Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials • Hacker News Board

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#41

Post by ch4s3 » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:31 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #27

adrr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this have to do with the discussion? Hackernews is suppose to be about constructive debate.

Maybe I am missing the constructive nature of your comment, can you clarify? Are you proposing coffee is as cancerous as Roundup? Constructively, have you seen this video? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2015/03/monsanto-lobbyist-dr...

That seems like a ridiculous gotcha type exchange. I can be both true that glyphosate is safer than alternative herbicides and something you shouldn't drink.

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#42

Post by omginternets » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:34 PM UTC

smilliken wrote: post #7

overreg wrote: post #5

"Organizations such as the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues and the European Commission, Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency, and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment[30] have concluded that there is no evidence that glyphosate poses a carcinogenic or genotoxic risk to humans. The final assessment of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority in 2017 was that "glyphosat…

[flagged]

Please don’t do that. There are plenty of good reasons to speak anonymously.

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#43

Post by ch4s3 » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:35 PM UTC

pella wrote: post #15

overreg wrote: post #5

"Organizations such as the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues and the European Commission, Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency, and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment[30] have concluded that there is no evidence that glyphosate poses a carcinogenic or genotoxic risk to humans. The final assessment of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority in 2017 was that "glyphosat…

check: glyphosate gut-brain axis https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=glyphosate+gut-brain+ax...

The important caveat here is in laboratory mice, which isn't to dismiss ongoing work but to temper strong claims a bit.

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#44

Post by hammock » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:35 PM UTC

ch4s3 wrote: post #41

hammock wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I am missing the constructive nature of your comment, can you clarify? Are you proposing coffee is as cancerous as Roundup? Constructively, have you seen this video? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2015/03/monsanto-lobbyist-dr...

That seems like a ridiculous gotcha type exchange. I can be both true that glyphosate is safer than alternative herbicides and something you shouldn't drink.

The guy, unprompted, said "you can drink a whole quart of it and it won't hurt you." If that is a gotcha, it's self-inflicted

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#45

Post by Swenrekcah » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:36 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #24

mbustamanter wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absence of evidence != Evidence of absence. This mistake is especially pernicious when facing the choice of repeated trials, and something inherent to this topic since constantly eating food that at some point was subject to this chemical is by definition a repeated trial.

Yes, absence of evidence is evidence of absence, under the right evidence-gathering circumstances. Would you say that perhaps there are pigs which can fly, because absence of the evidence of the existence of flying pigs isn't evidence of their absence?

People used to think there were no black swans until they found them.

Re. flying pigs, we have total and complete observation of pigs for thousands of years, as well as a physical and biological understanding of why they can’t fly.

If you have that, then it’s pretty safe to draw conclusions.

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#46

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:41 PM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #39

arminiusreturns wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#47

Post by LargoLasskhyfv » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:46 PM UTC

Monsanto is where it belongs. One direct successor of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IG_Farben

(Hrr Hrr Hrr)

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#48

Post by algoatecorn » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:53 PM UTC

Sure is lovely when a bunch of non-experts decide to chime in on a nuanced subject. Imagine a bunch of plant biologists congregated on a discussion board to make sweeping claims about SaaS or whatever your area of expertise is. Hilarious.

Even appealing to literature is limited by your knowledge background. Spend a few years in the field and you will realize that some studies are good and some are bad. Some indicate negative effects under incomparable conditions. Some are good. Some are just plain kooky.

Re: Toxic Exposure: The True Story Behind the Monsanto Trials

#49

Post by pella » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:53 PM UTC

ch4s3 wrote: post #43

pella wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

check: glyphosate gut-brain axis https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=glyphosate+gut-brain+ax...

The important caveat here is in laboratory mice , which isn't to dismiss ongoing work but to temper strong claims a bit.