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

Post by Tycho » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC

0xfeba wrote: post #185

shriphani wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Nicholas Taleb put it - stuff that is natural is time-tested. Food we've grown + consumed has a multi-millennium history of being safe to consume. The burden of proof is on the synthetic. And health issues can materialize with a time gap of a decade or so - essentially you can ruin a couple of generations with a mistake you didn't catch in time. It doesn't help when those who have to prove their validity have to r…

> Food we've grown + consumed has a multi-millennium history of being safe The food we consume now has little resemblance past a visual one (and even not that in some cases), to food of the past. Time-tested? Only in the past 60 years or so have we actually been able to begin to understand the effects of any food, natural or GMO. That our ancestors didn't keel over immediately after consuming these "same" foods does…

Post by CodeWriter23 » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 7:35 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #191

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gotta love how Snopes dismisses anecdotal claims of allergies, then goes on to use anecdotal stories from farmers on a discussion forum to support their assertion that RoundUp isn't used as a crop dessicant.

The article says it isn't used as a crop desiccant in wheat . If you want another anecdotal data point, as a grain grower myself, I have to echo the sentiment there. I'm sure someone has tried it, but I see no reason for wheat to need desiccation generally. Edible beans on the other hand...

Post by alevskaya » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 10:43 PM UTC

adsfqwop wrote: post #137

alevskaya wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not asking you to believe anything from Monsanto. There is a vast field of researchers that care deeply about what causes cancer and what can be done to prevent and treat it. Most of us aren't for sale. There are sensitive, objective and simple tests for determining whether or not a compound causes genetic mutations in cells (Ames test). There are tests for whether or not a compound induces chromosome abnormaliti…

You fail to account for the possibility of unknown unknowns, and again you're displaying biased cognitive dissonance. You can't determine generational toxicity from LD50 profiles. You are simplifying everything way too much. Glyphosate is an analog to glycine. You know, the building blocks for proteins. DuPont did a study in 2007 that shows glyphosate is integrating in protein structures. Does that not worry you? Gly…

Post by alevskaya » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 10:56 PM UTC

ConfuciusSay02 wrote: post #227

alevskaya wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not asking you to believe anything from Monsanto. There is a vast field of researchers that care deeply about what causes cancer and what can be done to prevent and treat it. Most of us aren't for sale. There are sensitive, objective and simple tests for determining whether or not a compound causes genetic mutations in cells (Ames test). There are tests for whether or not a compound induces chromosome abnormaliti…

Note that this poster, Anselm Levskaya, did his post doc at Stanford, a university that receives hundreds of millions of dollars per year in "funding" from private (secret) sources, among them, companies like Monsanto and Cargill.

Post by crumchunks » Fri, Apr 14, 2017, 2:08 AM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #90

crumchunks wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you even read your own link?

Did you? Things like copper sulfate, etc are not exactly on the "great for humans" list.