The List Of Products And Foods That Have Tested Positive For Monsanto's Carcinogenic Glyphosat

glyphosate-1-638.jpg
 
Yes, but that goes both ways. On the other side we have government telling us what is safe or not, and their track record isn’t very good either.

What do you mean? I think their track record is very good. My beef is that I think the're over cautious. For example, I read somewhere that something upwards of 90% of things that work in mouse studies don't work in human studies. What if the inverse is also true? What if 90% of the research that dead ends at mouse studies would have worked in human studies?
 

Go educate yourself. You just showed us all what a tool you are.

1. You have no idea what young corn or soy looks like. Because if he was spraying anything except those plants with Round-Up, they would die. Therefore, we know that either he wants to kill his crops (unlikely) or he's spraying something else.

2. It's a greenhouse. Round-Up is a weed-killer. Why the fuck would someone need to spray weedkiller in a greenhouse?

3. "not safe to breath" Seems legit

4. Quick - name 2 things that are both safe to eat and safe to breathe.


Now is the time when you call all begin to whine about how mean I am.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean? I think their track record is very good. My beef is that I think the're over cautious. For example, I read somewhere that something upwards of 90% of things that work in mouse studies don't work in human studies. What if the inverse is also true? What if 90% of the research that dead ends at mouse studies would have worked in human studies?

They are both over cautious and intertwined with crony corporatists. Not a good combination. They hinder new developments and are prone to regulatory capture by the big companies.

Luckily, when something really, truly, and obviously works, it can cut through the bureaucracy rather quickly (but maybe not monopoly patent controls). For instance, the miracle breakthrough on Hep-C treatment was delayed not by the FDA, but by a company that had a key patent, and then took the time to develop a knock-off of their former partners key component, so that they didn't have to share the cure.

Then there have been the miracle treatments for hair loss and ED... ;)

 
What do you mean? I think their track record is very good. My beef is that I think the're over cautious. For example, I read somewhere that something upwards of 90% of things that work in mouse studies don't work in human studies. What if the inverse is also true? What if 90% of the research that dead ends at mouse studies would have worked in human studies?

About their track record... I'm sure it's much better than many of the snake oil salesmen and contaminated food peddlers, but there have been plenty of drugs and food additives that have been removed/recalled from their "OK list" due to not being safe enough.

Hydrogenated oils may not kill you in a day, but over time, they have proven to be pretty bad.
 
Took me a while, but I found the original, with the caption: "David Geisler of Possum Run Greenhouse in Bellville, Ohio, uses an electrostatic sprayer to apply a fungicide to poinsettia plants. SEM technology showed that this type of sprayer covered plants more evenly than cold fogger sprayers."

My scientist friends assured me that the full PPE gear isn't required when applying glyphosate because it's not very toxic.


 
Back
Top