An Appeal to Citizens, Activists, Thought Leaders, Farmers, Food Manufacturers, and Policy Makers

Letter from Our Director:

The MAHA Commission Report is a historic document that marks a turning point in our society—a time when, finally, the requests of mothers and others asking for acknowledgment of their children’s and families’ chronic illnesses and harm from toxins have been, for the most part, acknowledged.

The 68-page report is a tour de force of scientific data, bold disclosures of corporate corruption, and sweeping statements about the decline of American health that will knock your socks off. You will be shocked and stunned by the statistics, which are not just numbers but represent our loved ones. The rise of depression, suicide, obesity, diabetes, fertility and many more health issues are staggering. We have a physical, mental, and reproductive health crisis in America, and finally, we have a President and government that is acknowledging these issues, not just a cancer crisis. After all, one cannot get cancer if they are not born. We must address the reproductive crisis in addition to physical health, and our mental health crisis as well, which this report does.

We are thrilled that this report points to four areas of harm:

• Ultra-Processed Foods
• Chemical Exposure
• Sedentary Lifestyles
• Overmedicalization

And mentions specific contributors to our health crisis that advocates have been speaking up about tirelessly for decades:

Ultra-processed foods, seed oils, preservatives, pesticides such as glyphosate and atrazine, PFAS, phthalates, electromagnetic radiation, over-medication, the growth of the vaccine schedule (i.e., too many), corporate influence, distorted nutritional guidelines, synthetic food dyes, titanium dioxide, dioxins, propylparaben, BHT, artificial sweeteners, lack of exercise, too much screen time, chronic stress, microplastics, synthetic clothing, lack of sleep for students, lack of sunlight, and more.

The report also says the best way to reverse the childhood chronic disease crisis “is to put whole foods produced by American farmers and ranchers at the center of healthcare.”

What the report is omitting is a major contributing factor to our chronic disease epidemic. Dr Michelle Perro, a 43-year pediatrician and author of What’s Making Our Children Sick and Founder of GMOScience.org, has pointed out is with GMO are not mentioned. Geoengineering is not mentioned. Organic foood is barely mentioned. Eighty percent of GMOs are engineered to withstand glyphosate, yet there is no mention of GMOs and their innate harm, and the mention of glyphosate is not all-inclusive of its harmful effects. I will explain.

The report states that “selected studies have noted a range of possible health effects" regarding glyphosate. However, hundreds of studies have clearly shown that glyphosate is directly harming the American public. Clearly, Big Ag interests influenced the outcome of this report.

“The American Soybean Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, International Fresh Produce Association and, in turn, the farmers these groups represent, are imploring the administration to consider the consequences of this MAHA Commission report before it is finalized,” the groups said in a joint statement posted by the American Soybean Association before the MAHA report came out.

Research shows that 15% of total crops grown in the U.S. are consumed directly by Americans. The rest supports other sectors like animal feed, exports, or biofuel production. The MAHA Commisison Report's focus is on health. Language inserted into the report that benefits an industry that exports the majority of their crops to Asia for animal feed, fuel, and plastic products (is not primarily feeding Americans), is inappropriate and puts financial interests before the health of the American people. The report goes so far as to suggest that Congress must put the profits of the Ag industry before health, stating “any further regulations to restrict crop protection tools (using a euphemism for the word ‘pesticides’ is highly intentional) beyond risk-based and scientific processes set forth by Congress must involve thoughtful consideration of what is necessary for adequate protection, alternatives, and cost of production.” It is understood that the farming industry needs to be able operate profitably, but I find it counter to the intent of this report that this is the only section, out of the dozens of contributing factors to health concerns, in which this type of wording is being used, without mention that the organic market has grown in sales from 20 billion a year to nearly 70 billion over the past decade due to legitimate concerns about the risks of GMOs, glyphosate and pesticides. The EPA has the authority to ban glyphosate and other already banned pesticides without Congress, and must do so.

The EPA can suspend or cancel the registration of a pesticide if it finds:

• It poses an imminent hazard.
• New scientific data shows unreasonable risks to human health or the environment.

However, the EPA is clearly not doing its job.

• FIFRA (the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) gives the EPA the power to register, regulate, restrict, or cancel the registration of pesticides.
• The EPA must determine that a pesticide “will not generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment” to allow its use.

There are copious amounts of studies to show that glyphosate has unreasonable effects on the environment, including the agriculture soil.

Two other sentences regarding regulatory assertions were problematic. One was claiming that “... a large-scale FDA study of pesticide residues ( 2009-2017) found the majority of samples (>90%) were compliant with federal standards.” As a former Organic Products Advisory Committee Consumer Representative for the Secretary of Agriculture for the State of California, I was presented with the documents of the 2017 year’s testing by both the FDA and the California Department of Food and Agriculture. When I reviewed the list of what pesticides the FDA and CDFA actually tested for, compared to the top 25 most widely used pesticides as disclosed by the EPA, I discovered that the FDA only tested for 2 on that list, and the CDFA only tested for 3. Therefore, this implied assertion that the food samples tested were and are in any manner safe because they meet regulatory standards is false.

