4 ms·

Surfactants are essentially soaps, right? So surely their safety profile is well understood already and glyphosate is the more important component to be researc

by shawnz 4y ago

Surfactants are essentially soaps, right? So surely their safety profile is well understood already and glyphosate is the more important component to be researching anyway?

ncmncm 4y ago
"Surely" is the opposite of science. There are as many kinds of surfactants as of acids and bases. You would not say of an acid, "surely it is essentially vinegar", or of a base "surely it is essentially baking soda".
- shawnz 4y ago
  Are they using an especially unusual choice of surfactant in roundup? Wouldn't it be trivial to just go to one with a better safety profile if it's not the active ingredient? It just doesn't seem like a plausible conspiracy to me that Monsanto would be going to such efforts to hide the side effects of the surfactant they are using. I'm not saying it shouldn't be studied, I'm just saying this doesn't seem like such a huge "gotcha" to me.
  - photochemsyn 4y ago
    Plants have waxy leaves; surfactants which dissolve waxes allow the glyphosate to enter the plant; such surfactants tend to be highly potent (i.e, they'd effectively strip oils from skins cells and get into those cells). Soap probably wouldn't dissolve waxes. Fundamentally, the exact identity of the 'inert ingredients' in Roundup and similar products should be exposed on the label. Currently that's proprietary information, but there's a wide range of toxicity of such substances. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30951798/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30951798/ > "(2019) As glyphosate-based-herbicide composition is legally classified as confidential commercial information, confusion concerning the identity and concentrations of co-formulants is common and descriptions of test substances in published studies are often erroneous or incomplete. In order to resolve this confusion, laws requiring disclosure of the chemical composition of pesticide products could be enacted. Research to understand health implications from ingesting these substances is required."
  - ncmncm 4y ago
    That the surfactants used are a "trade secret" seems to suggest they are not just soap. That they carefully exclude them from every toxicity test they commission suggests so more strongly. Why are the concealing "soap", and carefully not testing the product with it?
mike00632 4y ago
No. It's a common Monsanto/Bayer talking point to minimize these chemicals by calling them "soaps." These chemicals are what allows the active ingredient to permeate tissues. Monsanto/Bayer funds studies with only the active ingredient to mislead people into thinking RoundUp is safe to be sprayed on food.

by shawnz 4y ago

Surfactants are essentially soaps, right? So surely their safety profile is well understood already and glyphosate is the more important component to be researching anyway?

ncmncm 4y ago

"Surely" is the opposite of science. There are as many kinds of surfactants as of acids and bases. You would not say of an acid, "surely it is essentially vinegar", or of a base "surely it is essentially baking soda".

shawnz 4y ago
Are they using an especially unusual choice of surfactant in roundup? Wouldn't it be trivial to just go to one with a better safety profile if it's not the active ingredient? It just doesn't seem like a plausible conspiracy to me that Monsanto would be going to such efforts to hide the side effects of the surfactant they are using. I'm not saying it shouldn't be studied, I'm just saying this doesn't seem like such a huge "gotcha" to me.
- photochemsyn 4y ago
  Plants have waxy leaves; surfactants which dissolve waxes allow the glyphosate to enter the plant; such surfactants tend to be highly potent (i.e, they'd effectively strip oils from skins cells and get into those cells). Soap probably wouldn't dissolve waxes. Fundamentally, the exact identity of the 'inert ingredients' in Roundup and similar products should be exposed on the label. Currently that's proprietary information, but there's a wide range of toxicity of such substances. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30951798/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30951798/ > "(2019) As glyphosate-based-herbicide composition is legally classified as confidential commercial information, confusion concerning the identity and concentrations of co-formulants is common and descriptions of test substances in published studies are often erroneous or incomplete. In order to resolve this confusion, laws requiring disclosure of the chemical composition of pesticide products could be enacted. Research to understand health implications from ingesting these substances is required."
- ncmncm 4y ago
  That the surfactants used are a "trade secret" seems to suggest they are not just soap. That they carefully exclude them from every toxicity test they commission suggests so more strongly. Why are the concealing "soap", and carefully not testing the product with it?

mike00632 4y ago

No. It's a common Monsanto/Bayer talking point to minimize these chemicals by calling them "soaps." These chemicals are what allows the active ingredient to permeate tissues. Monsanto/Bayer funds studies with only the active ingredient to mislead people into thinking RoundUp is safe to be sprayed on food.