Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup is an endocrine (hormone) disruptor in adult male rats, a new study shows.

The lowest dose tested of 10 mg/kg bw/d (bodyweight per day) was found to reduce levels of corticosterone, a steroid hormone produced in the adrenal glands. This was only one manifestation of a widespread disruption of adrenal function.

No other toxic effects were seen at that dose, so if endocrine disruption were not being specifically looked for, there would be no other signs that the dose was toxic. However a 2012 study detected a 35% testosterone down-regulation in rats at a concentration of 1 part per million.

In both studies endocrine disruption was detected at the lowest level tested for, so we don’t know if, when it comes to endocrine disruption, there are ‘safe’ lower doses of Roundup. In technical parlance, this means that no NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), was found.

Significantly, the authors believe that the hormonal disruption could lead to the potentially fatal condition know as ‘adrenal insufficiency‘ in humans, which causes fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported”, they write. The increasing levels of Roundup in the environment and food could be “one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency.”

How does this level relate to safety limits set by regulators?

One problem with trying to work out how the endocrine disruptive level of 10 mg/kg bw/d relates to how ‘safe’ levels are set by regulators.

The experiment looked at Roundup, the complete herbicide formulation as sold and used, but regulators only look at the long-term safety of glyphosate alone, the supposed active ingredient of Roundup.

Safe levels for chronic exposure to the Roundup herbicide product have never been tested or assessed for regulatory processes. This is a serious omission because Roundup has been shown in many tests to be more disruptive to hormones than glyphosate alone, thanks to the numerous other ingredients it contains to enhance its weed-killing properties.

Given this yawning data gap, let’s for a moment assume that the regulatory limits set for glyphosate alone can be used as a guide for the safe level of Roundup.

The endocrine disruptive level of Roundup found in the experiment, of 10 mg/kg bw/d, is is well above the acceptable daily intake (ADI) set for glyphosate in Europe (0.3 mg/kg bw/d) and the US (1.75 mg/kg bw/d). But this isn’t a reason to feel reassured, since with endocrine effects, low doses can be more disruptive than higher doses.

Another worrying factor is that 10 mg/kg bw/d is well below the NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) for chronic toxicity of glyphosate: 500 mg/kg bw/d for chronic toxicity, according to the US EPA.

In other words, the level of 500 mg/kg bw/d – a massive 50 times higher than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the experiment – is deemed by US regulators not to cause chronic toxicity.

This experiment shows they are wrong by a long shot. They failed to see toxicity below that level because they failed to take endocrine disruptive effects from low doses into account and industry does not test for them.

Hormone disruption take place at or below ‘no adverse effects’ levels

Interestingly, the NOAEL for glyphosate in industry’s three-generation reproductive studies in rats was much lower than that for chronic toxicity – 30 mg/kg bw/day for adults and 10 mg/kg bw/day for offspring.

However the latter figures – at which no adverse effects should be apparent from glyphosate – are at the same as or higher level than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the new study.

These results therefore show that the reproductive processes of the rats are sensitive to low doses that are apparently not overtly toxic. This in turn suggests that the reproductive toxicity findings are due to endocrine disruptive effects.

Regulatory tests still do not include tests for endocrine disruption from low doses, in spite of the fact that scientists have known about the syndrome since the 1990s.

In the final section of the new study, the researchers discuss its implications. They note that the effects seen in the Roundup-treated rats to the Adrenocorticotropic hormone receptor (ACTH) were similar to adrenal insufficiency in humans:

“The findings that Roundup treatment down regulates endogenous ACTH, is similar to the condition known as adrenal insufficiency in humans. This condition manifests as fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss. Chronic adrenal insufficiency could be fatal, if untreated.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported. The present study describes one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency due to Roundup^{and suggests more systematic studies, to investigate the area further. “}

The study: ‘Analysis of endocrine disruption effect of Roundup in adrenal gland of male rats‘ is by Aparamita Pandey and Medhamurthy Rudraiah, and published in Toxicology Reports 2 (2015) pp.1075-1085 on open access.

This article was originally published by GMWatch. This version has been subject to some edits and additions by The Ecologist.

Last weekend I along with around one thousand other people took part in mass direct action against one of the largest open cast lignite mines in Europe, owned by RWE, which along with surrounding mines and coal powers stations is the largest source of greenhouse gases in Europe.

I took part because fossil fuel capitalism is destroying our Earth. Waiting for companies and governments to do the right things is not working and is not going to work so people must stand up and force them to.

Earlier this year, the German government caved in to the lobbying might of RWE, backtracking on plans to put a levy on the most polluting power plants, which would have led to a phase out of lignite. Last weekend, people stood up in protest to say ‘Ende Gelände’, here and no further.

This is my experience of the day. It was a long, exhausting and confused day, and what I experienced will not be the same thing that others in different parts of the action experienced. But I hope this can help anyone reading understand what happened.

The assault

“Guten Morgen, Ende Gelände!” Those were the words I woke up to at 5:45 am in my tent. An early start for a momentous day, I rushed to scramble my stuff together, go to the loo and then hastily join up with my affinity group.

We were in the ‘Green Finger’ one of the four groups with approximately 250 people in them, that would be laying siege to the mine.

When the whole finger was formed up with everyone in their agreed place, my affinity group was in the middle. The first kilometre or so passed calmly enough. I could even hear someone play ‘The Diggers Song’ on a pipe, as we searched for a way across the motorway between us and the mine.

In the end, we came upon a tunnel with only about four lines of cops blocking it. It was at this point that many people there had their first experience of police violence, in some ways I was lucky I knew what to expect from previous actions.

This is where the battle began. The nail of the finger pushed through the police line, some using sacks of straw as shields to protect themselves. The police tried to stand firm but couldn’t hold back our momentum.

So they resorted to filling the air with a mist of pepper spray and beating everyone they could reach with their clubs, in the hope of separating them from the group. Everyone around me bunched up like rugby players in a scrum so the police couldn’t drag any of us away.

After this came a mad dash across the fields going through two more police lines. Even when they weren’t in front of us, the police followed behind us on foot and in vans trying to beat and pick off any stragglers. One person in my affinity group got pepper spray in their face, so we had to guide him by hand as we ran through a break in the police line.

I’m humbled by the trust he showed in us to make sure he wasn’t beaten to a pulp. The way everyone rallied to help those around them who had been beaten or pepper sprayed was one the most beautiful displays of practical solidarity I had ever seen.

Into the mine

After we successfully got across the fields, we walked along a dirt track by the edge of the mine that was in line with some water sprinklers used to stop dust escaping. Before this point I hadn’t really grasped the scale of the place. It looked large enough to fit at least two good sized towns in. It went from sand coloured at the top down to pitch black at the bottom.

We descended down the mine on a sandy ramp wide enough to drive a van down. At a bend near the bottom there was an attempt to block the path, but we evaded the police by travelling out the bank and bypassing them instead.

