Glyphosate-free Molasses

slownickel brought up a good point about glyphosate use in the sugar cane industry. glyphosate is allowed to be present in molasses regardless of label titles. glyphosate could be bad for microbes. He stated he had a source of glyphosate-free sugarcane (molasses). Does anyone have an clues to what that was or an alternative that is glyphosate-free? My idea is malted barley syrup or powder.

Raw organic dark honey??
I belive the darker the honey has more minerals ect...

Organic MO should be glyphosate free. Beet MO should be glyphosate free if organic. If not organic, no. Good luck. -granger

Granger2 said:

Organic MO should be glyphosate free. Beet MO should be glyphosate free if organic. If not organic, no. Good luck. -granger

Click to expand...

This is what I found on the matter of labeling in the USA:

Sugarcane (molasses) allowable glyphosate residue maximum:
USDA Organic (maximum 1,500 ppb) vs. Glyphosate Residue Free (maximum 20 ppb)

The following findings involved a study using applications of 0, 0.5, 1, and 10x spray-solution concentrations. I cannot find a study done on what would be relative trace amounts in molasses. Interestingly, glyphosate had an inverse effect in soil media, stimulating microbial growth.


Findings:
Glyphosate was lethal to bacteria and fungi when added to soil-free media. At the recommended sprayer concentration of 50 mM, glyphosate reduced bacterial viability 1000-fold(from 107 to 104cells/g soil) on solid media, and completely eliminated fungal growth.

Increasing glyphosate to 500 mM stopped all bacterial growth. Bacterial growth rate in liquid media also declined following additions of glyphosate (Figure 1). Results were consistent for all
Garden of Eden sites, confirming that glyphosate is directly and indiscriminantly toxic to bacteria and fungi when added to soil-free media.

Contrary to the toxic response in soil-free media, glyphosate stimulated microbial growth and activity when added directly to soil. Microbial respiration, a standard measure of activity,
increased with increasing levels of glyphosate (Figure 2). The response was minor at 5 and 50 mg/ha, the estimated concentration range in the upper horizon of mineral soil following field application, and greatest at highest application rate. Again, the results were consistent for all sites. Increases in total and viable bacteria were found at the highest rate of glyphosate addition,
with Psuedomonas, Arthrobacter, Xanthomonas, and Bacillus spp. increasing in population. Fungal population size remained relatively unchanged regardless of glyphosate application rate.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9539/20c810702b44eea9bec5a0586454e6324e33.pdf

Apple; Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Glyphosate is a global evil. It is not just used for weed control but also for a so-called ripening agent for early senescence in crops so they can be harvested at a specified time. The result is glyphosate in everything; bread, cereal, pasta, soy, corn and apparently cane and sugar products. Barley and honey would also be affected. This is a sickness brought on by the greed of money-asses.

I will read over the citation concerning the supposed stimulation of soil microbes. I am dubious as many observers concentrate on specific groups of microbes while not counting other important groups.

I will state that every batch of molasses I've ever used has resulted in feeding bacteria, archaea and fungi (& yeast).

hh. I guess this would work by growing one's own beets. Love beet greens.

I drink a cup of coffee, I'm good. Drink 3 expresses and I'm a zombie.
Some weed killers are actually growth hormones.
Like giving your plant too much nitrogen. They spaz out and start producing weak cells. They die.

All things being the same, too much in our bodies will cause us to spaz out. Grow cancerous cells.
Microbes probably love the stuff. Too a point. Then they die.
I thought beets would be exempt. Not any longer.
Good topic.

Applesauce; I could find nothing untoward in the paper which you linked and am as surprised as the authors by their observations. I also concur with the hypothesis they presented to explain the increase in microbial activity from glyphosate.

I would have liked to see some protozoa counts included but this has no huge bearing on the observations.

When encountering such observations one must be reminded that, just because microbial activity is increased, does not always make it good. Diesel oil can also increase microbial activity but we know it is not good to apply to soil.

Still, for the purpose of the thread topic, it would appear the affects upon molasses produced from cane grown with glyphosate are likely negligible in the realm of use for microbial feedstock.

Glyphosate Worse than We Could Imagine. “It’s Everywhere”

Glyphosate Worse than We Could Imagine. “It’s Everywhere”

By F. William Engdahl :

Glyphosate residues have been found in tap water, orange juice, children’s urine, breast milk, chips, snacks, beer, wine, cereals, eggs, oatmeal, wheat products, and most conventional foods tested. It’s everywhere, in brief.

As new studies continue to point to a direct link between the widely-used glyphosate herbicide and various forms of cancer, the agribusiness lobby fights ferociously to ignore or discredit evidence of human and other damage. A second US court jury case just ruled that Monsanto, now a part of the German Bayer AG, must pay $ 81 million in damages to plaintiff Edwin Hardeman who contracted non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cancer. The ruling and a line-up of another 11,000 pending cases in US courts going after the effects of glyphosate, have hit Bayer AG hard with the company announcing several thousand layoffs as its stock price plunges.

In a trial in San Francisco the jury was unanimous in their verdict that Monsanto Roundup weed-killer, based on glyphosate, had been responsible for Hardeman’s cancer. His attorneys stated,

“It is clear from Monsanto’s actions that it does not care whether Roundup causes cancer, focusing instead on manipulating public opinion and undermining anyone who raises genuine and legitimate concerns about Roundup.”

It is the second defeat for the lawyers of Monsanto after another jury ruled in 2018 that Glyphosate-based Roundup was responsible for the cancer illness of a California school grounds-keeper who contracted the same form of cancer after daily spraying school grounds with Roundup over years, unprotected. There a jury found Monsanto guilty of “malice and oppression” in that company executives, based on internal email discovery, knew that their glyphosate products could cause cancer and suppressed this information from the public.

A new independent study shows that those with highest exposure to glyphosate have a 41% increased risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) cancer. A meta-analysis of six studies containing nearly 65,000 participants looked at links between glyphosate-based herbicides and immune-suppression, endocrine disruption and genetic alterations. The authors found “the same key finding: exposure to GBHs (glyphosate-based herbicides) are associated with an increased risk of NHL (Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma).” Further, they stated that glyphosate “alters the gut microbiome,” and that that could “impact the immune system, promote chronic inflammation, and contribute to the susceptibility of invading pathogens.” Glyphosate also ”may act as an endocrine disrupting chemical because it has been found recently to alter sex hormone production” in both male and female rats.

In a long-term animal study by French scientists under Gilles Eric Seralini, Michael Antoniou and associates, it was demonstrated that even ultra-low levels of glyphosate herbicides cause non-alcoholic liver disease. The levels the rats were exposed to, per kg of body weight, were far lower than what is allowed in our food supply. According to the Mayo Clinic, today, after four decades or more pervasive use of glyphosate pesticides, 100 million, or 1 out of 3 Americans now have liver disease. These diagnoses are in some as young as 8 years old.

Glyphosate from Monsanto’s Roundup Decimates Microbes in Soils and the Human Gut – New Science
But glyphosate is not only having alarming effects on human health. Soil scientists are beginning to realize the residues of glyphosate application are also having a possibly dramatic effect on soil health and nutrition, effects that can take years to restore.

Killing Soils too

While most attention is understandably drawn to the human effects of exposure to glyphosate, the most widely used agriculture chemical in the world today, independent scientists are beginning to look at another alarming effect of the agrochemical– its effect on essential soil nutrients. In a study of the health of soils in the EU, the online journal Politico.eu found that the effects of spraying of glyphosate on the major crops in European agriculture is having disastrous consequences on soil health in addition to killing weeds.

