Glyphosate is a molecule of the family of amino acids, discovered by Monsanto in the early 1970s.
It consists of an amino acid, glycine and a phosphoric acid molecule joined together by a nitrogen bridge.

And it’s the active ingredient in Roundup:
when sprayed on the leaves of the plants, it penetrates through their green parts, is absorbed and then diffused – technically it is said to be translocated – through the tissues and transported from the sap to the roots and organs of propagation and reproduction of the plant (rhizomes, stolons , bulbs, bulbils). Once penetrated, glyphosate inhibits the production of an enzyme called EPSP synthetase, which in turn prevents the plant from producing the aromatic amino acids essential for its growth and development.

Monsanto started selling Roundup in 1974.

At the beginning of the 70s the population had 3 billion 682 million people, destined to reach 4 billion by 1975.

In 1992 the patent expires and Monsanto is ready with more effective new products.
A progressive evolution of the Roundup therefore begins, which becomes an increasingly concentrated product.

With the arrival of the new millennium, the need to limit disposal costs is added to the need for concentration, and both lead to the new Transorb technology based on a mixture of surfactants that reduces the interval between application and sowing in just 6 hours. .

But the escalation continues: Roundup 450plus, Roundup 360power, and then Platinum in 2013.

March 4, 2013 is the date at the bottom of the letter that Marion Copley, a biology graduate with a master’s degree in animal husbandry and veterinary science, serving the EPA’s toxicology department for 30 years, writes to her colleague Jess Rowland nicknamed “Monsanto’s mole” “:

Since I left the Agency with cancer, I have studied the tumor process extensively and I have some mechanism comments which may be very valuable to CARC based on my decades of pathology experience. I’ll pick one chemical to demonstrate my points.

Glyphosate was originally designed as a chelating agent and 1 strongly believe that is the identical process involved in its tumor formation, which is highly supported by the literature.

-Chelators inhibit apoptosis, the process by which our bodies kill tumor cells.

-Chelators are endocrine disruptors, involved in tumorigenesis.

-Glyphosate induces lymphocyte proliferation.

-Glyphosate induces free radical formation.

-Chelators inhibit free radical scavenging enzymes requiring Zn, Mn or Cu for activity (i.e. SODs.

-Chelators bind zinc, necessary for immune system functio.

-Glyphosate is genotoxic, a key cancer mechanis.

-Chelators inhibit DNA repair enzymes requiring metal cofactor.

-Chelators bind Ca, Zn, Mg, etc to make foods deficient for these essential nutrient.

-Chelators bind calcium necessary for calcineurin-mediated immune respons.

-Chelators often damage the kidneys or pancreas, as glyphosate does, a mechanism to tumor formation -Kidney/pancreas damage can lead to clinical chemistry changes to favor tumor growth.

-Glyphosate kills bacteria in the gut and the gastrointestinal system is 80% of the immune system.

-Chelators suppress the immune system making the body susceptible to tumor.

Previously, CARC concluded that glyphosate was a “possible human carcinogen”. The kidney pathology in the animal studies would lead to tumors with other mechanisms listed above. Any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously. It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer. With all of the evidence listed above, the CARC category should be changed to “probable human carcinogen”. Blood cells arc most exposed to chelators, if any study shows proliferation of lymphocytes, then that is confirmatory that glyphosate is a carcinogen.

Jess, you and I have argued many times on CARC. You often argued about topics outside of your knowledge, which is unethical. Your trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated, thus CARC science is 10 years behind the literature in mechanisms. For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus. You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor industry. Chelators clearly disrupt calcium signaling, a key signaling pathway in all cellos and mediates tumor progression. Greg Ackerman is supposed to be our expert on mechanisms, but he never mentioned any of these concepts at CARC and when I tried to discuss it with him he put me off. Is Greg playing your political games as well, incompetent or does he have some conflict of interest of some kind? Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.

I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.
Marion Copley March 4, 2013

This page was created in her memory.

