A Tale of Two Poisons (Herbicides in General)

Member Name: Aspen

Product:	Herbicides in General
Date:	16/12/01 (3623 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Effective, non-residual

Disadvantages: Too slow for some!

If I said this was a fascinating subject, would you tell me to get my anorak and leave the party?

Please don’t. Pour yourself another double paraquat and tonic (only joking, kids), settle down, and listen.

Herbicides are nasty, but perform a very important function.

They are also one of the biggest consumer rip-offs of recent times.

And the dooyoo categories pander to this rip-off, by creating a heading “herbicides”, then sub-dividing it with branded products.

Herbicides are chemicals. The same chemicals appear in many branded products. The price you pay for the chemical depends on how famous and how well marketed the brand name is.


To remain relevant to topic, let me mention Scotts Roundup. Briefly. Because it is no different from Monsanto’s Roundup. Or PBI’s Roundup.

But until recently, no-one apart from Monsanto could use the name Roundup, ‘cos Monsanto licensed it. (Yes, the same Monsanto who are frantically genetically modifying every known vegetable, and breeding triffids which are even resistant to . . erm . .Roundup.)

But the license expired, was not renewed, and all the other manufacturers of a glyphosate-based herbicide, who couldn’t sell sod-all because they had to market it under the consumer-unfriendly label of “glyphosate-based herbicide”, called it Roundup. As soon as that happened, they upped their prices, because they had a name to sell. And Monsanto had to reduce theirs a little to compete.

Only a little.

But some herbicide manufacturers are still not using the Roundup marketing handle. And therefore their product, although identical in chemical formulation, is much cheaper.

If you have a small garden, and a small weedkilling requirement, by all means buy Scotts (or somebody’s) Roundup at the Garden Centre. If you use a lot of the stuff, go to an agricultural merchant, and buy five litre
s of Glyphosate 360, for about the same price as you will pay for a litre of Roundup in the Garden Centre. It is exactly the same product as basic Roundup.

On the safety side of things, Roundup is one of the safest herbicides to use, although personally I would always advise erring on the side of caution. The concentrate should be handled wearing gloves, but inhalation has not been proven to be harmful. Note, I didn’t say inhalation was not harmful.

The applied spray is safe to pets and humans when touch dry, assuming it has been prepared to the correct dilution.

Please do not fall into the trap of thinking, I’ll just make it a wee bit stronger to make sure it works. The manufacturers recommended dilution is not only the safe dilution, but the most effective. Using more will NOT make it work any better, and will only cost you money, and increase the environmental risk.

If you are in any way dubious of the safety of the product, or if you have uncontrollable young children or untamed pets, with a penchant for licking wet weeds, spend more money and buy yet another dreaded brand name. Monsanto’s Roundup Pro Biactive is approved by SEPA for use in watercourses, whereas ordinary glyphosate should not be applied within five metres of any watercourse. Pro Biactive has also dropped off the bottom of the COSHH list (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health), which means you can handle the stuff and eat your sandwich afterwards.


Now, let me dwell a little on Roundup’s main adversary.

The telly adverts are totally misleading. And the public do not understand the differences between herbicides, because they are not given enough information. Comparing herbicides is not apples with apples. Each herbicide has a different function, and that function must be understood by the user.

Again, it does not help that so many brand names are involved.

Always turn to the back of the pack/bo
ttle, and read the contents.

“Contains glyphosate” means, whatever it’s called, it is basically Roundup. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide, which is absorbed by an actively growing plant. The chemical works through the plant’s system to the root, kills the root, and the plant gradually dies. Hence, Glyphosate is slow-acting, but very effective.

“Contains paraquat” is the main rival, and features on the packaging of Weedol, Pathclear, and others. Paraquat does not kill plants. Paraquat merely burns off foliage. As a result, annual weeds will die, but perennial weeds – dandelion, dock, thistle, creeping buttercup, bindweed, etc – will simply lose their current leaves and regrow. But paraquat is visibly effective in two or three days, which deceives so many of us into thinking it is worth spending money on.

How many times have I heard or read “I sprayed Roundup a week ago and nothing happened.”

Roundup will probably take a fortnight, but apart from pernicious weeds like Ground Elder and Nettle, which need repeat applications, the area you spray will be clear of perennial weeds this time next year.

The area you spray with paraquat, will have a new flush of perennial weeds within three weeks.

Work it out for yourself.

Quick temporary fix, or long-term solution.


And finally, even the bog standard glyphosate can be ingested, and though uncomfortable, you, your children or your pets will live to tell the tale.

One ingested drop of a paraquat-based herbicide can be fatal.

I fail to understand why paraquat-based herbicides can be sold to the general public.

As a landscape professional, I have to be trained and certificated to handle and use paraquat. And when I buy it over a trade counter, I am required by law to sign a disclaimer, confirming that I am aware that it is a potentially fatal poison, and I am suitabl
y qualified to handle it.

Think about that, next time you buy Weedol in Woolies, and check your garden shed for half bottles of Pathclear . . .



© Mike Clark 2001

Summary: