> Am I mistaken about how difficult it should be to test for glyphosate? Read the article? The "official" samples contained nothing. "Testing" is not just the

> Am I mistaken about how difficult it should be to test for glyphosate? Read the article? The "official" samples contained nothing. "Testing" is not just the process of testing the sample in the lab, it takes place in a context. That context matters a lot, as this example shows. Even if your lab process is reliable, you can do a lot to influence the result before you have a sample on the plate of the technician. It's the same as with any measurement, any study: Before doing the actual measurement there is far larger and more important process that remains mostly invisible or ignored (even when it is published). Focus only is on the "numbers", because "numbers don't lie"...