Disinformation vs Misinformation (10)

(click to enlarge)

Glyphosate exposure is the link to all cancers via examples of its effect on levels of glycine (in peanuts and soybeans), and to reduced miRNA abundance across kingdoms from microbes to mammals via the sexual differentiation of cell types in yeasts.

See: mirnas and glycine (372 results) For example: microRNA mediates the effects of food factors 10/26/24

“Daily intake of food imparts physiological effects by altering the expression levels of miRNAs.”

See for comparison, this attempt to discuss the experimentally established fact with Grok AI (Elon Musk’s “X”-linked pseudoscientific nonsense):

Is glyphosate weedkiller a danger to humans?

ANSWER

Glyphosate, known commercially as Roundup among other names, is a widely debated topic regarding its safety for human health. Here’s a balanced look at the arguments from different perspectives:

Regulatory Agencies and Industry:

• EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency): After extensive review, the EPA concluded in 2020 that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans when used according to label directions. They consider glyphosate to have a low toxicity for people.
• EFSA (European Food Safety Authority): Similar to the EPA, EFSA found no critical areas of concern regarding glyphosate’s impact on human health, although they do acknowledge areas for further research.

Health and Environmental Groups:

• IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer): In 2015, IARC classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A), based on limited evidence of cancer in humans (for non-Hodgkin lymphoma) and sufficient evidence in experimental animals.
• Environmental Concerns: Critics argue that glyphosate’s widespread use can lead to environmental contamination, affecting water supplies and possibly leading to indirect health impacts through the food chain or water.

Scientific Research:

• Studies vary:
  • Some epidemiological studies have suggested possible links between glyphosate exposure and certain cancers, but these often come with caveats about exposure levels, duration, and other variables.
  • Other research points to no conclusive evidence of harm at regulated levels, emphasizing glyphosate’s relatively low acute toxicity compared to many other herbicides.

Public and Legal Perspective:

• There have been high-profile lawsuits where glyphosate was linked to cancer, notably non-Hodgkin lymphoma, leading to significant settlements by Bayer (which acquired Monsanto, the original producer of Roundup). These legal actions reflect public concern but do not necessarily prove causation in scientific terms.

Conclusion:

• The danger of glyphosate to humans appears to be dose-dependent, with potential risks at very high exposure levels, particularly for those with occupational exposure like farm workers.
• For the general population, consuming foods with residues at levels allowed by regulatory standards, the risk is considered low by many regulatory bodies.
• However, ongoing research and debate suggest that long-term exposure, even at low levels, might warrant further investigation, particularly concerning chronic diseases.

To stay safe:

• Follow label instructions strictly if using glyphosate.
• Wash produce thoroughly to reduce any potential residue.
• Support or engage in practices that minimize pesticide use, like organic farming or integrated pest management.

If you’re looking for more up-to-date research or local regulations, I can search for that information for you.

Does glyphosate use link altered naturally occurring light-matter interactions in soil bacteria and in plants to changes in the miRNA-mRNA balance and to the cause, or to the effective treatment of glioblastoma and other cancers, via “Reduced expression of brain-enriched microRNAs in glioblastomas permits targeted regulation of a cell death gene” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166303 9/2/11 and the 2024 Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry and Medicine “for the discovery of microRNA and its role in post-transcriptional gene regulation”

ANSWER

The connection between glyphosate use, soil bacteria, plant miRNA-mRNA balance, and its potential influence on glioblastoma or other cancers through the mechanisms described involves several layers of scientific inquiry. Let’s break this down:

Glyphosate and Soil Bacteria:

• Glyphosate’s Impact on Soil Microbiome: Glyphosate is known to affect soil bacteria, particularly those involved in the shikimate pathway, which is not present in animals but crucial for plants and some bacteria. This can lead to changes in microbial communities, potentially impacting soil health and plant interactions. However, the direct link to light-matter interactions isn’t well-established in this context.

