How Roundup Weedkiller Can Promote Cancer, New Study Reveals

Roundup herbicide (glyphosate) is in our air, rain, groundwater, soil and most food in the U.S., and an increasing body of research reveals it has cancer-promoting properties.

Researchers from the Indian Institute of Toxicology Research have recently confirmed the carcinogenic potential of Roundup herbicide using human skin cells (HaCaT ) exposed to extremely low concentrations of the world's best selling herbicide.

The researchers previously reported on glyphosate's tumor promoting potential in a two-stage mouse skin carcinogenesis model[i] through its disruption of proteins that regulate calcium (Ca^2+- ) signaling and oxidative stress (SOD 1), but were unable in these investigations to identify the exact molecular mechanisms behind how glyphosate contributes to tumor promotion.

The new study, published in the peer-reviewed journal ISRN Dermatology,[ii] sought out to clarify the exact mode of tumorigenic action, finding the likely mechanism behind glyphosate's cancer promoting properties is through the downregulation of mitochondrial apoptotic (self-destructive) signaling pathways, as well as through the disruption of a wide range of cell signaling and regulatory components. Cell proliferative effects were induced by concentrations lower than .1 mM, and as low as 0.01 mM, which is four orders of magnitude lower than concentrations commonly used in GM agricultural applications (e.g. 50 mM). The fact that lower concentrations were more effective at inducing proliferation than higher concentrations (which suppressed cell growth), indicates that Roundup is a potent endocrine disrupter, and further highlights why conventional toxicological risk assessments are inadequate because they do not account for the fact that as concentrations arereduced certain types of toxicity -- e.g. endocrine disruption -- actually increase.

The researchers used the product Roundup Original (glyphosate 41%, polyethoxethyleneamine (POEA) ≅15%—Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO, USA), and observed the following changes to human skin cells induced through exposure to this chemical mixture:

·         Significant increases in cell proliferation (via disruption of CA2+ levels, i.e. decreased levels)

·         Increases oxidative stress, as measured by levels of ROS (reactive oxygen species)

·         Cell-cycle dysregulation, marked by an accumulation of cells in S-phase (hallmark feature of cancer)

·         Increased proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), a marker for increased cell proliferation

·         Increased Bromodeoxyuridin (BrdU), a marker for increased cell proliferation

·         Decreases in the level of the protein IP3R1, an indication of resistance to cell death

·         Increases in Bcl-2 protein, a tumor promoter gene product

·         Decreases in Bax proteins, a tumor suppressor gene product

·         Caspase suppression (associated with prevention of cell death)

·         Changes in the expression of the Ca2+- binding family of proteins (S100 family) S100A6/S100A9, associated with various cancers.

It is important to emphasize that while the researchers observed cell proliferation-associated changes in the expression of the Ca2+- binding proteins S100A6/A9 following glyphosate exposure to human skin cells, the implications of these findings reach beyond the skin cell lineage. They explained that related modifications of the expression pattern of S100A6/A9 protein have also been found in "hepatocellular carcinoma [15], lung cancer [16], colorectal cancer [17], and melanoma [18]."

The study included a diagram (shown below) representing graphically the multiple ways in which glyphosate disrupts cellular structure/function to contribute to uncontrolled cell proliferation.

The researchers summarized their findings as follows:

In conclusion, in this study, we demonstrated that glyphosate may possibly exert proliferative effect in HaCaT cells by activating Ca2+ binding proteins to promote the imbalance of intracellular Ca2+ homeostasis and lessen SOD1 to increase ROS generation. This effect was partially reversed by treatment with antioxidant NAC indicating connections between oxidative stress and hypocalcaemia. Reduced Ca2+ levels enhance Bcl-2 and decrease Bax, subsequently leading to decrease in cytochrome c to stimulate further decrease of caspase 3 via the downregulation of IP3R1 level, thus halting apoptosis. The present study for the first time provides insight into the mechanism of glyphosate-induced neoplastic potential in mammalian skin system.

