Has science shown Roundup to be safe?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are we talking about Roundup exposure for:

• people that produce the mixture
• the people that dilute it and spray it on the ground to promote growth of vegetables or beans
• the people who pick or collect the crop that was grown with assistance by Roundup
• the people who have eaten the food that was produced in part by the Roundup

 

[thebeave]

Are we talking about Roundup exposure for:

• people that produce the mixture
• the people that dilute it and spray it on the ground to promote growth of vegetables or beans
• the people who pick or collect the crop that was grown with assistance by Roundup
• the people who have eaten the food that was produced in part by the Roundup

Exactly. This can't be emphasized enough. The dose makes the poison, people! Yet, its rare that this ever gets mentioned by the chemophobes.

 

[Malintent]

From the recently unsealed deposition.

View attachment 10288

While this may have been created in response to a deposition, it is not part of the deposition.

This is a statement made BY A LAWYER (not a Dr. or Chemist, or Scientist) to a judge in the face of damning testimony (in the depo). The lawyer urges the judge to ignore the testimony that roundup causes cancer, because the cited study did not explicitly name the test subject by its registered brand name (like testing "petroleum jelly", and then claiming that you didn't test "Vaseline")

.. or like your lawyer in traffic court trying to get you out of a speeding ticket by claiming the radar gun only measured the speed of the vehicle, and not the speed of the driver, directly.

 

[EricB]

Or perhaps water isn't a chemical. Would the result be different if we used Dihydrogen Monoxide, or Oxidane, or a solution of Hydroxinium Hydroxide, any of which can be found in Roundup? How do we know that those chemicals are not making the Glyphosate more toxic??

Maybe Roundup is homeopathic.

Truly sublime, good sir.

 

[fromderinside]

Oh dear,some people who spend too much time on the internet are ganging up on me...oh no.

Let me know when any of them post any science

You first.

Peez

THIS^^^^^

When does one know one is in the Trump era?

 

[Kharakov]

You first.

Peez

THIS^^^^^

When does one know one is in the Trump era?

Water supply supplemented with electrolytes?

 

[fromderinside]

Twenty Mule team fertilizer?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Which GMO is it that causes the autisms?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Which GMO is it that causes the autisms?

I think all GMOs that fall within the Asperger's Spectrum.

 

[LordKiran]

Which GMO is it that causes the autisms?

I think all GMOs that fall within the Asparagus Spectrum.

Tsk, missed opportunity here so I'll fix it for you

 

[Malintent]

Monsanto is now the target of a class action lawsuit against them for the sale of roundup, due to cancer studies of its active ingredient.

Roundup is, apparently, known to not be safe, due to its active ingredient, for people with recurring contact with treated crops (such as agricultural and construction workers).

 

[bilby]

Monsanto is now the target of a class action lawsuit against them for the sale of roundup, due to cancer studies of its active ingredient.

Roundup is, apparently, known to not be safe, due to its active ingredient, for people with recurring contact with treated crops (such as agricultural and construction workers).

Actually, it's just suspected not to be safe; And if carcinogenicity were to be demonstrated (which it has not yet been), then that would be a characteristic it shared with a host of other substances, including some that are explicitly marketed for human consumption, such as coffee and wine.

The existence of a lawsuit is not evidence of anything other than that someone decided that they might be able to win a lawsuit; And a court of law is not a laboratory - court rulings can and do fly in the face of reality.

Roundup is not particularly dangerous - it's safer than many things nobody worries about at all. That that's not the end of the discussion, merely shows how dreadfully bad human beings are at reasoning. Monsanto are targeted because they have become an arbitrary symbol of an ill-defined feeling amongst a section of society that technology and corporate power are somehow 'evil'. By doing so, activists are kicking themselves in the ass - Corporations that are not Monsanto, and hazardous chemicals that are not Glyphosate, are able to 'fly under the radar' because of all the FUD thrown up by ignorant morons who think that Monsanto is the anti-Christ.

 

[Elixir]

Wrong. Roundup contains glyphosate and it also contains other chemicals to activate the glyphosate.

Wow. THat's fascinating.
What chemicals are necessary to activate glyphosate?
What do you mean by 'activate?'
How do you know this?
How do they make a study about glyphosate invalid with respect to Roundup^TM?

Yes, Will Wiley. Curious minds want to know.

 

[Malintent]

Monsanto is now the target of a class action lawsuit against them for the sale of roundup, due to cancer studies of its active ingredient.

Roundup is, apparently, known to not be safe, due to its active ingredient, for people with recurring contact with treated crops (such as agricultural and construction workers).

Actually, it's just suspected not to be safe; And if carcinogenicity were to be demonstrated (which it has not yet been), then that would be a characteristic it shared with a host of other substances, including some that are explicitly marketed for human consumption, such as coffee and wine.

The existence of a lawsuit is not evidence of anything other than that someone decided that they might be able to win a lawsuit; And a court of law is not a laboratory - court rulings can and do fly in the face of reality.

Roundup is not particularly dangerous - it's safer than many things nobody worries about at all. That that's not the end of the discussion, merely shows how dreadfully bad human beings are at reasoning. Monsanto are targeted because they have become an arbitrary symbol of an ill-defined feeling amongst a section of society that technology and corporate power are somehow 'evil'. By doing so, activists are kicking themselves in the ass - Corporations that are not Monsanto, and hazardous chemicals that are not Glyphosate, are able to 'fly under the radar' because of all the FUD thrown up by ignorant morons who think that Monsanto is the anti-Christ.

The "somehow evil" comes from profit-driven activities.

Of course you are correct in that a lawsuit is not evidence of wrongdoing.. it is just highly indicative.
I like how you phrased that.. a courtroom is not a laboratory... totally correct and well said.

However, that a legal team would take on a class action.. something that carries with it a ton of overhead and cost to a legal firm to take (considering they get $0 compensation until all is said and done - YEARS later), I consider that an extremely good indicator that it is clear that Monsanto did something very wrong here.

 

[Deepak]

Actually, it's just suspected not to be safe; And if carcinogenicity were to be demonstrated (which it has not yet been), then that would be a characteristic it shared with a host of other substances, including some that are explicitly marketed for human consumption, such as coffee and wine.

The existence of a lawsuit is not evidence of anything other than that someone decided that they might be able to win a lawsuit; And a court of law is not a laboratory - court rulings can and do fly in the face of reality.

Roundup is not particularly dangerous - it's safer than many things nobody worries about at all. That that's not the end of the discussion, merely shows how dreadfully bad human beings are at reasoning. Monsanto are targeted because they have become an arbitrary symbol of an ill-defined feeling amongst a section of society that technology and corporate power are somehow 'evil'. By doing so, activists are kicking themselves in the ass - Corporations that are not Monsanto, and hazardous chemicals that are not Glyphosate, are able to 'fly under the radar' because of all the FUD thrown up by ignorant morons who think that Monsanto is the anti-Christ.

The "somehow evil" comes from profit-driven activities.

Of course you are correct in that a lawsuit is not evidence of wrongdoing.. it is just highly indicative.
I like how you phrased that.. a courtroom is not a laboratory... totally correct and well said.

However, that a legal team would take on a class action.. something that carries with it a ton of overhead and cost to a legal firm to take (considering they get $0 compensation until all is said and done - YEARS later), I consider that an extremely good indicator that it is clear that Monsanto did something very wrong here.

The team is playing the legal odds, because they understand that the courts, in addition to not being laboratories, are terrible at evaluating scientific matters.

These suits all hinge on IARC 2A classification, which also includes things like red meat, acrylamide, and hot beverages.