The FDA is finding 90% compliance with pesticides residues in food samples because they are not testing for 80% of the pesticides being used.

According to the data I have seen, and I hope I am wrong, the regulatory agencies were and are simply not testing for (not regulating) the most widely used pesticides, such as paraquat, glyphosate, atrazine etc, which are all banned in other countries. This equates to severe implications for both American and export partners’ citizens’ health. One would hope that a third party, such as the government funded by tax payer dollars, could verify and assure both Americans and export partners that our food has been tested and is safe.

In addition, the statement “...99% of food samples tested in 2023 were compliant with EPA’s safety limit” also presumes relevance because the authors are hoping the readers will assume that the “safety limits” include considerations for human health. They do not. The “safety” limits or Maximum Residue Levels as set by the EPA, are not, in fact, set based on human health and safety. For example, if they were they would take the peer-reviewed, published studies by Giles Eric Seralini and papers by Dr. Don Huber, a 60-year plant pathologist and Professor Emeritus of Purdue University, which show that .1 ppb of glyphosate exposure must be avoided to protect human health. Even if regulatory agencies decided to follow the European standard of 10 ppb for most pesticides, that standard would be the same across all crops sprayed with glyphosate. Instead, the EPA has set MRLs of glyphosate to be 1 ppm for sugar, 30 ppm for wheat, 200 ppm for mint - all different and all based on industry use, not on health and safety. If the MRLs were set for health and safety the MRLs would be the same on every crop.

Moms Across America is committed to the health of our children, no matter the difficulty in budgeting to buy organic food, educating food manufacturers, policymaking, farming practices, or cost. We have faith in our farmers who have farmed for thousands of generations without GMOs and toxic chemicals.

With input from numerous scientists and farmers with 30–60 years of experience, I have been studying glyphosate for over 12 years, raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce scientific data from accredited laboratories of glyphosate/pesticides/heavy metal/chemicals and drug testing on tap water, urine, breastmilk, beverage, and food glyphosate contamination test results, written a book and over 400 articles, and have been featured on hundreds of podcasts, news media, and presented talks around the world on the subject matter. However, I only recently learned the following information this January. I suspect most readers will not know this information either. In any case, it is information that has not yet reached the masses and is not influencing the decision-making of farmers, food manufacturers, or policymakers.

I am asking you to stand for truth, health, and freedom, for a food system with zero use of glyphosate and toxic chemicals, especially the 85 that have already been banned in other countries. This is not a pie-in-the-sky request.  If this action was taken, the famers would still have 1,067 pesticides in their tool box, a sufficient number by any means. It is a necessary action that must be taken in order to accomplish the goals of MAHA and Trump. You will see the following science (which does not include the carcinogenic, liver and kidney damaging, endocrine-disrupting, and thyroid-damaging effects) shows why this is so.

This is the "new" and crucial information: Please see the slides below from Michael McNeill of Ag Advisory (shown presenting above), which show how drift-level exposure of glyphosate reduces nutrient uptake by 20–85% into the root and 80–95% into the shoot (what we eat) of a crop. The nutrients are magnesium, iron, and zinc, the essential foundation for the plant, livestock, and human immune systems. Dr. Don Huber says that how glyphosate works, as a chelator, essentially gives the plant AIDS—an autoimmune disease—and the normally harmless bacteria in the soil kill it. That is what is happening to Americans: our immune systems are being wekaned because we do not have the nutrient density in our food as needed and then the normally harmless bacteria, viruses, mold, parasites, and close and constant exposure to wireless radiation are impacting us far greater because glyphosate is present in our food, water, and environment. Look at the rates of death from COVID, our rates of cancer, infertility, mental health issues,  and dozens of autoimmune disorders; America has the highest rates in the world and we consume the highest amounts of glyphosate. 

Toxicity aside, this nutrient deficiency issue alone is why Americans are sick. Most American farmers are, according to school lunch and fast food testing by Moms Across America and BioNutrient Institute, growing nutrient-deficient junk food that does not support the immune systems of livestock or humans. Livestock culling (due to sickness from weakened immune systems) is costing American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and is raising food prices, for example, $4.8 billion in poultry expenses and loss in 2023 alone.

According to Michael McNeil, lower nutrients also mean weaker crop durability, attracting more pests and poorer soil quality, which attracts more weeds. Farmers are making their job more difficult by using glyphosate in the long run, and the chemical giants will not tell them that in advance, because they know the farmer will simply buy more glyphosate and other toxic chemicals. Once they get a farmer on the toxic treadmill of chemical cocktails, it’s hard to get off.

Lower nutrient density means more weeds, pests, and sicker livestock. Sicker children, too. Weaker military. Decline of America.

According to the Department of Defense, about 75 percent of American youth are not eligible for military service, primarily due to obesity and poor fitness.