We then moved as fast as we could along the top tier of the mine, shadowed by a group of riot cops on the cliff top. When we reached one of the corners of the top tier, where conveyor belts over a kilometre long ended, we met a small group of security, which most of us were able to get past without much trouble. As we moved along the side of the conveyor belt towards one of the massive Baggers the police raced after us in borrowed 4x4s.

The police tried to form a line to block us off, but there were too few of them to do anything, so we were able to bust through the line with ease. My legs were burning from running in the sand with a heavy bag full of water. My right arm felt like it was on fire from the pepper spray.

After this we formed a line in order to stop any more police being able to join those in front of us. They tried again to block our path, but we held our line together by linking arms. We successfully stood our ground and they were forced to retreat. Seeing the police retreat was a wonderful sight.

Eventually we came to a point that was too wide for us to fully block and even more police managed to get past us. They had a much stronger line in front of us, which was thickest next to the conveyor belt where I was walking. On the very far side from me people managed to break through their line next to some smaller diggers.

The members of the affinity group I was with tried to run over to flow through the police, but by the time we got there they had closed it. I saw one police officer grab someone by their front and beat them across their back, while others lashed wildly in every direction, and others pepper-sprayed around them hoping to burn someone.

Detention

After two hours, roughly seven kilometres, and numerous police lines, we were kettled at 9 am. Even then we were still winning, as just by being there we stopped the mine from running and the police guarding us couldn’t work to keep others out.

We could see the Baggers lying still while in the distance wind turbines moved. A couple of hours in, they started to pull us out one by one, taking our photos and trying to get our names. Almost no one told them.

After this, they tied our hands with zip ties behind our backs. Through all this we supported each other, and worked to keep our spirits up by playing games and chatting (small talk when you can’t say your name, or say too much about yourself is strange).

After five to seven hours we were moved onto buses and taken to a police station. We sat for several more hours chatting, singing and sharing food (our hands had been freed by then). Eventually, they gave up on trying to process several hundred people that refused to give their names and resisted having their fingerprints taken.

Around 11 pm we were dumped outside a railway station and made our way back to camp, tired but triumphant. For the train ride back, some of us brought a couple of crates of beer, we celebrated the day and talked about what we’d been through on the train back. By around 1 am I was back in my tent exhausted, sore, emotionally drained, but also felt great about what we’d done together and achieved.

We had stopped the diggers for a day but it was also about more than just that. In economic terms it will have also damaged RWE’s position on the market (their share price just hit a new low) and made them seem less trustworthy to investors.

In addition to this many there had never taken part in direct action before but now know that by working together and taking matters into our own hands we can achieve more than waiting for salvation from those above us in society could ever do.

Many people both there and watching the events from afar will also have seen the role of the police, not as keeping of the peace but as guard dogs of social and economic order which is killing us and our planet. Last weekend, we fought and we won.

Background to the action: ‘Power struggle: after Germany’s renewables surge, can it keep its coal in the ground?‘ by Melanie Mattauch.

Toni Belly is a student at the University of Birmingham and a member of Plan C. He is also active in various student political and campaigning groups fighting on both environmental and economic issues. He’s critical of solutions to economic, social and environmental issues that rely on benevolent action on the part of those at the top of our current social economic order. Instead being of the view that real change can only come through struggle enacted from below.

Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup is an endocrine (hormone) disruptor in adult male rats, a new study shows.

The lowest dose tested of 10 mg/kg bw/d (bodyweight per day) was found to reduce levels of corticosterone, a steroid hormone produced in the adrenal glands. This was only one manifestation of a widespread disruption of adrenal function.

No other toxic effects were seen at that dose, so if endocrine disruption were not being specifically looked for, there would be no other signs that the dose was toxic. However a 2012 study detected a 35% testosterone down-regulation in rats at a concentration of 1 part per million.

In both studies endocrine disruption was detected at the lowest level tested for, so we don’t know if, when it comes to endocrine disruption, there are ‘safe’ lower doses of Roundup. In technical parlance, this means that no NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), was found.

Significantly, the authors believe that the hormonal disruption could lead to the potentially fatal condition know as ‘adrenal insufficiency‘ in humans, which causes fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported”, they write. The increasing levels of Roundup in the environment and food could be “one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency.”

How does this level relate to safety limits set by regulators?

One problem with trying to work out how the endocrine disruptive level of 10 mg/kg bw/d relates to how ‘safe’ levels are set by regulators.

The experiment looked at Roundup, the complete herbicide formulation as sold and used, but regulators only look at the long-term safety of glyphosate alone, the supposed active ingredient of Roundup.

Safe levels for chronic exposure to the Roundup herbicide product have never been tested or assessed for regulatory processes. This is a serious omission because Roundup has been shown in many tests to be more disruptive to hormones than glyphosate alone, thanks to the numerous other ingredients it contains to enhance its weed-killing properties.

Given this yawning data gap, let’s for a moment assume that the regulatory limits set for glyphosate alone can be used as a guide for the safe level of Roundup.

The endocrine disruptive level of Roundup found in the experiment, of 10 mg/kg bw/d, is is well above the acceptable daily intake (ADI) set for glyphosate in Europe (0.3 mg/kg bw/d) and the US (1.75 mg/kg bw/d). But this isn’t a reason to feel reassured, since with endocrine effects, low doses can be more disruptive than higher doses.

Another worrying factor is that 10 mg/kg bw/d is well below the NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) for chronic toxicity of glyphosate: 500 mg/kg bw/d for chronic toxicity, according to the US EPA.

In other words, the level of 500 mg/kg bw/d – a massive 50 times higher than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the experiment – is deemed by US regulators not to cause chronic toxicity.

This experiment shows they are wrong by a long shot. They failed to see toxicity below that level because they failed to take endocrine disruptive effects from low doses into account and industry does not test for them.

Hormone disruption take place at or below ‘no adverse effects’ levels

Interestingly, the NOAEL for glyphosate in industry’s three-generation reproductive studies in rats was much lower than that for chronic toxicity – 30 mg/kg bw/day for adults and 10 mg/kg bw/day for offspring.

However the latter figures – at which no adverse effects should be apparent from glyphosate – are at the same as or higher level than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the new study.

These results therefore show that the reproductive processes of the rats are sensitive to low doses that are apparently not overtly toxic. This in turn suggests that the reproductive toxicity findings are due to endocrine disruptive effects.

Regulatory tests still do not include tests for endocrine disruption from low doses, in spite of the fact that scientists have known about the syndrome since the 1990s.

In the final section of the new study, the researchers discuss its implications. They note that the effects seen in the Roundup-treated rats to the Adrenocorticotropic hormone receptor (ACTH) were similar to adrenal insufficiency in humans:

“The findings that Roundup treatment down regulates endogenous ACTH, is similar to the condition known as adrenal insufficiency in humans. This condition manifests as fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss. Chronic adrenal insufficiency could be fatal, if untreated.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported. The present study describes one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency due to Roundup^{and suggests more systematic studies, to investigate the area further. “}

The study: ‘Analysis of endocrine disruption effect of Roundup in adrenal gland of male rats‘ is by Aparamita Pandey and Medhamurthy Rudraiah, and published in Toxicology Reports 2 (2015) pp.1075-1085 on open access.