It should be noted that their observation that the carcinogenicity of Roundup may be suppressed by the antioxidant n-acetyl-cysteine (NAC), which is a precursor to the cellular detoxifier and antioxidant known as glutathione and a readily available dietary supplement, has important implications, owing to how widespread exposure to Roundup herbicide has become, both through environmental exposures in air, soil, rain and groundwater, as well as in the tens of thousands of unlabeled products containing GM ingredients contaminated with physiologically significant levels of this chemical. 

Reflecting on the Implications

We leave the reader with some final reflections on the implications of this research. The wholesale dismissal of attempts to differentiate GMO from conventional products through accurate labeling is based on the idea that they are 'substantially equivalent.' But, this fallacious approach is based on the mistaken view that the only difference between GMO and non-GMO crops of feed and food importance is the presence of either the novel transgenes inserted into them or their novel transgene protein products.

The discover of Roundup's extreme toxicity destroys that argument, and calls into question the credibility of any would-be 'scientist' or pro-GMO advocate who would propose otherwise.  How so? The fact is that the majority of approved GM plants have been genetically engineered to be "Roundup Ready," i.e. resistant to glyphosate, which means that the land they are grown upon is basically carpet-bombed with the chemical mixture to kill any living plant other than the glyphosate-resistant GM monocultures. The GM plants take up glyphosate, convert some of it to a similarly toxic metabolite AMPA, and survive the chemical exposure, while maintaining residues of both chemicals post-harvest -- which ultimately means that the consumer will be exposed to these compounds through their food.

This means that if you are not consuming foods that are explicitly GM free, you are being exposed to glyphosate (and glyphosate metabolites) on a daily basis. The difference, therefore between GMO and non-GMO is vastly more significant than simply the presence or absence of novel transgenes or their proteins.  It is the difference, candidly, between being exposed (poisoned) with a chemical with likely carcinogenicity or not being exposed to it.  For a more elaborate explanation read: Extreme Toxicity of Roundup Destroys GM/non-GM 'Substantial Equivalence' Argument.

Lastly, consider if Roundup (glyphosate) 'weed-killer' bore a warning sign 'may cause cancer,' or the tens thousands of products made with GM ingredients contaminated with it. Would there be any justifiable reason to resist GMO labeling? No, to the contrary, the focus would be on banning them immediately, instead of cow-towing to the powers that be to allow us the choice not to be poisoned by default.

Despite the so called "science" and "reason" based GMO proponents who think it makes sense to have mattresses labeled, but not food you put into your body, the actual empirical, peer-reviewed and published research – not ghost-written or funded by biotech corporations themselves – says that this omnipresent herbicide has multiple models of carcinogenicity, and in concentration ranges far below agricultural application, as far down as to the parts-per-trillion range. It is time those paying lip service to the 'evidence-based' model of GMO risk assessment, and who recklessly promote the dystopian interests of biotech corporations, address the evidence itself, or stop co-opting powerful sounding terms like "Science" to justify their highly irrational and ultimately biased and self-serving perspectives on the subject.

Source: GreenMedInfo

The Monarch Butterflies are Being Decimated by Monsanto

by Lauren McCauley | Common Dreams

Image: 

The migratory population of the monarch butterfly has reached an “ominous” low, researchers in Mexico announced Wednesday.

Scientists are attributing the decline of this essential pollinating population to the ongoing drought and the “explosive” increase in the use of genetically modified crops in the American corn belt.

“Because farmers have planted over 120 million acres of crops resistant to the milkweed-killing herbicide glyphosate, the monarchs’ essential food supply has been all but destroyed.”

Released by the Mexican government along with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), a recent survey found a 59% decrease in the area occupied by monarch colonies wintering in the forests of central Mexico, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Because of the difficulty in counting butterflies, scientists rely on measurements of the area that butterflies occupy to estimate their numbers; 1 hectare may contain as many as 50 million butterflies.

