# How effective is horticultural vinegar?



## Bud9051 (Nov 11, 2015)

An association I'm part of wanted to find a less objectionable weed killer so I tested vinegar with a dash of salt. I think it was about 25% of household white. It did kill most of the weeds where it contacted them, but did little to the roots, thus a few weeks later it was all back. Not scientific, but we abandoned that option and have gone to grading the gravel road as opposed to Roundup.

Bud


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

I agree, been there done that. 
Works great, knocks them back for about a month or less then you have to do it again.
I use a Product that last almost a year.
http://www.agrisupply.com/gly-star-plus-glyphosate-herbicide/p/50135/
Round Up is a rip off.
First thing I do is look at the label for the active ingredient.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

I have used this stuff with effective results.

http://www.arbico-organics.com/product/weed-zap-jh-biotech/natural-organic-weed-control


----------



## elmaur (May 15, 2011)

It kills by getting into the cells of the plant but does it get into the roots to keep weeds from regrowing? How often do you apply? Looks pricey.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

It wasn't cheap. Can't recall exactly. 

I just applied it a few times to some trouble areas and it seemed effective.


----------



## Bondo (Dec 8, 2007)

elmaur said:


> I am in Tucson AZ. I have about half acre of desert dirt, *minimally landscaped with everything that grows here always reoccurring after I manually hoe and rake.* Will use chemicals if I have to but first want to see about vinegar. Horticultural is 20% vinegar.


Ayuh,.... I've found Clorox bleach to be the best, cheapest, reasonably environmentally friendly weed killer there is,....

It's Cheap at 'bout a buck a gallon or so,....
It kills existin' weeds down to the root,....
It dissipates fairly quickly, 'n don't "run-off",....

My guess is the problem yer havin', 'n one I don't know how to fix is,....
After ya knock down/ pull all the weeds,...
Fresh seeds blow in from elsewhere, 'n the process starts all over again,.....


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

joecaption said:


> I agree, been there done that.
> Works great, knocks them back for about a month or less then you have to do it again.
> I use a Product that last almost a year.
> http://www.agrisupply.com/gly-star-plus-glyphosate-herbicide/p/50135/
> ...


Right- RU is a rip off, cuz youre paying for the Brand, like Bayer aspirin is a rip off when you can buy Wal mart aspirin- same thing (get it?). 

RU is Glyphosate, usually 20-40% as a concentrate, but dont buy the rU brand- look for glyphosate, as Joe recomended.


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

Bud9051 said:


> An association I'm part of wanted to find a less objectionable weed killer so I tested vinegar with a dash of salt. I think it was about 25% of household white. It did kill most of the weeds where it contacted them, but did little to the roots, thus a few weeks later it was all back. Not scientific, but we abandoned that option and have gone to grading the gravel road as opposed to Roundup.
> 
> Bud


Household vinegar is 5-20%. 25% is very strong and unusual to find, maybe impossible.


----------



## Bud9051 (Nov 11, 2015)

My bad, the 25% I was thinking was from the 4 to 1 I diluted it (looks like mine is 5%), so 1.25% is what I used, but it worked. 

Thanks,
Bud


----------



## Druidia (Oct 9, 2011)

Bud9051 said:


> My bad, the 25% I was thinking was from the 4 to 1 I diluted it (looks like mine is 5%), so 1.25% is what I used, but it worked.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bud




If the original concentration was 5% and you diluted it by adding 1 part vinegar to 4 parts water (total 5 parts), then the final concentration is 1%. 

C1V1 = C2V2
C x 100 mL = (5%) (20 mL)
C = 1%

If diluted 1 part vinegar to 3 parts water (total 4 parts):
C x 80 mL = (5%) (20 mL)
C = 1.25%


----------



## Bud9051 (Nov 11, 2015)

Actually I may have spilled some and possible not filled the container all of the way. Do you want me to repeat the process so you can run the calculations again. It killed the plants, at least for awhile. 

Bud


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

Druidia said:


> If the original concentration was 5% and you diluted it by adding 1 part vinegar to 4 parts water (total 5 parts), then the final concentration is 1%.
> 
> C1V1 = C2V2
> C x 100 mL = (5%) (20 mL)
> ...


Ahem....is that 1.25% by volume or by weight- you must consider the density of acetic acid. RECALCULATE!!! LOL!!


----------



## 95025 (Nov 14, 2010)

Gotta be honest here. I'm an old farm boy - though I'm in the city now.

Glyphosate (RoundUp) has been on the market for over 40 years, and is used by hundreds of millions of people worldwide, every single year. Study after study after study has found NO evidence of it causing cancer, or any other disease.

Add to that the fact that all these "miracle organic solutions" (read, vinegar) do not work, and I do something very simple. I use glyphosate.

If you dilute glyphosate the way it should be diluted, you'll have no problems. And there are NOT a bunch of environmental hazards. Just be sure that if you're part of an HOA it's not banned.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Plenty of evidence to indicate that while glyphosate does not directly accumulate in humans, it does impair the life cycles of microorganisms and his effect is being further connected to the human health. 

Ever wonder why so many people are gluten sensitive now? Do you know what they spray wheat with to dehydrate it prior to harvesting?


----------



## 95025 (Nov 14, 2010)

Windows on Wash said:


> Plenty of evidence to indicate that while glyphosate does not directly accumulate in humans, it does impair the life cycles of microorganisms and his effect is being further connected to the human health.
> 
> Ever wonder why so many people are gluten sensitive now? Do you know what they spray wheat with to dehydrate it prior to harvesting?


Not gonna argue with you about this, but yeah I know exactly why the spray wheat with RoundUp. It's not to dehydrate it. And the problem is not that they spray it, the problem is that a few farmers didn't wait long enough to harvest it. That's all.

That said, you're welcome to not use glyphosate. No problem. But I'm going to keep using it.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

It's not to dehydrate it (i.e. Desiccate) than what is it? It does control weed growth but it was my understanding that the primary role was to extract moisture for easier threshing. 

You can keep using it all you want, but the fact that it's use has exploded and the rise of cancer is tangible, is enough to raise some flags. 

I get it that correlation is not causation, but look at how much we use now.


----------



## 95025 (Nov 14, 2010)

Windows on Wash said:


> It's not to dehydrate it (i.e. Desiccate) than what is it? It does control weed growth but it was my understanding that the primary role was to extract moisture for easier threshing.
> 
> You can keep using it all you want, but the fact that it's use has exploded and the rise of cancer is tangible, is enough to raise some flags.
> 
> I get it that correlation is not causation, but look at how much we use now.


Wheat farmers - and other small grain farmers - used to windrow their grain and let it dry before combining it (my dad was one such farmer). That allowed the stalks (and weeds) to dry so that the green stalks didn't jam their combines. The problem with this method was two-fold: First, it was another step in the harvesting process. Second, some of the grain inevitably dropped off the stalks and was lost.

The preferred method of small grain harvest was/is to combine the standing grain. The problem with this method is that green stalks and green weeds often plugged the combines. Also, grain that is too wet will spoil.

Enter RoundUp. Spray it on 2 weeks before the harvest, all green matter dies, the glyphosate dissipates, the harvest is uniform and much easier, and everyone is happy.

The PROBLEM is that some farmers (usually migrant harvesting crews) did not wait long enough, after spraying, to harvest. Sometimes migrant harvesting crews showed up the day of or the day after the spraying was done, and they will NOT wait. The result? Traces of glyphosate on the grain. This is a huge problem on the part of the user, not the product. 

Also, the "explosion" of glyphosate use happened decades ago, not recently. In fact, use has declined in recent years. Keep in mind that this product has been on the market since the early 1970s.

Finally, please note that extensive studies have been done by countless agencies for many years, and there has NEVER been ANY confirmation of glyphosate being connected in ANY way to ANY disease. Nothing. Personally, I am very happy that there are so many watchdog groups (and the USDA and EPA) doing all these studies, because a corporation is not going to police itself. But I really wish people would start paying attention to the results of legitimate scientific studies, and stop paying so much attention to propaganda that's cranked out by the Organic Industry.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

The usage of glyphosate has "exploded" over the last two decades. 

I am aware of the history of the chemical. It was around in the 60's to be accurate but Monsanto patented it somewhere in the 70's. It usage, in tonnage, around the planet has skyrocketed in the last 20 years.


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

Windows on Wash said:


> Ever wonder why so many people are gluten sensitive now? Do you know what they spray wheat with to dehydrate it prior to harvesting?


No, I don't know. What is it, this thing causing all the Gluten sensitivity all of a sudden?


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

oops, I did not notice the later post- I assume the obvious answer is uhhh, Glyphosate. 

I don't buy the gluten sensitivity hype. You shouldn't either.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

papereater said:


> oops, I did not notice the later post- I assume the obvious answer is uhhh, Glyphosate.
> 
> I don't buy the gluten sensitivity hype. You shouldn't either.


So the fact that two family members are gluten sensitive is made up then? Perhaps the fact that we have isolated all other dietary substrates and the only one that was identified was gluten is "made up"?

Don't mistake me for being combative, but I am not a casual consumer and regurgitation of information here.

Whether it is the glyphosate or the gluten I cannot separate that out given the prevalence of glyphosate in agriculture, but what I can tell you is that one you get the wheat out of your diet for a certain amount of time, when you do eat some...you feel it.


----------



## 95025 (Nov 14, 2010)

Windows on Wash said:


> So the fact that two family members are gluten sensitive is made up then? Perhaps the fact that we have isolated all other dietary substrates and the only one that was identified was gluten is "made up"?
> 
> Don't mistake me for being combative, but I am not a casual consumer and regurgitation of information here.
> 
> Whether it is the glyphosate or the gluten I cannot separate that out given the prevalence of glyphosate in agriculture, but what I can tell you is that one you get the wheat out of your diet for a certain amount of time, when you do eat some...you feel it.