This article was originally published by GMWatch. This version has been subject to some edits and additions by The Ecologist.

Last weekend I along with around one thousand other people took part in mass direct action against one of the largest open cast lignite mines in Europe, owned by RWE, which along with surrounding mines and coal powers stations is the largest source of greenhouse gases in Europe.

I took part because fossil fuel capitalism is destroying our Earth. Waiting for companies and governments to do the right things is not working and is not going to work so people must stand up and force them to.

Earlier this year, the German government caved in to the lobbying might of RWE, backtracking on plans to put a levy on the most polluting power plants, which would have led to a phase out of lignite. Last weekend, people stood up in protest to say ‘Ende Gelände’, here and no further.

This is my experience of the day. It was a long, exhausting and confused day, and what I experienced will not be the same thing that others in different parts of the action experienced. But I hope this can help anyone reading understand what happened.

The assault

“Guten Morgen, Ende Gelände!” Those were the words I woke up to at 5:45 am in my tent. An early start for a momentous day, I rushed to scramble my stuff together, go to the loo and then hastily join up with my affinity group.

We were in the ‘Green Finger’ one of the four groups with approximately 250 people in them, that would be laying siege to the mine.

When the whole finger was formed up with everyone in their agreed place, my affinity group was in the middle. The first kilometre or so passed calmly enough. I could even hear someone play ‘The Diggers Song’ on a pipe, as we searched for a way across the motorway between us and the mine.

In the end, we came upon a tunnel with only about four lines of cops blocking it. It was at this point that many people there had their first experience of police violence, in some ways I was lucky I knew what to expect from previous actions.

This is where the battle began. The nail of the finger pushed through the police line, some using sacks of straw as shields to protect themselves. The police tried to stand firm but couldn’t hold back our momentum.

So they resorted to filling the air with a mist of pepper spray and beating everyone they could reach with their clubs, in the hope of separating them from the group. Everyone around me bunched up like rugby players in a scrum so the police couldn’t drag any of us away.

After this came a mad dash across the fields going through two more police lines. Even when they weren’t in front of us, the police followed behind us on foot and in vans trying to beat and pick off any stragglers. One person in my affinity group got pepper spray in their face, so we had to guide him by hand as we ran through a break in the police line.

I’m humbled by the trust he showed in us to make sure he wasn’t beaten to a pulp. The way everyone rallied to help those around them who had been beaten or pepper sprayed was one the most beautiful displays of practical solidarity I had ever seen.

Into the mine

After we successfully got across the fields, we walked along a dirt track by the edge of the mine that was in line with some water sprinklers used to stop dust escaping. Before this point I hadn’t really grasped the scale of the place. It looked large enough to fit at least two good sized towns in. It went from sand coloured at the top down to pitch black at the bottom.

We descended down the mine on a sandy ramp wide enough to drive a van down. At a bend near the bottom there was an attempt to block the path, but we evaded the police by travelling out the bank and bypassing them instead.

We then moved as fast as we could along the top tier of the mine, shadowed by a group of riot cops on the cliff top. When we reached one of the corners of the top tier, where conveyor belts over a kilometre long ended, we met a small group of security, which most of us were able to get past without much trouble. As we moved along the side of the conveyor belt towards one of the massive Baggers the police raced after us in borrowed 4x4s.

The police tried to form a line to block us off, but there were too few of them to do anything, so we were able to bust through the line with ease. My legs were burning from running in the sand with a heavy bag full of water. My right arm felt like it was on fire from the pepper spray.

After this we formed a line in order to stop any more police being able to join those in front of us. They tried again to block our path, but we held our line together by linking arms. We successfully stood our ground and they were forced to retreat. Seeing the police retreat was a wonderful sight.

Eventually we came to a point that was too wide for us to fully block and even more police managed to get past us. They had a much stronger line in front of us, which was thickest next to the conveyor belt where I was walking. On the very far side from me people managed to break through their line next to some smaller diggers.

The members of the affinity group I was with tried to run over to flow through the police, but by the time we got there they had closed it. I saw one police officer grab someone by their front and beat them across their back, while others lashed wildly in every direction, and others pepper-sprayed around them hoping to burn someone.

Detention

After two hours, roughly seven kilometres, and numerous police lines, we were kettled at 9 am. Even then we were still winning, as just by being there we stopped the mine from running and the police guarding us couldn’t work to keep others out.

We could see the Baggers lying still while in the distance wind turbines moved. A couple of hours in, they started to pull us out one by one, taking our photos and trying to get our names. Almost no one told them.

After this, they tied our hands with zip ties behind our backs. Through all this we supported each other, and worked to keep our spirits up by playing games and chatting (small talk when you can’t say your name, or say too much about yourself is strange).

After five to seven hours we were moved onto buses and taken to a police station. We sat for several more hours chatting, singing and sharing food (our hands had been freed by then). Eventually, they gave up on trying to process several hundred people that refused to give their names and resisted having their fingerprints taken.

Around 11 pm we were dumped outside a railway station and made our way back to camp, tired but triumphant. For the train ride back, some of us brought a couple of crates of beer, we celebrated the day and talked about what we’d been through on the train back. By around 1 am I was back in my tent exhausted, sore, emotionally drained, but also felt great about what we’d done together and achieved.

We had stopped the diggers for a day but it was also about more than just that. In economic terms it will have also damaged RWE’s position on the market (their share price just hit a new low) and made them seem less trustworthy to investors.

In addition to this many there had never taken part in direct action before but now know that by working together and taking matters into our own hands we can achieve more than waiting for salvation from those above us in society could ever do.

Many people both there and watching the events from afar will also have seen the role of the police, not as keeping of the peace but as guard dogs of social and economic order which is killing us and our planet. Last weekend, we fought and we won.

Background to the action: ‘Power struggle: after Germany’s renewables surge, can it keep its coal in the ground?‘ by Melanie Mattauch.

Toni Belly is a student at the University of Birmingham and a member of Plan C. He is also active in various student political and campaigning groups fighting on both environmental and economic issues. He’s critical of solutions to economic, social and environmental issues that rely on benevolent action on the part of those at the top of our current social economic order. Instead being of the view that real change can only come through struggle enacted from below.

Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup is an endocrine (hormone) disruptor in adult male rats, a new study shows.

The lowest dose tested of 10 mg/kg bw/d (bodyweight per day) was found to reduce levels of corticosterone, a steroid hormone produced in the adrenal glands. This was only one manifestation of a widespread disruption of adrenal function.

No other toxic effects were seen at that dose, so if endocrine disruption were not being specifically looked for, there would be no other signs that the dose was toxic. However a 2012 study detected a 35% testosterone down-regulation in rats at a concentration of 1 part per million.