“The report of the dwindling Monarch butterfly winter residence in Mexico is ominous,” said leading entomologist Lincoln Brower.

According to Chip Taylor, director of the conservation group Monarch Watch at the University of Kansas, the decline was “hastened” by North America’s ongoing drought and record-breaking heat

However, the more “alarming” source of decline, according to Taylor and Omar Vidal, head of WWF in Mexico, is the “explosive increase” in the use of herbicide-tolerant genetically modified soybean and corn crops across America’s farmland which, the New York Times reports, has “enabled farmers to wipe out the milkweed,” on which monarch larvae feed almost exclusively.

“The American Midwest’s corn belt is a critical feeding ground for monarchs, which once found a ready source of milkweed growing between the rows of millions of acres of soybean and corn,” they continue. However, as farmers have planted over 120 million acres of crops resistant to the milkweed-killing herbicide glyphosate, the monarchs’ essential food supply is all but destroyed.

“That habitat is virtually gone. We’ve lost well over 120 million acres, and probably closer to 150 million acres,” Mr. Taylor said.

Previously, environmental groups cited logging in Mexico’s forests, the butterfly’s winter habitat, as the primary threat to the population. Since the area was declared a nature reserve in 2000, that is now considered a lesser threat.

“The conservation of the Monarch butterfly is a shared responsibility between Mexico, the United States and Canada,” said Vidal. “By protecting the reserves and having practically eliminated large-scale illegal logging, Mexico has done its part. It is now necessary for the United States and Canada to do their part and protect the butterflies’ habitat in their territories.”

Like bees, butterflies provide essential pollinating functions for entire ecosystems.”The fruits, nuts, seeds and foliage that everything else feeds on,” said Taylor. “If we pull the monarchs out of the system, we’re really pulling the rug out from under a whole lot of other species.”

According to Nature World News, the Monarch butterflies begin life as an egg that hatch into larvae (which feed almost exclusively on the milkweed plant). These larvae become caterpillars and in the fourth stage they become butterflies. Only Monarchs born between late summer and early fall make the migration. Even though it takes about four generations of the Monarchs to make the incredible journey, each butterfly knows the way and at times, these butterflies have been found to come back to the same tree from where their great grandparents had begun the journey.
“This is one of the world’s great migrations. It would be a shame to lose it.”

Source: Common Dreams via RealFarmacy.com

Monsanto's RoundUp is Now Banned in El Salvador

Natural Cures Not Medicine on Facebook: www.facebook.com/naturalcuresnotmedicine

From a press release by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources:

With 45 votes in favor, members of the FMLN, Unidos por El salvador and GANA approved the amendment of a Law on the control of pesticides, fertilizers and products for agricultural use, which allows the prohibition of 53 chemicals in El Salvador.

Related: Join the March Against Monsanto on 10/12/13: http://bit.ly/14RN9EV

Among the list of the 53 chemicals are Paraquat, Glyphosate and Endosulfan, which caused controversy among right-wing deputies. Deputy Mario Ponce, of the Alianza Republicana Nacionalista (ARENA) party, opposed these substances being on the list, however, he did not have the support of other MPs.

Nery Diaz, deputy of the Frente Farabundo Martí party (FMLN) defended the opinion on the grounds that paraquat is related to an increase in renal diseases.

According to the president of the Association of Coffee Producers (ABECAFE), Carlos Borgonovo, the congressional initiative threatens the quality and quantity of the grain harvest. “At the moment there is no substitute, we would have to order in from an international laboratory,” said Borgonovo referring to the chemical endosulfan. This product is used for controlling the coffee berry borer pest.

In relation to herbicides, both Borgonovo as well as Marcelino Samayoa, director of ABECAFE agree that you cannot depend on labor dedicated to removing weeds. While these chemicals are applied twice a year, removing weeds with a machete requires twice as much effort.

For its part, the National Executive Council (COENA) asked President Mauricio Funes to study the decree banning the use of these 53 pesticides and fertilizers because they are working against the country’s agricultural sector.

“The call is for there to be a lot of research carried out and that prior to sanctioning, vetoing or monitoring them, there be observations of the impact that it will have in the medium and long term, not only in relation to the issue of food security, but also in relation to economics” said Ricardo Esmahán, COENA member.


Sources: http://en.centralamericadata.com/

 www.realfarmacy.com

Monsanto's EPA Raises Allowable RoundUp Pollution Levels

Natural Cures Not Medicine on Facebook: www.facebook.com/naturalcuresnotmedicine

Image theorganicprepper.ca

Great news!  You no longer have to worry about excessive levels of glyphosate, the toxic chemical found in Monsanto’s Round-up pesticide, in your food or in the feed that livestock consumes.  Why not?  Well, the Environmental Deception Protection Agency has looked over the situation, and in their infinite wisdom, raised the safety threshold of glyphosate that is allowed to be in consumable goods.

The EPA’s change of heart means that the the allowed glyphosate level in animal feed will rise to 100 parts per million (ppm) and 40 ppm in oilseed crops.  Thankfully, there’s no need for us to worry because they’ve assured us that the new allowable levels are only “minimally toxic” to humans.

The EPA is the agency that is charged with protecting the air we breathe, the soil in which we grow our food and the water that we drink. Unfortunately the only responsibility they seem to take seriously is their commitment to furthering the agendas of big business.  This decision to allow more Roundup to drench the food supply comes immediately after two major, peer reviewed studies have proven that glyphosate is deadly.

The first study found that glyphosate increases the breast cancer cell proliferation in the parts-per-trillion range.

An alarming new study, accepted for publication in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology last month, indicates that glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide due to its widespread use in genetically engineered agriculture, is capable of driving estrogen receptor mediated breast cancer cell proliferation within the infinitesimal parts per trillion concentration range. 

The study, titled, “Glyphosate induces human breast cancer cells growth via estrogen receptors,” compared the effect of glyphosate on hormone-dependent and hormone-independent breast cancer cell lines, finding that glyphosate stimulates hormone-dependent cancer cell lines in what the study authors describe as “low and environmentally relevant concentrations.”(source)

Another study found that consumption of glyphosate causes intestinal and gut damage, which opens the door to numerous human diseases, such as diabetes, gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, obesity, autism, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s

However, another classification of allergy-type food is emerging and getting recognized for adverse effects on the human intestinal tract and gut. Those foods are genetically modified organisms known as GMOs or GEs. There is scientific research indicating intestinal damage from GMO food and the article “Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Disease” discusses how the inordinate amount of pesticides sprayed on GMOs leaves residues in GMO crops that, in turn, are being traced to modern diseases.  (source)

The Organic Consumers Association is very concerned.  They are behind a petition to lobby the EPA to lower the allowable glyphosate levels instead of raising them. (Find it HERE)  The OCA cites numerous reasons why the EPA’s current move is a deadly mistake:

Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world.  According to the EPA, at least 208 million tons of Roundup were sprayed on GE crops, lawns and roadsides in the years 2006 and 2007. In 2007, as much as 185 million pounds of glyphosate was used by U.S. farmers, double the amount used just six years ago. 

A 2009 study found that Americans use about 100 million pounds of glyphosate annually on their lawns and gardens. It’s safe to assume all these number are much higher now. Why? Because GE crops are now being invaded by new strains of herbicide-resistant “superweeds” requiring higher and higher doses of poison.

Beyond Pesticides has assembled extensive documentation of past research linking glyphosate to increased cancer risk, neurotoxicity and birth defects, as well as eye, skin, respiratory irritation, lung congestion, increased breathing rate, damage to the pancreas, kidney and testes. 

Glyphosate also endangers the environment, destroys soil and plants, and is linked to a host of health hazards. The EPA’s decision to increase the allowed residue limits of glyphosate is out of date, dangerous to the health of people and the environment and scientifically unsupportable. (source)

So why would the EPA make this ruling?

