3 ms·

Given that as of 2023: 1. Glyphosate is one of the more heavily studied chemicals known to man. 2. The evidence for it causing cancer is poor. Studies routine

by vkou 3y ago

Given that as of 2023: 1. Glyphosate is one of the more heavily studied chemicals known to man. 2. The evidence for it causing cancer is poor. Studies routinely fail to find evidence for it. 3. The subset of studies that do find evidence for such a link, find it in occupational exposure, by people who have been working knee-deep in it for decades. [1] Yes, people probably should look at you like you're crazy, because you're extrapolating from cherry-picked evidence that supports your priors. [1] Whose exposure is dramatically higher than that of someone eating food grown with it.

sharts 3y ago
It would seem that #2 and #3 directly contradict one another and that the truth is that it does indeed cause cancer at a particular rate / exposure over time. Rather than saying it doesn't affect this group but does affect another group it would be more appropriate to establish the level of consumption/exposure that is likely to cause a statistical increase in the likelihood of developing cancer.
- cma 3y ago
  Studies fail to find it doesn't mean all studies fail to find it, but it could have been clearer.
defrost 3y ago
While I'm in essential agreement with the comment above it's still worth fleshing out the case against for those interested. The specific papers (worst effects of a great deal of exposure) oft cited are: Myers, J.P.; Antoniou, M.N.; Blumberg, B.; Carroll, L.; Colborn, T.; Everett, L.G.; Hansen, M.; Landrigan, P.J.; Lanphear, B.P.; Mesnage, R.; et al. Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement. Environ. Health 2016, 15, 19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26883814/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26883814/ Leon, M.E.; Schinasi, L.H.; Lebailly, P.; Beane Freeman, L.E.; Nordby, K.-C.; Ferro, G.; Monnereau, A.; Brouwer, M.; Tual, S.; Baldi, I.; et al. Pesticide use and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoid malignancies in agricultural cohorts from France, Norway and the USA: A pooled analysis from the AGRICOH consortium. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2019, 48, 1519–1535. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30880337/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30880337/ Zhang, L.; Rana, I.; Shaffer, R.M.; Taioli, E.; Sheppard, L. Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2019, 781, 186–206. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31342895/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31342895/ I'm in a grain growing district and glyphosate isn't being applied to grain ready to eat | harvest here, just sprayed pre harvest to kill weeds and mid season to suppress weeds coming up in competition. If people are concerned they could source from international suppliers that demand no glyphosate contracts such as https://www.grainmillers.com/grower-specifications/ https://www.grainmillers.com/grower-specifications/ For an industry review of the possiblities of avoiding Farming without Glyphosate? https://www.ahri.uwa.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/plants-09-00096.pdf https://www.ahri.uwa.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/plant... is a decent balanced paper - it points out the vast number of studies show no real cause for concern while also giving the papers that show issues for farmers and the possible future for glyphosate free farming.
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
> people probably should look at you like you're crazy, because you're extrapolating People who claimed that UK government gave them AIDS, on purpose, were called crazy. 50 years later, it turns out they were right. "The blood was imported from the US after a UK shortage, where people such as prisoners could donate in return for cash. The minutes ..shows that officials knew that haemophiliacs were being given dangerous blood from the US that was making them ill with hepatitis... No one raised the alarm to stop the spread of the blood and instead, officials hoped the imported goods would not get a "bad name". There was a major effort to supress this information. People has to extrapolate based on limited data. These situations are not rare - when the workers in Teflon factories were having birth defects and cancers, and started questioning that maybe it's related to their job, they were called crazy too. In my family we extrapolated based on limited data, twice, and doctors were looking at us like we were crazy, and it turned out we were right. If we didn't press the issue, two family members would have been dead. So now I am jaded and I have limited faith in Medical establishment and institutions doing their homework.
- hinkley 3y ago
  Or that orange shit they used to put in microwave popcorn.
- gruez 3y ago
  >People who claimed that UK government gave them AIDS, on purpose, were called crazy. 50 years later, it turns out they were right. The fact that governments did shady stuff in the past isn't proof for every conspiracy theory under the sun.

by vkou 3y ago

sharts 3y ago

It would seem that #2 and #3 directly contradict one another and that the truth is that it does indeed cause cancer at a particular rate / exposure over time. Rather than saying it doesn't affect this group but does affect another group it would be more appropriate to establish the level of consumption/exposure that is likely to cause a statistical increase in the likelihood of developing cancer.

cma 3y ago
Studies fail to find it doesn't mean all studies fail to find it, but it could have been clearer.

defrost 3y ago

While I'm in essential agreement with the comment above it's still worth fleshing out the case against for those interested. The specific papers (worst effects of a great deal of exposure) oft cited are: Myers, J.P.; Antoniou, M.N.; Blumberg, B.; Carroll, L.; Colborn, T.; Everett, L.G.; Hansen, M.; Landrigan, P.J.; Lanphear, B.P.; Mesnage, R.; et al. Concerns over use of glyphosate-based herbicides and risks associated with exposures: a consensus statement. Environ. Health 2016, 15, 19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26883814/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26883814/ Leon, M.E.; Schinasi, L.H.; Lebailly, P.; Beane Freeman, L.E.; Nordby, K.-C.; Ferro, G.; Monnereau, A.; Brouwer, M.; Tual, S.; Baldi, I.; et al. Pesticide use and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoid malignancies in agricultural cohorts from France, Norway and the USA: A pooled analysis from the AGRICOH consortium. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2019, 48, 1519–1535. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30880337/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30880337/ Zhang, L.; Rana, I.; Shaffer, R.M.; Taioli, E.; Sheppard, L. Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2019, 781, 186–206. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31342895/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31342895/ I'm in a grain growing district and glyphosate isn't being applied to grain ready to eat | harvest here, just sprayed pre harvest to kill weeds and mid season to suppress weeds coming up in competition. If people are concerned they could source from international suppliers that demand no glyphosate contracts such as https://www.grainmillers.com/grower-specifications/ https://www.grainmillers.com/grower-specifications/ For an industry review of the possiblities of avoiding Farming without Glyphosate? https://www.ahri.uwa.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/plants-09-00096.pdf https://www.ahri.uwa.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/plant... is a decent balanced paper - it points out the vast number of studies show no real cause for concern while also giving the papers that show issues for farmers and the possible future for glyphosate free farming.

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

> people probably should look at you like you're crazy, because you're extrapolating People who claimed that UK government gave them AIDS, on purpose, were called crazy. 50 years later, it turns out they were right. "The blood was imported from the US after a UK shortage, where people such as prisoners could donate in return for cash. The minutes ..shows that officials knew that haemophiliacs were being given dangerous blood from the US that was making them ill with hepatitis... No one raised the alarm to stop the spread of the blood and instead, officials hoped the imported goods would not get a "bad name". There was a major effort to supress this information. People has to extrapolate based on limited data. These situations are not rare - when the workers in Teflon factories were having birth defects and cancers, and started questioning that maybe it's related to their job, they were called crazy too. In my family we extrapolated based on limited data, twice, and doctors were looking at us like we were crazy, and it turned out we were right. If we didn't press the issue, two family members would have been dead. So now I am jaded and I have limited faith in Medical establishment and institutions doing their homework.

hinkley 3y ago
Or that orange shit they used to put in microwave popcorn.
gruez 3y ago
>People who claimed that UK government gave them AIDS, on purpose, were called crazy. 50 years later, it turns out they were right. The fact that governments did shady stuff in the past isn't proof for every conspiracy theory under the sun.