美國法院裁定拜耳因“除草劑致癌”案件需賠償1.75億美元, 有統計數據稱，農達係列產品占中國除草劑產品的80%之多。
如今，農達(Roundup)是世界上最受歡迎的除草劑。 它由孟山都(Monsanto)公司於 20 世紀 70 年代上市，被譽為比它所取代的除草劑安全得多。 但從 20 世紀 90 年代中期開始，年輕人死於結直腸癌的比例開始上升，與此同時，經過基因工程改造以耐受農達的種子也被釋放。 草甘膦(Glyphosate)是農達(Roundup)的活性成分，其使用量從 2014 年的 19% 增加了 15 倍。2015 年，世界衛生組織癌症部門國際癌症研究機構 (IARC) 將其指定為“可能對人類致癌” ”，“引發訴訟，迄今為止已達成 110 億美元的和解金。”2013 年泰國 Chulabhorn 研究生院進行的一項研究發現，由於草甘膦可以像雌激素一樣發揮作用，因此會導致激素依賴性人類乳腺癌細胞生長。 這項研究是為 IARC 的決定提供信息的一千多項公開研究之一，也是引發有關泰國農藥未來的激烈辯論的一項研究。泰國國家有害物質委員會於 2019 年 10 月投票禁止草甘膦和毒死蜱(chlorpyrifos) (與兒童神經發育遲緩有關）和百草枯(paraquat)（自 2007 年起在歐洲禁用。
拜耳於 2018 年收購了孟山都，並急於捍衛其新資產。 該公司聯係了美國農業部負責貿易和對外農業事務的副部長，他是陶氏益農公司的前雇員。 美國貿易代表收集了有關泰國政府官員的情報，另一家農業集團阿徹丹尼爾斯米德蘭(Archer Daniels Midland)公司提供的檔案對這些信息進行了補充。 最終，泰國政府放棄了草甘膦禁令，但成功禁止了毒死蜱和百草枯。 （這三種化學品均可在美國購買。）盡管業界盡了最大努力，但仍有數十個國家目前或很快計劃對草甘膦實施限製。 停止使用草甘膦尤其重要，因為它會引起 DNA 的表觀遺傳變化，這表明存在世代毒性的途徑，似乎它對個體的影響還不夠嚴重。 表觀遺傳變化是對我們基因組的改變，不會影響 DNA 序列，但會影響基因表達。 它們影響 DNA 的表達內容及其表達方式。 這些變化表明，從環境化學物質到暴力等破壞性接觸如何被寫入我們的 DNA，而不是寫入我們的 DNA。 對在兩種不同環境中長大的同卵雙胞胎的研究為表觀遺傳學如何影響疾病提供了見解。 雙胞胎擁有相同的遺傳物質，但受環境暴露的影響，其疾病表現卻有所不同。 即使在同一子宮內，這些環境差異也可能很微妙，胎兒的位置或臍帶的大小可能會有所不同。 巴西爆發寨卡病毒，雙胞胎出生，其中一人受到感染，另一人幸免於難。 這些雙胞胎的子宮內感染風險是一種表觀遺傳現象。 DNA上添加甲基是快速識別的表觀遺傳修飾，也是草甘膦帶來的變化。 這些 DNA 標簽可以改變細胞功能並抑製某些基因的表達。 這是具有相同基因的細胞（例如神經細胞和肌肉細胞）合成具有不同功能的不同蛋白質的一種方式。 雖然 DNA 甲基化是細胞分化的正常部分，但它可能是由基因組中甲基基團幹擾健康功能的部分環境化學物質引起的。 當我們的種係 DNA 中出現甲基時，草甘膦如何影響精子——這些改變會遺傳給後代。 接觸草甘膦的老鼠甚至第一代後代都沒有發現健康問題。 正是暴露的老鼠的曾孫患前列腺疾病、肥胖症、腎髒疾病和卵巢疾病的幾率增加，這是由於與這些疾病相關的基因區域添加了甲基所致。 我們生活在曾祖父母所經曆的暴露影響中。 我們的曾孫也麵臨著我們所麵臨的風險。 那麽，考慮一下豪德諾索尼人的智慧，他們的七代原則要求當代人對他們的行為將影響的未來社區負責。
草甘膦存在於我們的食物、水和腳下的灰塵中——這隻是全球資本主義如何影響人類健康的一個例子。 因為它的使用如此廣泛，如果你去尋找，你很可能會在你的尿液中發現它。 隨機樣本顯示 93% 的受測者體內含有草甘膦。 從 20 世紀 90 年代初開始，二十三年來收集的數據顯示，加利福尼亞州 50 歲以上人群尿液中的草甘膦及其代謝物含量增加了 1,200%。 食用全有機飲食可以降低草甘膦在尿液中的含量. 但有機食品太貴了。 當市場決定我們攝入多少汙染物程度時，我們的健康種族隔離將不可避免地變得更糟。 低收入社區別無選擇，隻能吃受化學汙染的食物。
草甘膦是我們生活中普遍存在的眾多有害化學物質之一，其未經許可且受到危險的監管。 有毒星球對人類免疫係統的影響並不令人驚訝。 在北半球國家，越來越多的兒童被診斷出患有癌症。 治療正在趕上疾病的進展，死於該病的兒童人數正在下降。 然而，不可避免的是，權力梯度決定了發病率和恢複情況：低收入兒童比富裕同齡人更有可能死亡，有色人種和窮人更有可能暴露於環境危害和慢性炎症的其他係統性誘因。
Today, Roundup is the world's most popular weed killer. Marketed by the Monsanto Corporation in the 1970s, it was touted as far safer than the herbicides it replaced. But rising rates of young people dying from colorectal cancer began in the mid-1990s, at the same time as the release of seeds genetically engineered to tolerate Roundup. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup, and its use increased fifteen-fold from 19% to 2014. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization's cancer unit, designated it as "probably carcinogenic to humans," fueling lawsuits that, to date, have yielded $11 billion in settlements."' A 2013 study conducted at the Chulabhorn Graduate Institute in Thailand found that because glyphosate can act like estrogen, it causes hormone-dependent human breast cancer cells to grow. This research was one of over a thousand publicly available studies that informed the IARC decision, and one that contributed to a rich debate about the future of pesticides in Thailand. The Thai National Hazardous Substances Committee voted in October 2019 to ban glyphosate, along with chlorpyrifos (associated with neurological developmental delay in children) and paraquat (banned in Europe since 2007).
