Andrés Carrasco, MD is head of the Molecular Embryology Lab at University of Buenos Aires (UBA), and chief scientist at the National Council for Science and Technology (Conicet), Argentina. In April 2009 he went public with his scientific findings that Roundup and its active ingredient, glyphosate, causes malformations in frog and chicken embryos. In his research paper, which has since been published in the US scientific journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, Carrasco explicitly extrapolates his results to humans, linking them to human birth defects found in huge numbers in areas growing GM Roundup Ready soy.

The following interview is by Argentine journalist Dario Aranda, who has helped expose the public health emergency around glyphosate spraying on RR soy.

Photograph of Carrasco:
http://www.gmwatch.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12496:reports-images-for-download
Interview in English and Spanish, and links to Carrasco's published research paper:
http://www.gmwatch.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12482:reports-andres-carrasco-interview
---
Andrés Carrasco

Interview by Dario Aranda

In April 2009, Andres Carrasco made public a scientific investigation that revealed lethal effects of glyphosate in embryos of amphibians. This was the first time in Argentine history that this type of experiment had been conducted and made public. The scientific study stemmed from all the towns and villages that report and file complaints about the harmful effects of agrochemicals. The mass media (which had partnered with the big agrochemicals companies) started a conspiracy and attempted to discredit Carrasco. Even the minister of Science, Lino Barañao, tried to have Carrasco sanctioned and suspended by the Conicet. The media's greatest criticism centered on the fact that the scientist had not published his findings in a scientific journal.

In August of 2010, the US scientific journal Chemical Research in Toxicology (American Chemical Society) published Carrasco’s study. The agro-business defenders (prime ministers, businessmen, among others) still questioned the scientist. For the people and farmers living and working in the towns and villages that were being sprayed, and for the environmental NGOs and concerned scientists, Carrasco's investigation was what they needed to condemn the use of agrochemicals. "The findings in the lab are compatible with malformations observed in humans exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy," warned Carrasco.

"I didn't discover anything new. I just confirmed what other scientists discovered. In spite of the evidence, they still tried to run down 30 years of my reputation as a scientist. They are hypocrites, lackeys of the big corporations, but they are afraid. They know they can't cover up the sun with one hand. There is scientific proof and, above all, there are hundreds of affected towns which are a living evidence of this public health emergency.

"The origin of my work was in my contacts with communities who were victims of agrochemical abuse. They are the most irrefutable proof of what I have researched with an experimental model during the past 30 years. With this system I have confirmed that glyphosate is devastating for amphibian embryos, even at doses far below those used in agriculture. This chemical causes many and varied types of malformations. Vertebrate animal models now used in embryological research have an early embryonic development and gene regulation, which is common to humans. Scientific findings should be considered extrapolated when an external shock alters them. The scientific world knows this and government officials also know it. There are very similar investigations in different parts of the world and they are also from very serious and reliable sources. At the same time, there is a huge hypocrisy, on the part of the mass media companies and their employed journalists. They discredit an investigation very lightly but do not take the time to hear the cascade of health issues clearly present in soybean crop areas. The provinces are full of victims of pesticides, but the newspapers do not want to reach out there to the communities, much less the responsible companies. I do not understand why my story is more important than that of the Mothers of Ituzaingó (activist group fighting agrochemicals spraying on GM soy, based in Cordoba province). Why? In no way, am I more important. Doctors in the different provinces have been denouncing this for years. Peasants and the people living in urban slums have done the same thing.

"In the northern part of Santa Fe, there are medical reports that confirm that the statistics of newborn babies with malformations are well above the world average, but everything is silenced. It is an evidence of reality and it is indisputable. It can’t be refuted. I was inspired by that reality and the results are known. The agro-businesses, the media, the scientific world and government officials are basically hypocrites with regards to the harmful side effects of pesticides. They discredit and protest against a simple scientific investigation but they are not able to observe medical evidence and countless claims in Santiago del Estero, Chaco, Entre Rios, Cordoba and Santa Fe.

"Bear in mind that Argentina is a unique case, with huge amounts of soybean acres 19 million hectares on more than half the cultivated area of the country, This is something rarely seen. So I say that, from the eco-toxicological point of view, what is happening in Argentina is a massive experiment."