Every type of food test I have reviewed has had extremely low nutrient density because of glyphosate use; even drift-level exposure is destroying America’s health.

The levels of mycotoxins are skyrocketing along with the use of glyphosate. A weakened immune system means the crops do not resist the pathogenic fungi as they normally would. Ochratoxin, (a type of mycotoxin, a byproduct of fungi), contamination of our food supply is a massive issue that hardly anyone is talking about. I am on the board of a pending study by Triada World of 36 children and young adults with autism, tested for $1.5 million worth of biological data, and their ochratoxins were sky-high.

Low levels of glyphosate also increase the growth of pathogenic bacteria that are connected to neurotoxicity and SIDS.

Low levels of glyphosate also reduces beneficial gut bacteria such as E.Faecalis, and disrupts the balance of the microbiome, which additionally weakens the immune system. It then promotes the growth of the pathogenic gut bacteria as depicted in the above slide, showing C. Botulinum and Botulinum neurotoxin growth.

Glyphosate makes other environmental toxins, such as heavy metals, mold, and agrochemicals more harmful because it breaks through the blood-brain barrier and brings those toxicants into the brain. Dr. Christopher Exley has identified aluminum as a cause of autism and Alzheimer’s, and I assert it is, in conjunction with glyphosate chelating, or bringing the aluminum in vaccines and food into the brain.

I believe that if farmers truly knew and understood these facts, they would choose not to use glyphosate.  It wouldn't have to be banned, as it would just become irrelevant to them because of their commitment to their family's health, their soil, the nutrient density and yield of their crops, and leaving a legacy for future farmers.  Instead of having to constantly defend the use of a product most consumers do not want, they would be proud to support the health of their consumers, livestock, and pets, as well as increasing export market viability. 

Glyphosate and other toxic agrochemicals must be banned, not just reduced.

I am asking you, dear reader, to be a champion for the truth.

I am asking you to support farmers, food manufacturers, policymakers, the public, and all of our loved ones by sharing the truth and only the truth.

For those who doubt the feasibility of our ask—to not only ban glyphosate (and support a shift to regenerative organic farming) but to ban the 85 pesticides that have already been banned in China, Brazil, and Europe — I remind you of this: The EU does not allow the spraying of glyphosate as a drying agent. The bold leadership of the EU would not back down. They have not done that here in the USA because our leadership has not required it.

Some would consider the EU stance force.

Others would consider that necessary policy.

A belief in the concept of "anything being possible" is what transforms society, not acceptance of the way things are and catering to the convenience of the status quo.

The argument that chemicals more harmful than glyphosate will be used as substitutes is merely an acceptance and enabling of the system that is killing us. There are non toxic, safe farming practices and weed management alternatives. We mothers will not compromise our children’s health, and we are asking for farmers’ partnership to also stand for a future where no toxic and harmful chemicals are utilized in our food.

Farmers such as Mark Doudlah and Rick Clark have transitioned to regenerative organic farming. Mark Doudlah transitioned when he saw the name on his father’s box of chemo said “Bayer” - the same name as the brand of agrochemicals that gave his father, who has since passed away, cancer. Rick Clark has stated at an ag conference that he saves 2.7 million dollars a year on his 10,000 acres by NOT using glyphosate and other agrochemicals. It can be done, profitably. And it is safer, not just for consumers, but for the families of the farmers and the soil of their agriculture acres.

The food system needs to be transformed to regenerative organic agriculture.

If we do not speak the truth and stand for this no one will.
A change to regenerative practices alone, which does improve soil organic matter, but still allows GMOs and the use of some glyphosate and agrochemicals, is progress but not the end goal.

The only way we can make America healthy again is to create a new paradigm, transform the food supply, and support regenerative organic farming 100%.

My question is: are the farmers who are switching to just regenerative (not organic and still using some glyphosate and agrochemicals) being told this information about the drift-level exposure to glyphosate and depleted nutrients (affecting yield and quality), mycotoxins, and pathogenic bacteria? Are they being informed that regenerative must be a part of the progress towards regenerative organic to restore their soil, leave a legacy, and improve nutrient density and the health of their livestock and the American people?

We believe that when farmers learn the truth they will see that the best tools in the tool box are their hearts (which are BIG!), their minds (INGENIOUS!) and organic practices (more profitable!).

It is time for us to acknowledge all of the science, the truth, and what is possible—our farmers can farm as has been done for thousands of generations, without toxic chemicals. Until these changes are made, eat organic, regenerative organic if possible, or Biodynamic, whole, local foods as much as poossible. You willl feel a difference if you go 100% organic in two weeks. Try it. Start with making YOURSELF healthy again!

We are deeply grateful for the entire team who created the MAHA Commission Report, for the MAHA Institute who is creating a think tank of experts in DC who are representing the people, focusing on health, and for all the Moms Across America collaborators and donors who help make everything possible. This is a tremendous beginning. We hope it is also the END of this chemical Era.

Thank you for your partnership in creating healthy communities and Making America Healthy Again!

With gratitude,
Zen Honeycutt