3 ms·

Yes. I'm sure the EPA, currently headed by Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist for Murray Energy, known for trying to push back environmental protection laws, wou

Yes. I'm sure the EPA, currently headed by Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist for Murray Energy, known for trying to push back environmental protection laws, would be fairly quick to dismiss any health concerns on a product that a large corporation, with deep lobbying pockets and a track record of doing terrible things to both the environment and farmers that use their products, relies on for hefty profits. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814613019201 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030881461... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166445X14002422 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01664... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935117316730?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393511... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16263381 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16263381 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166445X17303156 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01664... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21922334 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21922334

dekhn 7y ago
I don't think it's only the EPA that made this determination. IARC stands in opposition to a wide range of government agencies. Note that much of their opposition is based on results in S-D rats which really aren't indicative of any effect in humans.
- grawprog 7y ago
  I really don't need the EPA or the IARC to tell me that spraying a bioaccumulative nerve toxin designed specifically to kill things, into the environment, year after year on a mass scale has negative repercussions for the environment and the potential to cause damage in humans.
  - dekhn 7y ago
    if it's that bad, can you point to the health outcomes in the US (which uses this at massive scale) that definitely are attributed to this? I worked in life sciences and there are many things which are published that don't actually have anything to do with a compound being safe.

dekhn 7y ago

I don't think it's only the EPA that made this determination. IARC stands in opposition to a wide range of government agencies. Note that much of their opposition is based on results in S-D rats which really aren't indicative of any effect in humans.

grawprog 7y ago
I really don't need the EPA or the IARC to tell me that spraying a bioaccumulative nerve toxin designed specifically to kill things, into the environment, year after year on a mass scale has negative repercussions for the environment and the potential to cause damage in humans.
- dekhn 7y ago
  if it's that bad, can you point to the health outcomes in the US (which uses this at massive scale) that definitely are attributed to this? I worked in life sciences and there are many things which are published that don't actually have anything to do with a compound being safe.