Because instead of being an unbiased agency looking out for public interest, they are merely puppets for the biotech industry.  They spread disinformation from beneath a cloak of benevolence and authority.  They use the trust that people have put in them to deceive and manipulate the public in favor of big business.

Here are some examples of their incestuous partnerships:

The EPA has been accused of covering up crimes committed by public health enemy #1, Monsanto, as well as Dow Chemicals.  The EPA’s investigation proved that Monsanto knowingly tainted Lysol (used by moms everywhere to sanitize babies’ toys) with dioxin.  However, no criminal charges have been forthcoming as of this publication.

The EPA also quietly closed an investigation of Monsanto’s twisted cover-up in the Nitro, West Virginia herbicide plant accident that exposed hundreds of workers to deadly carcinogen dioxin, which can still be found in nearby streams and lakes. Despite the fact that this investigation simply disappeared, Monsanto agreed in February to pay $93 million dollars to residents of Nitro in order to settle a class action lawsuit.

 The EPA has refused to ban a pesticide made by Dow Chemicals, the controversial 2,4-D, the same substance used in Agent Orange. This pesticide will be used on corn crops that have been genetically engineered to be resistant to the toxin.  Agent Orange causes cancer, hormone disruption, genetic mutations and neurotoxicity and will be soon be coming to a corn field near you. 

The EPA has refused a petition to ban BPA in industry, citing a lack of scientific evidence of the negative effects of the chemical. BPA is commonly found tainting canned goods, especially soup, and bottled water that has been exposed to heat. (Author’s note:  It would probably be very expensive for industry to have to replace all those containers with BPA-free cans and bottles.) (source) 

The EPA pulled an identical sleight of hand when radiation from the Fukushima disaster began to reach the United States in 2011.  They raised the acceptable levels of radiation, stopped measuring it, and even tried to convince us that a little radiation was actually good for us: 

The EPA is right on top of things with their response, of course. First, they promptly closed down 8 of 18 radiation measuring stations in the hardest hit area, California.  Then, to further calm the good people of the nation, the EPA magically changed the numbers.  They’ve raised the amount of radiation that we can safely absorb and ingest.  It wouldn’t do for the large factory farms to be unable to sell their tainted produce or for the huge dairies to be stuck with all that radioactive milk. 

The radiation in our food supply is of so little concern to the EPA that they’ve actually begun to tell us that a little bit of radiation is good for us. According to a report citing the EPA, a bit of radiation can prevent cancer, instead of causing it. 

Since our minds can be at ease now, the EPA has decided that they are no longer planning to monitor the radiation levels in our food supply.  They will return to their previous practice of only monitoring random samples every three months.  Yep.  Really.  The Environmental Protection Agency of the United States is no longer monitoring radiation levels in our food and water supplies as of April 14th.  That will definitely keep them from getting those inconveniently high readings that might affect Big Agra’s prosperity.  (source)

The government’s consumer protection agencies are hopelessly corrupted.  The FDA, the EPA, and the USDA are all servants of Big Food, Big Pharma and Big Agri.  We are on our own.  The public outcry will be muffled in the mainstream media because, well, Big Food, Big Pharma, and Big Agri own them too – you need only look at the advertisers to see this.

Therefore, we have to resort to other means to spread the word. We have to be so loud and so adamant that even the sleepiest individual will have no option but to see what is going on.  So, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to “out” the EPA for this disastrous decision.

Share information via social media

Protest publicly

Sign this petition and persuade everyone you know to sign it too

Contact the EPA directly and let them know your thoughts on this matter (please be civil)

Here’s the phone number for the office of the EPA’s administrator – give him a call:  (202)564-4711

Write letters to the editor of all of your local publications

Make comments on message boards for the mainstream media (they’ll get deleted but a few people might read them first)

Don’t purchase processed foods or any foods that may contain GMOs, including factory farmed meats.  The animals are given GMO feed throughout the course of their entire lives

Please understand, the system is irrevocably corrupted. Only by shedding light on this corruption can we make a change.  People are being lulled into compliance, all the while, feeling that there are measures in place to ensure that what they consume from the grocery store is not poison.