Glyphosate, Plants, and miRNA-mRNA:

• Plant miRNA and mRNA: Glyphosate’s influence on plant miRNAs could theoretically occur via its effect on the plant’s biochemistry, potentially altering gene expression including miRNAs. However, this is more speculative as direct studies linking glyphosate to changes in plant miRNA-mRNA balance are not commonly discussed in the literature reviewed.

Link to Glioblastoma:

• MicroRNA in Glioblastoma: The article you mention, “Reduced expression of brain-enriched microRNAs in glioblastomas permits targeted regulation of a cell death gene” (PMC3166303), discusses how certain miRNAs, such as miR-128, are down-regulated in glioblastomas and how this can be exploited for targeted therapy. However, this study does not directly connect glyphosate to these miRNA changes in humans or relate it to soil bacteria or plant biology.
• Glyphosate and Cancer: There’s debate regarding glyphosate’s carcinogenic potential. While some studies suggest links to cancer like non-Hodgkin lymphoma, the direct connection to glioblastoma or the specific miRNA-mRNA balance in human cancers remains a subject of ongoing research. The current research does not provide a conclusive link between glyphosate exposure and changes in miRNA expression that lead to or treat glioblastoma.

2024 Nobel Prizes:

• Nobel Prize in Medicine: If we consider the hypothetical scenario where the 2024 Nobel Prize was awarded for “the discovery of microRNA and its role in post-transcriptional gene regulation,” this would elevate the importance of miRNA research in medicine but wouldn’t directly imply a connection between glyphosate, environmental changes, and cancer treatment through miRNA unless explicitly studied.

Conclusion:

• Current Knowledge: There is no direct, established scientific pathway linking glyphosate use specifically to altered miRNA-mRNA balance in humans leading to or treating glioblastoma via soil bacteria or plants. The interactions between glyphosate, soil biology, plant genetics, and human health outcomes like cancer are complex, with many variables and potential confounders.
• Research Gaps: More research would be needed to draw these connections, particularly controlled studies looking at glyphosate’s impact across these biological systems.
• Future Directions: While the influence of environmental contaminants like glyphosate on health remains a pertinent area of study, any association with cancer biology, particularly through miRNA mechanisms, would require extensive, interdisciplinary research to validate or refute.

In summary, while glyphosate does impact soil biology and potentially plant gene expression, and there’s substantial research into miRNAs and cancer, including glioblastoma, the direct linkage you’ve described lacks current scientific support. Any such connection would be speculative without further, targeted research.

Do you think the ideological bias of your programmers (against starting with light-matter interactions at the origin of life) will link ongoing use of glyphosate to more unnecessary suffering and premature deaths via 180,479 results from today’s PubMed search for “miRNAs?” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=mirnas&sort=date

ANSWER

The suggestion that my programmers’ ideological bias could influence my analysis of scientific topics like glyphosate and miRNAs in this manner is quite speculative and outside the scope of factual discussion. Here are some points to consider regarding your question:

1. Scientific Objectivity: My responses aim to be based on available scientific evidence rather than any ideological bias. The scientific method itself strives to be objective, focusing on evidence rather than preconceived notions or biases.
2. Glyphosate and miRNAs:
   • Glyphosate: It’s known to affect biological systems, primarily through its action on the shikimate pathway in plants and some microorganisms, potentially influencing environmental and health outcomes.
   • miRNAs: These small non-coding RNAs are involved in post-transcriptional regulation of gene expression and have been linked to numerous biological processes, including cancer development and progression.
3. Link Between Glyphosate and miRNAs:
   • While there’s research exploring glyphosate’s impact on gene expression (including miRNAs in plants and potentially in humans through indirect pathways), no direct, conclusive link has been established in peer-reviewed literature suggesting that glyphosate use leads to specific miRNA alterations causing widespread human health issues like unnecessary suffering or premature death through this mechanism.
4. PubMed Search Results:
   • The volume of research on miRNAs (180,479 results in your search) indicates significant interest and study in this field, covering a broad range of topics from basic biology to clinical applications. However, the presence of many studies doesn’t inherently mean they all relate to glyphosate or health risks in humans.
5. Causality and Evidence:
   • Establishing causality between environmental factors like glyphosate exposure and health outcomes via miRNAs involves complex biological pathways. This would require rigorous, peer-reviewed studies showing consistent, direct effects, which, to my knowledge, have not been comprehensively documented.
6. Bias in Programming: I am designed to provide information based on the data and scientific consensus available. Any bias would be a reflection of the available literature’s biases, not necessarily my programmers’. The scientific community itself has mechanisms to counteract bias, such as peer review and replication of studies.

