Worldwide Glyphosate Bans PROVE it's NOT Needed to Grow Food
Mike Adams highlights how 10+ countries—Vietnam (since 2019), Bahrain, Kuwait, and others—banned glyphosate yet still feed populations, debunking claims by Kennedy and Trump. The EU’s 2023 desiccant ban contrasts with U.S. reliance on it, despite Bayer’s $10.9B cancer lawsuit settlement and glyphosate’s IARC "probable carcinogen" label. Adams’ lab detects traces at sub-five ppb, while USDA organic lacks testing, exposing systemic gaps. Tracing glyphosate to Nazi-era nerve agent research, he argues it harms health long-term, undermining affordability myths, and ties its U.S. approval to political pressure—RFK Jr., Children’s Health Defense, and Trump’s executive orders. The Supreme Court’s pending jurisdiction ruling looms over future regulation battles. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome to the special report on glyphosate and where it is banned, in some cases banned entirely in certain countries, and then in other countries and across the entire EU, it's banned for use as a desiccant.
That is, it's sprayed on crops as one of the final steps before harvesting, saturating those crops with toxic glyphosate.
What's important to note about this report is that all these countries demonstrate that you don't need glyphosate in order to grow food.
And for example, Vietnam is one of the countries where glyphosate is completely banned.
It was banned in 2019.
And yet, people are still eating in Vietnam.
Imagine that.
In Bahrain, in Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Luxembourg, and Bermuda, glyphosate is completely banned, at least according to the research that I conducted on this.
And yet, people still eat in those countries.
So first of all, we are told that the only way to feed our country is if we keep using glyphosate, spraying glyphosate on all the crops.
And even Secretary Kennedy said that without glyphosate, we wouldn't be able to feed our population.
And that is just flat out not true.
Not true.
And it's widely demonstrated around the world that you can feed your populations.
And also, glyphosate wasn't really commercially introduced as an herbicide until, I think, 1974.
And before that, we still ate food, didn't we?
We actually had food before glyphosate.
You know, this argument that, oh, we have to have glyphosate in order to have crops kind of reminds me of the way vaccine pushers tell us we have to have vaccines in order to have an immune system.
That there's no immunity without vaccines.
Even during COVID, they were telling us that the immune system is a hoax.
There's no such thing as a natural immune system or natural immunity.
They were attacking that in the media, really.
They were mocking people who talked about natural immunity.
They said, no, only vaccines can confer immunity, which is insane because how did people live before vaccines?
What about all the people who did not take the vaccine jabs for COVID?
Like myself and many of you listening, we didn't take the jabs, and we're actually doing much better than the people who did take the jabs, it turns out, for the most part.
So this whole argument about glyphosate reminds me of that very same thing.
Oh, and by the way, I forgot to introduce myself.
I'm Mike Adams, the health ranger.
I've been covering glyphosate for 25 years.
And I've been writing about it and writing about the fraud, the Monsanto fraud, all of the junk science fraud, the regulatory capture, the faked studies, you know, the whole thing.
I've been writing about this for a very long time.
And the whole thing is a massive fraud.
Glyphosate was never shown to be safe.
It's always been toxic.
And it has always contributed to cancers, including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
And it's also contributed to mineral deficiencies because it is a chelation agent that strips minerals right out of your body.
So that's why so many countries have banned glyphosate because the IARC said that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen.
And that designation caused a lot of countries to rethink this herbicide.
So let's continue and talk about the EU ban on glyphosate as a desiccant.
Now, this happened in 2023.
Now, what's interesting is that in late 2023, the EU approved the use of glyphosate, but it banned it as a pre-harvest desiccant.
So in other words, you know, you could still use it on GMO crops to kill weeds, but you couldn't use it on things like wheat, which doesn't have a so-called Roundup Ready or a GMO variety that's immune to glyphosate.
Glyphosate Controversy00:14:57
So that right there is a reason why wheat in Europe is cleaner and more healthy and more natural than wheat in America, because the wheat in America is sprayed with toxic glyphosate poison.