In both studies endocrine disruption was detected at the lowest level tested for, so we don’t know if, when it comes to endocrine disruption, there are ‘safe’ lower doses of Roundup. In technical parlance, this means that no NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), was found.

Significantly, the authors believe that the hormonal disruption could lead to the potentially fatal condition know as ‘adrenal insufficiency‘ in humans, which causes fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported”, they write. The increasing levels of Roundup in the environment and food could be “one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency.”

How does this level relate to safety limits set by regulators?

One problem with trying to work out how the endocrine disruptive level of 10 mg/kg bw/d relates to how ‘safe’ levels are set by regulators.

The experiment looked at Roundup, the complete herbicide formulation as sold and used, but regulators only look at the long-term safety of glyphosate alone, the supposed active ingredient of Roundup.

Safe levels for chronic exposure to the Roundup herbicide product have never been tested or assessed for regulatory processes. This is a serious omission because Roundup has been shown in many tests to be more disruptive to hormones than glyphosate alone, thanks to the numerous other ingredients it contains to enhance its weed-killing properties.

Given this yawning data gap, let’s for a moment assume that the regulatory limits set for glyphosate alone can be used as a guide for the safe level of Roundup.

The endocrine disruptive level of Roundup found in the experiment, of 10 mg/kg bw/d, is is well above the acceptable daily intake (ADI) set for glyphosate in Europe (0.3 mg/kg bw/d) and the US (1.75 mg/kg bw/d). But this isn’t a reason to feel reassured, since with endocrine effects, low doses can be more disruptive than higher doses.

Another worrying factor is that 10 mg/kg bw/d is well below the NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) for chronic toxicity of glyphosate: 500 mg/kg bw/d for chronic toxicity, according to the US EPA.

In other words, the level of 500 mg/kg bw/d – a massive 50 times higher than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the experiment – is deemed by US regulators not to cause chronic toxicity.

This experiment shows they are wrong by a long shot. They failed to see toxicity below that level because they failed to take endocrine disruptive effects from low doses into account and industry does not test for them.

Hormone disruption take place at or below ‘no adverse effects’ levels

Interestingly, the NOAEL for glyphosate in industry’s three-generation reproductive studies in rats was much lower than that for chronic toxicity – 30 mg/kg bw/day for adults and 10 mg/kg bw/day for offspring.

However the latter figures – at which no adverse effects should be apparent from glyphosate – are at the same as or higher level than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the new study.

These results therefore show that the reproductive processes of the rats are sensitive to low doses that are apparently not overtly toxic. This in turn suggests that the reproductive toxicity findings are due to endocrine disruptive effects.

Regulatory tests still do not include tests for endocrine disruption from low doses, in spite of the fact that scientists have known about the syndrome since the 1990s.

In the final section of the new study, the researchers discuss its implications. They note that the effects seen in the Roundup-treated rats to the Adrenocorticotropic hormone receptor (ACTH) were similar to adrenal insufficiency in humans:

“The findings that Roundup treatment down regulates endogenous ACTH, is similar to the condition known as adrenal insufficiency in humans. This condition manifests as fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss. Chronic adrenal insufficiency could be fatal, if untreated.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported. The present study describes one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency due to Roundup^{and suggests more systematic studies, to investigate the area further. “}

The study: ‘Analysis of endocrine disruption effect of Roundup in adrenal gland of male rats‘ is by Aparamita Pandey and Medhamurthy Rudraiah, and published in Toxicology Reports 2 (2015) pp.1075-1085 on open access.

This article was originally published by GMWatch. This version has been subject to some edits and additions by The Ecologist.

Last weekend I along with around one thousand other people took part in mass direct action against one of the largest open cast lignite mines in Europe, owned by RWE, which along with surrounding mines and coal powers stations is the largest source of greenhouse gases in Europe.

I took part because fossil fuel capitalism is destroying our Earth. Waiting for companies and governments to do the right things is not working and is not going to work so people must stand up and force them to.

Earlier this year, the German government caved in to the lobbying might of RWE, backtracking on plans to put a levy on the most polluting power plants, which would have led to a phase out of lignite. Last weekend, people stood up in protest to say ‘Ende Gelände’, here and no further.

This is my experience of the day. It was a long, exhausting and confused day, and what I experienced will not be the same thing that others in different parts of the action experienced. But I hope this can help anyone reading understand what happened.

The assault

“Guten Morgen, Ende Gelände!” Those were the words I woke up to at 5:45 am in my tent. An early start for a momentous day, I rushed to scramble my stuff together, go to the loo and then hastily join up with my affinity group.

We were in the ‘Green Finger’ one of the four groups with approximately 250 people in them, that would be laying siege to the mine.

When the whole finger was formed up with everyone in their agreed place, my affinity group was in the middle. The first kilometre or so passed calmly enough. I could even hear someone play ‘The Diggers Song’ on a pipe, as we searched for a way across the motorway between us and the mine.

In the end, we came upon a tunnel with only about four lines of cops blocking it. It was at this point that many people there had their first experience of police violence, in some ways I was lucky I knew what to expect from previous actions.

This is where the battle began. The nail of the finger pushed through the police line, some using sacks of straw as shields to protect themselves. The police tried to stand firm but couldn’t hold back our momentum.

So they resorted to filling the air with a mist of pepper spray and beating everyone they could reach with their clubs, in the hope of separating them from the group. Everyone around me bunched up like rugby players in a scrum so the police couldn’t drag any of us away.

After this came a mad dash across the fields going through two more police lines. Even when they weren’t in front of us, the police followed behind us on foot and in vans trying to beat and pick off any stragglers. One person in my affinity group got pepper spray in their face, so we had to guide him by hand as we ran through a break in the police line.

I’m humbled by the trust he showed in us to make sure he wasn’t beaten to a pulp. The way everyone rallied to help those around them who had been beaten or pepper sprayed was one the most beautiful displays of practical solidarity I had ever seen.

Into the mine

After we successfully got across the fields, we walked along a dirt track by the edge of the mine that was in line with some water sprinklers used to stop dust escaping. Before this point I hadn’t really grasped the scale of the place. It looked large enough to fit at least two good sized towns in. It went from sand coloured at the top down to pitch black at the bottom.

We descended down the mine on a sandy ramp wide enough to drive a van down. At a bend near the bottom there was an attempt to block the path, but we evaded the police by travelling out the bank and bypassing them instead.

We then moved as fast as we could along the top tier of the mine, shadowed by a group of riot cops on the cliff top. When we reached one of the corners of the top tier, where conveyor belts over a kilometre long ended, we met a small group of security, which most of us were able to get past without much trouble. As we moved along the side of the conveyor belt towards one of the massive Baggers the police raced after us in borrowed 4x4s.

The police tried to form a line to block us off, but there were too few of them to do anything, so we were able to bust through the line with ease. My legs were burning from running in the sand with a heavy bag full of water. My right arm felt like it was on fire from the pepper spray.

After this we formed a line in order to stop any more police being able to join those in front of us. They tried again to block our path, but we held our line together by linking arms. We successfully stood our ground and they were forced to retreat. Seeing the police retreat was a wonderful sight.

Eventually we came to a point that was too wide for us to fully block and even more police managed to get past us. They had a much stronger line in front of us, which was thickest next to the conveyor belt where I was walking. On the very far side from me people managed to break through their line next to some smaller diggers.

The members of the affinity group I was with tried to run over to flow through the police, but by the time we got there they had closed it. I saw one police officer grab someone by their front and beat them across their back, while others lashed wildly in every direction, and others pepper-sprayed around them hoping to burn someone.

Detention

After two hours, roughly seven kilometres, and numerous police lines, we were kettled at 9 am. Even then we were still winning, as just by being there we stopped the mine from running and the police guarding us couldn’t work to keep others out.

We could see the Baggers lying still while in the distance wind turbines moved. A couple of hours in, they started to pull us out one by one, taking our photos and trying to get our names. Almost no one told them.

After this, they tied our hands with zip ties behind our backs. Through all this we supported each other, and worked to keep our spirits up by playing games and chatting (small talk when you can’t say your name, or say too much about yourself is strange).

After five to seven hours we were moved onto buses and taken to a police station. We sat for several more hours chatting, singing and sharing food (our hands had been freed by then). Eventually, they gave up on trying to process several hundred people that refused to give their names and resisted having their fingerprints taken.

Around 11 pm we were dumped outside a railway station and made our way back to camp, tired but triumphant. For the train ride back, some of us brought a couple of crates of beer, we celebrated the day and talked about what we’d been through on the train back. By around 1 am I was back in my tent exhausted, sore, emotionally drained, but also felt great about what we’d done together and achieved.

We had stopped the diggers for a day but it was also about more than just that. In economic terms it will have also damaged RWE’s position on the market (their share price just hit a new low) and made them seem less trustworthy to investors.

In addition to this many there had never taken part in direct action before but now know that by working together and taking matters into our own hands we can achieve more than waiting for salvation from those above us in society could ever do.

Many people both there and watching the events from afar will also have seen the role of the police, not as keeping of the peace but as guard dogs of social and economic order which is killing us and our planet. Last weekend, we fought and we won.

Background to the action: ‘Power struggle: after Germany’s renewables surge, can it keep its coal in the ground?‘ by Melanie Mattauch.

Toni Belly is a student at the University of Birmingham and a member of Plan C. He is also active in various student political and campaigning groups fighting on both environmental and economic issues. He’s critical of solutions to economic, social and environmental issues that rely on benevolent action on the part of those at the top of our current social economic order. Instead being of the view that real change can only come through struggle enacted from below.

Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup is an endocrine (hormone) disruptor in adult male rats, a new study shows.

The lowest dose tested of 10 mg/kg bw/d (bodyweight per day) was found to reduce levels of corticosterone, a steroid hormone produced in the adrenal glands.

No other toxic effects were seen at that dose, so if endocrine disruption were not being specifically looked for, there would be no other signs that the dose was toxic.

The researchers didn’t test below that level, so we don’t know if when it comes to endocrine disruption, there are ‘safe’ lower doses of Roundup. In technical parlance, this means that no NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level), was found.

Significantly, the authors believe that the hormonal disruption could lead to the potentially fatal condition know as ‘adrenal insufficiency‘ in humans, which causes fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported”, they write. The increasing levels of Roundup in the environment and food could be “one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency.”

How does this level relate to safety limits set by regulators?

One problem with trying to work out how the endocrine disruptive level of 10 mg/kg bw/d relates to how ‘safe’ levels are set by regulators.

The experiment looked at Roundup, the complete herbicide formulation as sold and used, but regulators only look at the long-term safety of glyphosate alone, the supposed active ingredient of Roundup.

Safe levels for chronic exposure to the Roundup herbicide product have never been tested or assessed for regulatory processes. This is a serious omission because Roundup has been shown in many tests to be more disruptive to hormones than glyphosate alone, thanks to the numerous other ingredients it contains to enhance its weed-killing properties.

Given this yawning data gap, let’s for a moment assume that the regulatory limits set for glyphosate alone can be used as a guide for the safe level of Roundup.

The endocrine disruptive level of Roundup found in the experiment, of 10 mg/kg bw/d, is is well above the acceptable daily intake (ADI) set for glyphosate in Europe (0.3 mg/kg bw/d) and the US (1.75 mg/kg bw/d). But this isn’t a reason to feel reassured, since with endocrine effects, low doses can be more disruptive than higher doses.

Another worrying factor is that 10 mg/kg bw/d is well below the NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) for chronic toxicity of glyphosate: 500 mg/kg bw/d for chronic toxicity, according to the US EPA.

In other words, the level of 500 mg/kg bw/d – a massive 50 times higher than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the experiment – is deemed by US regulators not to cause chronic toxicity.

This experiment shows they are wrong by a long shot. They failed to see toxicity below that level because they failed to take endocrine disruptive effects from low doses into account and industry does not test for them.

Hormone disruption take place at or below ‘no adverse effects’ levels

Interestingly, the NOAEL for glyphosate in industry’s three-generation reproductive studies in rats was much lower than that for chronic toxicity – 30 mg/kg bw/day for adults and 10 mg/kg bw/day for offspring.

However the latter figures – at which no adverse effects should be apparent from glyphosate – are at the same as or higher level than the level of Roundup found to be endocrine disruptive in the new study.

These results therefore show that the reproductive processes of the rats are sensitive to low doses that are apparently not overtly toxic. This in turn suggests that the reproductive toxicity findings are due to endocrine disruptive effects.

Regulatory tests still do not include tests for endocrine disruption from low doses, in spite of the fact that scientists have known about the syndrome since the 1990s.

In the final section of the new study, the researchers discuss its implications. They note that the effects seen in the Roundup-treated rats to the Adrenocorticotropic hormone receptor (ACTH) were similar to adrenal insufficiency in humans:

“The findings that Roundup treatment down regulates endogenous ACTH, is similar to the condition known as adrenal insufficiency in humans. This condition manifests as fatigue, anorexia, sweating, anxiety, shaking, nausea, heart palpitations and weight loss. Chronic adrenal insufficiency could be fatal, if untreated.

“A progressive increase in its prevalence has been observed in humans, while a very few studies relating to xenobiotic exposure and adrenal insufficiency development have been reported. The present study describes one of the possible mechanisms of adrenal insufficiency due to Roundup^{and suggests more systematic studies, to investigate the area further. “}

The study: ‘Analysis of endocrine disruption effect of Roundup in adrenal gland of male rats‘ is by Aparamita Pandey and Medhamurthy Rudraiah, and published in Toxicology Reports 2 (2015) pp.1075-1085 on open access.

