EPA Responds to Moms

Agency_Response_to_Moms_Across_America_6_26_2014-page-001.jpg 

Agency_Response_to_Moms_Across_America_6_26_2014-page-002.jpg

Agency_Response_to_Moms_Across_America_6_26_2014-page-003.jpg

Agency_Response_to_Moms_Across_America_6_26_2014-page-004.jpg

Agency_Response_to_Moms_Across_America_6_26_2014-page-005.jpg

 

 Moms Across America reads this and is outraged by the lack of precaution the EPA chooses to exercise.

They are NOT protecting our children, but instead choosing to give more importance to the "studies" that show that glyphosate is "safe" by the chemical companies than on independent, world renowned, ( including MIT)  scientists, doctors and moms. This is erring on the side of corruption, not protection.

We gave them studies CLEARLY showing the destruction of the gut bacteria of chickens at .10 ppm by glyphosate, endocrine disruption and testimonials from moms that warrant immediate investigation into glyphosate. 

We will continue to do whatever it takes to protect our children.

Today we go to the EPA, we will stand out side with our message "Recall Roundup!"  and we will offer the EPA and Washington DC Senate staffers an opportunity to find out for free, how much glyphosate is in their body.

If it's so safe, what's the harm in being informed? 

We ask for your continued support of our campaigns. Please chip in and donate to cover transportation and materials.

We are a national coalition of Unstoppable Moms! 

Thank you to ALL Of our supporters!

www.momsacrossamerica.com/donate

Zen Honeycutt

Moms Across America Team

 


Showing 8 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Ruth
    followed this page 2016-10-20 10:48:02 -0700
  • Andy A.
    commented 2014-08-10 18:06:47 -0700
    Hi Zen. Congratulations on getting the opportunity to receive feedback from the EPA. I hope that it was helpful.

    You and Henry Rowlands are extremely effective activists, but my main question about your ‘glyphosate in milk’ study is, who designed it? Perhaps I’m reading too much into this secrecy—do you have a “stealth” scientist, who doesn’t want to be identified? In my whole career, I honestly can’t think of any scientist who would not want to get visibility for their work, but surprisingly, there is no name attached to your report. You do mention the lab the performed the assays on milk, but am I right in assuming that these folks were not actually involved in the design? Your website often talks about secrecy, conspiracy, and lack of transparency, so this would be a great opportunity to set a better example!
  • Daniel Goldstein
    commented 2014-07-08 17:34:31 -0700
    Much of the information here or on your facebook page regarding reproductive outcomes and health effects attributed to glyphosate would be regarded by the majority of scientists and regulators around the globe to be incorrect. While it is apparent in my e-mail address, in the interest of transparency I would note that I am a pediatrician, clinical pharmacologist, and medical toxicologist and that I am a Senior Science Fellow and Lead for Medical Sciences and Outreach at Monsanto.
    http://monsantoblog.com/2013/07/03/a-pediatricians-inside-monsanto/

    In regards to the statements regarding infant mortality, rates have been in decline since at least 2005 according to the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db120.htm . Primary infertility rates in the US are mid-range for developed nations, which have higher rates in part due to delays in childbearing. The primary infertility rate has been level for the last 28 years- since before the advent of GM crops. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr067.pdf

    I would recommend that you see the statement and Q&A by teh German Institute for Risk assessment, which just completed its initial evaluation for glyphosate in the EU:" In conclusion of this re-evaluation process of the active substance glyphosate by BfR the available data do not show carcinogenic or mutagenic properties of glyphosate nor that glyphosate is toxic to fertility, reproduction or embryonal/fetal development in laboratory animals." http://www.bfr.bund.de/en/the_bfr_has_finalised_its_draft_report_for_the_re_evaluation_of_glyphosate-188632.html
    http://www.bfr.bund.de/en/frequently_asked_questions_on_the_health_assessment_of_glyphosate-127871.html

    Glyphosate has never been classified as an endocrine disrupter by the EPA. It was included in the first tier screening as a high use molecule which already had extensive reproductive studies in animals available from multiple registrants (Monsanto is not the only maker or seller)- in part because the validation of a test requires that one observe both negative and positive results. The federal register announcement makes very clear that included compounds are not determined to be endocrine disrupters. Glyphosate exposure has been associated with a reduced time to pregnancy- not with infertility. I would not claim this as a benefit, mind you- only pointing out that the allegation that glyphosate accounts for infertility is not consistent with the data. The reproductive epidemiology of glyphosate has recently been reviewed. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230011001516

    As noted by Genetic Literacy Project, the breast milk glyphosate concentrations appear to represent either a highly unusual level of exposure or an analytical problem based on the known properties and metabolism of glyphosate. http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/05/06/mass-general-pediatrics-chief-says-glyphosate-poses-no-danger-in-breast-milk/

