Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents • Hacker News Board

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#61

Post by alevskaya » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:05 AM UTC

abandonliberty wrote: post #32

I've been researching this. 1. Glyphosate (roundup) use is two orders of magnitude higher than originally approved. 2. Due to the emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds, the dosage has been increased substantially. 3. It is now also usually combined with other compounds to increase effectiveness, which affects how it breaks down and affects both the food and environment. 4. It is now also used for 'green burndown'.…

There are many conflicts of interest in the world - organic farming is an industry too. e.g. at least one of those 14 experts is an active member of the organic industry and has long had a beef with the GMO industry: https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/glp-facts/charles-ben...

As to the science: the original highly-questionable IARC determination has since been contested by both the European Chemical Agency and the European Food Safety Authority.

It doesn't do us any good calling everything in the world a carcinogen. We have to rank-order risks in order to make reasonable choices in life, and glyphosate sits very low on that list compared to other industrial chemicals when you look at the evidence for mutagenicity or secondary carcinogenic mechanisms.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#62

Post by mikekchar » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:06 AM UTC

baldfat wrote: post #11

The funny thing is we have less herbicides because of Roundup. The option is we starve the world, because we will not be able to product enough wheat etc. or we use stronger herbicides. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/organic-farming-y...

There is actually another option -- especially with respect to herbicides: manual labour. Herbicides don't increase yield. They decrease cost.

Wheat is currently $4.35 a bushel. A bushel of wheat is about 60 lbs. So, we're paying just over 7 cents a pound for wheat.

Fix the distribution side, not the production side. There's a lot more fat there. And in the mean time, research ways of reducing labour on physical methods of weed control.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#63

Post by baldfat » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:16 AM UTC

mikekchar wrote: post #62

baldfat wrote: post #11

The funny thing is we have less herbicides because of Roundup. The option is we starve the world, because we will not be able to product enough wheat etc. or we use stronger herbicides. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/organic-farming-y...

There is actually another option -- especially with respect to herbicides: manual labour. Herbicides don't increase yield. They decrease cost. Wheat is currently $4.35 a bushel. A bushel of wheat is about 60 lbs. So, we're paying just over 7 cents a pound for wheat. Fix the distribution side, not the production side. There's a lot more fat there. And in the mean time, research ways of reducing labour on physical meth…

Have you ever been on a wheat farm? I actually have been and even got to help around the farm for fun.

My friend had 4.5 squares. That is a square equals 1 square mile. How would we increase labor for weed control?

I also lived in Imperial Valley, California. The back breaking work that the migrant workers did was amazing difficult. It would take double or triple the workers to pick through and weed a farm then pick fruits and vegetables. I don't think Kansas nor Manitoba have the population to do that seasonal work.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#64

Post by baldfat » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:17 AM UTC

nicksergeant wrote: post #21

anigbrowl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not the existence of Roundup but Monsanto's apparent failure to inform people of its known dangers.

"known" dangers is debatable, that's what the issue is. As posted elsewhere in these comments: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/does-glyphosate...

I would think if this was an issue wouldn't we see epidemic health issues already its been going strong for over 20 years.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#65

Post by Houshalter » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:21 AM UTC

burntrelish1273 wrote: post #2

"Monsanto Advocate Says Roundup Is Safe Enough To Drink, Then Refuses To Drink It" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/27/monsanto-roundup-pa...

So if I remember the discussion on this article when it was going around, the roundup they had wasn't pure glyphosate. They sometimes mix it with other stuff, especially the off the shelf stuff for lawns. You can drink pure glyphosate and survive (I wouldn't recommend it, though.) It's been tested on animals many times. It's not like some mystery substance that's never been tested.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#66

Post by bobbington » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:22 AM UTC

alevskaya wrote: post #29

luckydude wrote: post #25

My dad died because of roundup. He was a physics prof, smart guy, fought hard for wetland issues. Was on the board of Wisconsin Wetlands. He didn't drink, didn't smoke, he was very active, very fit, and yet he got cancer. I can feel the down votes coming, but he was a guy that just should not have gotten cancer. Roundup gave him cancer. I could tell you stories about him dieing that would be not so fun. Fuck cancer a…

I'm very sorry for your loss. But as a cancer researcher, I can fairly confidently say that glyphosate had nothing to do with your father's death. There just isn't any evidence showing that it has direct mutagenic activity or even other indirect biological influences on the probability of developing cancer. I've also lost several fit, active nonsmoking friends and family to cancer. Our cells copy themselves imperfect…

This statement sounds typical of a medical researcher - you are trained to think this way. However medicine has a long and horrible history of mocking as quacks those who have the truth, and are a step ahead of the powers that be. At one point doctors thought germ theory was idiocy and mocked those who insisted on cleanliness.

Just because there is no evidence that "top researchers" accept today does not mean that it won't come out in the future.

For something as toxic as this, I think we are best to assume dangerous until proven safe.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#67

Post by taneq » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:24 AM UTC

sien wrote: post #28

taneq wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lithium ion batteries are pretty much 'safe to eat'^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H non-toxic (Edit: NOT safe to eat, as discussed below) (compared with lead-acid or nickel-cadmium batteries)... but I still wouldn't actually eat one .

Lithium in your stomach? Seriously? Button batteries are a real risk for kids. They have died eating them. For any parent out there it's scary, button batteries are pretty common and look like a sweet or something. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/two-year-ol...

That's a terrible story. :( And a timely reminder that 'non-toxic' doesn't mean 'edible'.

It seems like a heartless nitpick but the reason button cells are dangerous is because they're batteries, not because of their constituent chemicals. The electric current they generate electrolyzes water producing highly corrosive hydroxide. A running blender isn't poisonous either, but you wouldn't eat one.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#68

Post by beautifulfreak » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:28 AM UTC

nicksergeant wrote: post #21

anigbrowl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not the existence of Roundup but Monsanto's apparent failure to inform people of its known dangers.

"known" dangers is debatable, that's what the issue is. As posted elsewhere in these comments: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/does-glyphosate...

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/ITX_2013_06_04_Seneff.pdf

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#69

Post by hammock » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:36 AM UTC

finid wrote: post #23

“We would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” Mr. Heydens wrote, citing a previous instance in which he said the company had done this. Science for sale. Shouldn't that Mr. Rowland guy be in jail?

What sockpuppets are downvoting this? Not your typical downvoted HN comment, yet, here it is at the bottom.

Re: Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents

#70

Post by joering2 » Thu, Apr 13, 2017, 4:39 AM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #27

It's difficult to judge long term toxicity in humans. You don't immediately keel over and die when you smoke a cigarette, and the correlation between lung cancer and cigarettes needs a fully understandable cause. That's how the industry slipped by for years. Likewise, most European countries do not fluoridate their water and the correlation doesn't seem to show any significant difference in dental health. The anti-fl…

> You don't immediately keel over and die when you smoke a cigarette,

My all-time favorite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpwcF3Malj8

To play devils advocate.. we will never prove if smoking truly cause cancer, unless we go back in time and look at the same person in the same circumstances only that he/she never smoked.

And in all seriousness, my grandmother smoked all her life, from age of 16 all the way till she died at 103 due to Alzheimer. Her lungs were as gold as it gets!