3 ms·

So the issue here is if Monsanto's products were safe, they wouldn't have to pay people to attach their name to company-written articles claiming they are. If y

So the issue here is if Monsanto's products were safe, they wouldn't have to pay people to attach their name to company-written articles claiming they are. If you have to buy your support (looking at Google Public Policy team here hard), you probably are not a good company. In short, if Roundup was safe, it's likely there would be studies proving so from scientists not paid by Monsanto to do so. The fact that they have to ghostwrite them means there isn't any legitimate science supporting their position.

Supermancho 4y ago
> So the issue here is if Monsanto's products were safe, they wouldn't have to pay people to attach their name to company-written articles claiming they are. That isn't how scientific evidence has been received by the public and that's blatantly obvious of the last few years. There are plenty of "independent" roundup-is-safe whitepapers, which unsurprisingly, either use large amounts of Monsanto data or Monsanto facilities. Sifting through the details to discount them is quite laborious. There are a scant few "roundup-causes-cancer", which is a consequence of Monsanto monopolizing, sabotaging, or restricting traceable data.
- mike00632 4y ago
  Actually no. Monsanto pays for studies to be done on just one of the active ingredients of RoundUp, not on RoundUp itself. RoundUp has chemicals in it that exist solely to help the active ingredients permeate tissues. Test with only active ingredients and it can appear relatively safe. Test actual RoundUp and it is invariably toxic. That is why there are countless studies showing RoundUp to be toxic and populations who have been negatively affected all while Monsanto publishes an avalanche of paid studies purposefully conducted on a select active ingredient instead of the product itself.

3 ms·

So the issue here is if Monsanto's products were safe, they wouldn't have to pay people to attach their name to company-written articles claiming they are. If y

by ocdtrekkie 4y ago

Supermancho 4y ago
> So the issue here is if Monsanto's products were safe, they wouldn't have to pay people to attach their name to company-written articles claiming they are. That isn't how scientific evidence has been received by the public and that's blatantly obvious of the last few years. There are plenty of "independent" roundup-is-safe whitepapers, which unsurprisingly, either use large amounts of Monsanto data or Monsanto facilities. Sifting through the details to discount them is quite laborious. There are a scant few "roundup-causes-cancer", which is a consequence of Monsanto monopolizing, sabotaging, or restricting traceable data.
- mike00632 4y ago
  Actually no. Monsanto pays for studies to be done on just one of the active ingredients of RoundUp, not on RoundUp itself. RoundUp has chemicals in it that exist solely to help the active ingredients permeate tissues. Test with only active ingredients and it can appear relatively safe. Test actual RoundUp and it is invariably toxic. That is why there are countless studies showing RoundUp to be toxic and populations who have been negatively affected all while Monsanto publishes an avalanche of paid studies purposefully conducted on a select active ingredient instead of the product itself.