This article was originally published by GMWatch. This version has been subject to some edits and additions by The Ecologist.

Last weekend I along with around one thousand other people took part in mass direct action against one of the largest open cast lignite mines in Europe, owned by RWE, which along with surrounding mines and coal powers stations is the largest source of greenhouse gases in Europe.

I took part because fossil fuel capitalism is destroying our Earth. Waiting for companies and governments to do the right things is not working and is not going to work so people must stand up and force them to.

Earlier this year, the German government caved in to the lobbying might of RWE, backtracking on plans to put a levy on the most polluting power plants, which would have led to a phase out of lignite. Last weekend, people stood up in protest to say ‘Ende Gelände’, here and no further.

This is my experience of the day. It was a long, exhausting and confused day, and what I experienced will not be the same thing that others in different parts of the action experienced. But I hope this can help anyone reading understand what happened.

The assault

“Guten Morgen, Ende Gelände!” Those were the words I woke up to at 5:45 am in my tent. An early start for a momentous day, I rushed to scramble my stuff together, go to the loo and then hastily join up with my affinity group.

We were in the ‘Green Finger’ one of the four groups with approximately 250 people in them, that would be laying siege to the mine.

When the whole finger was formed up with everyone in their agreed place, my affinity group was in the middle. The first kilometre or so passed calmly enough. I could even hear someone play ‘The Diggers Song’ on a pipe, as we searched for a way across the motorway between us and the mine.

In the end, we came upon a tunnel with only about four lines of cops blocking it. It was at this point that many people there had their first experience of police violence, in some ways I was lucky I knew what to expect from previous actions.

This is where the battle began. The nail of the finger pushed through the police line, some using sacks of straw as shields to protect themselves. The police tried to stand firm but couldn’t hold back our momentum.

So they resorted to filling the air with a mist of pepper spray and beating everyone they could reach with their clubs, in the hope of separating them from the group. Everyone around me bunched up like rugby players in a scrum so the police couldn’t drag any of us away.

After this came a mad dash across the fields going through two more police lines. Even when they weren’t in front of us, the police followed behind us on foot and in vans trying to beat and pick off any stragglers. One person in my affinity group got pepper spray in their face, so we had to guide him by hand as we ran through a break in the police line.

I’m humbled by the trust he showed in us to make sure he wasn’t beaten to a pulp. The way everyone rallied to help those around them who had been beaten or pepper sprayed was one the most beautiful displays of practical solidarity I had ever seen.

Into the mine

After we successfully got across the fields, we walked along a dirt track by the edge of the mine that was in line with some water sprinklers used to stop dust escaping. Before this point I hadn’t really grasped the scale of the place. It looked large enough to fit at least two good sized towns in. It went from sand coloured at the top down to pitch black at the bottom.

We descended down the mine on a sandy ramp wide enough to drive a van down. At a bend near the bottom there was an attempt to block the path, but we evaded the police by travelling out the bank and bypassing them instead.

We then moved as fast as we could along the top tier of the mine, shadowed by a group of riot cops on the cliff top. When we reached one of the corners of the top tier, where conveyor belts over a kilometre long ended, we met a small group of security, which most of us were able to get past without much trouble. As we moved along the side of the conveyor belt towards one of the massive Baggers the police raced after us in borrowed 4x4s.

The police tried to form a line to block us off, but there were too few of them to do anything, so we were able to bust through the line with ease. My legs were burning from running in the sand with a heavy bag full of water. My right arm felt like it was on fire from the pepper spray.

After this we formed a line in order to stop any more police being able to join those in front of us. They tried again to block our path, but we held our line together by linking arms. We successfully stood our ground and they were forced to retreat. Seeing the police retreat was a wonderful sight.

Eventually we came to a point that was too wide for us to fully block and even more police managed to get past us. They had a much stronger line in front of us, which was thickest next to the conveyor belt where I was walking. On the very far side from me people managed to break through their line next to some smaller diggers.

The members of the affinity group I was with tried to run over to flow through the police, but by the time we got there they had closed it. I saw one police officer grab someone by their front and beat them across their back, while others lashed wildly in every direction, and others pepper-sprayed around them hoping to burn someone.

Detention

After two hours, roughly seven kilometres, and numerous police lines, we were kettled at 9 am. Even then we were still winning, as just by being there we stopped the mine from running and the police guarding us couldn’t work to keep others out.

We could see the Baggers lying still while in the distance wind turbines moved. A couple of hours in, they started to pull us out one by one, taking our photos and trying to get our names. Almost no one told them.

After this, they tied our hands with zip ties behind our backs. Through all this we supported each other, and worked to keep our spirits up by playing games and chatting (small talk when you can’t say your name, or say too much about yourself is strange).

After five to seven hours we were moved onto buses and taken to a police station. We sat for several more hours chatting, singing and sharing food (our hands had been freed by then). Eventually, they gave up on trying to process several hundred people that refused to give their names and resisted having their fingerprints taken.

Around 11 pm we were dumped outside a railway station and made our way back to camp, tired but triumphant. For the train ride back, some of us brought a couple of crates of beer, we celebrated the day and talked about what we’d been through on the train back. By around 1 am I was back in my tent exhausted, sore, emotionally drained, but also felt great about what we’d done together and achieved.

We had stopped the diggers for a day but it was also about more than just that. In economic terms it will have also damaged RWE’s position on the market (their share price just hit a new low) and made them seem less trustworthy to investors.

In addition to this many there had never taken part in direct action before but now know that by working together and taking matters into our own hands we can achieve more than waiting for salvation from those above us in society could ever do.

Many people both there and watching the events from afar will also have seen the role of the police, not as keeping of the peace but as guard dogs of social and economic order which is killing us and our planet. Last weekend, we fought and we won.

Background to the action: ‘Power struggle: after Germany’s renewables surge, can it keep its coal in the ground?‘ by Melanie Mattauch.

Toni Belly is a student at the University of Birmingham and a member of Plan C. He is also active in various student political and campaigning groups fighting on both environmental and economic issues. He’s critical of solutions to economic, social and environmental issues that rely on benevolent action on the part of those at the top of our current social economic order. Instead being of the view that real change can only come through struggle enacted from below.

Dear Tim Hill, (Natural England Chief Scientist)

We write to you with respect to licence applications for badger culls under the Government’s policy on Bovine TB and badger control in England (2011).

As far as we understand, the existing licences for the pilot zones in Gloucestershire and Somerset remain in force, and culling is set to continue in these areas subject to letters of authorisation from Natural England. There is also speculation that an additional licence application may have been lodged for a cull zone in Dorset.

We wish to register our professional opinion that before making any decision the Natural England Scientific Advisory Committee (or equivalent) and thence the Board of NE should re-examine the scientific evidence associated with the control of bovine tuberculosis.

In particular, they should examine the role that badgers play in the epidemiology of the disease, the hard data around the success of badger vaccination and the potential adverse impacts of badger culling on the spread of bovine tuberculosis in cattle.

