Monsanto Weedkiller Is ‘Probably Carcinogenic,’ WHO Says • Hacker News Board

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

#101

Post by mkempe » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:02 PM UTC

mkempe wrote: post #66

Here is a better source for the hypothesis and evidence: Glyphosate probably causes cancer, says WHO + Lancet paper. [1] Yes, Glyphosate happens to be an ingredient in Roundup, which happens to be manufactured by Monsanto. Neither are the primary subject of the scientific hypothesis. [1, PDF] http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVol...

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, has assessed the carcinogenicity of five organophosphate pesticides. Here is the key finding for glyphosate:

For the herbicide glyphosate, there was limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The evidence in humans is from studies of exposures, mostly agricultural, in the USA, Canada, and Sweden published since 2001. In addition, there is convincing evidence that glyphosate also can cause cancer in laboratory animals. On the basis of tumours in mice, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group C) in 1985. After a re-evaluation of that mouse study, the US EPA changed its classification to evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans (Group E) in 1991. The US EPA Scientific Advisory Panel noted that the re-evaluated glyphosate results were still significant using two statistical tests recommended in the IARC Preamble. The IARC Working Group that conducted the evaluation considered the significant findings from the US EPA report and several more recent positive results in concluding that there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. Glyphosate also caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells, although it gave negative results in tests using bacteria. One study in community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby.

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

#102

Post by eurleif » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:03 PM UTC

pharke wrote: post #87

jp555 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people cook with oil at too high a temperature, causing it to smoke and develop carcinogenic compounds, regularly, over decades. There are many examples of this in our lives (ultravilot sunlight, cosmic radiation on intercontinental flights, radon rich basement bedrooms, etc), the point being that carcinogens and cancer are more complex than you suggest. Yes smoking 4 packs of cigarettes a day for decades increa…

To make things even more complex, with ultra-violet for sure but possibly involving other forms of radiation as well, it is possible that small amounts of exposure actually produce a preventative effect in regards to cancer. With UV, that mechanism is the production of vitamin D in the body, a lack of which causes a wide variety of health issues and may have a link to the development of cancer. This panel by the Mars…

>With UV, that mechanism is the production of vitamin D in the body, a lack of which causes a wide variety of health issues and may have a link to the development of cancer.

I imagine that vitamin D production and DNA damage are separate events. Presumably, both can occur at the same time.

So would someone who took vitamin D supplements but didn't get sun exposure be slightly less likely to develop cancer than someone who got just enough sunlight for their body to produce enough vitamin D?

If that's the case, it's not really a general rule that small exposures to carcinogens prevent cancer.

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

#103

Post by mkempe » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:07 PM UTC

rmason wrote: 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…

From the actual study, rather than speculation and red-herrings: "One study in community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby." [1]

[1, PDF] http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/MonographVol...

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

#104

Post by tedunangst » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:09 PM UTC

fit2rule wrote: post #37

TeMPOraL wrote: post #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.…

The reason this is important to discuss is that Roundup is out there, in massive quantities, and if it is determined that it can cause cancer in much higher rates than previously expected - then something must be done about it, because of the sheer magnitude of the market penetration of this product . If it is discovered that Roundup-poisoned regions have extraordinarily high rates of cancer - and this is yet to be d…

> something must be done!

There's a mentality that's never backfired.

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

#105

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #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.…

[deleted]

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

#106

Post by task_queue » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

healthisevil wrote: post #26

fit2rule wrote: post #13

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?

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 po…

The leading cause of overdose and acute liver failure in America is from Tylenol (APAP).

There is good reason that many prescription pain-medication formulations are switching from acetaminophen to different NSAIDs.

There is no justification for doling out acetaminophen when safer options exist.

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

#107

Post by drhodes » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

eurleif wrote: post #102

pharke wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To make things even more complex, with ultra-violet for sure but possibly involving other forms of radiation as well, it is possible that small amounts of exposure actually produce a preventative effect in regards to cancer. With UV, that mechanism is the production of vitamin D in the body, a lack of which causes a wide variety of health issues and may have a link to the development of cancer. This panel by the Mars…

>With UV, that mechanism is the production of vitamin D in the body, a lack of which causes a wide variety of health issues and may have a link to the development of cancer. I imagine that vitamin D production and DNA damage are separate events. Presumably, both can occur at the same time. So would someone who took vitamin D supplements but didn't get sun exposure be slightly less likely to develop cancer than someon…

FWIW, I have a friend with a form of skin cancer who got orders from his doctor to go to a tanning salon.

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

#108

Post by mkempe » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

pharke wrote: post #87

jp555 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people cook with oil at too high a temperature, causing it to smoke and develop carcinogenic compounds, regularly, over decades. There are many examples of this in our lives (ultravilot sunlight, cosmic radiation on intercontinental flights, radon rich basement bedrooms, etc), the point being that carcinogens and cancer are more complex than you suggest. Yes smoking 4 packs of cigarettes a day for decades increa…

To make things even more complex, with ultra-violet for sure but possibly involving other forms of radiation as well, it is possible that small amounts of exposure actually produce a preventative effect in regards to cancer. With UV, that mechanism is the production of vitamin D in the body, a lack of which causes a wide variety of health issues and may have a link to the development of cancer. This panel by the Mars…

There is evidence for and debate surrouding hormesis, a positive biological response to a little bit of something deadly at higher doses e.g. low-dose radiation. [1] [2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis

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

#109

Post by fit2rule » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:52 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #62

jholman wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we're not. You might be, but no one else is. What people are generally discussing is whether or not Monsanto is poisoning humans, and meta-issues like whether or not the article does a good job of helping us understand whether or not Monsanto is poisoning humans. Although some (currently-absent) HN commenters probably feel otherwise, I don't see a single comment in this thread trying to downplay culpability (alth…

> (Note, btw, that all of your comments in this thread-subtree have all been downvoted to hell. It appears to me that these same comments are sarcastic and nasty, and very poorly argued. On the other hand, your comment that begins with "The reason this is important to discuss is that..." is mostly pretty reasonable, and hasn't been smashed by downvotes. I think that's not a coincidence.) Indeed. I disagree with fit2r…

In the meantime, the pro-Monsanto downvote brigade has been quenched by more who agree with me than don't...

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

#110

Post by TeMPOraL » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 4:55 PM UTC

fit2rule wrote: post #109

TeMPOraL wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Note, btw, that all of your comments in this thread-subtree have all been downvoted to hell. It appears to me that these same comments are sarcastic and nasty, and very poorly argued. On the other hand, your comment that begins with "The reason this is important to discuss is that..." is mostly pretty reasonable, and hasn't been smashed by downvotes. I think that's not a coincidence.) Indeed. I disagree with fit2r…

In the meantime, the pro-Monsanto downvote brigade has been quenched by more who agree with me than don't...

Cool. But how about just writing more of the constructive kind of comments? Then there will be no need for downvoting brigades for any side.