Bayer purchased Monsanto in 2018, and rushed to defend its new asset. The company approached the US Department of Agriculture’s undersecretary for trade and foreign agricultural affairs, a former employee of Dow Agrosciences. The US trade representative gathered intelligence on the relevant Thai government officials, information that was supplemented by dossiers provided by yet another agricultural conglomerate, Archer Daniels Midland. Ultimately, the Thai government backed down from the glyphosate ban, though the government succeeded in prohibiting chlorpyrifos and paraquat. (All three chemicals are available for purchase in the United States.) Despite the industry's best efforts, dozens of countries currently or soon plan to have restrictions on gIyphosate. Stopping glyphosate use is especially important because it induces epigenetic changes in DNA, suggesting a pathway for generational toxicity, as if its effects on individuals weren't bad enough. Epigenetic changes are alterations to our genome that do not affect the DNA sequence but do impact genetic expression. They impact what DNA is expressed and how it is expressed. These changes are how damaging exposures—from environmental chemicals to violence—become written onto, not into, our DNA. Studies on identical twins raised in two different environments are offering insights on how epigenetics are influencing disease. Twins share the same genetic material but can manifest disease differently, influenced by environmental exposure. And those environmental differences can be subtle even within the same womb, where fetal placement or umbilical cord size might be different. With the Zika virus in Brazil, twins were born where one had the infection and the other was spared. Infection risk in utero with these twins was an epigenetic phenomenon. The addition of methyl groups onto DNA was the fast identified epigenetic modification and is the change brought by glyphosate. These DNA tags can alter cellular functioning and inhibit the expression of certain genes. This is one way cells that have the same genes, such as a nerve cell and a muscle cell, synthesize different proteins with different functions. While DNA methylation is a normal part of cellular differentiation, it can be caused by environmental chemicals in parts of the genome where methyl groups interfere with healthy functioning. When methyl groups occur in our germline DNA, how glyphosate can impact sperm—those alterations are transmitted to future generations. Health problems were not seen in the rats exposed to glyphosate or even in the first generation of offspring. It was the great-grandchildren of exposed rats that had increased rates of prostate disease, obesity, kidney disease, and ovarian disease, caused by methyl groups added into genetic regions involved in these conditions. We are living with the impact of exposures our great-grandparents experienced. And our great-grandchildren, too, are at risk from the exposures we face. Consider, then, the wisdom of the Haudenosaunee people, whose Seven Generations Principle holds the present generation accountable to the forthcoming community that their actions will impact.
Glyphosate is in our food, our water, and the dust under our feet—just one example of how global capitalism affects human health. Because it is so widely used, you would very likely find it in your urine if you went looking. A random sample revealed glyphosate in 93 percent of the people tested. Data collected over twenty-three years, starting in the early 1990s, shows a 1,200 percent increase in levels of glyphosate and its metabolite in urine of people over fifty in California. Consuming an all-organic diet can drop urinary levels by 76 percent in just six days. But organic food is more expensive. When the market determines our exposure, our health apartheid will inevitably get worse. Lower-income communities have little choice but to eat foods that are chemically contaminated.
Glyphosate is one of many harmful chemicals that have become prevalent in our lives, unbidden and dangerously under regulated. The consequences of a toxic planet for the human immune system aren't surprising. In the Global North, children are increasingly diagnosed with cancer. Treatment is catching up with illness, and the number of children who die from the disease is falling. Inevitably, however, gradients of power govern incidence and recovery: low-income children are more likely to die than their richer peers, and people of color and the poor are more likely to be exposed to environmental hazards and other systemic triggers for chronic inflammation.
