Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 302 posts

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#231

Post by 6nf »

user3939382 wrote: post #59

Remember when Bayer (who now owns Monsanto) intentionally sold HIV infected blood in South America? The people that own these companies would sell their own grandmother for $5. They’re poisoning the world, as science and litigation they couldn’t buy their way out of has evidenced, and we get people on here “hacktually”ing their defense. Glyphosate is used for only one reason, it’s profitable for Monsanto.

Pfizer is still trustworthy though even after the 2.3 billion fine they got for Bextra alone

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#232

Post by mandmandam »

parineum wrote: post #216
mandmandam wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > Try to find a HN thread about glyphosate where no one gaslights, deflects, toxifies or baits. > That's an impossible barrier. I know, right? The notion Monsanto and Bayer would never stoop so low as to employ propagandists to protect their profits is literally unbelievably naive. As in, I don't believe that you believe that. > Given the prevalence and duration of glyphosate use, compelling evidence should be read…

> You'll never guess what people who sold lead and asbestos used to say about lead and asbestos. Also see the denials of PFAS dangers. And fracking. And lobotomies, thalidomide, tobacco, mercury, etc etc. It's not about who said it was safe. It's about who proved it wasn't. Who proved glyphosate wasn't safe?

It fucks up ecosystems. It lingers on our food. It bonds with abundant minerals like calcium and magnesium and does unexpected shit. It comes in Roundup with a cocktail of chemicals that increase bioavailability and toxicity. It has links to chronic kidney disease and cancer.

That's scientists saying all this; not just me, and not just "greedy lawyers" as you claimed elsewhere.

If this fits your definition of safe, you have a very unusual one imo.

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#233

Post by mardifoufs »

cvccvroomvroom wrote: post #195
OfSanguineFire wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Glyphosate is used for only one reason, it’s profitable for Monsanto. Farmers love glyphosate because it kills weeds very effectively. It’s hard to exaggerate how much of a neat thing glyphosate was considered in the agricultural world when it appeared. That’s the reason it is used. Now, the reason it is produced and sold is that it is profitable for Monsanto, and regulation hasn’t stopped Monsanto.

Salt and vinegar can do the same. Chemically-intensive pollution and contamination of the food supply, air, soil, and water is a choice. But it's not a Hobson's choice. Go organic.

I guess those dumb farmers just wanted to waste money on roundup then. I mean come on.

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#234

Post by mardifoufs »

cvccvroomvroom wrote: post #205
throwaway290 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It sounds like they evaluated the chemical itself but didn't evaluate what could happen to the chemical once it was in the environment. I bet that's most of evaluations and it's probably not even required to take into consideration the environment and how it can change the response...

And I would hazard a guess that this "mountain of evidence" was bought and paid-for by Monsanto.

So there's just no way to convince you then, right? Well for my part I say that all the anti glyphosate studies (not that there are many of them) are financed by competitors in the herbicide market. Just super convenient

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#235

Post by mandmandam »

faeriechangling wrote: post #228
mandmandam wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you think that people saying that glyphosate is safe are arguing in bad faith I can see why you'd think there's a lot of disingenuousness around here. Some people can’t detect astroturf - that’s why it works. Consider that you may be one of them. > I've defended glyphosate in plenty of threads Can I see an example? Google couldn't find your name + glyphosate, or + roundup together anywhere. > I've seen no compel…

I have heard rants about Monsanto’s shill army for over a decade now, not just on HN but on every mid-sized or larger internet community I have ever been on, and not once have I actually seen a single person produce a shred of hard evidence substantiating it. I also notice right, if shills are so common every company ought to be sending their shills to influence HN, but I only ever hear Monsanto, no other big company…

Buddy, Exxon were caught astroturfing with the entire planet at stake, and suffered no real consequence. Big tobacco did it for decades, and those same companies are still marketing and selling to children in developing countries.