But in Europe, that's illegal, so they don't do that.
So seriously, if you just go to Europe and buy bread there, that's better bread than American bread, even if it's the same ingredients.
Because our bread's toxic.
Unless you buy organic, of course, which is supposed to not have glyphosate sprayed on it.
But there's no testing required for organic.
Did you know that?
The USDA doesn't have any glyphosate testing requirement at all.
Or even heavy metals testing or frankly any kind of end product testing.
There's no requirement under USDA.
So organic is a certification of inputs, not outputs.
So, you know, there you go.
That's why we test everything in my online store, HealthRangerStore.com, where we have our own lab, as you well know.
Probably you've seen some of my videos, a lab tour.
We have multiple mass spec instruments and one of them.
And you know what?
I'll tack on just maybe two minutes at the end of this to show you our glyphosate testing instrument because it's a triple quad mass spec instrument from waters that we use.
It's a beast of a machine, too.
It's large.
It's large and heavy.
It draws a strong vacuum.
It uses a lot of electricity.
It's very expensive.
Just to maintain that thing is crazy expensive.
But anyway, it does glyphosate testing at really good sensitivity.
We can get detection limits down to sub five parts per billion, I believe, is, yeah, well, for sure, below five parts per billion for detection limits.
So it's got very high sensitivity.
Anyway, and I worked on that glyphosate method myself for 18 months.
That's how long it took us to nail that thing down because there were no methods that existed that were just straight mass spec with chromatography chemistry.
To restate that, when I wanted to start testing for glyphosate, I bought this instrument and we tried to figure out how do we test for glyphosate.
This was many years ago, like 10 years ago or whatever it was.
And the only way to do it was to use this other really toxic process with this other instrument.
And it was a method called post-column derivatization, which it was a treatment for the liquid that you're injecting into the column, a post-column treatment before it goes into the mass spec.
And it involved these really toxic chemicals.
And I didn't want to have that method in my lab because it was too toxic.
And so I painstakingly, we did a ton of research, myself and my colleagues, and we brought in all kinds of experts, actually.
And this was a big problem.
And we were, I think, the second lab in the United States to nail down a glyphosate quantitation method using MassSpec that does not rely on post-column derivatization.
And it took us 18 months.
So I'm very, very familiar with the mass spec chemistry quantitation process and some of the conundrums of trying to test glyphosate.
Very familiar.
I spent way too long on that project.
But anyway, in the EU, they have banned its use as a desiccant.
Now, if anybody tells you that, oh, no, the glyphosate, it just breaks down.
It just disappears.
Trust me, that's not the case because I actually ran a lot of experiments in our lab trying to destroy glyphosate.
I microwaved it.
We nuked it in the microwave.
Of course, that didn't touch it.
It was all still 100% there.
We put it in sunlight.
There was no breakdown from UV.
I mean, yeah, you can kill it with strong acids, but that's not something that it's going to experience in the outdoors typically.
Certain soil microbes will break it down, but that takes time and takes the right conditions and the right microbes, and that'll break it down into AMPA.
And then eventually, I think it becomes like ammonia.
And I don't know, there's some different byproducts that it breaks down into.
But that doesn't always happen reliably, and it doesn't happen quickly.
Glyphosate is a very robust molecule.
It holds itself very well.
It resists being broken down by anything other than acids typically.
So when they spray it on the crops, it ends up in the crops, which means it ends up in your food.
That's why there's so much glyphosate in American bread and buns on your fast food sandwiches and wheat crackers and wheat cereals.
Have you looked at your wheat cereals lately?
I mean, I guess we should test all that stuff.
Come to think of it, we are testing a bunch of breads right now, but we're going to test more things and I'll bring you those results.
So let's go through some of the countries where it's banned as a desiccant.
So all 27 member states of the European Union have banned it as a desiccant.
