41–50 of 90 posts
Direct link to response: https://assets.ctfassets.net/hhv516v5f7sj/77NQsg1qDb6d9Hi4PB...
Awesome response by IF. (Also, their burgers are pretty damn good; enough to make it way, way easier to do the right thing.)
Direct link to response: https://assets.ctfassets.net/hhv516v5f7sj/77NQsg1qDb6d9Hi4PB...
If this is really interesting enough to discuss on HN, the story should link directly here, not to the blogspammed version on Care2. The actual Impossible Foods response is savage and sort of entertaining. I'm not a fan of Impossible but my respect for them went up a notch after reading this.
Do you have anything written up on why? I haven't heard anyone say that yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>has not been established Then why are lawsuits that claim those links have been established winning regularly in courts now?
Because you don't actually need to prove causation to win a civil court case. Causation vs correlation is key in science, but is not the standard used in judging civil litigation.
OF COURSE you need to prove causation to win a civil court case. Yes, the burden of proof is less than that of criminal trials (greater than 50% chance vs beyond a reasonable doubt), but correlation does not win in civil courts unless the defense is consists of the 6th grade debate team.
Are you seriously suggesting that Monsonto's lawyers are that inept?
"Mom's Across America" is a well known science denying hotbed who stoke fear of GMOs, chemicals, and vaccines. They don't care whether or not glyphosate is safe or not. They care that impossible foods is getting headlines, and they want to get a piece of it by introducing FUD. Impossible is 100% right to do a hard reply to this. These people aren't interested in honest debate or product safety and the world needs to…
I don't care about teams or taking sides. All I care about is my health. If Glyphosate is safe, there needs to be a lot of experimental evidence supporting that conclusion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beats me. I think Impossible is right when they say: “Proven to be carcinogenic” is a ridiculous claim, refuted by multiple government agencies, including EFSA, Germany, Canada, and the World Health Organization (WHO), who determined that glyphosate exposure in the human diet is unlikely a carcinogenic risk. No regulatory authority in the world considers glyphosate to be carcinogenic to humans at current exposure lev…
Well, I'm certainly not an expert on this, but my understanding was that WHO had identified it as probably a carcinogen. https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/MonographVolu... Other studies show the link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138357421... Now, admittedly, I don't have a strong background to stand on here, so I'm open to being convinced otherwise. And I would agree with the overa…
My impression --- again, corrections welcome --- is that glyphosate has been intensively studied, both epidemiologically and in lab studies, and that none of those studies has conclusively linked glyphosate to cancer, even in rodent models, and even at unrealistically high doses.
To your original question: again, it's also important to remember that glyphosate-based pesticides aren't, like, pure aqueous solutions of glyphosate; there's lots of other stuff in there, as there are in all chemical herbicides, and if there's a lymphoma link to Roundup, who knows what the actual causative agent is? The evidence points away from glyphosate being it.
Well said.
"Mom's Across America" is a well known science denying hotbed who stoke fear of GMOs, chemicals, and vaccines. They don't care whether or not glyphosate is safe or not. They care that impossible foods is getting headlines, and they want to get a piece of it by introducing FUD. Impossible is 100% right to do a hard reply to this. These people aren't interested in honest debate or product safety and the world needs to…
These people sell barely-regulated supplements such as this extremely normal "hydrogen water": https://shop.momsacrossamerica.com/collections/health-soluti... > An additional benefit is that H2 Elite generates an electron-rich potential (-ORP) in the water (you can measure it!). This rare property is uniquely found in fresh, raw living foods and juices, mothers milk and many of the world’s healing waters. And this ex…
So let us sell you some for low cost of $60!
Is this a new way of selling snow to Eskimo?
This isn't helpful. I don't like use of pesticides and I think there's a reasonable controversy to be had about the dangers of Glyphosate. But the environmental impact of meat production is so enormous desastrous, we should welcome every possible alternative. Whatever the Glyphosate (and GMO) concerns are, they are tiny in comparison.
>> " the environmental impact of meat production is so enormous desastrous " Reference, please. In case you haven't seen what industrial plants agriculture looks like nowadays: https://www.ecowatch.com/europes-dirty-little-secret-morocca... The anti-meat propaganda is getting obnoxious. The most sustainable agriculture is one in which the soil is fertilised with manure and rotated livestock, because grazing animals k…
It "looks" bad but do we care about looks more than pollution ? Look at any large scale animal farm, it looks much worse. Any solutions to feed 8b people will be far from perfect, but some solutions have less of an impact
Reducing (not stopping) meat consumption is a very easy way to reduce your carbon footprint, and you can still get all the animal protein you need from dairy, eggs, &c.
> The most sustainable agriculture is one in which the soil is fertilised with manure and rotated livestock, because grazing animals keep the soil healthy
It's true, but the current meat industry is far from that. I'm all for sustainable farms and eating animals that have been reasonably grown and treated. The problem is that so many people eat meat every day, multiple time a day that the industry will never be able to provide sustainable meat. Look at the chicken industry, they grow them so fast that they die of organ failures and other growth related diseases and deformations. There is no soil fertilization coming from the millions of animals that have never been on a field. https://www.aspca.org/sites/default/files/chix_white_paper_n...
> meat keeps us healthy, because we are omnivores.
Omnivore doesn't especially mean meat eater, just animal derived products. People live without meat just fine, the abuse of meat and the consumption of low quality/processed meat has been linked to many health issues on the other hand.
Nowadays I only eat meat when I go out and can spend good money on a quality steak, asian bbq or the like. Your body doesn't _need_ that daily ultra processed bacon, that $1.5/kg chicken or any of the fast food low quality burgers. The current western diets really are a metaphors for humanity; long term self destruction for short term pleasure & convenience.
I don't like the taste of it but by golly I am going to support these new fangled vegan stuff: they are doing the right thing.
Without GMOs a billion people in India will not be alive today. So let's not give these people any more attention than they deserve.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They also came from farmers who were using glyphosate solutions that included many other chemicals, and no doubt came into contact with a variety of other pesticides. A direct link between glyphosate and actual illness has not been established.
>has not been established Then why are lawsuits that claim those links have been established winning regularly in courts now?