Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which could be equally dangerous as external pesticides like glyphosate.
What's your source that's an outrageous claim
More self-evident than outrageous but alright.
Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
341–350 of 379 posts
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone on reddit claimed he was on a US presidential campaign doing exactly that. Respond to posts with pre-made replies, if things got hairy, distract with humor or memes. Interestingly, they were aware when they were dealing with another paid shill from the opposing side. After all those years on the internet I think I can also feel the impact of systematic forum activity; controversial topics that get swift, well…
Hillary Clinton had a super PAC that did so openly: "In April 2016, Correct the Record announced that it would be spending $1 million to find and confront social media users who post unflattering messages about Clinton in a "task force" called "Barrier Breakers 2016".[1][5] In addition to this, the task force aimed to encourage Sanders supporters to support Clinton and to thank both "prominent supporters and committe…
I don't know why you're singling HRC (it also wasn't her but David Brock, which is ironically the kind of misinformation designed to make her seem ultra-nefarious that CTR was formed to combat) out here; literally every issue and political campaign has activists doing this. They're called messaging and persuasion campaigns, and they include everything from yard signs to forum posters to ad buys. Do you have an issue with conservatives or pro-life activists doing this?
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s not a well established link between gluten intolerance and glyphosate, but: > Fish exposed to glyphosate develop digestive problems that are reminiscent of celiac disease. Celiac disease is associated with imbalances in gut bacteria that can be fully explained by the known effects of glyphosate on gut bacteria https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/ This isn’t made up woo. It’s a real potential…
> It’s a ... potential link that needs to be fully explored not dismissed Sure. Explore/research away but that doesn't justify the comment... > that's ridiculous it also messes up digestive systems, gluten intolerance. Anyone making a definitive statement on a causal link between glyphosate and cancer is not being informed by science. There might be a link, I don't really care. If there is, I'd definitely support get…
> global warming
Don't lump this in with those others. It totally spoils your credibility.
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can that be relevant? I mean, this is just the grossest of correlations "Americans have X, and are also exposed to Y, therefore Y causes X"? If anything, it means actually establishing a causal relationship (assuming one existed) would be difficult because the background rate of this disease is so high.
I was responding to the parent commenter’s claim that “gluten intolerance” (quotes theirs) was a “strong warning sign of woo”. We know that environmental factors contribute to the development of celiac disease, so we should understand the degree to which glyphosate may be one of those.
It's a strong sign of woo because it's very trendy and brought up for all sorts of environmental effects with little actual evidence. Most of those claims must be false.
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most swimming pools (in ground) are filled once with water and rarely need additional water added. They use much less water than the average sprinkler system. They do require energy (pump and filter systems) and chemicals to keep things balanced but it designed as a closed loop system other than unusual circumstances.
Indoor or outdoor?
Both. Once filled, they don't generally need additional water unless there is a leak, some evaporates or the pool is drained for maintenance.
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
This type of rhetoric isn’t helpful, except to companies and manufacturers looking to minimize the attention around specific products with known carcinogenic properties.
This type of rhetoric isn’t helpful, except to people who wish to replace basic critical thinking and healthy skepticism with vacuous opinionated polemics on evil corporations and their general evilness.
Blind acceptance is just as dangerous as toxic skepticism.
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is refuting what was said in the video but in the process has completely mistated what was said in that same video.
No. I did watch the video before I posted. Thus the last sentence of my first post about drinking it (or not) being bullshitting in both directions. You are the one not reading or understanding.
[deleted]
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hillary Clinton had a super PAC that did so openly: "In April 2016, Correct the Record announced that it would be spending $1 million to find and confront social media users who post unflattering messages about Clinton in a "task force" called "Barrier Breakers 2016".[1][5] In addition to this, the task force aimed to encourage Sanders supporters to support Clinton and to thank both "prominent supporters and committe…
I don't know why you're singling HRC (it also wasn't her but David Brock, which is ironically the kind of misinformation designed to make her seem ultra-nefarious that CTR was formed to combat) out here; literally every issue and political campaign has activists doing this. They're called messaging and persuasion campaigns, and they include everything from yard signs to forum posters to ad buys. Do you have an issue…
Your sort of low effort knee jerk response to a well researched informative comment is precisely why it's so hard to have rational discussion online. Can you not stay on topic and refrain from instigating polarisation for one minute? Do you have an opinion on these "persuasion campaigns"?
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why you're singling HRC (it also wasn't her but David Brock, which is ironically the kind of misinformation designed to make her seem ultra-nefarious that CTR was formed to combat) out here; literally every issue and political campaign has activists doing this. They're called messaging and persuasion campaigns, and they include everything from yard signs to forum posters to ad buys. Do you have an issue…
Your sort of low effort knee jerk response to a well researched informative comment is precisely why it's so hard to have rational discussion online. Can you not stay on topic and refrain from instigating polarisation for one minute? Do you have an opinion on these "persuasion campaigns"?
It's not well-researched; it has a single Wikipedia link, which it doesn't even represent properly (literally the first thing it says is CTR was founded by David Brock). It's also not informative; it presents a slanted, highly selective case against Clinton and Democratic/liberal/progressive politics. It's the Fox News of comments. It's also not on topic; how is CTR relevant to glyphosate?
I do have an opinion: Citizens United should be overturned, or we should have an Amendment clarifying that money isn't speech, so we can get rid of Super PACs. I also think the advertising industry should be regulated such that it's a shadow of what it is today.
Re: Weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
>A man got a court to rule in his favour for 289 million dollars, after the jury saw this evidence: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/10/monsanto-tr ... You seem to be presenting this fact as some sort of that bayer is guilty, but it's not really convincing. For one, it's a 8 person jury in san francisco. I'd expect them to rule against bayer on ideological grounds (ie. little guy vs multi bililon dollar…
If the jurors all just ruled against Bayer "on ideological grounds" then their counsel was asleep at the wheel.
Why would that be? Lawyers aren't magicians, if the jury is predisposed to rule in certain way, the lawyer can flap their lips as long as they wanted, and change nothing. Ingrained convictions are remarkably hard to change, even if presented with undeniable contradicting evidence - see example of apocalyptic cults surviving failed prophecy repeatedly. Councils aren't wizards, and they can reject only so many potential jurors. If there are none to be found that would listen, then council can't do much.