    Given the manner in which these results are currently being interpreted on your website, and given the benefits of breast feeding, I am rather concerned that your efforts may do more harm than good, and would inquire as to whether this program has undergone IRB bioethical review as would be expected for an academic or industry research program involving measurement of human body fluids.
  • Kathleen Hallal
    commented 2014-07-03 12:14:03 -0700
    If you could send me any lifetime studies of the effects of Roundup, I would greatly appreciate it. The only one I can find is the toxicity study published by Seralini, which I know you would not accept because it does not look good for Roundup or for GMOs. Can you show me one other? All of the industry studies seem to be short term, and you could test cigarettes short term and they would look fine. The issue here is CHRONIC exposure over the long term. A 3 month test is pretty worthless to me as a mother. Also, can you give me a reason why we need so many EPI pens in the school nurses’ offices now? The numbers are STAGGERING. Why is food poison now for kids? Why can food kill them? I had never even heard of this as a child. Can you offer an explanation? Why? Why should children’s bodies see food as a threat? Maybe there is some new quality to the food that sets off a reaction? Hmmm…
  • Kathleen Hallal
    commented 2014-07-03 11:43:25 -0700
    And, just so you know, organic sales are going up because our kids are sick and we are trying to avoid buying pesticides :) And do you know what? It is WORKING. That is why I know there is a link. Because of what is happening with mothers seeing improvement in their children’s health when their diets are cleaned up!
  • Kathleen Hallal
    commented 2014-07-03 11:38:44 -0700
    Okay, Mrs. Pesticide Industry. I get where you are coming from now. Well, I think organophosphates are destroying our health. And eating the current cocktail PLUS the 2,4-d they are desperately trying to get into our food due to the failing GMO pesticide “technology” is just going to escalate the chemical warfare and create more health problems. But then, what do I know? I am just a stupid mother who thinks feeding more pesticides to our children and families is a bad idea. I will take the mild pesticides used in organic any day. And don’t bring up the stupid Bt deal. Yes, Bt is used on organics, in its natural form, and it can be washed off. The Bt in all of the GMOs is systemic and goes into our bodies at full strength because it is never hit by the UV rays that kills it on the outside of foods. What is more, it colonizes and forms a factory in our guts. Been linked to leaky gut and leukemia in scientific studies. How about you keep eating Roundup and throw in some 2,4-D and other adjuvants, and my family won’t? IN ADDITION, your line that we have been eating GMOs for hundreds of years is just a lie. No we have not. We have been eating food that was cross-bred. Like species. Not freaky combos created in a lab using randomly shot genes that are activated using bacteria and viruses. That is all new my dear. GMOs are out there failing in the mid west. I talk to farmers every day, and more and more of them are looking to buy non-GMO seed and switch back. Monsanto knows it, they are selling less of it each year, non? But they are selling more Roundup, as desperate farmers are applying more and more trying to defeat the super weeds which now cover more than 50% of all US farmland. It is a disaster. Texas cotton farmers are actually begging for permission to use toxic carcinogens on their crops because they cannot get rid of the weeds that have been created by applying pesticide 24/7. Darwinsm. Yup! Maybe putting all of that herbicide and insecticide out there all day long was not such a hot idea. (There were FDA scientists who went on record predicting this, but it looked too profitable to pay them any attention. Shame.) Maybe only using it as needed would have been a better concept. But then there would be no patents, and so GMO companies could not control the food supply. It is all going the other way now. You can deny for as long as you like, but GMOs are failing farmers (yields are dropping, too, and they fail in drought), and moms would prefer not to feed their kids MORE pesticides, thank you very much. The EPA can continue to approve everything like they do, and they can continue to raise and raise and raise the “acceptable” levels of pesticides that we consume- but we are no longer going to buy them. Plain and simple. Why? We care about the health of our families, and of all of the children. I don’t think mixing pesticide with food is such a great idea. You might, but I don’t. We want our bees back, too.
  • Kathleen Hallal
    commented 2014-07-02 16:06:15 -0700
    @ Clare – yes, you have a point. Let’s do both. Independent testing and then jump through the EPAs hoops. However, I don’t see any real concern on their part. I wish I were wrong, but they do bow to industry. The health graphs put together by Epidemiologist Nancy Swanson should be extreme cause for alarm, and our government should be JUMPING UP AND DOWN to get to the root of it. The graphs were created from the CDC’s own figures. They are alarming, and health problems are going straight UP. Instead, we get crickets and yawns from those we pay in Washington. It is shameful. If they cared, they would be jumping on this and conducting more studies. But they don’t. They sit back and do NOTHING. (It is almost as if they do not want to know.) Autism rates? Food allergies? Autoimmune issues? SKYROCKETING. Our government is doing nothing at all to find the source. So, we will do it ourselves. You call it scaremongering, I call it getting something done. Anything. I hope, Clare, that your children are healthy and that you can enjoy the fruits of your labors working for the pesticide industry. I have a hard time admiring them. Although their lobbyists are really something, aren’t they? Oh! And, during the Middle Ages, all scholars insisted the earth was flat. Imagine that! I call scientists who ignore the studies that are ALREADY PUBLISHED AND PEER REVIEWED proving harm from Roundup “Flat Earthers.” There is a danger out there, and we have to find out what it is! If the government will not look into it, we have no choice but to figure it out ourselves. The first place to look is in our fields. Do you know why? Because the animals fed GMOs have similar health problems to our kids. And there is hope, because when the GMOs are eliminated (and hence the Roundup), the animals get better. Maybe there is hope for our children, too. What do you think?
  • Kathleen Hallal
    commented 2014-07-02 10:57:25 -0700
    You all need to read “Poison Spring” about the EPA. It is eye-opening. I think we should just get a test out there that every mom can do on her own milk so that moms can just KNOW and skip the EPA all together. Just my two cents :)
Return Policy: You may return any item purchased from the Moms Across America Health Solutions Store for any reason within thirty (30) days of purchase. Unopened bottles can be shipped back and be refunded within 30 days. Opened bottles can be shipped back and given store credit. Shipping and handling charges are non-refundable. Moms Across America reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to reject returns that do not comply with these requirements. All other sales are final.

Disclaimers: Any statements about the products we offer have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. The products we offer are not intended to treat, diagnose, cure, or prevent any disease. There is no guarantee of specific results for the products we offer and the results can vary.