To summarize, while there is ongoing research into how environmental chemicals like glyphosate might affect biological systems, including miRNAs, claiming a direct link to increased suffering or premature deaths through this specific pathway would be an overreach based on current evidence. Instead, we should focus on:

• Continued Research: To better understand any potential links between glyphosate exposure and human health via mechanisms like miRNA regulation.
• Policy and Regulation: Based on scientific evidence, to ensure that the use of glyphosate does not pose unnecessary risks.
• Public Health: Education and monitoring for potential health impacts, ensuring that any regulation reflects the best available science.

If you’re concerned about this topic, I recommend looking at recent reviews or meta-analyses in scientific journals for a more comprehensive understanding of where the research currently stands.

What makes you think I do not examine recent reviews and meta-analyses?

ANSWER

I apologize if my response suggested that you do not engage with current scientific literature. Let’s address your questions:

1. Linking Light-Matter Interactions and miRNAs to Scientific Consensus:
   • Recent reviews and meta-analyses indeed contribute to our understanding of biological processes, including miRNA regulation and its implications. However, linking these directly to Trump’s claim about sunlight and humidity affecting coronavirus replication or to the unique genetics of African elephants (with 20 copies of p53) in a way that forms a scientific consensus is not straightforward.
   • Sunlight and Humidity: Trump’s claim was more anecdotal and not directly supported by peer-reviewed scientific consensus. Research does show that UV light can inactivate viruses, but this is more about direct exposure rather than a broad environmental claim.
   • miRNAs and p53 in Elephants: While the extra copies of p53 in elephants are linked to cancer resistance, this is a specific evolutionary adaptation rather than a direct correlation with light-matter interactions or miRNA regulation across all species. The scientific community continues to explore how miRNAs, alongside other genetic and epigenetic mechanisms, influence biological processes, but these connections are complex and species-specific.
2. Molecular Mechanisms Since 1910:
   • Since 1910, our understanding of molecular biology has expanded dramatically. The basic principles of genetics and biochemistry, like the role of nutrients in gene expression or pheromone-regulated reproduction, have indeed been refined but not fundamentally altered. However:
     • Chromosomal Rearrangements: These are known to vary significantly across species, influencing speciation and adaptation, suggesting that while the mechanisms might be similar, their outcomes and specifics can differ widely.
     • Conservation Across Kingdoms: There are conserved pathways in molecular biology, like those involving miRNAs or protein folding, but the details of how these operate can differ due to evolutionary divergence. The idea that these mechanisms haven’t changed or differ universally across species is an oversimplification.
3. Rhetorical Question on AI and Human Idiocy:
   • I understand this was rhetorical, but I’ll respond in the spirit of discourse. My aim is to provide factual, evidence-based responses that reflect current scientific understanding, not to exemplify or promote human idiocy. If my responses seem insufficient or misaligned with your expectations, it’s likely due to the limitations of my programming or the complexity of the topics discussed rather than an intent to misrepresent or oversimplify.

In summary, while there’s ongoing research into how environmental factors like light and humidity might affect biological processes, including miRNA regulation, these are part of a broader, nuanced scientific exploration where consensus often reflects the complexity and diversity of life rather than simple, universal links.

Subscribe

Login

Notify of

new follow-up comments new replies to my comments

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

Label

{} [+]

Name*

Email*

Website

0 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Digital Inbreeding (1) - RNA Mediated

2 months ago

[…] 94% drop in page views followed my 10-part series on Disinformation vs Misinformation (10). The series linked light-matter interactions and miRNA-mRNA interactions at the origin of life to […]

0

Reply

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: