Buck Randall
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2019
- Messages
- 2,697
- Reaction score
- 3,148
You're making the assumption that exposure to insecticides is the ONLY reason a ruminant can have underdeveloped facial bones, and that there are no individuals who could be more or less susceptible to its effects. Those are both huge, and likely incorrect, assumptions.One study done in South Dakota had three pens of white-tailed deer females that were pregnant. One pen of does was given a specific dose of an insecticide imidacloprid in their water. Another pen of does was given a low dose of imidacloprid in their water and the third pen was the control group so not deliberately given imidacloprid. The fawns that died soon after birth had the highest levels of imidacloprid in their spleen. Those that were born with underdeveloped facial bones causing an underbite or an overbite and/or reproductive malformations also had some of the highest leveles of imidacloprid in their spleen. Interestingly, Oregon uses quite a lot of imidacloprid on their fields. Also of concern is that imidacloprid and glyphosate work synergistically to cause far more cellular damage than either alone. Glyphosate is a patented mineral chelator. It chelates the minerals out of any exposed plants and when it falls on plants that animals eat, it chelates the minerals in the animal, causing it to be mineral deficient. When a pregnant grazing animal is thus caused to be mineral deficient, her newborn is likely to have underdeveloped facial bones. I really do not see any way that the livestock owner can select against underdeveloped bones. When those two chemicals are falling in the rain onto the foliage that his or her animals are eating there is no way to keep the animals from being exposed.