To whom it may concern.
I had no intention of sending a submission to this Advisory Group but I have heard so much nonsense spoken on the UK radio and in the Press that I could no longer remain silent.
One spokesman for the farming community actually had the nerve to suggest that if endocrine disrupting chemicals used in farming should be banned then so should water because water contains residues of endocrine disrupting birth control drugs. That is perfectly true of course and some two decades ago scientists demonstrated that fish changed sex because of the low levels of oestrogen mimics in river water. It is not reported if any of those pollutants came from agriculture.
Can one pollutant that is known to cause harm be used as a reason for continuing to use other pollutants with the same property? This is corrupted science.
It was known and published in the 1950s that even very small changes in hormone levels can trigger dangerous adverse health effects. To quote " Hormones, always in astoundingly small quantities usually weighed in millionths of grams, often start reaction chains that influence the entire future course of the life process. They serve not as building stones but rather as executive officers, organising and directing growth, differentiation and maintenance of organisms by control over enzymatic chemical transformations. Their importance becomes most evident in their failures, under pathologic conditions and in senescence."
Even at that time there was recognition of the direct link between hormones and the nervous system. To quote "one speaks also of neurohormones, insect and plant hormones. There is a tendency to apply the name to any substance which carries inductive excitation from one part of the body to another. In this wider formulation the hormones appear in the role of chemical messengers. They may remain confined within the membrane of a single cell, carrying their "message" from one district of a protozoan to another, or from the peripheral dendrites of a nerve cell to its central ganglionic body and nucleus. Also, the original restriction to substances produced within the organism fell when the chemists were able to synthesise not only the naturally occurring hormones but also structurally different mimetic hormones which, in some instances, act as almost ideal substitutes (e.g. stilbestrol for the natural female sex hormones)"
Those quotes are taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica published in 1959 but stilbestrol in its diethylstilbestrol form has been known to trigger delayed health effects for many years.
It is simply not satisfactory to place reliance on the No Observable Adverse Effect Levels or the Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Levels.
This may be the preferred approach but it is deeply flawed.
Many of the actions of chemicals take place at levels far lower than those which can create observable effects. Supporting evidence for this view is found in the dreadful histories of thalidomide and DES (diethylstilbestrol) neither of which showed any observable effects in the mothers upon whom the drugs were administered but both of which induced serious adverse health effects in the unborn children. (see the publication "Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colborn, John Peterson Myers and Dianne Dumanoski.
It should be noted that these were low dose exposures, within the recommended levels, and yet the effects were both disastrous and in the case of DES with very much delayed effects resulting in cancers and immune system dysfunction when the exposed unborn children became adults.
Recently similar delayed effects in the offspring of exposed humans have been suspected as linked to Agent Orange.
No amount of animal testing or modelling will indicate such dangers since no test animals live that long and few laboratory studies will exceed more than a few years.
These reactions illustrate that science is not as well versed in the actions of chemicals in the body as some would suggest but there are concerns over the extent of knowledge in respect to the chemicals themselves.
Recently there came confirmation from scientists in Egypt that glyphosate does indeed behave like other organophosphorus compounds as a cholinesterase inhibitor. This has been denied in correspondence from various Government agencies despite the fact that they were informed of evidence from human exposures. The German regulators have been informed of the dangers and their own scientists demonstrated that glyphosate killed beneficial insects yet the permitted residue levels in food were increased significantly. Now it seems that they were entirely wrong in making those denials which allowed the chemical to escape the review of anticholinesterase compounds and yet the entire safety policy for that chemical is indicated as grossly unsound by that simple fact. But even this is not the whole story since it is clear that the experiments (Demerdash et al 2001 etc) showed that other vital enzymes were also affected by the presence of the chemical at levels far below those which can induce observable effects.
Some of them could have disastrous consequences for human life in the long term and yet the industry, governments and farmers continue to promote its greater use despite the warning signs.
What is happening in the UK is disgraceful and involves criminal actions by the authorities.
Additionally hormones are activated by the involvement of Cyclic AMP, which is also adversely affected by the presence of OPs as it is part of the energy process that depends on the cycling of natural phosphates and is controlled by the mitochondria, which UK regulators admitted have been damaged at all levels tested by glyphosate, which itself has been shown to cause hormonal damage and is yet another organophosphorus compound for which the effects should surprise no one.
The immune system involves several hormones and is therefore also vulnerable to hormone disruption, which can trigger many forms of cancer.
Since the action of all OP agents is at the phosphorus atom and since phosphorus is a vital element in almost all enzyme and hormonal systems, it is likely that a whole host of diseases may be unrecognised results of cumulative long-term chemical exposures, including and specifically the organophosphorus group and their solvents.
When hormone balance is disrupted a wide range of problems are induced including stunted or excessive growth, breast, prostate and other cancers, Addison's disease, Diabetes, Cushing's syndrome, Hyperplasia (adrenogenital syndrome), Hypoglycemia, Thyroid Goiter, Hyperthyroidism, Thyroiditis, Thyroid cancer, hyperparathyroidism, Osteoporosis, Paget's disease, Rickets, Pituitary tumors, Acromegaly, gigantism, Cushing's disease, sex development or intersex disorders such as Hermaphroditism, genetic and chromosomal disorders, Premature Menopause, Testicular failure, Delayed and Precocious puberty, fertility disorders, Amenorrhea, Polycystic ovary syndrome, and many other serious disorders including Autoimmune diseases such as Lupus. All too many of these are rising in the population.
If the Advisory Group fails to introduce restrictions or bans on the use of these chemicals I fear future generations will pay an horrific price for our short-sightedness. It is very likely that our own generation is already suffering from failed regulation of pesticides in the past.
Interestingly a spokesman for the UK regulatory bodies proclaimed in a radio broadcast that he was confident that all the chemicals in use today conform to the "current" safety standards and, as always, that they are highly regulated, which is I fear misinformation, for even when flaws in safety data and adverse health effects are reported to the regulators here in the UK every effort is made to protect the chemical and to hide the harm done.
As a result a host of illnesses are increasing in the population and the official denial deepens in order to protect those involved in the decision making process - to the detriment of those who suffer badly as a result. http://www.oprus2001.co.uk/everyone.htm
Thank you for your time. No doubt I have wasted mine - but at least I tried...
Click here for more on hormones.
Dated 28/02/2015
Go to top
Return to OPs File;
Return to latest updates;
Return to Front Page