4 ms·

The forests of New Brunswick are routinely sprayed with large amounts of glyphosphate herbicide. Is it possible that this is the cause, instead of prions? [1]

by GioM 5y ago

The forests of New Brunswick are routinely sprayed with large amounts of glyphosphate herbicide. Is it possible that this is the cause, instead of prions? [1] https://www.conservationcouncil.ca/where-our-forest-is-being-sprayed-this-summer-2019/ https://www.conservationcouncil.ca/where-our-forest-is-being... [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/liberals-greens-glyphosate-spraying-election-forestry-1.5706309 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/liberals-greens... [3] https://nben.ca/en/component/tags/tag/glyphosate-ban https://nben.ca/en/component/tags/tag/glyphosate-ban [4] http://www.stopsprayingnb.ca/?page_id=118 http://www.stopsprayingnb.ca/?page_id=118

bluGill 5y ago
No, glyphosphate is used in a lot of different places and is well studied. There are the usual conspiracy theories but the science is pretty strong.
- rubicon33 5y ago
  What science are you referring to? The most I've heard about it is the Bayer lawsuit. "A San Francisco jury initially awarded Johnson $289.2 million after finding the chemical glyphosate in Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma" [1] [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/bayer-appeals-20-5-million-roundup-ruling-to-california-supreme-court-idUSKBN25T0BX https://www.reuters.com/article/bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/bay...
  - bluGill 5y ago
    A jury trial is not science. Juries tend to be swayed by emotions and sticking it go big companies not right. (I can't offer you anything better to replace them though ) There have been many real scientific studies done. https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-finalizes-glyphosate-mitigation https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-finalizes-glyphosate-miti... is the most readable summary
    - rubicon33 5y ago
      A publication from the EPA citing science, without linking the studies, is also not science. I honestly do not trust the EPA to do a fair review here, given how deep the connections between big business and government are. It's extremely naïve to assume this was a completely unbiased, purely scientific undertaking. Your point is fair too, that juries tend to be swayed by emotion. Unfortunately, unless a true third party does an actual scientific review, I'll be avoiding the stuff.
decasteve 5y ago
A direct causal relationship is unlikely, however, the link between increased cyanobacteria in our waters and glyphosate spraying is possible and being studied elsewhere. New Brunswick also carried on with heavy spraying of DDT into the 1980s stopping much later than most places. There have been more diseased moose sightings in recent years too. What about the possibility of contaminated seafood? So many possibilities. Quite scary with no concrete answers.

by GioM 5y ago

bluGill 5y ago

No, glyphosphate is used in a lot of different places and is well studied. There are the usual conspiracy theories but the science is pretty strong.

rubicon33 5y ago
What science are you referring to? The most I've heard about it is the Bayer lawsuit. "A San Francisco jury initially awarded Johnson $289.2 million after finding the chemical glyphosate in Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma" [1] [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/bayer-appeals-20-5-million-roundup-ruling-to-california-supreme-court-idUSKBN25T0BX https://www.reuters.com/article/bayer-glyphosate-lawsuit/bay...
- bluGill 5y ago
  A jury trial is not science. Juries tend to be swayed by emotions and sticking it go big companies not right. (I can't offer you anything better to replace them though ) There have been many real scientific studies done. https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-finalizes-glyphosate-mitigation https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-finalizes-glyphosate-miti... is the most readable summary
  - rubicon33 5y ago
    A publication from the EPA citing science, without linking the studies, is also not science. I honestly do not trust the EPA to do a fair review here, given how deep the connections between big business and government are. It's extremely naïve to assume this was a completely unbiased, purely scientific undertaking. Your point is fair too, that juries tend to be swayed by emotion. Unfortunately, unless a true third party does an actual scientific review, I'll be avoiding the stuff.

decasteve 5y ago

A direct causal relationship is unlikely, however, the link between increased cyanobacteria in our waters and glyphosate spraying is possible and being studied elsewhere. New Brunswick also carried on with heavy spraying of DDT into the 1980s stopping much later than most places. There have been more diseased moose sightings in recent years too. What about the possibility of contaminated seafood? So many possibilities. Quite scary with no concrete answers.