Here is the presentation by The Risk Monger on his blog:
“It is a bit long but answers, very clearly and patiently, every question anyone with concerns about the continued use of this herbicide might have. If you are a journalist, please read this. If you are a policy-maker, please read this. If you are going to share an anti-GMO or anti-conventional farming meme, please read this. If you are going to the Monsanto Tribunal next month, … please learn to read!”
Worth reading.

Her 17 questions:

1. Does glyphosate cause cancer?
2. Could glyphosate have other health effects? What about the surfactants in RoundUp, or glyphosate breakdown products?
3. What about studies claiming glyphosate causes celiac disease, autism, obesity etc? A look at Seneff et co.
4. Does glyphosate harm our gut bacteria?
5. Could glyphosate be another case like DDT or Thalidomide – should we apply the precautionary principle? The important difference between persistent and non-persistent pesticides
6. Is glyphosate an especially dangerous pesticide?
7. Is there glyphosate in the air and rainwater?
8. Is there glyphosate in urine?
9. What about breastmilk?
10. Should we worry about glyphosate in wine?
11. Is wheat toxic because of glyphosate?
12. Are crops drenched in glyphosate?
13. Does glyphosate use enable bad farming practices?
14. What about resistance and superweeds?
15. Does glyphosate interfere with soil organisms or nutrient availability?
16. Does glyphosate harm Monarch butterflies or bees?
17. Can glyphosate research be trusted? What about conflicts of interest?

It’s based on a scientific article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, where “a group of scientists explore how exactly caterpillars drove plants to make chemicals that humans find tasty”.

“It happened through what’s called an evolutionary arms race, explains Chris Pires, a plant evolutionary biologist at the University of Missouri and one of the lead authors of the study. This works a lot like a military arms race — repeated escalations to have better weapons or defenses — but on an epic timescale. In this case, the opposing armies are caterpillars of the cabbage butterfly and plants in the order Brassicales, which today includes cabbage, horseradish, kale and mustard.”  This arms race has lasted 90 millions years.

The arms race isn’t a new story. It was described as an example of coevolution. This research precise the timing and the mecanism of this co-evolution.

The arms used by Brassicales are “glucosinolates”, a mix of chemicals. “Glucosinolates have at least two sensory properties: burn and bitter”. “”Most bugs don’t like it. It’s toxic. it turns their guts inside out.”

“We humans happen to find glucosinolates delicious. These chemicals — there are hundreds — impart unique smells and flavors to the plants that contain them. Many glucosinolates are in the cruciferous vegetables that evolved from those ancient cabbage plants when the family tree expanded.”

NPR concludes : « “Why do you think plants have spices or any flavor at all? It’s not for us,” says Pires. “They have a function. All these flavors are evolution.” »

In  “Misconceptions about the cancer“, Bruce Ames, US researcher, explains “The amounts of synthetic pesticide residues in plant foods, for example, are tiny compared to the amount of
natural “pesticides” produced by plants themselves. Of all dietary pesticides that humans eat, 99.99% are natural: these are chemicals produced by plants to defend themselves against fungi, insects, and other animal predators. Each plant produces a different array of such chemicals. On average, Americans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides and their breakdown products. Americans eat about 1,500 mg of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than they consume of synthetic pesticide residues”

To go further in French:
« De la belle pédagogie « Co-évolution des plantes et des pathogènes : le modèle en zig-zag » (Vegenov) »

Papillon sur fleur de crucifère (Photo : Tom Blackwell sur Flickr)

It’s not just about GM foods. It’s about every social dispute which includes a risk assessment part. Our brain is not so reasonable : “the brain is only the organ with which we think we think. To be blunt: we are not as smart as we think we are.” We often think in a “heuristic” way, a thinking shortcut, which sometimes drives us towards mistakes, especially about risk evaluation.

An other important element is our willing to be inside our group : “Mark Lynas describes how that feels. A long-time environmental activist, he recently changed his mind about GMOs.  “I lacked the courage to speak out for a long, long time. When I did, I felt like I had fallen through the floor. It was heretical to my tribe.” That is not the language of reason, nor does it have anything to do with the facts about GMOs. It is the language of fear, and emotion, which is the central language that shapes the way we see risks.

The complete reading of this story is very useful. It is not ony an analysis. It also gives some good news: how to deal with the challenge of communicating about risk more respectfully.

In this story,

The European Food Information Council (EUFIC) is a non-profit organisation which communicates science-based information on nutrition and health, food safety and quality, to help consumers to be better informed when choosing a well-balanced, safe and healthful diet.. Visit EUFIC site.