Roundup (cancer causing substance) cases underway

[jahson777]

I don't think the studies of these chemicals have gone through enough generations to understand if they are safe for humanity and wildlife in the long-term. Here is an interesting article: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovatio...180947644/

[Chas]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeremy Lutes

Apropos of this "discussion", today's Democracy Now devotes much of the hour to the recent ruling against Monsanto. They interview the lawyer representing the plaintiff. Interestingly, there appears to be evidence that (a) Monsanto knew Roundup had adverse health effects in humans and actively worked to downplay the risk, and (b) workers at the FDA helped to squash certain studies (that Monsanto was uncomfortable with) of glyphosate from even being started. Here's a link to the show - you can skip to the relevant sections if you'd rather not watch the whole hour:
https://www.democracynow.org/shows/2018/8/14

edited to fix link formatting

---

I watched this show. It explains a lot about the case and why they were victorious. I liked how they said they don’t want to ban it, just make people aware of the dangers of it. As they said, and I agree, it reminds me a lot of the cigarette industry.

[ironyak]

PaulW - If you succumb to the uneducated mob and put GMO on labels then what's to stop every special interest group from demanding that their fetish be put on the label as well. "Prepared by lefthanders", "Harvested on a Wednesday", "Touched by non-believers". There isn't enough room.

So imagine putting the key information on a package that is readily available at the point of purchase (ingredients, nutritional info, etc). Then also there is a 2D barcode that can be scanned to list the batch information for that product including everything from seed batch to processing plant or whatever may be of interest (which we've talked about before HOTPE). No precious ink wasted and can even include the left or right-handedness of the chemicals (a little thalidomide "humor").

PaulW - It's all about freedom of choice and not having others' opinions imposed on those who actually know what they're talking about.

Not providing info is freedom of choice... sure... You say you've worked with the FDA but you've provided no evidence, no technical data, nothing at all to support your views. You can't get through a single post without employing one or more logical fallacies, but at least you really believe in your opinion so that is something?

PaulW - I'm getting confused.

Finally something we can agree on

Probably time to invoke the immortal words of Pahoated (who was at least entertaining in his convictions) - "Aloha also means goodbye. Aloha!"

[ElysianWort]

“In essence,” Skinner explains, “what your great-grandmother was exposed to could cause disease in you and your grandchildren.”

Very interesting link, thanks Jahson.

It sums up one of my many points here:
As I have said, we are the "guinea-pig" generation for the use and the consumption of this weedkiller, Roundup. The Roundup generation.

So, we are trying to do this for our children. Their grandchildren and so forth. Limit the amount of unnecessary, harmful and potentially toxic chemicals in their bodies.

That's right, not for us, for our future. That's why I just laugh and shake my head when I have people like rainyjim post this:

"I guess it comes down to selfishness.

Basically you want to abandon all advances in modern science and return to having 90% + of the population as agricultural laborers."

Pleasant evening y'all.

[PaulW]

Even with a scannable label there still isn't enough room to list every possible piece of information that uninformed people could possibly demand from a food manufacturer - and of course they would have to maintain it all too. A better idea is to only list information that is useful based on evidence, not Facebook hysteria.

What is it with people who make ridiculous allegations (it causes cancer!) demanding that others have to deliver evidence of the negative. If you think something causes cancer then YOU provide the evidence. These are the basics, try to keep up.

Thanks for the thalidomide joke, glad you can laugh about that tragedy. Which, by the way, the FDA spared us from in the USA because of their reluctance to approve anything.

Some useful links for you in this Monsanto statement:
https://monsanto.com/news-stories/statem...son-trial/

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Even with a scannable label...

The label is the easy part. Keeping the product separated from seed to manufacturer, especially in transport, on existing systems would require revamping, and reconfiguring, storage facilities and transportation bin size, at an undetermined (at this time) additional cost.

