As noted in the article Glyphosate: treating science like a buffet (Manitoba Co-operator, Aug. 19), public pressure has caused Health Canada to delay a proposed increase to the amount of glyphosate allowed on legumes as a residue.
The authors of the article then go on to suggest that the idea of glyphosate being dangerous (other than when applied outside of guidelines), is a misrepresentation done by people who pick and choose their source of information. The authors then go on to do what they condemn, by citing a European Union report that condemns glyphosate as being not cancer causing.
Read Also
Supply management schism still dividing agriculture
Bill C-202 wound up pitting farmer against farmer for political reasons at a time when an unwritten law of Canadian politics remains very much in effect anyway.
From my position as a farmer who, in his childhood, saw the introduction of the first post-emergent wild oats herbicide, Carbine, I have been witness to an ever-increasing line of products designed for one purpose alone, to increase a farmer’s bottom line. And let’s be clear about this, farmers use chemicals for one overriding purpose, profit.
Balanced against this are an ever-increasing number of incidents of allergies, cancers and learning disorders amongst our children. No, I can’t say there is a direct link, but I do question how the life forms that we grow, plant or animal can be enhanced with the deliberate application of synthetic toxins into the food chain.
And to this I must ask: Are we so invested with the idea of making money that we are prepared to risk the health and well-being of our children and those yet to come?
Wayne James
Beausejour, Manitoba