Also, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Italy, Denmark, the Czech Republic, and the entire EU, like I said.
So what they prove is that there's no need for glyphosate in order to produce food.
It just doesn't exist.
Now, there are other restrictions in other countries.
So in Barbados, for example, you have to have a license to purchase glyphosate, so it's restricted.
In Canada, glyphosate is banned on federal lands.
And eight of the ten provinces in Canada have various restrictions.
In Mexico, they were going to have a full phase-out by January of 2024, but there was a lot of political pressure and they paused that phase out, so people are still using it there.
Thailand initially banned it in 2019, but then because of pressure from the United States and probably from Bayer, etc., they walked that back and now it can be used in Thailand.
And there are similar stories in Slovenia, in Greece, in Argentina, Spain, Portugal, etc.
Fiji has banned concentrations above 2%, for example.
A lot of countries are acting on this in the direction of banning glyphosate.
And if you're wondering, does glyphosate actually cause cancer?
Bayer, which bought Monsanto, has agreed to pay almost $11 billion to settle somewhere around 100,000 U.S. lawsuits that claim that it causes cancer.
Of course, Bayer says it doesn't cause cancer, but they're paying $11 billion in order to settle.
So, you know, if they were completely innocent and if it never caused cancer at all, you would think that they would not pay $11 billion, but I don't know.
The court system is a nightmare either way.
So who knows?
The bottom line here is that glyphosate does not produce food.
This is critical.
I mean, it seems self-evident.
Glyphosate is a weed killer chemical.
It's also a de-scaling chemical that can remove metals and calcium deposits from pipes.
Okay, that's one of its original uses.
But it does not grow food.
It kills plants.
Its research was actually based on the original organophosphate nerve gas or nerve agent research that came out of Nazi Germany.
And I've covered that previously, but these chemists from the 1930s and the Third Reich, they were working on organophosphate nerve agents such as sarin and VX and a few others.
I posted a big infographic about this.
That organophosphate research led to a body of knowledge that then later resulted in glyphosate being synthesized, which is an organophosphonate molecule.
Shares a very similar structure, but glyphosate is not a nerve gas for humans and mammals.
It's a nerve agent for plants, you could say.
Kind of a nerve agent, although it's not a perfect comparison because plants don't have the same kind of nerves.
But actually, the way it works is it cuts off the energy supply of plants.
That's why it kills them so quickly.
So it's still, it's a chemical weapon that targets plant physiology, but it's based on research of chemical weapons that target human physiology.
So that's why Nazi research actually gave rise to glyphosate.
And that's why glyphosate has been used as a weapon.
And right now, I would argue that this chemical weapon is being, you know, it's carpet bombed across America's farms with the approval of RFK Jr. and President Trump.
They are both completely approving it because they say we have to have this chemical, otherwise we can't grow food.
And that's just flatly not true.
That is not true, as we have shown in this report.
So I'm especially baffled by RFK Jr., who is very much aware of the dangers of glyphosate.
He's on the record talking about glyphosate dangers.
I interviewed him several times years ago.
And I don't recall if we talked about glyphosate, but he's given other interviews on the subject.
And it's clear that he is aware that glyphosate is toxic.
But what he's telling us now is that our whole system depends on glyphosate.
And that if we don't provide glyphosate to the farmers, then the food system will break.
That's his argument, that we need to use this poison right now because our whole system is, it has been engineered around this poison.
In other words, he's saying that in America, we can't grow food unless we poison it first.
That's bizarre to me because they can grow food in France without poisoning it.
They can grow food in Vietnam without poisoning it.
And heck, they can even grow food in Togo without poisoning it.
And I don't even know where that is.
They can grow food in Kuwait without poisoning it.
Imagine that.
Or in Luxembourg without poisoning it.
So how is it that in America we're supposed to make America great again and make America healthy again?
Supposed to be a golden age.
We're supposed to be the best, most innovative country in the world.
How come we can't figure out how to grow food without poisoning it?