The public debate on carcinogenic risks related to glyphosate begins only two years after her death.

In 2016, in fact, the gardener Dewayne Johnson, following a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, filed a lawsuit against Monsanto for using Roundup.

Meanwhile Bayer acquires Monsanto.

In October 2018, the popular jury sentenced Bayer and $ 250 million in damages for punitive damages + 39 for damages.
The sentence is then reduced to 78 million in total.

In 2020 Bayer entered into a record deal of over $ 10 billion in plea bargaining for tens of thousands of lawsuits filed for glyphosate-related diseases.

However, the Roundup may continue to be sold.

Today the population has practically doubled since 1975.

Certainly these multinationals speculate and even if ethically questionable progress is unstoppable.

The agri-food market, however, must meet an ever-increasing demand that goes hand in hand and a general impoverishment: many people struggle a quadrant far from the accounts and therefore makes the way of the need to spend as little as possible. Market demand often involves low-cost food, obviously to the detriment of quality and health itself.

So the problem grows and evolves, just like Roundup …

The seeds of life are not what they once were
Mother Nature and God don’t own them anymore

So it ends The Monsanto Years
by Neil Young

PM 2.5

PM 2.5

PM comes from Particulate Matter: and consists of airborne particulate matter, more precisely, according to the definition of the Ministry of the Environment it represents the set of solid and liquid atmospheric particles suspended in ambient air. The term PM2.5 identifies particles with a diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 µm … from here on, however, I dissociate from the description: these particles are too easily incorporated into the PM10 values, especially in the detection ratios, when instead the difference it is substantial.
I always quote verbatim from the Essia i.e. Effects on the Health of Air Pollution project: in particular, the smallest particles manage to penetrate deeper into the respiratory system. Hence, it is important to understand which and how many particles are able to penetrate the human body, how deep they manage to reach and what type of substances they can carry. For example, the toxicity of particulate matter, and therefore its ability to generate damage to health, can be amplified by the ability to absorb gaseous substances such as PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) and heavy metals, some of which are powerful carcinogens.
The significant relief of environmental pollution in relation to the onset of tumors is also the subject of the open letter published by Isde the increase in tumor incidence and chronic degenerative diseases that occur in the most polluted areas and at an increasingly early age affecting children, adolescents and young adults is the most striking aspect of the link between environment and health.
I disagree with the choice of the adjective: I find this aspect rather terrifying than striking.
Even the OMS declares that in the European Union only the finest particulate matter causes a loss of life expectancy of about 8,6 months.
In light of all this, it would be natural to think that given the high danger, strict monitoring is applied on the emissions of this fine particulate.
Unfortunately, on the other hand, in many cases it is not even distinguished from the PM10 and is very smoky, forgive the play on words, reporting the data of the relief that has a daily index: which oscillates between 9 and 8 while I’m writing, when the term of comparison is according to Ispra is an annual limit of 25 µm, among other things with a reference to 2010: it is difficult even to find updated information, I wonder why.
Personally I consider this topic of the utmost importance and I care about Lomellina: a land battered between mud and waste-to-energy plants, where livability is compromised.
In Italy there are 51 waste-to-energy plants, of which 29 only in northern Italy are reported by the Civil Protection specifying that the fumes generated are treated and purified.
Among other things, the results of a 2017 Inemar study indicates non-industrial combustion as the main responsible for the PM2.5 emission in Lombardy.
What does it consist of in practice? According to the classification “trade, residential, agriculture.”
To put it mildly: “Are we getting too hot?”
It would look just like this: in fact the concentrations are significantly higher in the winter months as visibly demonstrated in the EEA European Environment Agency graphs.
So waste-to-energy plants are innocent?
No, although over the years the incinerators have covered this “enhancement” with control and purification systems that have certainly reduced the percentage of incidence, a quantity of pollutants is still discharged into the atmosphere. The notorious nano-particles are as capable of easily entering our body and reaching blood, tissues and organs as they are partially able to escape the filtering or disposal systems, here you find an analysis about it.
And if you can solve the calculation of the daily / annual thresholds, you deserve a coffee!