The NESAC and Board should also very carefully consider the Independent Expert Panel’s report (April 2014) on the welfare of badgers in the pilot trials, the withdrawal of British Veterinary Association (BVA) support for the one of the methods of culling proposed and the growing veterinary voice calling for the badger cull to be abandoned.

We are pleased to see the evidence strategy and standards section on Natural England’s website, laying out its clear strategy on using evidence to weigh policy proposals (ref NE340).

We hope and trust that in particular your evidence-based work on this issue will be Fit For Purpose, Quality Assured and Transparent.

We would very much appreciate the opportunity to open a line of communication with the Scientific Advisory Council and Board for Natural England, and if possible, would like to meet and discuss the scientific evidence and professional opinion that continues to accrue against the continuation and roll-out of culling.

Our objections to the cull are manifold, but can be briefly summarised thus:

1. The scientific evidence – The majority of wildlife, bTB and veterinary scientists do not support badger culling in any area of England, including the existing cull zones in Gloucestershire and Somerset.

2. The science categorically does not support widening the cull to new areas. Many areas within the government’s ‘high-risk zone’ for bovine TB, including Dorset, have seen substantial falls in the numbers of cattle slaughtered because of bovine tuberculosis over the two years during which culling was being carried out in Gloucestershire and Somerset.

In Dorset, the number of cattle slaughtered has fallen from 1,192 in 2012, to 748 in 2014 (a fall of over a third). Indeed, across the west region as a whole there has been a fall in the number of cattle slaughtered as a result of bovine TB policy, of approximately 16% from 2012-2014.

The falls are even more marked when increased testing intensity is taken into account. These reductions have occurred in the absence of badger culling across the vast majority of the region, and reflect improvements in Wales where badger culling has been rejected in favour of the introduction of stricter cattle measures and the use of badger vaccination in the Intensive Action Area. We therefore argue that there is no scientific reason to introduce culling when current controls are working.

3. Poor results from Gloucestershire and Somerset – The contractors in both Gloucestershire and Somerset failed to achieve the cull targets set as conditions of their licences during the first year of culling. In Gloucestershire, the contractors also failed to meet the considerably reduced targets set for the second year. The failure to achieve cull targets has likely resulted in significant badger perturbation, which is known to increase the risk of spread of bovine tuberculosis between badgers, and by extension from badgers to cattle. (See Bourne and Carter et al)

Such impacts could have been predicted from the results and subsequent analysis of the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT). These impacts have not been accounted for in the claims made by vet Roger Blowey and others for the efficacy of the pilot culls in terms of their effects on TB incidence in cattle within the cull zones, claims that have been rejected in the veterinary press (eg Torgerson et al 2015) and also in live debate with the former chair of the Independent Scientific Group that oversaw the RBCT, Prof John Bourne (at the Badger Trust AGM 2015).

4. Ethics and humaneness. The IEP report of April 2014 concluded that the pilot culls in year one failed in terms of humaneness (as well as efficacy) in both Somerset and Gloucestershire. The failure to satisfy humaneness criteria raises serious animal welfare concerns relating to the impacts of controlled shooting.

5. Lack of veterinary support. Citing concerns over lack of humaneness, the British Veterinary Association has withdrawn support for the controlled shooting of badgers. In spite of this, the method remains available to the contractors in the two zones.

6. Lack of public support. Recent polls in the cull areas suggest that public opposition to the rolling out of badger culling remains high. ()

7. There is evidence for the efficacy of badger vaccination -In their publication describing the analysis of data from a four year field study, Carter et al (2012) identified a direct beneficial effect of vaccination in individual badgers, and an indirect protective effect in unvaccinated cubs.

Their analysis suggested that intramuscular injection of BCG resulted in vaccinated badgers being 76% less likely to be tested positive by a dual diagnostic system, and 54% less likely using a more sensitive triple system of diagnostics, possibly more closely aligned to true infection status.

Furthermore, the study suggested that the risk of unvaccinated badger cubs testing positive to an even more sensitive panel of diagnostic tests decreased significantly as the proportion of vaccinated individuals in their social group increased, with unvaccinated cubs being 79% less likely to test positive when more than one third of the adults in the social group had been vaccinated.

Vaccination has the added advantage of avoiding the perturbation effect on badger social groups that can result from culling; perturbation is thought to increase the risk of infection spreading between badgers and from badgers to cattle.

8. The Chief Veterinary Officer for Wales has reported that “incidents of TB have fallen by 28%” without badger culling but with cattle-based measures and badger vaccination.

9. The badger cull policy has been overwhelmingly defeated twice in Parliament on a free vote.

10. Lack of a thorough Disease Risk Analysis (DRA). The risks of badger shooting include not only perturbation of badgers with concomitant risks of bTB spread to neighbouring areas, but also contamination of woodland with bTB infected blood and body tissues.

We have previously asked for the Disease Risk Analysis for the pilot projects, and for the use of free-shooting of badgers in particular. None has been forthcoming, and we suspect that no thorough DRA was ever conducted for the policy. We have submitted a separate FOI request regarding the missing DRA.

We are also concerned that the wider environmental impacts of badger removal on other threatened species and protected areas, and in particular the possibility of sympatric mesopredator release within the cull zones, have not been sufficiently evaluated or addressed; such evaluations are a requirement of the Habitats and Birds Directives and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, and of the Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats (Bern Convention).

11. Spiralling costs. Each dead badger killed in the pilot culls has cost the public purse over £5,000 including policing. Much of this spiralling cost is due to the unpopularity of the cull, which increases policing and logistics costs.

12. The NESAC Chair called for the cull to be immediately stopped in 2013. I am sure you are only too well aware of the expert opinion given by former NESAC Chair Prof David Macdonald, that the cull should have been stopped back in 2013.

In summary, we strongly request that the NESAC and Board take full account of the science, logistics, ethics and probity of any continued or extended culling of badgers, and examine the policy in the light of its lack of a science base, its ineffectiveness, its lack of humaneness, public opposition and spiralling costs.

It is our view that this policy does not represent an ethically sound, scientifically valid, or fiscally prudent method of controlling bovine tuberculosis. Natural England is the body the public looks to in order to ensure government policy does not harm wildlife and wild spaces.

It is incumbent on Natural England to fully consider the evidence before proceeding to endorse a failing policy which will cause untold suffering to badgers and continuing hardship for dairy farmers by failing to tackle bTB.

This Open Letter was sent to Natural England Chief Scientist Professor Tim Hill, the Natural England Science Advisory Committee, and the Natural England Board on 12th August 2015.

Signatories

Iain McGill BSc(Hons), BVetMed, MRCVS (Correspondent)

Mark Jones BVSc MSc (Stir) MSc (UL) MRCVS, Born Free Foundation

Caroline Allen MA, VetMB, CertSAM, MRCVS

Patricia Barros RVN, MBVNA

Fiona Dalzell BVSc BA(Hons) MRCVS. Department of Philosophy, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Bronwen Eastwood BSc(Hons), BVetMed, CertGP (SAP), MRCVS

Richard Edwards MSc, MA, VetMB, MRCVS

Phill Elliott BVM&S, MSc, MRCVS

Jo Hinde RVN, MBVNA

Louise Flynn RVN, MBVNA

Sophie Hill MA, VetMB, MRCVS

Hannah Hughes RVN, BVNA

Shailen Jasani MA, VetMB, MRCVS, DACVECC, Emergency & Critical Care (ECC) specialist

Andrew Knight BSc(Vet Biol), BVMS, CertAW, DipECAWBM (AWSEL), PhD, MRCVS, SFHEA. Professor of Animal Welfare and Ethics, University of Winchester

Jo Lewis BSc, BVMS(Hons), MRCVS

Cobie Loubser, BVSc, MRCVS

Derek Moran BVSc, MRCVS

Andre Menache BSc(Hons), BVSc, MRCVS.

Marie O’Connor RVN

Ann Pocknell DVM, MVetSci, DACVP, DipRCPath, MRCVS

Sue Pell, MSc RVN

Judy Puddifoot BSc, MSc, BVetMed, MRCVS

Richard Saunders BSc (Hons) BVSc FSB CBiol DZooMed (Mammalian) MRCVS, RCVS, Specialist in Zoo and Wildlife Medicine

Peter Southgate BVetMed, MSc, MRCVS

Jon Twigg RVN

Liz Wheeler RVN

Jessica Upchurch BSc (Zoology), MRes, BVetMed, MRCVS.

References

• McGill et al. 2012.
• Jones et al. 2013.
• Allen et al. 2013.
• Abraham et al. 2014.
• Torgeson 2015.
• McGill et al 2015 Vet Times 45, No 31 August 3, p.35.

The Guardian’s for Yvette Cooper. The Mirror is for Andy Burnham. The Telegraph was for Jeremy Corbyn. Until they suddenly got a sick feeling in the pit of their guts as they realised he was set to win the contest. So who’s The Ecologist for? Corbyn, of course.

The decision’s an easy one. He’s the only candidate to publish a substantial, detailed manifesto purely on green issues. And we like what he says. He’s for all for renewable energy, against nuclear power and nuclear weapons, against fracking and the TTIP, and he wants to bring the Big Six power monopolists to heel. Along with the water companies and the railways.

As for coal, mischief has been made over his suggestion of restarting coal mining in South Wales. In fact, he’s clear that he wants any new coal power stations to be equipped with ‘clean coal’ technology to pump the CO₂ emissions safely underground. Moreover he’s after high quality anthracite from deep mines, not landscape destroying open cast pits.

He’s been widely slagged off as a ‘yesterday’s man’ with ‘old solutions for old problems’, like nationalising energy companies. But his mission is not to recreate the old monopolies of the CEGB and the Gas Board. It’s to devolve energy to communities, cooperatives and local authorities to create real freedom of choice and democratic accountability, not to mention lower energy bills. That’s a modern approach to a problem of today.

We know also that Jeremy is no recent convert to green issues. For example he was an outspoken supporter of the 1990s road protests against the M11 Link Road in Leytonstone, a ghastly project that cut a huge swathe though housing, parks and open spaces in a deprived corner of northeast London.

And can be confident that Jeremy will stand up against the iniquities of Tory rule today. As Team Cameron takes a sledgehammer to wind and solar power, home insulation programmes and the fight against fuel poverty, while featherbedding fossil fuels and energy monopolists, it’s been hard to detect a squeak of dissent from the opposition benches. Under Corbyn that will all change. And about time too.

Now, the counter-revolution swings in

But just in case anyone lacks conviction that Jeremy is the right choice, just heed the panicked reaction to his success of the establishment, both inside and outside the Labour Party.

Today openDemocracy reports of a “great Labour purge” of its membership and voting lists, in which thousands of people are being stripped of their legitimate right to vote. Of course this is being done in the name of ‘democracy’ – purging ‘infiltrators’ from other parties and those who oppose Labour and its ideals.

But among those being purged are many who have never been a member of any political party at all, who are simply left wing and not afraid to say so, whose only offence is to be a student, or who have posted pro-Corbyn material on Facebook and Twitter. Now it seems that merely to be young or left wing is to oppose the Labour Party.

By the way, Labour is inviting people to email leadership2015@labour.org.uk to report people who are abusing the system, providing proof. Do not for a moment take this as an invitation to send hundreds of emails reporting Tony Blair and Gordon Brown as infiltrators, or just gum up the system with reports of random made up people’s disloyalty.

The BBC is also swinging the ‘anti-Semite’ tar brush at Corbyn, along with other media, because he once in 2009 shared a speaking platform with a Palestinian liberation campaigner who is accused of being an anti-Semite. Of course they say that no one actually believes Corbyn is anti-Semitic himself – yet the taint remains.

These attacks reveal only the perversity of mainstream media and political opinion. It’s absolutely fine to lie to Parliament, attack Iraq without provocation, cause the deaths of a million or more people, and set off a train of events that has turned the entire Middle East into a hell hole.

It’s entirely respectable to promote the combustion of climate-destroying fossil fuels, pass legislation that mandates their fullest possible exploitation, force fracking wells on unwilling communities, and attack two of the most important ways of reducing emissions, energy efficiency and renewables.

And it is statemanlike to allocate a scarce £100 billion of taxpayers’ money to nuclear weapons of mass destruction whose only purpose is to commit indiscriminate mass murder against millions of men, women, children.

But to have shared a podium with an alleged anti-Semite six years ago – that’s not on!

Can he win a general election? Yes he can!

Tony Blair, Alistair Campbell, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and other Labour ‘grandees’ with dubious pasts have all weighed in against Corbyn. Their favourite line is that we must make sure he doesn’t win the leadership, because he will never be elected prime minister.

But what they are really worried about is the precise reverse (first rule of political life – listen carefully to what politicans say, believe the opposite). That is, that he will be elected prime minister. Heaven help us! All they hold dear – from Trident to anti-Union laws to economic austerity, NHS privatisation and the TTIP trade deal – would be scrapped.

Can a Corbyn-led Labour Party really win? The SNP’s sweeping of the political board in Scotland shows that there’s a huge public appetite for progressive reform. The lesson of Miliband’s defeat is not that he was too left wing, but that he put forward an incoherent ‘Tory-lite’ agenda that gave Labour supporters little positive reason to vote.

We know Corbyn’s not going to make that mistake! And his enviable record of ever-increasing popularity in his Islington North constituency, the packed halls as thousands throng to hear him speak from Plymouth to Glasgow, and the surge of support within the party, the trade union movement and the country, all cry out: “Yes he can!”

Urgent information: If you’ve been told you can’t vote, ring the Labour Party on 08450 922 299. Many people are finding out they were sent the disqualification email ‘by mistake’.