So why do you think "Monsanto" (it's Bayer now, keep up) would be scared of getting caught? Do you think they can't use a VPN, or subcontracting, or any of a hundred well developed ways to maintain plausible deniability? Do you really think "no other big company" gets accused of astroturfing?

You don't seem to have given any of this much thought tbh. Even if it's as you say, lol, why would you be happy with them doing "straightfowards propaganda work"? Have you followed the logical conclusions of your "contrarianism" theory more than a single step? Good luck to ye

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#236

Post by mardifoufs »

wrs wrote: post #181
riversflow wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why GM is pushed so hard. Well go on, don't just eldude to it. Spell it out. My understanding is that GM is pushed so hard because while farming is the most necessary thing humans do, it's also highly undesirable labor and the pay is shit. It's also risky business, on a long enough timeline every crop fails. Consumers should grow their own food if they are worried. See how hard it is. My experience is that 99% of t…

Monsanto introduced proprietary GMO crops that were resistant to Roundup so you could easily wipe out every plant that wasn’t the crop (aka “weeds”). It was a package deal. > In 1996, Monsanto introduced the Roundup Ready soybean, a genetically engineered crop resistant to glyphosate. In the few years after, Roundup Ready cotton, maize, and various other crops also made their debut. https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash…

Sure, but that's not a bad thing. Plus, farmers still use it without using GMO resistant crops.

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#237

Post by anon84873628 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #76
xpe wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you consider cost/acre and calories/acre, it is also abundantly clear that for all its flaws, modern industrial farming is a technological marvel. Modern farming seems optimized for the wrong thing all too often: cheap calories. Calories are important (for basic metabolic needs) but not the whole story. Nutrient density and sustainable practices are worth promoting.

It's easy to be picky about nutrient density and sustainable farming when you have a full belly. Modern farming techniques have saved the lives of millions of people who would otherwise starve to death.

If there was no modern industrial agricultural, probably fewer people would have been born to be at risk of starving to death.

When the synthetic inputs disappear (due to, say, war or supply chain disruption) or the soil is simply too exhausted & eroded altogether, lots of people starve.

People want "sustainable" agriculture so that the system is resilient to shocks. It's possible to have this and feed the same amount of people. Maybe even for a lower percentage of GDP. But it requires a drastically different approach to the problem.

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#238

Post by CheBuzz »

robbiep wrote: post #227
Qem wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. It's a weedkiller. Putting it ON the fruits would be expensive and useless. So, why Monsanto went all the trouble of developing GMO crops resistant to it, if it is intended just for the weeds?

There is roundup-ready Cotton, Soybeans, Corn and Canola, that I am aware of. My family grows Roundup-ready cotton. The other 2 are used for animal feed; in no case is any farmer going to be spraying it when it is fruiting, because once the weeds have got to that point you've already lost all the benefit of it being 'roundup ready' - where the purpose is for weeds to be killed so they don't take the moisture which is…

There's RR Alfalfa as well, but your point still stands.

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#239

Post by diogenes4 »

bluGill wrote: post #175
diogenes4 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glyphosate kills far more than just weeds (whatever those are).

Glyphosate is well studied and affects cell paths that don't exist in humans.

Oh man i had no idea we could enumerate the totality of chemical effects in the human body, my b

Re: Roundup herbicide ingredient connected to epidemic chronic kidney disease

#240

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

cvccvroomvroom wrote: post #195
OfSanguineFire wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Glyphosate is used for only one reason, it’s profitable for Monsanto. Farmers love glyphosate because it kills weeds very effectively. It’s hard to exaggerate how much of a neat thing glyphosate was considered in the agricultural world when it appeared. That’s the reason it is used. Now, the reason it is produced and sold is that it is profitable for Monsanto, and regulation hasn’t stopped Monsanto.

Salt and vinegar can do the same. Chemically-intensive pollution and contamination of the food supply, air, soil, and water is a choice. But it's not a Hobson's choice. Go organic.

There are no salt and vinegar resistant crops. The desirability of glyphosate is that it lets you selectively cull all but your GM crops.
Post reply on HN