“It is sometimes said that the flapping of a butterfly’s wings in one part of the world can cause a hurricane on the other side of the globe.”
This quote comes from the 2004 film The Butterfly Effect and is inspired by a theory taken up and debated in numerous areas.
Once again, as happened for the War of the Worlds: the inspiration comes from a science fiction novel, it is in fact Ray Bradbury who in his Sound of thunder attributes to the proper death of a butterfly during a journey through time, a variation of future events:

Eckels felt himself fall into a chair. He fumbled crazily at the thick slime on his boots. He held up a clod of dirt, trembling,
“No, it can’t be. Not a little thing like that. No!”
Embedded in the mud, glistening green and gold and black, was a butterfly, very beautiful and very dead.

Another coincidence, also in this case the story was broadcast by the BBC in 2011: here if you want to find the podcast (butterfly from about 35 minutes but I would advise you to listen to it all if you have time).
The butterfly symbol was taken up by Edward Lorenz, mathematician and meteorologist professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in his 1963 paper for the New York Academy of Science and later in a 1979 lecture that went down in history.
In general, the butterfly effect belongs to quantum physics and more precisely to the basis of chaos theory.
Chaos is the most congenial aspect to me, but actually I didn’t want to talk about this … not this time, at least.
Antonietta Gatti is perhaps known to most as “the wife of” despite her respectable curriculum. Her skills add up over time, and I would list, almost a bit to summarize, this recognition: she has been awarded the title of Fellow of the International Union of Societies for Biomaterials Science and Engineering for her contribution to the progress of science. The various national societies of biomaterials and bioengineering have tens of thousands of members worldwide and the union of the various companies has elected Dr. Gatti to be part of the elite of scientists that consists of 32 members, and she was part of a parliamentary commission of inquiry as a responsible consultant. I know, difficult to read, but I found her report very interesting, perhaps because I live in a highly polluted area: here the mortality rate from tumors is terrible:
She deals with nanopathology or pathologies induced by micro and nano-sized particulate exposures, i.e. powders with dimensions less than 100nm (0.1 microns) but her research has become difficult due to the reduced availability of a suitable microscope.
Her flapping wings has not changed the world yet, but she has been able to reach the hearts of people who have made it possible to buy a new electron microscope with their donations.
Let us not stop at the fact that individually we cannot make a difference, let us not stop flying lightly on the difficulties, each of us can be the butterfly of change, let’s believe it, and do not let ourselves be crushed in the mud.



In the period in which we are living, among the numerous aspects that have taken the place of what was our daily life before, we also observe forms of behavior that are not exactly social, not to say friendly at all.
The idea that the true self of some people comes out only in emergencies or forcing, has always been latent. We come into contact with it through sayings or legends, just like that of the white wolf who is joy, love of peace, hope of serenity, humility, well-being, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith; or the black wolf who is anger, envy, jealousy, displeasure, regret, self-pity, greed, arrogance, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority and ego.
The official origin is lost over time: the source has been handed down orally, but I found this Tale of the two wolves.
Each individual has within him both wolves and who will win is the one he decides to feed.
Therefore free will.
Concept as broad as it is debated.
Among the countless discussions that are lost in history, between nature and culture, between philosophy and science, one example comes out: the Stanford experiment.
In 1971 a young psychology professor from Stanford University: Philip Zimbardo recreated a prison in the basement of the university and selected 24 students from 70 candidates who had offered themselves, doing various tests that ascertained, for example, the absence of diseases, of addictions, and criminal records. These students were divided equally and randomly into two groups: prisoners and guards.
The aim was to demonstrate the impact of situational variables on human behavior.
The Lucifer effect, this is the definition given to the result of the experiment, interrupted after only 6 of the 14 days scheduled, due to harassing and violent incidents by the guards against prisoners.
This effect was also induced by de-individualization: the guards in the institutional role, behind uniform and mirrored glasses, which gave a sort of individual anonymity precisely, showed to let emerge their worst side.
Zimbardo himself said that he had taken the role of prison director and the accusation of having induced and piloted some dynamics, brought copious criticisms and tended to refute the validity of the experiment.
So now, seeing various types of outlets not only virtual, perhaps we can consider the fact that some people feel “prisoners” and others assume the role of “guards”.
What we can do is try to stay ourselves and not feed the bad wolf … and not even the Lucifer effect.



