Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 261 posts

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#51

Post by 0xcde4c3db »

emmelaich wrote: post #10
gcheong wrote: post #7

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/does-glyphosate...

Great website! Thanks.

You might also be interested in Science-Based Medicine [1], another blog where Steven Novella posts.

[1] https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/

(in case you're wondering about the name: in a nutshell, "science-based medicine" is the position that "evidence-based medicine" is an insufficient rejection of quackery because it leads to a lot of effort being misspent on finding "evidence" to support scientifically implausible and already-debunked treatments and theories)

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#52

Post by HillaryBriss »

a_bonobo wrote: post #41
crumchunks wrote: post #36

This is why people eat organic food. Now if you want some other curious links to pesticides and weedkillers, look at Stephanie Seneffs research.

It's a common misconception that organic food doesn't use pesticides - the USDA's list of allowed pesticides has quite a few pesticides that are dangerous to humans, such as various coppers, elemental sulfur, boric acid, the list is here: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=9874504b6f1...

boric acid is an interesting one. it has a significant level of toxicity for kidneys. they use a lot of boric acid in that common residential attic insulation made from shredded post-consumer paper.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#53

Post by pkaye »

burntrelish1273 wrote: post #2

"Monsanto Advocate Says Roundup Is Safe Enough To Drink, Then Refuses To Drink It" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/monsanto-roundup-pa...

Caffeine is a part of many drinks yet its LD50 is lower than that of Roundup. The dosage matters too.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#54

Post by crumchunks »

finid wrote: post #23

“We would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” Mr. Heydens wrote, citing a previous instance in which he said the company had done this. Science for sale. Shouldn't that Mr. Rowland guy be in jail?

he will likely head a regulatory agency soon instead

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#55

Post by snowpanda »

alphonsegaston wrote: post #50
alevskaya wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrible paper. This is a small epidemiological study where they're looking both at 1. exposure to sun and 2. occupational exposure to -any- herbicides/pesticides/fungacides/insecticides (not just glyphosate) and trying to pull out odds ratios of melanoma risk. Outdoor work definitely increases melanoma risk, but I wouldn't try to pull out much more than that from this paper!

Thanks for clarifying!

He didn't really clarify anything though, just gave his opinion on evidence that he said didn't exist just a comment before.

You could have given any of the other studies that warn against roundup and people will always find something wrong with the study. When people make up their minds about this stuff they stop looking at it objectively.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#56

Post by snowpanda »

kirrent wrote: post #43
crumchunks wrote: post #34

This is why people eat organic food.

Wilful misunderstanding of the research in the field? Or is it a gut reaction that spurs them into alternatives, based on a pretty meaningless label, which have no real proven health benefit? Perhaps it's the easy narrative of painting an entirely normal company as evil because they're messing with forces best left alone.

All the arguments you used can be applied on both sides of the argument actually.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#57

Post by abandonliberty »

luckydude wrote: post #25

My dad died because of roundup. He was a physics prof, smart guy, fought hard for wetland issues. Was on the board of Wisconsin Wetlands. He didn't drink, didn't smoke, he was very active, very fit, and yet he got cancer. I can feel the down votes coming, but he was a guy that just should not have gotten cancer. Roundup gave him cancer. I could tell you stories about him dieing that would be not so fun. Fuck cancer a…

I understand the desire to blame something.

Unfortunately, I'm not aware of enough evidence in the universe to be come to that conclusion.

Statistically speaking the odds are very high that it was something else because so many things cause cancer.

It's safe to assume that roundup causes less than 50% of cancer deaths (it's probably much lower), which means that most likely it wasn't roundup. Even if it was shown to be worse than tobacco, it's still a long way from being the likely culprit. Tobacco is the single worst thing, so we are very aware of it. It 'only' causes 30% of deaths, but that has mobilized governments around the world to curb its use.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#60

Post by wslh »

alevskaya wrote: post #29
luckydude wrote: post #25

My dad died because of roundup. He was a physics prof, smart guy, fought hard for wetland issues. Was on the board of Wisconsin Wetlands. He didn't drink, didn't smoke, he was very active, very fit, and yet he got cancer. I can feel the down votes coming, but he was a guy that just should not have gotten cancer. Roundup gave him cancer. I could tell you stories about him dieing that would be not so fun. Fuck cancer a…

I'm very sorry for your loss. But as a cancer researcher, I can fairly confidently say that glyphosate had nothing to do with your father's death. There just isn't any evidence showing that it has direct mutagenic activity or even other indirect biological influences on the probability of developing cancer. I've also lost several fit, active nonsmoking friends and family to cancer. Our cells copy themselves imperfect…

I invite you to visit some places in Argentina and you will surely change your mind. You can find more information about this here http://www.i-sis.org.uk/argentinasRoundupHumanTragedy.php
Post reply on HN