it from Dr. Mercola and others who have learned how to make the most of the Internet.

Anyway, you might find some of her other articles fascinating, if you haven't seen them before.
I find these particularly interesting:

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/alzh ... atins.html

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/why_ ... _work.html

Here's her home page.

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/

Tex

Gigi · Post by **Gigi** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:44 pm

Tex, thank you so much for those links. When I went to her home page I see that the bulk of her most recent work is focused on glyphosphate. She makes a compelling case regarding the danger it imposes. She links it not just to celiac and IBD but also to autism and obesity. Two of her points that are that glyphospate kills gut bacteria, especially bifidobacteria. Also that it chelates minerals in the gut causing deficiencies. I had the Genova GI effects test prior to Enterolab that showed that I had low levels of Bifidobacteria. Also, micronutrient testing showed I was low or deficient in all minerals.

I don't, so far, see how she comes to the conclusion that glyphosphate in our food supply is leading to gluten intolerance. Perhaps it can be said that glycophosphate exacerbates the effects of gluten sensituvity. I will take some time and read through all of the articles and presentations she has posted on her site. I'm eager to learn more about this.

Post by **tex** » Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:26 pm

Yes, if she would stick with the chemistry, she might have an interesting case. Unfortunately, as she has begun making more paid appearances at nontraditional health events, the science behind some of her claims has become pretty thin. For example, she presents a plot of autism against glyphosate application rates to corn and soy in the U.S. as a function of time, and pretends that it proves her point.

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/glyp ... osate.html

Anyone with a little experience and skill in creative graphing could easily plot hundreds of other irrelevant events against autism (and/or glyphosate application rates), with a similar dramatic correlation (but absolutely no relevance). So what if they happen to plot coincidentally? That proves absolutely nothing. You could do the same with many food additives, many medications, manufacturing practices, the use of sunscreen, the use of soy as a food ingredient, the use of cell phones, the use of various other types of technology, etc. That's fake science, because it's strictly coincidental, not cause and effect.

5 years ago she blamed obesity on nutritional deficiencies.

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/obes ... drome.html

and she blamed autism on Cholesterol Sulfate.

But yes, now she is focusing on glyphosate, because it is trendy among alternative health advocates. I was sincerely interested in her research on glyphosate until I saw that fake graph. That killed much of her credibility for me.

Apparently her strategy in trying to link glyphosate with an alleged increase in celiac disease is based on the philosophy that if you throw enough claims at an issue that is being defiled, some of the claims will stick, whether they have any basis in fact or not, simply because your audience wants to believe you, so they won't bother to check the facts.

Tex

nerdhume · Post by **nerdhume** » Mon Sep 22, 2014 4:12 am

wow that's a lot of reading, thanks for posting this. My mom died of Alzheimers so I have those genes as well as IBD. I will definitely read all of this later on.

Gigi · Post by **Gigi** » Mon Sep 22, 2014 5:45 am

Theresa, my mother has alzheimers as well. At least she has Alzheimers type dementia; who knows for sure what the etiology is. But I suspect gluten intolerance contributes to it.

As far as glyphosphhate is concerned, common sense tells me it's not good for you and should be avoided. We go a long way towards that by being gluten and soy free. Of course when they start splicing it into the genes of our foods it becomes difficult.

brookevale · Post by **brookevale** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 4:31 pm

I just read Grain Brain by Dr. Perlmutter. Very good. Much of what he wrote is similar to the links you shared, Tex. The only thing I grateful for with Dr. Mercola is that he tackles some very real problems head on like the dangers of fluoroquinolones, while mainstream medical doctors aren't doing anything about. Otherwise I get the sense he is all about making a buck. I feel the same way about Dr. Mark Hyman. He is located near me and charges a ridiculous amount to be seen at his clinic and doesn't take insurance. Anyone who self promotes the way they do I have no use for.

JFR · Post by **JFR** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:29 pm

brookevale wrote:I feel the same way about Dr. Mark Hyman. He is located near me and charges a ridiculous amount to be seen at his clinic and doesn't take insurance. Anyone who self promotes the way they do I have no use for.

I feel the same way about Mark Hyman. I live fairly close too but when I checked out his website and saw he didn't take insurance that not only ruled him out as someone I could see but put into question, for me, his motives and integrity.

Jean

Post by **tex** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:44 pm

It seems that so many of these doctors (and other Internet gurus) hand out free advice until they build up a reputation and a following and then after that (as you point out) it's all about money.

And easy money at that, because dealing with the insurance companies is a huge hassle. I agree that a doctor unwilling to take insurance has questionable motives, because that policy cuts out everyone except those for whom money is not a consideration.

It obviously implies that they consider themselves to be better than everyone else.

Tex