We are quite used to Elon Musk’s statements about his visions of future, the latest in order of time foresees one million people on Mars by 2050.
This estimate originated from a quick tweet format calculation in response to a detractor.
Textually: “Starship design goal is 3 flights / day avg rate, so ~ 1000 flights / year at> 100 tons / flight, so every 10 ships yield 1 megaton per year to orbit. Building 100 Starships / year gets to 1000 in 10 years or 100 megatons / year or maybe around 100k people for Earth-Mars orbital sync.”
So the plan would be to build 100 Starships per year.
Meanwhile, SpaceX, in order to test the safety of the Crew Dragon capsule and to have the authorization to fly with astronauts on board, carried out a test intentionally destroying rocket Falcon 9 which crashed into the ocean off the coast of Florida.
However, while waiting to solve the problem of making the red planet livable, the closest target is the moon by 2022 to ensure the resources for people who according to the Artemis project should remain there for 5/6 days in 2024.
So I would tell: save the date.
Let’s see if these years 20s of ours will be out of orbit and let’s try to imagine what format but above all what taste the interstellar coffee will have.




What do the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents have in common? First of all a number: they are both level 7.
The Chernobyl accident occurred in 1986 and according to the Greenpeace report thirty years after the catastrophe over ten thousand square kilometers are unusable for economic activity, more than one hundred and fifty thousand square kilometers are the contaminated areas of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine and five million people live in areas officially considered contaminated. Due to the high levels of plutonium contamination within 10 kilometers of the plant, the area cannot be repopulated for the next ten thousand years.
The recent HBO series has given us the opportunity to live again through images, those days that have changed everyone’s habits.
Thousands of miles away, we have avoided foods such as vegetables and milk, in addition to special measures for children.
As regards Fukushima, according to the Greenpeace report, the government’s decontamination interventions have been fragmented, inadequate and there is a serious risk of re-contamination of the already decontaminated areas. Despite massive effort and expense, decontamination is likely to become an endless process. Furthermore, decontamination efforts without being able to ‘get rid’ of radioactive contamination, i.e. simply moving it to other places such as temporary storage sites, continue to pose a danger to local communities and the environment.
The risk is that Japan will decide to discharge the contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean.
The water that from the day of the accident, that is, from 11 March 2011, was necessary to pump on the reactor to keep the core temperature low: more than 220 cubic meters per day. Can you figure how big the quantity can be?
According to Tepco’s forecasts, the storage limit will be reached in 2022.
This problem affects the whole world even if only South Korea seems to worry about it for now.
Not to mention the perennial risk that this thousand tanks represent in a seismic area.
Meanwhile, some newspapers are already reporting that tritium is “relatively toxic” and minimizing the impact of disposal at sea since it would have a short life, of course, a decay of just over 12 years is nothing compared to ten thousand …
Recall that tritium was used for fluorescence in watches and that use has been interrupted.
Now the question is simple: if it is really so harmless, why storing it for nine years?
I would say that when we talk about nuclear power plants, even Einstein‘s phrase is no longer enough, we are not even like rats that build a trap for themselves, we went further.
The lightness with which the construction of these plants is allowed, knowing that in case of accidents there is no way to shelter, it is as disgusting as appealing to the causes of force majeure hiding behind the fact that the real effects on health do not appear immediately.
People will get sick and die, but someone will have earned money. As it always happens.

Pin It on Pinterest