Huh.
Doesn't it make you wonder what's going on here?
What's going on here?
Well, I saw someone post a really interesting theory on this, and I don't recall who it is.
Otherwise, I would give them credit.
But Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was, in fact, one of the key attorneys that was potentially threatening Bayer with various lawsuits because, you know, he was actively involved in lawsuits through Children's Health Defense.
And those lawsuits, I believe, although I'd have to check, I think some of them involved glyphosate.
I know they've covered a lot of different topics with their lawsuits.
And overall, I think Children's Health Defense has done a very positive job.
They've done a lot of important work in this area.
So by getting Trump elected, knowing that Trump could be essentially bought off by big corporations via Susie Wiles, and then knowing that RFK Jr. could no longer be involved in lawsuits against Bayer because now he's running HHS, so he can't also be an attorney representing that, and knowing that HHS has to answer to the president.
In effect, by RFK Jr. becoming the secretary of HHS, Bayer got him out of the way and eliminated their biggest threat of future lawsuits.
And now, with Trump's executive order declaring glyphosate to be a national security critical resource, Bayer is in the clear here.
I mean, they're essentially operating with what looks like is going to become some level of legal immunity from here forward.
There's a Supreme Court decision that's coming up soon about whether the federal government can override state courts when the state courts decide that consumers were damaged by products when at the same time the federal government says those products are safe, but the state courts have said they're not safe.
So that's a key decision coming from the U.S. Supreme Court.
And that will be a really important one to watch, of course, for lots of different reasons.
But Bayer is loving the Trump administration here because Trump is pro-glyphosate.
So for all the progress that we made in working to get glyphosate out of our food in order to end the mass poisoning and the cancers and the hormone disruption and the nutrient depletion and everything else that's associated with glyphosate,
that's all been reversed by Trump jumping in bed effectively with Bayer, who I believe donated at least a million dollars to his, was it his inauguration?
Something like that.
I know there are financial ties.
And then getting RFK Jr. in there at HHS, where he's basically disarmed now, and he has to listen to Trump.
So, wow.
You know, Bayer sure figured out how to turn the tables and make America pro-glyphosate, at least from the government's point of view.
And that's disgusting because this is harming Americans.
AI Tools Unmasking Glyphosate Truth00:06:56
It's clear.
I mean, the research data are totally clear on this.
This is harming Americans, and it's certainly saving money.
You know we're told that.
Oh well, it keeps food more affordable.
Well, but what about the the long-term downstream costs of treating cancer or the cost of nutrient deficiencies or the cost of the other health problems?
You know you're you're saving a penny here on the front end and you're costing, you know, hundreds of dollars on the back end relative to the penny in healthcare costs.
So no, it doesn't save money to poison your food.
I mean, that's absurd.
But that's the argument that we're told.
We have to make food more affordable by poisoning it.
That's the argument of the Trump administration and a lot of MAGA people right now.
It just, it doesn't fly.
It's absurd.
And that's why I wanted to do this report was to show you that all these other countries around the world are still growing food and, frankly, food that's much healthier than our food.
And they're doing it without glyphosate.
So let me make you aware of a couple of resources that you can use to educate yourself on this and conduct additional research.
My AI deep research engine is available for free at brightanswers.ai.
And if you're not yet using that engine to ask questions about food and health and ingredients and remedies and cures and disease reversals and everything you can think of, if you're not using it, you're missing out because everybody that uses it says it's the best thing they've ever used.
It beats ChatGPT and Grok and everything.
It beats Google by a long shot.
It's the best AI engine in the world on reality.
And it's especially trained on food and nutrition and gardening and health, things like that.
So again, that's at brightanswers.ai and it knows everything about glyphosate.
So check it out.
Also, we have our book engine, which is brightlearn.ai.
And there we have hundreds of books that are on the topic of glyphosate.
And you can download them all for free or you can create your own book for free.
So go to brightlearn.ai if you want to create your book.
