Who has helped to kill more people: Monsanto or the NRA?

[friendly_iconoclast]

17. Gun deaths are quick and obvious. Roundup-induced cancer, kidney & liver damage are slow and hidden

Monsanto might still pull ahead. FWIW, I despise the NRA and Bayer/Monsanto equally

Note:emphasis added

https://www.google.com/search?ei=io6dXI-DKMGMggf5zJy4AQ&q=%22kidney+disease%22+poor+farmers+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com&oq=%22kidney+disease%22+poor+farmers+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com&gs_l=psy-ab.12...0.0..4714...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.FkYm_85Wtbs

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4549093/

Transcriptome profile analysis reflects rat liver and kidney damage following chronic ultra-low dose Roundup exposure

Background

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) are the major pesticides used worldwide. Converging evidence suggests that GBH, such as Roundup, pose a particular health risk to liver and kidneys although low environmentally relevant doses have not been examined. To address this issue, a 2-year study in rats administering 0.1 ppb Roundup (50 ng/L glyphosate equivalent) via drinking water (giving a daily intake of 4 ng/kg bw/day of glyphosate) was conducted. A marked increased incidence of anatomorphological and blood/urine biochemical changes was indicative of liver and kidney structure and functional pathology. In order to confirm these findings we have conducted a transcriptome microarray analysis of the liver and kidneys from these same animals.
Results

The expression of 4224 and 4447 transcript clusters (a group of probes corresponding to a known or putative gene) were found to be altered respectively in liver and kidney (p < 0.01, q < 0.08). Changes in gene expression varied from −3.5 to 3.7 fold in liver and from −4.3 to 5.3 in kidneys. Among the 1319 transcript clusters whose expression was altered in both tissues, ontological enrichment in 3 functional categories among 868 genes were found. First, genes involved in mRNA splicing and small nucleolar RNA were mostly upregulated, suggesting disruption of normal spliceosome activity. Electron microscopic analysis of hepatocytes confirmed nucleolar structural disruption. Second, genes controlling chromatin structure (especially histone-lysine N-methyltransferases) were mostly upregulated. Third, genes related to respiratory chain complex I and the tricarboxylic acid cycle were mostly downregulated. Pathway analysis suggests a modulation of the mTOR and phosphatidylinositol signalling pathways. Gene disturbances associated with the chronic administration of ultra-low dose Roundup reflect a liver and kidney lipotoxic condition and increased cellular growth that may be linked with regeneration in response to toxic effects causing damage to tissues. Observed alterations in gene expression were consistent with fibrosis, necrosis, phospholipidosis, mitochondrial membrane dysfunction and ischemia, which correlate with and thus confirm observations of pathology made at an anatomical, histological and biochemical level.
Conclusion

Our results suggest that chronic exposure to a GBH in an established laboratory animal toxicity model system at an ultra-low, environmental dose can result in liver and kidney damage with potential significant health implications for animal and human populations.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28067231

Multiomics reveal non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in rats following chronic exposure to an ultra-low dose of Roundup herbicide.

Abstract

The impairment of liver function by low environmentally relevant doses of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) is still a debatable and unresolved matter. Previously we have shown that rats administered for 2 years with 0.1 ppb (50 ng/L glyphosate equivalent dilution; 4 ng/kg body weight/day daily intake) of a Roundup GBH formulation showed signs of enhanced liver injury as indicated by anatomorphological, blood/urine biochemical changes and transcriptome profiling. Here we present a multiomic study combining metabolome and proteome liver analyses to obtain further insight into the Roundup-induced pathology. Proteins significantly disturbed (214 out of 1906 detected, q < 0.05) were involved in organonitrogen metabolism and fatty acid β-oxidation. Proteome disturbances reflected peroxisomal proliferation, steatosis and necrosis. The metabolome analysis (55 metabolites altered out of 673 detected, p < 0.05) confirmed lipotoxic conditions and oxidative stress by showing an activation of glutathione and ascorbate free radical scavenger systems. Additionally, we found metabolite alterations associated with hallmarks of hepatotoxicity such as γ-glutamyl dipeptides, acylcarnitines, and proline derivatives. Overall, metabolome and proteome disturbances showed a substantial overlap with biomarkers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and its progression to steatohepatosis and thus confirm liver functional dysfunction resulting from chronic ultra-low dose GBH exposure.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6120931/

Reply to ‘Comments on two recent publications on GM maize and Roundup’

The opinion expressed by Eriksson and colleagues’ fails to recognise that there are no standard experimental designs for academic investigations involving omics analyses of genetically modified crops and that the only valid comparator to determine the effect of the process of transgenesis is a near isogenic variety grown at the same time and location, as was the case in our investigation of NK603 maize. Eriksson does not acknowledge that the quality of the rat liver tissues in our chronic Roundup toxicity study has neither been questioned nor branded as unsuitable for further investigation. In addition, Eriksson fails to appreciate that the statistical methods we used to analyse the liver metabolomics dataset are recognised as appropriate as some of a number of approaches that can be taken. Moreover, Eriksson neglects to mention that the proteomics analysis of the liver tissues highlights structural and functional damage from Roundup exposure. Thus our results are sound and the claims by Eriksson and colleagues of experimental flaws are unfounded.Replying to: Eriksson et al. Sci Rep 8 (2018); 10.1038/s41598-018-30440-7.