《世界新闻》网站：应禁绝草甘膦除草剂

admin

到了宣布对野草化学战争停火的时候

《人民食物主权》志愿者翻译团队编译自《世界新闻》网站：

http://worldnewss.net/its-time-t ... mical-war-on-weeds/

原载：

http://www.examiner.com/article/ ... emical-war-on-weeds

Nancy Swanson  June 8, 2015 11:19 AM MST

南希·斯万森  2015年6月8日



As the war on weeds gears up for summer, the London-based Institute for Science in Society publishes a Manifesto on Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup. The Manifesto was published today, June 8, and already 155 scientists and medical professionals have signed, calling on all governments to ban glyphosate-based herbicides. The Manifesto states in part:

随着迎接夏天到来，对野草的战争也将升级，设在伦敦的《面向社会的科学研究所》发表了《针对草甘膦的宣言》。草甘膦是除草剂农达的活性成分。6月8日发表的这个宣言已经获得了世界各地155位科学家与医学专业人士签署，呼吁各国政府禁绝草甘膦除草剂：


Independent Scientists Manifesto on Glyphosate

独立科学家针对草甘膦的宣言

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Independ ... o_on_Glyphosate.php

More than 80 scientists worldwide are calling on governments at all levels to ban the spraying of glyphosate herbicides, based on overwhelming evidence of harm from scientific studies and witness testimonies compiled by the group.

世界各地80多位科学家，根据他们汇集的关于草甘膦危害汇的巨量科学研究与证人证词，呼吁各国各级政府禁绝喷洒草甘膦除草剂。



Please circulate widely and forward to your local government representatives

请广泛传播并且提交给你们当地的政府代表。



This letter has been signed by 292 scientists and 408 non-scientists from 46 different countries - add your name

这个宣言已获得46个国家292位科学家与408非科学家人士的签署。



We, the undersigned international scientists and medical professionals, call on governments at all levels to ban the spraying of glyphosate herbicides. As professionals who have read the literature on glyphosate herbicides and their effects, we have concluded that they are causing irreparable harm.

我们，签署该宣言的国际科学家与医学专业人士，呼吁各国各级政府禁绝草甘膦除草剂。作为阅读了有关草甘膦及其影响文献的专业人士，我们得出的结论是草甘膦除草剂在造成不可挽回的伤害。



The World Health Organization’s recent reclassification of glyphosate as a 'probable human carcinogen' is only a small part of the known toxicity of glyphosate herbicides. Chronic exposure to glyphosate herbicides is associated not only with cancers, but also with infertility, impotence, abortions, birth defects, neurotoxicity, hormonal disruption, immune reactions, an unnamed fatal kidney disease, chronic diarrhoea, autism and other ailments.”

“世界卫生组织最近重新将草甘膦分类为‘对人类可能的致癌物’，但这仅仅是草甘膦除草剂已知的毒性的一小部分。长期接触草甘膦除草剂不仅与癌症关联，也与不孕不育、阳痿、流产、生育缺陷神经毒性、激素干扰、免疫反应、不知名致命肾疾病、慢性拉稀、自闭症与其他疾病关联。”



In addition to human diseases, glyphosate herbicides are linked to more than 40 new and re-emerging major crop diseases.  They are causing irreparable harm to the entire food web; including the plant kingdom, beneficial microbes that supply nutrients to our crops and soils, fish and other aquatic life, amphibians, butterflies, bees, birds, mammals, and the human microbiome.

除了人类疾病，草甘膦除草剂还与40多种主要作物疾病关联，这些疾病有些是新的，有些是复出的。它们对整个食物网造成不可挽回的伤害，包括植物界、对我们农作物与土壤供应营养物的有益微生物、鱼类与其他水生生物，两栖动物、蝴蝶、蜜蜂、鸟类、哺乳动物，与人类自身的微生物系统。



For the sake of the planet, our children and our grandchildren, all spraying of glyphosate herbicides should be immediately replaced with eco-friendly alternatives that restore damaged food webs. We urge you to have the courage to stop the destruction of life on our planet as leaders for future generations.

为我们的星球、我们的孩子与后代子孙，必须立即停止所有草甘膦除草剂的喷洒，转用生态友好替代方法，使遭受损害的食物网络得以恢复。我们催促你们作为领导，为了子孙后代，拿出勇气终止对我们星球生命的摧毁。

  Scientific reviews, papers, and witness testimonies are presented here:科学评论、论文与证人证词提交如下：


Research papers on glyphosate herbicides compiled by Dr Alex Vasquez:

（阿根廷）Alex Vasquez医生汇集的关于草甘膦除草剂的研究论文：

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/pdf/Glyp ... Dr_Alex_Vasquez.pdf  

Glyphosate crop interactions reviewed by Dr Don Huber:

（美国）Don Huber博士对草甘膦与农作物相互作用的审查报告：

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/pdf/Glyp ... by_Dr_Don_Huber.pdf

A Roundup of Roundup Reveals Converging Pattern of Toxicity from Farm to Clinic to Laboratory Studies:

对农达的汇总研究揭示从农场、临床到实验室研究毒性模式的合流：



http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Roundup_of_Roundup.php

Signature collection is ongoing. If you are a scientist or medical professional, you may sign the Manifesto

here.

