3 ms·
Neither of your links offer support for your statements. As the BBC article notes glyphosate is considered one of the "most environmentally friendly" farm chemi
by spikels 13y ago
Neither of your links offer support for your statements. As the BBC article notes glyphosate is considered one of the "most environmentally friendly" farm chemicals by the World Health Organisation (glyphosate breakers down in water unlike older herbicides). GMOs and Monsanto are not even mentioned in the BBC article. Your second story is a photo essay with sad pictures but very little actual information. It is much more likely if farm chemicals did cause any of these illnesses it was older pesticides that are known to be much more dangerous.
Do you have better evidence than this? If not why are you so sure you are correct?
- Daishiman 13y agoA paper examining residual glyphosate on soybean crops with well-researched references to the health impacts on crops and humans, as well as analysis of additives to pesticides. http://www.testbiotech.de/sites/default/files/TBT_Background_Glyphosate_Argentina_0.pdf http://www.testbiotech.de/sites/default/files/TBT_Background... Aside from the known biological effects, the simple reality is that there are cancer cluster now where there weren't ten years ago, and the only variable explaining them is the appeareance of glyphosate-resistant soya bean plantations. This is enough for me to consider it a massive publich health issue, which is not being publicized given the tremendous importance of soybean in Argentine exports.