Live data from Hacker News

Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

bloomberg.com

21–30 of 123 posts

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#21
post #7

I know that its hard for someone to understand who doesn't work with farm chemicals on a regular basis but Roundup is on the low side in terms of toxicity. Here's a copy of a Material Safety Data Sheet that all those who handle herbicides need to maintain for employee access: http://greenhouse.ucdavis.edu/pest/pmsds/Roundup.PDF Almost anything is toxic, even salt, if the dose is high enough. The question that must be…

Whats your point? That the WHO are scare-mongering? That Monsanto shouldn't be held accountable for knowingly marketing a poisonous, carcinogenic substance and profiting from it in the billions?

I'm trying to provide a background because I have twenty plus years in the fertilizer business. I'm old enough that I remember when it was introduced.

I don't know WHO's agenda but I've seen enough cycles on both pesticides and GMO's when someone makes a provocative statement based on early research and are usually proven wrong.

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#22
post #2

The report's a bit light on details. All sorts of things can cause cancer in lab animals if you give them enough. It's more a question of what concentration. And if the human exposure studies are that bad I wonder why there's not been much fuss since they were published in 2001.

It's a fanciful smear to suggest that the billions of dollars at stake play a role here, isn't it? What a ridiculous idea!

http://www.gmwatch.org/gm-firms/10595-monsanto-a-history

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#23
This article (not the study) is total trash. Every other thing on this planet - from water to oxygen to sunlight to common cold[0] to turning a light on when you go pee at night[1] apparently causes cancer. People read bullshit like that, start being afraid of everything they interact with, and then newspapers are surprised we have anti-vaccine movements, or that the general population doesn't trust science at all.

If anything is a serious danger to humans here, it's not Roundup, it's reporting like this.

EDIT: because it seems not clear to some - "causing cancer" is not a binary thing. There are degrees, and types, and required exposure levels, etc., and not all types of cancer are actually dangerous. And all of this is more important than "oh welp, it's carcinogenic", yet none of it is even mentioned in the article.

[0] - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-371451/Common-cold...

[1] - http://gawker.com/5515697/turning-on-the-light-to-pee-at-nig...

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#24
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats your point? That the WHO are scare-mongering? That Monsanto shouldn't be held accountable for knowingly marketing a poisonous, carcinogenic substance and profiting from it in the billions?

I'm trying to provide a background because I have twenty plus years in the fertilizer business. I'm old enough that I remember when it was introduced. I don't know WHO's agenda but I've seen enough cycles on both pesticides and GMO's when someone makes a provocative statement based on early research and are usually proven wrong.

Side question. If I wanted to explain with studies to someone that GMO hate is unfounded, do you have a recommendation on a place to gather facts or recent studies on it?

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#25

This interview about the topic (Glyphosate by Monsanto) is also quite telling: http://m.canalplus.fr/?vid=1122650 (English with French subtitles) Interviewee: It is completely safe and you could even drink it Interviewer: We got a glass of it here, you want to drink some Interviewee: No, of course not, I'm not an idiot and the interview is over now.

Yes, it's a good clip, I suggest watching it from the start to the very end and then making up your mind.

The interview was apparently supposed to be about the golden rice, which is a topic that is completely unrelated to Monsanto in any way at all.

Also, if I was in the shoes of the interviewee, I wouldn't drink it as well, even if I trusted it was completely safe for me - it probably doesn't taste well, and I don't feel like doing a show for a disrespectful jokester in front of me who thinks he's funny, and refuses to talk about the thing he was supposed to.

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#26
post #7

I know that its hard for someone to understand who doesn't work with farm chemicals on a regular basis but Roundup is on the low side in terms of toxicity. Here's a copy of a Material Safety Data Sheet that all those who handle herbicides need to maintain for employee access: http://greenhouse.ucdavis.edu/pest/pmsds/Roundup.PDF Almost anything is toxic, even salt, if the dose is high enough. The question that must be…

Whats your point? That the WHO are scare-mongering? That Monsanto shouldn't be held accountable for knowingly marketing a poisonous, carcinogenic substance and profiting from it in the billions?