Food safety should not be in the hands of the highest bidder.

Source: The Organic Prepper

Monsanto Pays Farmers to Spray GM Crops With RoundUp

Natural Cures Not Medicine on Facebook: www.facebook.com/naturalcuresnotmedicine

Proving that nothing is out of bounds in the pursuit of food hegemony, Monsanto alters the free market itself by paying customers to use their products. Farmers are paid up to $20 per acre to plant Monsanto’s RoundUp Ready GM corn, as long as they spray it with a blend of RoundUp and herbicides from other companies.

The story behind this bizarre twisting of the free market starts with Monsanto’s genetically-engineered corn that was made to survive Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicide, RoundUp. Actually, the story began billions of years ago with basic evolutionary functions. As a population of life forms is attacked repeatedly, individuals will begin to evolve defense mechanisms against that mode of attack. These individuals survive (the fittest) and pass the defense mechanisms along to their progeny.

In this case the predator was Monsanto’s chemicals and the prey was agricultural weeds. Some of the target weeds, such as pigweed, developed resistance to RoundUp in a matter of years. These “superweeds” are now a major problem for an agricultural system that has become dependent on chemical poisons.

Facing this reality, Monsanto keeps its product in use by actually paying farmers to use other herbicides from other manufacturers in conjunction with its own. While this is going on, it is developing other genetically-engineered crops that can withstand even more toxic herbicides than glyphosate.

Interestingly, when Monsanto was pushing to have its GM corn seed approved for commercial sale in 1993, it stated that RoundUp is “considered to be a herbicide with low risk for weed resistance” and it was “highly unlikely” that resistant weeds would emerge. Apparently this was good enough for the USDA. Besides calling into question the validity of the USDA approval process, this calamity casts a great deal of doubt on Monsanto’s ability or truthfulness of their own research.

However, this likelihood of weed resistance was in fact known among scientists involved in agricultural issues. In 1990 the Union of Concerned Scientists published a report called “Biotechnology’s Bitter Harvest” where they explicitly warned of the development of herbicide-resistance.

This free market manipulation—Monsanto paying farmers to use its product—can only be carried out by a corporation with huge economic might and a near monopoly, in tandem with government protection in the form of patents on life.

by Justin Gardener
Source: RealFarmacy.com

Farmers using more pesticides as pests become immune to GMOs

Natural Cures Not Medicine on Facebook: www.facebook.com/naturalcuresnotmedicine

As plant and agriculture biotechnology is advancing, so too are the pests which these technologies are aimed at preventing. In a natural cycle of evolution, present on all life forms, life must overcome adversity by evolving to it's environment and conditions. This phenomena is now becoming present in modern agricultural pests as we see common insects that feed on plants adapt to the use of genetic and conventional pesticides.

This phenomena is partly why the industrial farming industry has been forced to use more chemical pesticides like Monsanto's Roundup now that pests like the rootworm are becoming immune to the GMO seed's internally produced pesticides.

GMO seeds are already under the fire after the recent March Against Monsanto protests, the revelation that GM wheat has contaminated the world wheat supply, the seemingly retaliatory destruction of GMO crops in Oregon, and the recent independent studies showing the dangerous effects of pesticide producing GMOs and spray on pesticides. The latest revelations regarding the growth of pests that are immune to GMOs are likely to only add more fuel to the anti-GMO fire which is already blazing.

One of the very negative side effects of these revelations are that farmers will be forced to not only use the GMO seeds, but will also have to douse the crops with extra pesticides which are shown to cause many negative health and environmental effects. Just a few weeks ago 50,000 bees died in Oregon from pesticide exposure

There are more natural ways to deal with pests, even simply rotating crops will help manage pests, not to mention the many natural and organic pest management techniques. The rising tide of public awareness of the issues surrounding GMOs, Monsanto, and chemical pesticides is forcing a change of tone from corporate world; who are now trying to shift marketing plans and products to a more health oriented plan. It's better late than never, but the alternative food and health industry and movement is already years ahead of them and making huge advances in market share. Support local, independent, and alternative and the rest will be forced to change.