For anyone interested, here’s a paper outlining some of the requirements:

Any labeling scheme must be supported by an effective identity preservation system which implies extra logistical costs. Both direct and hidden costs exist in identity preserved systems. Such costs vary substantially with the configuration of individual supply chains and can be meaningful, especially under strict standards and thresholds.
https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/373/Direct%20and%20hidden%20costs%20in%20identity%20preserved%20supply%20chains.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

“What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.” - President Donald J. Trump, 7/25/18

[Jeremy Lutes]

quote:

---

... A better idea is to only list information that is useful based on evidence, not Facebook hysteria.

---

Even better - stop using potentially harmful chemicals in food crop production. Label space problem solved. Tada !

And seriously, ya'll need to stop whining on about "infringin' mah rights". Do you or your kids fish or swim in streams, rivers or lakes ? Maybe you collect and use rainwater. Say hello to glyphosate, whether you want it or not:
https://toxics.usgs.gov/highlights/2014-..._2014.html

[TomK]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ElysianWort

OMG there is so much I can say here. From open-d trying to school me about what a chemical is to Paul making his usual assumptions to Tom wondering if we are okay with pot legalization. But this rang the loudest to me:

Tom, you posted: "Wow. Logical fallacy alarms are sounding out loud around Puna." But you DIDN'T mention rainyjim crying foul that my postings of my beliefs that I feel would make the world a better place, are "infringing upon his rights"

[...]

---

1) I was responding to glinda's post;

2) I didn't see any serious logical fallacies in rainyjim's post;

3) glinda's post was putting words in other people's mouths;

4) Scientists have known for a hundred years that smoking tobacco causes serious health problems and therefore that's not comparable to glysophate;

5) I was curious about those who want glysophate banned but want pot growing legalized because marijuana is known to create health issues and wanted to explore why some people might have double standards.

[MarkP]

https://www.biofortified.org/2014/03/rou...ally-says/

"Basically, the paper says that when you get into an ag area you can find ag chemicals, if you have sophisticated equipment and plenty of know-how. The authors discuss that they sample two different sites with different crops growing, so that could affect data and account for some of the weirdness and spikes observed.. It does not change the take-home message that agricultural chemicals volatilize and persist in the environment, so it is best to minimize their use, use chemicals with less environmental impact, and choose seeds that require less chemical.

That is exactly what GM crops do, and exactly what the data shows.

Some additional points to note:

1. The use of “Monsanto’s Roundup” in the website titles above. Glyphosate was detected. The test did not find “Roundup” and the authors do not say “Roundup” once in the manuscript cited. Do you see a political agenda showing?

2. The headlines above come from sources where the authors did not read the paper– it was not available, just the abstract.

3. The same information outlets neglected to mention that glyphosate increases offset the use of other herbicides with more impact, that insecticide use was down, and that the levels were nanograms per cubic meter.

These are all important to note because is reveals how misinformed, ignorant and willing to deceive the anti-GMO media really is. They are not out for science or truth, it is about an agenda."

Someone here was saying that roundup was in the rain. The above article address that hysteria. Seems once again that the internet is a vehicle to spread misinformation when the essence of a statement is twisted almost beyond recognition.

All this harping about "Do it for the children". I am not closing my mind to the possibility that chemicals used today could have downsides but neither am I exaggerating the downsides or forgetting the incredible upsides. The availability of food today, particularly without having to engage in backbreaking labor in agricultural fields is like some wild dream compared to only a couple of generations ago. Also overall health is pretty darn good too. I don't think that your kids would thank you for condemning them to be agricultural laborers. Ask any Chinese person who lived through the Cultural Revolution.

None of that is the point though. The present body of evidence is not sufficient to support this verdict. Monsanto getting convicted without evidence is like any other unpopular bogeyman getting convicted without evidence. It is tempting to just feel good cause you got the bad guy but the convicted without evidence part ought to scare the crap out of you, the cure being worse than the disease.

[jahson777]

Cannabis/hemp make medicine, food, fiber/clothing. Cannabis seeds are one of the best plant based protein sources in nature. I don't see how someone who would like Roundup banned and cannabis growing legal have double standards.