4 ms·

Seriously, WTF is wrong with people... we repeatedly polluted whole world with harmful substances like lead that killed god knows how many people and damaged in

Seriously, WTF is wrong with people... we repeatedly polluted whole world with harmful substances like lead that killed god knows how many people and damaged in some way everybody else with this kind of logic, yet people have the balls to come up with "innocent until proven guilty by 100 peer reviews" mantra for... MONSANTO I don't believe, unlike many, that they are comically evil guys. Just playing a god for profit with stuff they probably understand only in lower 90 percentile range, especially second, third etc. order effects. And probably too over-invested in direction company took decades ago, so nobody looking at bonuses as drive will change its direction dramatically.

DiggyJohnson 4y ago
Choosing to blindly believe one side over blindly believing the other side is a dubious approach to these things. I care about environmental issues, and have no love for many aspects of Monsanto’s business and history, but your emotional appeal is extremely unconvincing. > for Monsanto GP isn’t making their comment “for Monsanto”, but for the sake of seeking the truth on this specific issue. You will continue to be shocked until you change your perspective on how we ought to evaluate nuanced issues. Especially when those issues have to do with global food production.
- soperj 4y ago
  > sake of seeking the truth on this specific issue I don't disagree with you, I also don't think we should be using the product when the truth is as clouded as it is. So ban it until the truth comes out.
  - gruez 4y ago
    >So ban it until the truth comes out. Okay but given that we have endless studies already, it seems like "until the truth comes out" really means "until my preferred conclusion comes out".
    - soperj 4y ago
      My preferred conclusion would be that it's actually safe, since we're using a massive amount of it already and we're all exposed.
    - drekk 4y ago
      It took decades to prove conclusively that cigarettes cause cancer in humans. Similarly to tobacco companies Monsanto is subsidizing research that just happens to find no harms with RoundUp. I'm sure it's fine though, no big deal that trace amounts can be found in urine samples from 80% of Americans. https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-g https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-g...
      - gruez 4y ago
        >It took decades to prove conclusively that cigarettes cause cancer in humans. Glyphosate has been around for almost 5 decades. Wikipedia says "The consensus among national pesticide regulatory agencies and scientific organizations is that labeled uses of glyphosate have demonstrated no evidence of human carcinogenicity"[1]. If you think this is not "conclusively" enough, how much longer/more evidence do you need? Is this a standard that we should apply to everything[2], or just chemicals made my evil multinational corporations? Maybe we should delay rolling out cell phones for a few decades just to be sure that they don't cause brain cancer? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate [2] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demand...
        mike00632 4y ago
        But only when the advent of RounUp ready crops have we started spraying RoundUp directly onto food. Previously we only consumed RoundUp in trace amounts. It's extremely misleading to exclude the facts.
        gruez 4y ago
        I appreciate the correction. That said, it doesn't affect the argument that much. At best it changes "almost 5 decades" to "almost 3 decades". I think it's reasonable to say that if people aren't willing to wait 5 decades to "prove conclusively that [thing] causes cancer", that they're not willing to wait 3 decades either. Let me re-ask the question from my prior comment: should delay rolling out cell phones for a few decades just to be sure that they don't cause brain cancer?
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    there is no rampant epidemy of cancers striking farmers who use round up. let the market decide based on the available data.
- mike00632 4y ago
  Nobody is "blindly believing" that RoundUp causes cancer. There have been numerous cancer cases. There have been studies directly linking RoundUp to cancer. The world's foremost experts on cancer classified RoundUp as a carcinogen. Monsanto has been caught numerous times falsifying studies and paying for studies to be done on only the active ingredient (leaving out the ingredients that make it permeate the cells).

DiggyJohnson 4y ago

Choosing to blindly believe one side over blindly believing the other side is a dubious approach to these things. I care about environmental issues, and have no love for many aspects of Monsanto’s business and history, but your emotional appeal is extremely unconvincing. > for Monsanto GP isn’t making their comment “for Monsanto”, but for the sake of seeking the truth on this specific issue. You will continue to be shocked until you change your perspective on how we ought to evaluate nuanced issues. Especially when those issues have to do with global food production.

soperj 4y ago
> sake of seeking the truth on this specific issue I don't disagree with you, I also don't think we should be using the product when the truth is as clouded as it is. So ban it until the truth comes out.
- gruez 4y ago
  >So ban it until the truth comes out. Okay but given that we have endless studies already, it seems like "until the truth comes out" really means "until my preferred conclusion comes out".
  - soperj 4y ago
    My preferred conclusion would be that it's actually safe, since we're using a massive amount of it already and we're all exposed.
  - drekk 4y ago
    It took decades to prove conclusively that cigarettes cause cancer in humans. Similarly to tobacco companies Monsanto is subsidizing research that just happens to find no harms with RoundUp. I'm sure it's fine though, no big deal that trace amounts can be found in urine samples from 80% of Americans. https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-g https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-g...
    - gruez 4y ago
      >It took decades to prove conclusively that cigarettes cause cancer in humans. Glyphosate has been around for almost 5 decades. Wikipedia says "The consensus among national pesticide regulatory agencies and scientific organizations is that labeled uses of glyphosate have demonstrated no evidence of human carcinogenicity"[1]. If you think this is not "conclusively" enough, how much longer/more evidence do you need? Is this a standard that we should apply to everything[2], or just chemicals made my evil multinational corporations? Maybe we should delay rolling out cell phones for a few decades just to be sure that they don't cause brain cancer? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate [2] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demands-for-rigor/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demand...
      - mike00632 4y ago
        But only when the advent of RounUp ready crops have we started spraying RoundUp directly onto food. Previously we only consumed RoundUp in trace amounts. It's extremely misleading to exclude the facts.
        gruez 4y ago
        I appreciate the correction. That said, it doesn't affect the argument that much. At best it changes "almost 5 decades" to "almost 3 decades". I think it's reasonable to say that if people aren't willing to wait 5 decades to "prove conclusively that [thing] causes cancer", that they're not willing to wait 3 decades either. Let me re-ask the question from my prior comment: should delay rolling out cell phones for a few decades just to be sure that they don't cause brain cancer?
- ekianjo 4y ago
  there is no rampant epidemy of cancers striking farmers who use round up. let the market decide based on the available data.
mike00632 4y ago
Nobody is "blindly believing" that RoundUp causes cancer. There have been numerous cancer cases. There have been studies directly linking RoundUp to cancer. The world's foremost experts on cancer classified RoundUp as a carcinogen. Monsanto has been caught numerous times falsifying studies and paying for studies to be done on only the active ingredient (leaving out the ingredients that make it permeate the cells).