对该项宣言的联署支持签名在继续。如果你是一位科学家或者医学专业人士，你可以在这里签署：http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Independ ... o_on_Glyphosate.php



Non-scientists can sign a separate list in support of the Manifesto. If your local government is spraying toxic herbicides in a war on weeds, you can print out the Manifesto and present it to your officials.

非科学家人士可以在另外一个名单签署支持这个宣言。如果你的当地政府在对付野草的战争中继续喷洒有毒的除草剂，你可以将这个宣言打印出来提交给你们当地的官员。



In Washington state there are six counties that have adopted a no-spray policy. They are: Thurston, Snohomish, Clallam, Jefferson, San Juan and Island. If you don't live in one of these counties, then your county is likely spraying a highly toxic substance, increasing exposure for all life forms, at taxpayer expense.



在美国华盛顿州，已经有六个县采纳了“不喷洒除草剂”政策。他们是：Thurston, Snohomish, Clallam, Jefferson, San Juan 与Island。如果你没有居住在这些县，那么你的县可能依然在喷洒这些高毒性物质，增加对所有生命的危害，而由纳税人承担喷洒费用。



Why should you be concerned?为什么你应当关注？
The EPA evaluated 271 case reports of injury resulting from glyphosate exposure between 2002 and 2008. The reported exposures were primarily from people who had sprayed glyphosate in their yards and gardens. The EPA reported 98 (36%) cases of neurological symptoms, including seizures, unconsciousness, neuropathy, dizziness, tremor, malaise, anxiety, slurred speech, loss of coordination, numbness & tingling, lethargy, confusion and difficulty concentrating; 80 (30%) cases of dermal symptoms, including blisters, lesions, hives, rash, redness, swelling, peeling, burning, itching and soreness; 13 (5%) cases of gastro-intestinal symptoms, including vomiting, nausea, abdominal cramps, blood in urine & stool, and diarrhea; 28 (10%) cases of upper-respiratory symptoms, including fluid and blood in lungs, pneumonia, bronchitis, sore throat, congestion, sinusitis, coughing, choking, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing and heavy breathing; 39 (14%) cases of ocular symptoms, including corneal abrasion, redness, burning, swelling, itching, blurred vision; 1 case of cardiovascular symptoms of chest pain, tachycardia, irregular heartbeat and palpitations; 10 (4%) cases of some combination of the above; and 2 cases of no adverse symptoms. Also reported were: vomiting blood, low platelet count, fatigue, loss of appetite, fever, chills, salivary gland swelling, muscle and joint pain.

美国环保署（EPA）评价了2002年至2008年之间接触草甘膦造成的271项损害实例报告。报告中接触草甘膦的主要是在庭院与花园中喷洒草甘膦的人。EPA报告了98项（36%）神经症状，包括癫痫、昏迷,神经病变,头晕、震颤、不适、焦虑、口齿不清、运动的协调性丧失、麻木和刺痛、嗜睡、混乱、难以集中注意力；80项（30%）皮肤症状，包括水泡、病变、荨麻疹、皮疹、发红、肿胀、脱皮、燃烧、瘙痒和疼痛；13项（5%）胃肠症状，包括呕吐、恶心、腹部痉挛、尿与粪便带血和腹泻；28项（10%）上呼吸道症状，包括肺部有液体和血，肺炎、支气管炎、喉咙痛、拥堵、鼻窦炎、咳嗽、窒息、呼吸急促、呼吸困难和呼吸沉重；39项（14%）眼部症状，包括角膜擦伤、发红、灼烧、肿胀、发痒、视力模糊、1例心血管症状胸痛、心跳过速、不规则的心跳和心悸；10项（4%）上述某些症状合并症；以及2例没有不良症状。报告的症状还有：吐血、低血小板计数、疲劳、食欲不振、发热、寒战、唾腺肿胀、肌肉和关节疼痛。



Because glyphosate readily binds to metals, it causes mineral deficiencies in our bodies. It bioaccumulates in our organs and muscle tissue. Glyphosate has also been detected in our urine and breast milk.

由于草甘膦容易与金属螯合，它造成我们体内矿物质缺乏症。它在我们的器官与肌肉组织中生物蓄积。草甘膦在我们的尿样与母乳中检测到。



Several studies have shown that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor. There are no “safe” levels of endocrine disruptors. Endocrine disrupting chemicals act at extremely low concentrations and this response invalidates the dogma of 'the dose makes the poison.' In 2009 Gasnier et al. published an article in the journal Toxicology citing evidence that glyphosate-based herbicides are endocrine disruptors with “...the first endocrine disrupting actions at 0.5 ppm [parts per million]." Compare this to the EPA 'safe' level of 0.7 ppm for drinking water.

数项研究表明草甘膦是一种内分泌干扰剂。内分泌干扰剂没有“安全”剂量。内分泌干扰化学品在非常低浓度发生作用，所以“剂量致毒”的教条不适用于这种情况。2009年，Gasnier et al.在《毒理学》杂志发表了一篇论文，列举证据证实草甘膦除草剂在“0.05 ppm浓度造成内分泌干扰作用”。把这种浓度与美国环保署（EPA）对饮水规定的草甘膦残留“安全”水平0.7 ppm比较看看。



Monsanto, maker of glyphosate, has lost lawsuits that challenged their claim that glyphosate is biodegradable in both New York and France. A report by Mercurio et al. showed that glyphosate can persist in sea water for up to 315 days!

孟山都，草甘膦的制造商，声称草甘膦“生物降解”。在纽约与法国孟山都输掉了挑战它这种说法的法律诉讼。 Mercurio et al.发表的报告表明草甘膦在海水中保持其作用的时间长达315天。



What about EPA approval of glyphosate?如何理解美国环保署（EPA）对草甘膦的批准？


World-wide government regulatory authorities only require that the active ingredient be tested for toxicity. The actual product, containing surfactants and 'inert' ingredients is not tested. This allows the manufacturers to change the formulation at any time without any oversight.

世界范围内，政府监管机构仅要求对活性成分进行毒性测试。实际的产品则既含表面活性剂又有“惰性”成分，却没有经过测试。这就允许制造商可以在没有任何细查情况下随时改变农药的配方。



According to Vallianatos & Jenkins, authors of Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA, the scientific credibility of the EPA has been damaged due to the history of fraud in the testing of these toxic chemicals that has been going on for decades.

依据《毒化的春天--污染与美国环保署秘史》作者Vallianatos（退休前卫美国环保署EPA科学家）与Jenkins（记者）的看法：因为已经有数十年毒性化学品试验的欺诈历史，美国环保署的科学信誉已经严重受损。



Vallianatos quotes the EPA scientist Adrian Gross as saying that EPA scientists don't actually read the studies they get from the chemical companies, but it's a “cut-and-paste business.”

Vallianatos引用美国环保署科学家Adrian Gross的话：EPA的科学家并非认真阅读他们从化学公司获得的研究，而是“剪切与粘贴”。



According to Vallianatos, “Staff scientists were openly using industry's own in-house (and therefore inherently biased) science in the formal approval process of dangerous chemicals. This was not oversight, it was rubber-stamping” [p. 123].

依据Vallianatos，“EPA就职的科学家在危险化学品正式的审批程序中公开使用产业自己的（因此内在有偏见的）科学报告。这不是失察，这是成为橡皮图章”[《毒化的春天》第123页]。



Chapter 7 gives a hair-raising account of how data is fabricated and falsified in these industry studies. According to Gross, such studies are unreliable “because EPA toxicologists don't really review them. ... Instead, they go straight to the company's summary and lift it word for word and give it as their own evaluation of those studies” [p. 130].

第7章揭露了这些产业研究中如何令人发指欺骗与伪造数据。依据EPA科学家Gross，这些研究不可靠“EPA的毒理学家不是真正审查他们。... 而是，他们直接看公司研究的摘要，抄录其中的文字，当成自己对那些研究的评价”[《毒化的春天》第130页]



A new assessment report has been due out by the EPA for some time now. One reason for the delay is that the European reassessment has been delayed and the EPA is relying on renewal in the EU as part of their justification for renewal. Germany is the rapporteur member state (RMS) responsible for the safety review on glyphosate in Europe. The RMS submits the renewal assessment report to the European Food Safety Authority with a recommendation on whether or not to renew registration for glyphosate use in the EU.

美国环保署（EPA）理应公布的对草甘膦的新评估报告已经拖延了相当一段时间。延迟的一个理由是欧盟的重新评估也推迟了，而EPA依赖于欧盟的更新作为他们更新批准理由的一部分。德国是欧洲负责对草甘膦做安全性审查的报告成员国（RMS）。报告成员国将他们的重新评估报告提交给欧洲食品安全机构（EFSA），同时关于是否更新草甘膦在欧盟的使用登记提出自己的意见。



The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung) is responsible for advising the European Food Safety Authority on glyphosate.

德国联邦风险评估研究所（Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung）负责给欧洲食品安全机构（EFSA）提供关于草甘膦的意见。



The Glyphosate Task Force, a consortium of chemical and biotechnology companies in Europe, headed by Monsanto Europe, prepared the dossier that was submitted to Germany requesting the re-approval of glyphosate.

《草甘膦特遣队》是以孟山都欧洲为首的化学与生物技术公司组成的财团，他们准备了提交给德国方面申请重新批准草甘膦的资料档案。



The toxicology section consists, almost in its entirety, of the word-for-word assessment submitted by the Glyphosate Task Force.

德国联邦风险评估研究所向欧洲食品安全机构（EFSA）提交的关于草甘膦毒理学的全部意见，几乎一个字一个字抄录了《草甘膦特遣队》提交的评估报告。



In the toxicology portion of the report, it clearly states:

德国联邦风险评估研究所报告中的毒理学部分，清楚写明：



“Due to the large number of submitted toxicological studies, the RMS was not able to report the original studies in detail and an alternative approach was taken instead. The study descriptions and assessments as provided by the GTF were amended by deletion of redundant parts and new enumeration of tables. Each new study was commented by the RMS. These remarks are clearly distinguished from the original submission by a caption, are always written in italics and may be found on the bottom of the individual study summaries.”

“由于提交的毒理学研究数量巨大，报告员成员国未能对原始研究详细报告而是采取了替代的方法。报告员成员国对《草甘膦特遣队》提供的研究描述与评估进行了修改，删除其重复的部分，重新编制数据列表。报告员成员国对每个新的研究提出了看法。这些看法，通过每项研究的摘要底下添加的斜体字的标题与原先提交的内容明显区别。”



In other words, the German Institute didn’t even bother to cut and paste. They just added a few comments in italics. The German reassessment of glyphosate was performed by the chemical companies via the Glyphosate Task Force. In the US, the glyphosate review dossier was submitted to the EPA by the Joint Glyphosate Task Force.

换句话说，德国的研究所甚至连剪切与粘贴都没有做。他们仅用斜体字添加了某些看法。也就是说，德国向欧盟食品安全机构（EFSA）提交的对草甘膦提交的重新评估报告事实上通过《草甘膦特遣队》由化学公司提供。在美国，对草甘膦进行审查的资料档案也由联合草甘膦特遣队提交给美国环保署。



An Environmental Protection Agency memo dated October 30, 1991 states that the EPA classified glyphsate as a possible carcinogen in 1985. In this 1991 memo, without any justification, this classification was changed to Not Carcinogenic. Three scientists refused to sign, two of whom wrote beside their name: Do Not Concur. This document contains data that clearly shows a statistically significant increase in tumors in laboratory animals treated with glyphosate. But because there weren't more tumors in the group of animals who received a higher dose of glyphosate than there were in the group that received a lower dose, Monsanto, relying on the the 'dose makes the poison' dogma, made the claim that the tumors could not be related to glyphosate.

美国环保署日期为1991年10月30日的备忘录写明，美国环保署1985年曾将草甘膦分类为可能的致癌物。这个1991年的备忘录，在提供没有任何理由的情况下，又将草甘膦的分类改为“非致癌物”。三位科学家拒绝签署这个备忘录，两位科学家在他们的姓名旁注明“不同意”。这个文件包含的数据清楚表明，草甘膦处理的实验动物中，肿瘤的增加有显著的统计学意义。但是因为接受了更高剂量草甘膦处理组发生肿瘤数量不比低剂量草甘膦处理组更多，孟山都，依赖于“剂量致毒”的教条，宣称这些肿瘤与草甘膦无关。



Suggested Links推荐链接
Monsanto sued in Los Angeles County for false advertising

孟山都在洛杉矶县因欺诈广告遭到起诉

European glyphosate reassessment is corrupt

欧洲草甘膦重新评估已经腐败

Seventeen reasons to ban glyphosate

必须禁绝草甘膦的十七个理由

Connect the dots!

将点连接起来

Roundup: so safe you can drink it?   

农达：安全到你可以喝它？

参考资料：


全国各地各界六百多人士致国务院法制办公室请愿信

博文：http://t.cn/R2K4ckp 微博：http://weibo.com/1269923485/Cl63FzNwK



拉美与欧洲十七个非政府组织关于草甘膦除草剂造成全球性灾难致中国人民、习近平主席与李克强总理的公开信

博文：http://t.cn/R2yUGiO  微博：http://weibo.com/1269923485/CiH3kxaYR



1766人士联署支持反转挺生态农业《公开信》与“八点建议”