The acetaminophen in Tylenol ( a common over the counter pain and fever medication used by millions of children and adults every day ) is carcinogenic and hepatotoxic.

" There are, however, published data giving clear evidence that paracetamol causes chromosomal damage in vitro in mammalian cells at high concentrations and indicating that similar effects occur in vivo at high dosages. Available data point to three possible mechanisms of paracetamol-induced genotoxicity: (1) inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase; (2) increase in cytosolic and intranuclear Ca2+ levels; (3) DNA damage caused by NAPQI after glutathione depletion. "

"Paracetamol induced sister chromatid exchange in human cells in vivo, and it was aneugenic and induced chromosomal aberrations but not micronuclei in mammalian cells in vivo. It induced DNA single-strand breaks in mice treated in vivo. Paracetamol induced sister chromatid exchange and chromosomal aberrations in human cells in vitro. It weakly induced cell transformation in a mouse cell line. It induced chromosomal aberrations, micronuclei and sister chromatid exchange in mammalian cells in vitro. It did not induce gene mutation, and the results of tests in mammalian cells in vitro for unscheduled DNA synthesis and DNA damage were inconclusive. Overall, paracetamol was genotoxic in mammalian cells in vivo and in vitro. It was not mutagenic to insects but was clastogenic in plant cells."

And here is an entry from the NIH TOXNET database about liver and bladder cancers induced by tylenol.

http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cpdb/chempages/ACETAMINOPHEN.html

Everything including water is toxic under the right conditions.

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#27

This interview about the topic (Glyphosate by Monsanto) is also quite telling: http://m.canalplus.fr/?vid=1122650 (English with French subtitles) Interviewee: It is completely safe and you could even drink it Interviewer: We got a glass of it here, you want to drink some Interviewee: No, of course not, I'm not an idiot and the interview is over now.

Really? Company representatives are obligated to drink glassfuls of foul chemicals to prove that reasonable doses are nontoxic?

Would you drink a glass of food coloring?

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#28
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GMOs have very little to do with weed killers.

The entire point of roundup is that you use a GMO that has been modified to make it resistant to the weedkiller. In theory this allows you to use less weedkiller earlier in the growing cycle.

You got that around backwards. The entire point of certain GMOs is to enable roundup to be used to kill weeds in the crop without affecting the crop itself. Ie Roundup-ready Cotton (and other Roundup-ready crops that are grown in the US - My family grows Roundup-ready cotton and it has been awesome in terms of improving productivity)

You can't use weedkiller at all in the growing cycle unless you modify the organism against it.

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#29

This interview about the topic (Glyphosate by Monsanto) is also quite telling: http://m.canalplus.fr/?vid=1122650 (English with French subtitles) Interviewee: It is completely safe and you could even drink it Interviewer: We got a glass of it here, you want to drink some Interviewee: No, of course not, I'm not an idiot and the interview is over now.

Really? Company representatives are obligated to drink glassfuls of foul chemicals to prove that reasonable doses are nontoxic? Would you drink a glass of food coloring?

He is not even a company representative! He's some random environmentalist who wanted to talk about golden rice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_%28environmentali...

It's sickening what passes on as journalism today.

Re: Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says

#30

This article (not the study) is total trash. Every other thing on this planet - from water to oxygen to sunlight to common cold[0] to turning a light on when you go pee at night [1] apparently causes cancer. People read bullshit like that, start being afraid of everything they interact with, and then newspapers are surprised we have anti-vaccine movements, or that the general population doesn't trust science at all.…

>If anything is a serious danger to humans here, it's not Roundup, it's reporting like this.

What exactly is so horrible about Bloomberg's reporting in this instance?

Did you even read the article? Half of it is essentially defending Roundup.

Post reply on HN