61–70 of 337 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counterexamples: asbestos, tobacco, alcohol, fossil fuels, climate change. (On the latter two, the studies mostly have the correct outcome. What is difficult is convincing half of the American population that that matters.)
Who has supported the asbestos industry? Has there ever been a company that actually promotes asbestos?
https://www.pinterest.com/braytonpurcell/vintage-asbestos-ad...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much of what's been written about bees and pesticides is also probably bullshit (not to put too fine a point on it). American honey bees are livestock, not wildlife.
How does that fact change the narrative? If anything, it makes it worse. It does take away a bit of the emotional appeal of pristine, natural, innocent public resources that need protection from greedy farmers when the bees are owned by and grown for a different group of greedy farmers instead of being championed by people with purely altruistic motivation. But that they're declining when there are people with expert…
So this suggests that the samples submitted to the FDA for testing were not representative of ordinary food. This reminds me of the ongoing Tetra Tech/Hunter's Point scandal [1], where the US Navy paid $300M to a contractor to clean up a development site. The contractor was required to submit samples from the site to prove they had cleaned it up. Instead, they just pulled soil from known clean places and submitted fo…
Most of the world runs of on good faith and best intentions, without it everything would break down. This goes for taxes, healthcare, insurance, checks, postal mail, traffic code, currency, etc. This also holds for an alarming number of electronic systems such as the phone network, and many ISP network configurations. While it's tempting to say no trust should be required, that's very expensive, like bitcoin. For sys…
It's not remotely hard at all for the FDA to buy products off the shelf and test them for glyphosate. They need not and should not trust samples obtained any other way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This conveniently ignores the other side of the coin where interests are aligned and it's the conspiracy theorists that are harmful (e.g. vaccine manufactures and autism). All functioning economies have vested interests in things good and bad. The only thing a vested interest means is that scrutiny is needed on the actions of the vested parties.
On what planet is the jury out about vaccines and autism? There's not a single research paper suggesting a link between those. You are falsely conflating scientific consensus with public opinion.
So this suggests that the samples submitted to the FDA for testing were not representative of ordinary food. This reminds me of the ongoing Tetra Tech/Hunter's Point scandal [1], where the US Navy paid $300M to a contractor to clean up a development site. The contractor was required to submit samples from the site to prove they had cleaned it up. Instead, they just pulled soil from known clean places and submitted fo…
Not quite. It suggests that it’s possible that regular food has glyphosate residue. But samples “brought from home” may have been contaminated elsewhere. This is why we depend on rigorous controlled tests.
It’s also possible that the “official tests” were rigged, and suspiscions about that led the testers to go rogue, and that glyphosate really IS in our food in larger concentrations than we are led to believe. That seems more plausible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the world runs of on good faith and best intentions, without it everything would break down. This goes for taxes, healthcare, insurance, checks, postal mail, traffic code, currency, etc. This also holds for an alarming number of electronic systems such as the phone network, and many ISP network configurations. While it's tempting to say no trust should be required, that's very expensive, like bitcoin. For sys…
I feel like that is an unreasonable generalization. It's not remotely hard at all for the FDA to buy products off the shelf and test them for glyphosate. They need not and should not trust samples obtained any other way.
I've noticed that Monsanto appears to be on an astroturfing campaign. Half of the ads appearing in my Reddit front page are promoted posts that are pro-glyphosate. They point to legitimate news articles, for example, that report on a study finding that glyphosate is not a carginogen. Of course, these studies contradict other studies that glyphosate is a carcinogen or otherwise a concern. In truth, I was ready to beli…
[1 - actual court documents] https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/MDLLetNothingGo...
[2 - summary article ] https://www.organicconsumers.org/newsletter/organic-bytes-55...
I've noticed that Monsanto appears to be on an astroturfing campaign. Half of the ads appearing in my Reddit front page are promoted posts that are pro-glyphosate. They point to legitimate news articles, for example, that report on a study finding that glyphosate is not a carginogen. Of course, these studies contradict other studies that glyphosate is a carcinogen or otherwise a concern. In truth, I was ready to beli…
Wouldn’t it be ironic if the campaign were actually promoting the truth, and yet the effect it had on you was to persuade you of the opposite?
Not trying to change the subject but I see a parallel in US politics. This is how Trumpers harden their beliefs. So much true reporting about Trump’s lies, results in people becoming more loyal to him. Confounding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On what planet is the jury out about vaccines and autism? There's not a single research paper suggesting a link between those. You are falsely conflating scientific consensus with public opinion.
SO what about cell phone radiation and cancer, or maybe GMO food and cancer?
Another reason to go organic.
Organic pesticides are nasty stuff as well. "In 2010, a study was published detailing the progression of Parkinson's-like symptoms in mice following chronic intragastric ingestion of low doses of rotenone. The concentrations in the central nervous system were below detectable limits, yet still induced PD pathology.[31] In 2011, a US National Institutes of Health study showed a link between rotenone use and Parkinson'…
[Even in America. It can only be used as a "fishkill"]
source: http://npic.orst.edu/NPRO/#