Scientists at Austria’s University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Vienna showed that casting activity of earthworms had nearly disappeared from the surface of farmland within three weeks of glyphosate application. Casting is the process of the worm pushing fertile soils to the surface as they burrow, essential for healthy soil and plant nutrition. A study at Holland’s Wageningen University of topsoil samples from more than 300 soil sites across the EU found that 83% of the soils contained 1 or more pesticide residues. Not surprisingly,

“Glyphosate and its metabolite AMPA, DDTs (DDT and its metabolites) and broad-spectrum fungicides… were the compounds most frequently found in soil samples and at the highest concentrations.”

The use of various pesticides, above all glyphosate-based ones like Roundup, has exploded over the past four decades across the EU much as across the USA. The agribusiness industry claims that this has been the key to the dramatic rise in farm crop productivity. However if we look more closely at the data, while average yields of major grains such as rice, wheat and maize have more than doubled since 1960, the use of pesticides like glyphosate-based ones has risen by 15-20-fold. Oddly enough, while the EU requires monitoring of many things, monitoring of pesticide residues in soil is not required at the EU level. Until recently the effects of heavy use of pesticides such as Roundup have been ignored in scientific research.

Evidence of soil experts is beginning to reveal clear links between use of pesticides such as glyphosate and dramatic drops in soil fertility and the collapse of microbe systems essential to healthy soil. Worms are one of the most essential.

It’s well-established that earthworms play a vital role in healthy soil nutrients. Soils lacking such are soils that deprive us of the essentials we need for healthy diets, a pandemic problem of soil depletion emerging globally over the past four decades, notably the same time frame that use of pesticides has exploded worldwide. Earthworms are beneficial as they enhance soil nutrient cycling and enhance other beneficial soil micro-organisms, and the concentration of large quantities of nutrients easily assimilable by plants.

The EU puts no limits on how much glyphosate can be put on crops even though it is established that glyphosate can kill specific fungi and bacteria that plants need to suck up nutrients in addition to its effects on earthworms. That is a major blind spot.

Where now?

What is becoming clearer is the colossal and obviously deliberate official blind eye given to potential dangers of glyphosate-based pesticides by regulatory bodies not only in the EU and the USA, but also in China, which today produces more glyphosate than even Monsanto. Since the Monsanto Roundup patent expired, Chinese companies, including Syngenta, Zhejiang Xinan Chemical Industrial Group Company, SinoHarvest, and Anhui Huaxing Chemical Industry Company, have emerged as the world’s major producers of the chemical as well as largest consumers, a not good omen for the future of the legendary Chinese cuisine.

Glyphosate is the base chemical component for some 750 different brands of pesticides worldwide, in addition to Monsanto-Bayer’s Roundup. Glyphosate residues have been found in tap water, orange juice, children’s urine, breast milk, chips, snacks, beer, wine, cereals, eggs, oatmeal, wheat products, and most conventional foods tested. It’s everywhere, in brief.

Despite the overwhelming evidence, however, EU Commission bureaucrats and the USA EPA continue to ignore prudence in not banning the toxic chemical pending thorough independent investigation over longer time. If I were cynical, I would almost think this continued official support for glyphosate-based herbicides is about more than mere bureaucratic stupidity or ignorance, even more than simply corruption, though that for sure plays a role. The nutritional quality of our food chain is being systematically destroyed and it is about more than corporate agribusiness profit.

Source: https://www.globalresearch.ca/glyphosate-worse/5674472



F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.


RMS

I've seen pieces of sugar cane being sold locally in a grocer.

I bet a person could put that thru a blender and make their own dilute molasses.

I'm surprised I don't see people use Maple Syrup. It's full of minerals also.

Not only glyphosate but other chemicals combined contribute to many health problems in this country and the world. Sickness and disease for example obesity and diabetes have replaced health. It is difficult to separate major ag pharma rhetoric propaganda from some of the main or special financial interests, in other words a large source of money itself.


Hospitals pharma and tech companies are partners in this as they all produce chemical waste which is a direct source of pollution cancer and other disease. These poisonous entities continue to morph their lies and deny responsibility. To give an illustrative example a cell phone company is not going to advertise pollution from mining minerals or factory worker conditions and wages at their retail outlet on the other side of the globe. In other words the human cost or real cost which isn't expressed by a currency number.


Recently cnbc showed a 30+ minute story on how the banana industry is not affected by a virus. When in truth imported bananas have been inedible for years. The piece plays like propaganda for the southern US based companies. If you're familiar with reefer madness it is similar. When you think about whether anyone is listening to that, seeing that it is done as an advertisement, biased rather than informational, it is interesting. I can see what someone might call state news, something like that. To me it is slanted and not true, from my point of view those are facts.


A consumer must ask to clarify a lot of this as far as I can tell. If you call a hay or straw producer to ask what the fields have been treated with, they may not always know the answer but it is a start. The same is true for everything all inputs I suppose. Ask which if any herbicides pesticides fertilizers were used. One way is to ask how the crop and soil were treated comprehensively. This should avoid any confusion about what is and isn't allowed. Nothing is allowed, explain each input used. Instead of attempting to list what isn't allowed.


The phrase think global, act local rings true here. It may be a multinational conglomerate several states away or your next door neighbor using chemical products of the fracking shale oil and natural gas industries which degrade the environment and adversely affect human health. There is no such thing as property or mine and yours when the use of such products harms the environment and health for everyone. These entities, industries which partner together have caused physical and mental social economic decay with no admission of wrongdoing. That is just following war and colonization so really it should come as no surprise. Being able to resolve or clarify some of this can help inform future decisions for your health, loved ones etc.

troutman said:

I've seen pieces of sugar cane being sold locally in a grocer.

I bet a person could put that thru a blender and make their own dilute molasses.

I'm surprised I don't see people use Maple Syrup. It's full of minerals also.

Click to expand...

C+ quality Maple Syrup is full of minerals, but the price is where i live around EUR 11 per 500 ml
Organic blackstrap molasses is around €2.99 per 450 grams.Big difference.

I tend to use what I eat.
Coconut syrup, agave, maple syrup.
I have it already and don’t use that much. Pocket change.

mexcurandero420 said:

C+ quality Maple Syrup is full of minerals, but the price is where i live around EUR 11 per 500 ml
Organic blackstrap molasses is around €2.99 per 450 grams.Big difference.

Click to expand...

Well there you go.

zifozonke said:

Raw organic dark honey??
I belive the darker the honey has more minerals ect...

Click to expand...

Honey is a antimicrobial.

Is molasses even necessary to grow good herb? I've tried using it a few times over the years and never noticed a difference.... Its unfortunate that even the air we breathe is tainted with Glyphosate... I don't think there is even a way around it...

BubbaBear said:

Honey is a antimicrobial.

Click to expand...

Just needs water stirred in to ferment. Molasses is for cookies.. Table sugar and fruit gets processed much faster. I'm sure organic means no gw/Monsanto? Maybe when you pluck it yourself, miles away from civilization?

Raw organic dark honey??
I belive the darker the honey has more minerals ect...

Click to expand...

I'd be careful with the honey, it contains antibiotics that might kill certain microorganisms and encourage other weird ones you don't want. The antibiotics, wax, and other stuff in the honey prevents it from breaking down as smoothly as cane sugar for instance. It could stick around long enough and smell strong enough to attract unwanted friends, bees, wasps, rats, opossums, raccoons, bears, etc.

When I was beekeeping I'd get the dark honey later in the year, sometimes with strong molasses type flavors. I don't know about it containing more minerals, it depends on what the forage is. I know they were foraging ivy which is darker. Some of the dark honey is actually honeydew from insects I think they were collecting it late in the season when the flowers were dried out. There's a scale insect that lives on pine tree sap they collect the dew from, I think it's where some of the funky spicy flavors I was getting came from. The consistency is weird too, sometimes super thick and hard to extract, other times almost watery.

Mead.