171–180 of 190 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please respond to what my comment actually said, not what you wish it said.
> Ironically, by avoiding "GMO foods", your friends are probably increasing their exposure to herbicides that have a much clearer connection to human health risks. I am responding to that comment from you. I'd love to read about how avoiding "GMO foods" increases exposure to herbicides, do you have any information on that?
The OP comment doesn't say that.
It says that probably is increasing their exposure more toxic herbicides, not that is increasing the exposure to herbicides
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which pesticides do you refer to? I'd love to read and share exactly that sort of data.
A quick Google finds this (I consider NPR to be at least a decent source): http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2011/06/18/13724926... That seems to cover the basics of the situation. The TL;DR is that an "organic" label just means the food was grown using only "organic" components. There are plenty of organic pesticides.
I suspect the general need for pesticides and herbicides comes with large scale production, where manual efforts for weeding and pest control is inefficient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agrochemicals are a leading method for suicide worldwide, although not so much in EU or US. glyphosate is much safer than other agrochemicals, but Roundup contains more than just glyphosate. People have died after drinking Roundup.
fair point, maybe what I should have said is can you point to a single injury/death resulting from the intended or proper use of roundup/glyphosphate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The astroturfing comment is broad about nearly any controversial information online, it's why people must be skeptical, critical, and discerning. It's just an annoying reality of the internet, I suppose.
People are much too quick to conclude that they're observing astroturfing when what they're really observing is the simple fact that not everyone agrees with them. Because of this, we have two problems: real astroturfing (when it's actually going on), and imaginary astroturfing (which people project onto their opponents in arguments). Both are destructive, but since the imaginary variant is more common, it's more des…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhm, glyphosate doesn't affect pollinators.[1] It's an herbicide. And drift that reduces "critical forage"? That's not even part of the glyphosate controversy. Glyphosate either works on a plant or it doesn't. Where you're killing your neighbor's plants by drift, you're going to get a citation or sued or both. [1] https://goo.gl/lGpC1k
Many people confuse herbicides with pesticides as you have probably noticed. Both can be harmful or beneficial, depending on usage obviously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really want a t-shirt saying in bold letters "This person contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer."
Quick Google search: https://www.zazzle.com/ca_prop_65_t_shirt-235283992142706565
http://www.cafepress.com/mf/9264497/proposition-65-t-shir_ts...
Here's the current California Prop 65 list. It's... extensive. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/proposition-65//p65sing... I don't think this means as much as the headline makes it sound like. In the State of California, alcoholic beverages are also carcinogens requiring warnings. California cognitive dissonance: the science suggesting carcinogenicity of acrylamide, which is present --- in significant amounts ---…
> In the State of California, alcoholic beverages are also carcinogens requiring warnings. Well, alcohol is a carcinogen. Why not label it as such?
Here's the current California Prop 65 list. It's... extensive. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/proposition-65//p65sing... I don't think this means as much as the headline makes it sound like. In the State of California, alcoholic beverages are also carcinogens requiring warnings. California cognitive dissonance: the science suggesting carcinogenicity of acrylamide, which is present --- in significant amounts ---…
> In the State of California, alcoholic beverages are also carcinogens requiring warnings. You make that sound like a dumb move, but alcohol is linked to several cancer, and people who drink alcohol need to know that drinking is raising their risk of several different types of cancer. Whether prop 65 is the right way to do that is another matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but probably more toxic than glyphosphate. https://geneticliteracyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/0...
interesting. that chart describes caffeine as more toxic than glyphosate.
"The LD50 of caffeine in humans is dependent on individual sensitivity, but is estimated to be 150 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of body mass (75–100 cups of coffee for a 70 kilogram adult)"
For glyphosate: "The acute oral LD50 in the rat is 5,600 mg/kg. Other oral LD50 values for glyphosate are 1,538 to greater than 10,000 mg/kg for mice, rabbits mg/kg, and goats"
http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/dienochlor-gly...