5 ms·

Is there actually any consensus as to whether it does cause cancer, or how much you have to use it for ill effects? All I ever see in these stories are a list o

Is there actually any consensus as to whether it does cause cancer, or how much you have to use it for ill effects? All I ever see in these stories are a list of lawsuits in CA (which doesn't count for much, TBH), various places it's been banned "as a precaution", and much rejoicing in the peanut gallery because bad things are happening to Monsanto.

sschueller 7y ago
Is it logical to use something before it has been proven save? My router has a whitelist, not a blacklist. Which is safer?
- lettergram 7y ago
  Pretty much impossible to prove something has no harm generally. Proving non-existence is a fallacy[1] You can however say that “today there is little evidence”, then offset it by potential costs (in this case food supply). [1] https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/145/Proving-Non-Existence https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla...
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Prove to me that typing on a keyboard doesn't cause cancer. I'll wait.
  - sschueller 7y ago
    Smoking cigarettes didn't cause cancer until 1964...
    - orwin 7y ago
      This is false. Sufficient evidence was found in the 40s, but tobacco was seen as a threat by some scientists/doctors way before. And today we have a much better understanding of epidemiology, so any cancer glyphosate enhance would have been discovered already. And we did: NHL.
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      We knew earlier, but I'm sorry; I thought we were talking about actual proof, not lack of knowledge and/or marketing. If nothing could be used by the general public until 'proven safe' you would be living in a cave and discussing this via carrier pigeon.
lettergram 7y ago
Bayer owns Roundup at this point and it appears that Australia (note not Austria) in 2017 deemed that it doesn’t cause cancer... so this seems like a purely political move. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_%28herbicide%29 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_%28herbicide%29
- quickthrower2 7y ago
  It might be for agricultural workers as it says in one of the references in the Wikipedia article: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/diet-and-cancer/food-controversies#food_controversies4 http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cance... I’m not saying it should or shouldn’t be banned. I’d still use it myself though although I tend not to because it takes ages to kill weeds when you can just pull them out, mow the lawn or mulch for instant results.
- weq 7y ago
  Australia's government is owned by argi-mining corperate interests. The ruling poltical party was founded by such creatures, and they all seem to retire into cushy lobbying positions for the same companies after the fact. The ruling Conservative party ran on a platform of "removing green tape" and often defunds / disbands science institutions which are not friendly to their narrative. If you read the court documents, you will see just like Johnson and Johnson, Bayer has been repressing science ont he subject for a long time. https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/johnson-and-johnson-knew-for-decades-that-asbestos-lurked-in-its-baby-powder-20181215-p50mgf.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/johnson-and-johnso...
xxpor 7y ago
From what I've read, glyphosate itself is pretty safe (how it works should only affect pathways that exist in plants). The issue is more about the stuff it's dissolved in to be sprayed.
- codr7 7y ago
  Shouldn't that be "exist in plants, gut bacteria and whatever else we haven't figured out yet"?
  - manicdee 7y ago
    Irrelevant considering the stuff glyphosate is mixed with, including emulsifiers, surfactants, stabilisers, buffers, solvents. The cocktail is designed to protect the solution in storage and transport, make it easy to mix into batches for spraying, atomise cleanly when sprayed, but then cling to whatever it is sprayed on, then get absorbed into the plant quickly. It is those chemicals which cause wet membrane irritation, chemical burns, skin irritation and inflammation, etc. The glyphosate itself is basically harmless to humans and any effect it might have on gut flora is overshadowed by the damage RoundUp will do to your throat and gut on the way through. Basically remember to follow the directions including appropriate PPE: gloves, dust/mist breathing mask and eye protection.
    - codr7 7y ago
      Given that gut flora is connected to everything and involved in many common conditions and more to come, I think that's pretty significant. It's also further proof that Monsanto is full of shit, always deceiving and lying as much as they can get away with. How much is it going to take before we make them stop? Or, don't spray poison on food?
- wavepruner 7y ago
  Just because we know it inhibits one specific enzyme does not mean we know that it will not inhibit any other enzymes. Enzymes and other parts of biological systems often share similar modalities, and if glyphosate targets a shared modality, it would affect any compound that uses said modality.

sschueller 7y ago

Is it logical to use something before it has been proven save? My router has a whitelist, not a blacklist. Which is safer?

lettergram 7y ago
Pretty much impossible to prove something has no harm generally. Proving non-existence is a fallacy[1] You can however say that “today there is little evidence”, then offset it by potential costs (in this case food supply). [1] https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/145/Proving-Non-Existence https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla...
EpicEng 7y ago
Prove to me that typing on a keyboard doesn't cause cancer. I'll wait.
- sschueller 7y ago
  Smoking cigarettes didn't cause cancer until 1964...
  - orwin 7y ago
    This is false. Sufficient evidence was found in the 40s, but tobacco was seen as a threat by some scientists/doctors way before. And today we have a much better understanding of epidemiology, so any cancer glyphosate enhance would have been discovered already. And we did: NHL.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    We knew earlier, but I'm sorry; I thought we were talking about actual proof, not lack of knowledge and/or marketing. If nothing could be used by the general public until 'proven safe' you would be living in a cave and discussing this via carrier pigeon.

lettergram 7y ago

Bayer owns Roundup at this point and it appears that Australia (note not Austria) in 2017 deemed that it doesn’t cause cancer... so this seems like a purely political move. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_%28herbicide%29 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_%28herbicide%29

quickthrower2 7y ago
It might be for agricultural workers as it says in one of the references in the Wikipedia article: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/diet-and-cancer/food-controversies#food_controversies4 http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cance... I’m not saying it should or shouldn’t be banned. I’d still use it myself though although I tend not to because it takes ages to kill weeds when you can just pull them out, mow the lawn or mulch for instant results.
weq 7y ago
Australia's government is owned by argi-mining corperate interests. The ruling poltical party was founded by such creatures, and they all seem to retire into cushy lobbying positions for the same companies after the fact. The ruling Conservative party ran on a platform of "removing green tape" and often defunds / disbands science institutions which are not friendly to their narrative. If you read the court documents, you will see just like Johnson and Johnson, Bayer has been repressing science ont he subject for a long time. https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/johnson-and-johnson-knew-for-decades-that-asbestos-lurked-in-its-baby-powder-20181215-p50mgf.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/johnson-and-johnso...

xxpor 7y ago

From what I've read, glyphosate itself is pretty safe (how it works should only affect pathways that exist in plants). The issue is more about the stuff it's dissolved in to be sprayed.

codr7 7y ago
Shouldn't that be "exist in plants, gut bacteria and whatever else we haven't figured out yet"?
- manicdee 7y ago
  Irrelevant considering the stuff glyphosate is mixed with, including emulsifiers, surfactants, stabilisers, buffers, solvents. The cocktail is designed to protect the solution in storage and transport, make it easy to mix into batches for spraying, atomise cleanly when sprayed, but then cling to whatever it is sprayed on, then get absorbed into the plant quickly. It is those chemicals which cause wet membrane irritation, chemical burns, skin irritation and inflammation, etc. The glyphosate itself is basically harmless to humans and any effect it might have on gut flora is overshadowed by the damage RoundUp will do to your throat and gut on the way through. Basically remember to follow the directions including appropriate PPE: gloves, dust/mist breathing mask and eye protection.
  - codr7 7y ago
    Given that gut flora is connected to everything and involved in many common conditions and more to come, I think that's pretty significant. It's also further proof that Monsanto is full of shit, always deceiving and lying as much as they can get away with. How much is it going to take before we make them stop? Or, don't spray poison on food?
wavepruner 7y ago
Just because we know it inhibits one specific enzyme does not mean we know that it will not inhibit any other enzymes. Enzymes and other parts of biological systems often share similar modalities, and if glyphosate targets a shared modality, it would affect any compound that uses said modality.