Weed Free Organic Gardening

There is nothing more satisfying than growing your own organic vegetables, but how is it possible to keep the weeds at bay? 

Weedkillers such as roundup don't just kill weeds. They contaminate the soil around them and make it virtually impossible to grow healthy organic food that is safe to eat. Studies have shown that it can stay in the soil for up to 2 years and has an adverse affect on plant and soil ecology.1  In laboratory tests using rats and mice, it has shown to decrease fertility.

So what are the alternatives to using harsh chemicals? 

The best way (and probably the hardest) to keep the weeds to a minimum is to remove weeds on a daily basis, removing them manually from the soil. In order to reduce the effort involved in this, it is best to turn the soil over and keep it loose on the areas where there are no plants growing. With the use of tools to help you and getting into the habit of maintaining it daily, it becomes relatively easy and hassle free in time. 

Plant strategically, known as companion planting. Learn which foods grow better next to each other and will not invade one an other's space but will give enough ground coverage to suppress weeds, repel pests and keep your vegetables or fruits growing abundantly.2

Know your soil type. It is possible to buy testing kits that can test the ph level of your soil. For example, clay soil is more alkali and will have a higher ph than sandy soil. Research the ideal soil type for each vegetable you want to grow, and if your soil is not right, look for a natural organic fertilizer to correct it.

    Supplement the soil with compost. It is best to know the source or ideally, make your own. Remember to burn weeds and put the ashes on the compost heap rather than the weed itself, or it will leave unwanted seeds in the compost that will wreak havoc in your organic garden for many years to come.

Salt diluted in water makes for an excellent weed killer. Applying directly to the weed will not have any adverse affect on the soil or to the vegetables you are growing around it. Be conscious that if the soil becomes too contaminated with salt it will impair the quality of the vegetables you are growing.

Boiling water is another natural way to eliminate weeds from your patch. This would be better suited when preparing the soil to plant, rather than using with established plants as the heat from the water will kill any roots that are surrounding the weeds. 

Vinegar is an excellent organic weedkiller. It has a high acidity which works by killing the leaves of the weed and stopping it from growing further shoots. It is most effective on younger weeds, but can have a desired affect on more established ones after several applications. 

Weed suppressants such as mulch, straw and newspaper are fantastic for preventing weed growth by blocking sunlight to the weed. Simply lay it down around your plants.

Corn Gluten Meal stops weed seeds from germinating. The gluten ( which is a by-product in the manufacture of corn meal and cornstarch) in the corn is the active ingredient that does this. Scattering the corn meal over the soil will help stop the weeds from coming through. Although this method is not highly recommended in the U.S. due to the fact that nearly all corn is GMO. It can be said that it is still allowed though in organic standards.

Organic gardening can be fun and productive. With a little t.l.c. it can be something you can be proud of. If you have young children, it is also a great way to educate and entertain them. The benefits are endless and you will feel better knowing exactly where your food has come from.

Sources: 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_(herbicide)
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companion_plants#Vegetables


Related Posts From Natural Cures Not Medicine
Find A Farmers Market Near You
http://www.naturalcuresnotmedicine.com/2013/05/find-farmers-market-near-you.htmlIs Monsanto's Glyphosate Destroying The Soil?
http://www.naturalcuresnotmedicine.com/2013/05/is-monsantos-glyphosate-destroying-soil.htmlA List of Non-GMO Companies
http://www.naturalcuresnotmedicine.com/2013/05/a-list-of-non-gmo-companies.htmlThe Sad Truth About GMO Foods
http://www.naturalcuresnotmedicine.com/2013/04/the-sad-truth-about-gmo-foods.html