6 ms·

> Researchers had found signs of CKDu outside Central America, including in Sri Lanka, India, and Nepal. But it had never been documented in the United States.

> Researchers had found signs of CKDu outside Central America, including in Sri Lanka, India, and Nepal. But it had never been documented in the United States. I searched a bit more and found this interesting bit from an article talking about a similar epidemic in Sri Lanka. > An analysis showed that trace metal ions such as calcium and magnesium that naturally occur in the hard water reacted with glyphosate. This meant that, instead of breaking down rapidly, glyphosate was able to persist in the environment for up to seven years in water and twenty-two years in soil. https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/mysterious-kidney-illness-rising-among-sri-lankan-farmers https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/mysterious-kidney-...

declan_roberts 13d ago
We should be seeing it all over America in that case.
cyberax 13d ago
> This meant that, instead of breaking down rapidly, glyphosate was able to persist in the environment for up to seven years in water and twenty-two years in soil. Bulllshiiiitttt. There are no reputable studies that show anything like this.
- anenefan 12d ago
  The tl;dr - even if there were reputable studies, what do the results mean or imply exactly? There is a study [1] which was via information from the link from the parent comment. Interpretation of results though is the issue. From their method of study, to myself it's clear that storing heavy mineralised ground water in a used Glyphosate spray tank or product drum, is a not a very good idea given the results of the study. It is though a different story for the groundwater given that degradation in soil [2] [3] is measured in half lives and depends on many factors. As for detection - there may well be some complex of Glyphosate that has resisted breaking down a couple decades later, but one would expect the amount would probably be far less that the allowable or typical amount of Glyphosate found in food from crops that have been sprayed with it prior to harvest. The other question is what breakdown complexes are they measuring for detecting Glyphosate. For years roundup was though to be still be at higher levels of use than it should have been after it was phased out in some European countries ... based on levels detected in rivers. [4] [5] and the preprint via [6] indicate that some detergents were to blame for the higher detection level. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ [2] https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth_Technical_Guide_to_its_Degradation_Pathways_in_Soil_and_Water.pdf https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth... [pdf] [3] https://greenfieldesg.com/how-long-does-roundup-last-in-the-soil/ https://greenfieldesg.com/how-long-does-roundup-last-in-the-... [4] https://phys.org/news/2024-07-glyphosate-european-rivers-farming.html https://phys.org/news/2024-07-glyphosate-european-rivers-far... [5]https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/university/news-and-publications/press-releases/press-releases/article/most-of-the-glyphosate-in-our-rivers-may-not-come-from-farming/ https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/university/news-and-publications... [6] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosate_contamination_in_European_rivers_not_from_herbicide_application https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat... -> [Preprint] https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1
  - cyberax 12d ago
    > The tl;dr - even if there were reputable studies, what do the results mean or imply exactly? That it's bullshit. There are no reputable studies showing extended half-life of years. > [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ In Zebrafish. Not even mice. > [2] https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth... [pdf] Half-life of weeks. > [6] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat... -> [Preprint] https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 Nothing to do with soil persistance.
    - anenefan 12d ago
      Half life [1] in biological systems isn't quite the same as radioactive decay. Essentially what is being relayed is that after a couple of months generally they are, by measuring the product directly or the secondary and tertiary by products, deducing a time when only half of the active product is left. Farming systems that use herbicides, are going to cycle though every few years of using Glyphosate, so there's little point IMO of creating a special study that looks into Glyphosate residues over more than a few years where they are monitoring the degree of fractional amount that could remain - there are too many variations of soil types, rainfall and temperature to be greatly useful. Any results of how long it might persist would more likely come from real life examples - areas where its use has been phased out, but the difficulty most (if not all) would not have an accurate starting point of just how much Glyphosate was applied in total, time period and weather conditions to extrapolate carefully. Detection is different to a noteworthy amount of product that is bound to clay or other particles which has prohibited biological degradation. Many who conduct studies in complex systems are usually focused on just a small number of instances they feel might encompass most of the issue they believe to be at heart ... to the point of dismissing local / on the ground knowledge. Yes the study used fish which can be useful ... however they tried to simulate using the raw product. It would have been better had they had some water from a month after a paddock was sprayed and used surface or underground flow. What it actually means, for example to those like myself who use it regularly, is there is certainly evidence we have to be doubly careful to ensure no or as little as possible over spray of waterways occurs which contain aquatic life. A better study might be what results might be when groundwater that has a noteworthy amount, is then heated with bound Glyphosate and it's by products, to simulate cooking and boiling of the water. >"Nothing to do with soil persistance." Do you think that if soil was measured for a study it was watered only with distilled water? The purpose of mentioning was to suggest that there's an uncertainty as to what may have been measured. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life Edit: as not was

declan_roberts 13d ago

We should be seeing it all over America in that case.

cyberax 13d ago

> This meant that, instead of breaking down rapidly, glyphosate was able to persist in the environment for up to seven years in water and twenty-two years in soil. Bulllshiiiitttt. There are no reputable studies that show anything like this.

anenefan 12d ago
The tl;dr - even if there were reputable studies, what do the results mean or imply exactly? There is a study [1] which was via information from the link from the parent comment. Interpretation of results though is the issue. From their method of study, to myself it's clear that storing heavy mineralised ground water in a used Glyphosate spray tank or product drum, is a not a very good idea given the results of the study. It is though a different story for the groundwater given that degradation in soil [2] [3] is measured in half lives and depends on many factors. As for detection - there may well be some complex of Glyphosate that has resisted breaking down a couple decades later, but one would expect the amount would probably be far less that the allowable or typical amount of Glyphosate found in food from crops that have been sprayed with it prior to harvest. The other question is what breakdown complexes are they measuring for detecting Glyphosate. For years roundup was though to be still be at higher levels of use than it should have been after it was phased out in some European countries ... based on levels detected in rivers. [4] [5] and the preprint via [6] indicate that some detergents were to blame for the higher detection level. [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ [2] https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth_Technical_Guide_to_its_Degradation_Pathways_in_Soil_and_Water.pdf https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth... [pdf] [3] https://greenfieldesg.com/how-long-does-roundup-last-in-the-soil/ https://greenfieldesg.com/how-long-does-roundup-last-in-the-... [4] https://phys.org/news/2024-07-glyphosate-european-rivers-farming.html https://phys.org/news/2024-07-glyphosate-european-rivers-far... [5]https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/university/news-and-publications/press-releases/press-releases/article/most-of-the-glyphosate-in-our-rivers-may-not-come-from-farming/ https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/university/news-and-publications... [6] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosate_contamination_in_European_rivers_not_from_herbicide_application https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat... -> [Preprint] https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1
- cyberax 12d ago
  > The tl;dr - even if there were reputable studies, what do the results mean or imply exactly? That it's bullshit. There are no reputable studies showing extended half-life of years. > [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41580968/ In Zebrafish. Not even mice. > [2] https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth https://pdf.benchchem.com/1263/Glyphosate_s_Fate_An_In_depth... [pdf] Half-life of weeks. > [6] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378883530_Glyphosat... -> [Preprint] https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3917957/v1 Nothing to do with soil persistance.
  - anenefan 12d ago
    Half life [1] in biological systems isn't quite the same as radioactive decay. Essentially what is being relayed is that after a couple of months generally they are, by measuring the product directly or the secondary and tertiary by products, deducing a time when only half of the active product is left. Farming systems that use herbicides, are going to cycle though every few years of using Glyphosate, so there's little point IMO of creating a special study that looks into Glyphosate residues over more than a few years where they are monitoring the degree of fractional amount that could remain - there are too many variations of soil types, rainfall and temperature to be greatly useful. Any results of how long it might persist would more likely come from real life examples - areas where its use has been phased out, but the difficulty most (if not all) would not have an accurate starting point of just how much Glyphosate was applied in total, time period and weather conditions to extrapolate carefully. Detection is different to a noteworthy amount of product that is bound to clay or other particles which has prohibited biological degradation. Many who conduct studies in complex systems are usually focused on just a small number of instances they feel might encompass most of the issue they believe to be at heart ... to the point of dismissing local / on the ground knowledge. Yes the study used fish which can be useful ... however they tried to simulate using the raw product. It would have been better had they had some water from a month after a paddock was sprayed and used surface or underground flow. What it actually means, for example to those like myself who use it regularly, is there is certainly evidence we have to be doubly careful to ensure no or as little as possible over spray of waterways occurs which contain aquatic life. A better study might be what results might be when groundwater that has a noteworthy amount, is then heated with bound Glyphosate and it's by products, to simulate cooking and boiling of the water. >"Nothing to do with soil persistance." Do you think that if soil was measured for a study it was watered only with distilled water? The purpose of mentioning was to suggest that there's an uncertainty as to what may have been measured. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life Edit: as not was