151–160 of 379 posts
> Organic diet intervention significantly reduces urinary glyphosate levels in U.S. children and adults > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do have to have a dim outlook on your prospects of winning to agree to pay out 10 billion.
Winning or losing a lawsuit of this type is not necessarily proof of guilt, or proof that roundup causes cancer. what it proves is that a jury was convinced that it does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was shocked to learn that many farms are using the chemical to spray the entire field in order to not just kill weeds, but also to increase bud yield / weight. Similar to the rohip whatever chemical is given to some beef when it close to slaughter to magically make it gain weight. Apparently when you spray this stuff on the plants a couple days before harvest, they know they are being killed / dieing - so they put…
Wow that's incredibly depressing. Yeah glyphosate kills weeds by inducing unsustainable growth and forcing the plant to overextend itself and die as a result. So it makes sense that if you apply it to a crop you're going to harvest anyway you'll get a bit more yield out of it. I guess tech+ban is the only way to go, unless we're okay forcing ourselves to play the cancer lottery with worse odds.
Glyphosate blocks the action of an enzyme that is necessary for plants to grow.
Crops are frequently sprayed with desiccants to speed harvest once they are mature. Glyphosate is used that way.
Society loves to make fun of those who choose organic produce, but avoiding glysophate is the main reason I do so, and it works: > Organic diet intervention significantly reduces urinary glyphosate levels in U.S. children and adults > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...
Not knowing anything about glyphosate, I went to the article before reading the comments. I’ll just put this here because it was clear the researchers wanted to be sure people see it. From the first paragraph of the article—> > In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer determined that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen” (IARC, 2015). However, the European Food Safety Authority and the Joint Foo…
Not knowing anything about glyphosate, I went to the article before reading the comments. I’ll just put this here because it was clear the researchers wanted to be sure people see it. From the first paragraph of the article—> > In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer determined that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen” (IARC, 2015). However, the European Food Safety Authority and the Joint Foo…
The back and forth with regulatory agencies is so frustrating. Another user here pointed out a while back that the better regulatory model, when it comes to health, is to put the onus on the supplier. We must scientifically prove the thing is safe to use, not have to prove it is unsafe to be removed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
right and that's why they just settled instead of proving their product is safe
You don’t prove a product is safe. You fail to prove it isn’t.
Maybe we should just pee on the weeds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
right and that's why they just settled instead of proving their product is safe
You don’t prove a product is safe. You fail to prove it isn’t.