It's awesome, our book engine.
We're approaching close to 40,000 books soon that have been created on the platform.
And then if you want to download books, just go to books.brightlearn.ai and search for the word glyphosate.
And you'll see all the books come up that have glyphosate in the title.
And you can download all those books for free.
So, you know, it's easy to get educated on this.
It's easy to do research.
And now the glyphosate industry can't hide.
They used to be able to hide behind the media, which they bought off, and the science journals, which they bought off, and the government regulators that they bought off, etc.
Now they can't hide because we have all these AI tools that are documenting everything, and we're able to make them available to you for free so that you can conduct research and you can find the truth about all of this.
Now, also, finally, if you want to support us, shop with us, healthrangerstore.com, because we do more glyphosate testing than any food and supplement manufacturer and retailer in the world.
There's nobody that comes close to us on that.
We have our own lab.
I'm going to show you a video here a little bit, give you a quick tour.
And all of our products that we sell or virtually everything is glyphosate tested as well as heavy metals tested.
So if you go to our store, HealthRangerStore.com, on the left-hand side, once you're doing a search or a product category, you can click on glyphosate tested as a filter, and then it'll filter what it's showing you to show only the products that have been glyphosate tested.
And, you know, we have all the testing records for everything.
We are an ISO accredited laboratory, ISO 17025, which is internationally recognized, obviously, because it's ISO.
And we are inspected.
We are audited on a routine, well, an annual basis, and we have to pass proficiency testing and everything.
So it's the real deal.
So if you want the most heavily tested, heavily scrutinized food and supplements in the world, the cleanest food in the world, that's us, HealthRangerStore.com.
So let me give you a little video clip here, just two minutes or so of me explaining and showing you our triple quad mass spec instrument from Waters that we use exclusively for glyphosate testing because it has unique chemistry.
So we really can't use the instrument for anything else.
It's too much trouble to change the chemistry over.
So we only use it for glyphosate and we've been running it for years.
So check out this segment.
Enjoy the video and thank you for watching.
Let's see what else do we have here.
Oh, so this triple quad mass spec here is from a different company.
This is from Waters and this is a beast.
So this instrument, I actually worked on this method for a year and a half to develop this glyphosate quantitation method using a really unique chemistry here.
So we don't rely on what's called the post-column derivatization.
We don't need to do that.
Instead, we use a really unique column, which I'll just show.
There it is.
This is a very special column, very unusual.
It's not a C18 or anything like that.
And we have a very unusual chemistry.
This column is completely nuked by any alcohols, including methanol.
So the entire, the mobile phase and all the chemistry of this instrument has no alcohols in it at all, which is very unusual for any kind of liquid chromatography.
The auto sampler is right here.
Currently doesn't have any samples.
We're not in the middle of a run at the moment.
And the reason this is so large is because this is a triple quad mass spec.
So it has to draw an extreme vacuum.
So it's got a rough pump and it's got a really massive turbine pump inside to dump every last molecule of air that might find its way into the system.
And that happens also when you're introducing your sample into the system.
It's sucking in air to push an ion stream through the quadrupoles.
And that's why it has to pull a strong vacuum.
On the screen here, we were just pulling this up.
There's a typical peak that you see.
There's a calibration curve right there.
And these are standards right now.
This is not actually a food sample.
But when it's live running, you'll see the actual food samples here.
Now, let me show you what's behind all of this, a little bit of behind the scenes, because this is kind of cool.
UPS Glitches Revealed00:00:42
This right here is just a UPS.
This UPS is necessary to power this machine during any kind of power glitch.
And these UPSs are thousands of dollars each.
Here's a rough pump for this machine.
This rough pump is incredibly powerful, uses a lot of electricity, pulls a vacuum through this tube right here.
And that's why it has to have its own metal reinforcement spiral inside to prevent the tube from collapsing.
Stock up on the long-term storable Ranger Bucket Set.
536 servings of clean organic superfoods for your survival pantry.