That is purely anecdotal. I'm not saying this is not happening to you, but you cannot make a blanket statement like, "RoundUp is why there's so much gluten intolerance now!" based off your experience. That's like me saying that my entire extended family is farm-connected, and there is NOBODY in my family who has gluten intolerance, therefore glyphosate CANNOT be involved.

What I've found is this: People who believe glyphosate is the cause of everything from autism to cancer have already made up there minds, and nothing is going to change that. It's best to just move on.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Windows on Wash said:


> I get it that correlation is not causation, but look at how much we use now.





papereater said:


> I don't buy the gluten sensitivity hype. You shouldn't either.





DrHicks said:


> That is purely anecdotal. I'm not saying this is not happening to you, but you cannot make a blanket statement like, "RoundUp is why there's so much gluten intolerance now!" based off your experience. That's like me saying that my entire extended family is farm-connected, and there is NOBODY in my family who has gluten intolerance, therefore glyphosate CANNOT be involved.
> 
> What I've found is this: People who believe glyphosate is the cause of everything from autism to cancer have already made up there minds, and nothing is going to change that. It's best to just move on.


Where did I make a blanket statement? 

Please see my statements from previous posts (i.e. *correlation is not causation*). 

I did not say that it was the specific cause, but what I have provided so far you have not refuted as it pertains to usage of glyphosate. The US consumption of this product has skyrocketed in the last 20 years and and much of these issues we are seeing seem overlap quite consistently with that time frame and usage increases. 

What I am saying is that "I don't know". As it pertains to me and my family, I have observed the undeniability of this connection as well as in my own diet. 

Do I think it is all of a sudden gluten that is the issue (i.e. something that we have eaten for thousands of years), no. Do I think it is a combination of things (runt wheat, glyphosate, pesticides and herbicides), yes. 

We are finding more and more about glyphosate and its impact on the microorganisms and our own bodies and that same micro level.

Do I think a substance, regardless of the claimed benignity to humans, is a good idea when it is found in the drinking water, urine, and blood of humans...no. 

I do find it interesting that links to studies claiming cancer links go dead from time to time.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/widely-used-herbicide-linked-to-cancer/


----------



## 95025 (Nov 14, 2010)

I have no dog in this fight, and there is no point in continuing an already-decided discussion.

Cheers - and I mean that seriously, not snarkily.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

I appreciate your feedback and previously provided information. 

Thank you for the discussion and enjoyed it as well.


----------



## papereater (Sep 16, 2016)

Windows on Wash said:


> So the fact that two family members are gluten sensitive is made up then? Perhaps the fact that we have isolated all other dietary substrates and the only one that was identified was gluten is "made up"?
> 
> Don't mistake me for being combative, but I am not a casual consumer and regurgitation of information here.
> 
> Whether it is the glyphosate or the gluten I cannot separate that out given the prevalence of glyphosate in agriculture, but what I can tell you is that one you get the wheat out of your diet for a certain amount of time, when you do eat some...you feel it.



I never disputed those "two people" as not having gluten sensitivity- just that the whole gluten free craze is hype, thats all, Windows. Thats was the tone of your position on the gluten sensitivity "epidemic". Gluten fee marketing histeria and Hype, Hype, and Hype. Dont feed on it (pun??)

First it was "fat free", then "sugar free", then "buy Organic", then the Probiotic Hype, now its "gluten free". 

Gluten sensitivity affects <5% of our population, but the food industry has figured that if they market their gluten free products to say, 100% of the market, it pays off big. We dont have a gluten problem, nor a pesticide problem, nor a digestive enzyme/biotics problem- we have an overeating problem.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

Please reread my previous posts. I didn't not even infer that anything was an "epidemic" here. 

I agree wholeheartedly with you that some fad dietary trends are massive money makers, but to somehow claim that historical data on pesticides and herbicides is not well documented as having negative impacts on your health is just purposely ignorant to facts. 

You do realize that most of the pesticides/herbicides on the market are in direct replacement of products that were banned for health impacts. These impacts were determined only after they were previously thought of as being "safe". 

I am not claiming that glyphosate is going to kill everyone, only that I am cautious of anything that is used in these quantities that we see chemicals being used in. 

http://www.fao.org/docrep/w2598e/w2598e07.htm


----------



## Flyas (Jan 6, 2017)

elmaur said:


> I am in Tucson AZ. I have about half acre of desert dirt, minimally landscaped with everything that grows here always reoccurring after I manually hoe and rake. Will use chemicals if I have to but first want to see about vinegar. Horticultural is 20% vinegar.




I'm a little late but I think a box or two of borax ( 20 mule team laundry booster) will effectively render that soil unable to sprout seeds of anytype


----------

