Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Monsanto ruled to have caused man’s cancer

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Malayalam wrote: »
    Try not to be disingenuous. You know very well that the article I posted is the relevant information/link. But you are avoiding it just about as solidly as I avoid Round Up. And if you want to ''balance risk'' then be pragmatic enough to also realise that ultimately your weedkiller producers will have to pay out in the long run when the risk accumulates sufficiently in enough human tissue.

    There us nothing in the paper that shows a risk with round up residues in food and adverse effects.

    The best study available found no risk from it in the food chain.

    https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/glyphosate-causes-cancer-science-says-no/


  • Options
    #63
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    freedominacup wrote: »
    I don't consider roundup to be risk free but there's much more harmful sprays being used on food crops every day that never get a mention. Some of the research is laughable. I showed one particular paper to a relation of mine. She has a phd in an ag science field and would have a good understanding of the science involved. The paper showed a link between glyphosate and birth defects in laboratory rats. Her comment was that if they had administered folic acid to the rats in the same concentrations it would also have caused birth defects. Folic acid, you know the stuff women are advised to take if they are thinking of having a baby and in early pregnancy to prevent birth defects. I'm not an apologist for Monsanto or glyphosate but you'd have to wonder if it's almost a distraction from other more dubious products at this stage.

    Causes need enemies. It's much easier to choose an enemy & focus on them.

    People rave about using salt as a safe weedkiller. Pop a little on a worm or mollusc & see how safe it is.


  • Options
    #64
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    I find the verdict even more surprising after reading this - my bold :

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/jury-orders-monsanto-pay-289...

    Johnson used Roundup and a similar product, Ranger Pro, as a pest control manager at a San Francisco Bay Area school district, his lawyers said. He sprayed large quantities from a 50-gallon (about 3.8 litres) tank attached to a truck, and during gusty winds, the product would cover his face, said Brent Wisner, one of his attorneys.

    Once, when a hose broke, the weed killer soaked his entire body."

    That isn't Monsanto's fault.


  • Options
    #65
    s7ryf3925pivug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭s7ryf3925pivug


    freedominacup wrote: »
    Her comment was that if they had administered folic acid to the rats in the same concentrations it would also have caused birth defects. Folic acid, you know the stuff women are advised to take if they are thinking of having a baby and in early pregnancy to prevent birth defects.

    Excessive folic acid doesn't cause birth defects. While I'd guess she knows this and was being sarcastic, a PhD in agricultural science doesn't qualify her as an expert in teratogens in any case.


  • Options
    #66
    s7ryf3925pivug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭s7ryf3925pivug


    Discodog wrote: »
    I find the verdict even more surprising after reading this - my bold :

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/jury-orders-monsanto-pay-289...

    Johnson used Roundup and a similar product, Ranger Pro, as a pest control manager at a San Francisco Bay Area school district, his lawyers said. He sprayed large quantities from a 50-gallon (about 3.8 litres) tank attached to a truck, and during gusty winds, the product would cover his face, said Brent Wisner, one of his attorneys.

    Once, when a hose broke, the weed killer soaked his entire body."

    That isn't Monsanto's fault.
    It is because they've they've professed that it is entirely harmless. "Practically nontoxic" and "safer than table salt".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Daniella Cold Dude wrote: »
    It is because they've they've professed that it is entirely harmless. "Practically nontoxic" and "safer than table salt".

    It's safer than table salt & very non toxic to pets, wildlife etc. They have never said you can bath in it.


  • Options
    #68
    s7ryf3925pivug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭s7ryf3925pivug


    Discodog wrote: »
    It's safer than table salt & very non toxic to pets, wildlife etc. They have never said you can bath in it.
    You can swim in saltwater.


  • Options
    #69
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Daniella Cold Dude wrote: »
    You can swim in saltwater.

    Yes, very very dilute saltwater. I just looked at the label. No where does it say the product is harmless. It has a big list of warnings & instructions. By the way put some seawater on your garden plants & see if it has any effect.


  • Options
    #70
    YFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    Discodog wrote: »
    I find the verdict even more surprising after reading this - my bold :

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/jury-orders-monsanto-pay-289...

    Johnson used Roundup and a similar product, Ranger Pro, as a pest control manager at a San Francisco Bay Area school district, his lawyers said. He sprayed large quantities from a 50-gallon (about 3.8 litres) tank attached to a truck, and during gusty winds, the product would cover his face, said Brent Wisner, one of his attorneys.

    Once, when a hose broke, the weed killer soaked his entire body."

    That isn't Monsanto's fault.


    Large quantities from a 50-gallon (about 3.8 litres) tank attached

    What volume tank?


  • Options
    #71
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    One of the best ways to remove spray residue from foods (apples, tomatoes)
    - is a quick scrub, with a drop of Organic Cyder Vinegar.

    Not possible with cereals such as corn flakes, crackers, unless it's certified organic and residue free.
    Animals feed may have higher tolerances 400ppm (glyphosate), but then we eat the animals anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    YFlyer wrote: »
    Large quantities from a 50-gallon (about 3.8 litres) tank attached

    What volume tank?

    Good question but apparently a motorised vehicle so definitely more that 3.8 litres. I suspect that, as it's in the US, the gallons is correct.


  • Options
    #73
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    One of the best ways to remove spray residue from foods (apples, tomatoes)
    - is a quick scrub, with a drop of Organic Cyder Vinegar.

    Not possible with cereals such as corn flakes, crackers, unless it's certified organic and residue free.
    Animals feed may have higher tolerances 400ppm (glyphosate), but then we eat the animals anyway.

    You don't spray Roundup near apples or tomatoes


  • Options
    #74
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Discodog wrote: »
    You don't spray Roundup near apples or tomatoes

    A pesticide is a pesticide.

    As part of its annual report, EFSA analyses the results of the EU-coordinated control programme (EUCP), under which reporting countries analyse samples from the same “basket” of food items and for the same pesticides.

    For 2016 the products were apples, head cabbage, leek, lettuce, peaches, strawberries, tomatoes, rye, wine, cow’s milk and swine fat.

    The lowest MRL exceedance rates were identified for rye (0.7%), followed by head cabbage (1.1%) and strawberries (1.8%). The highest exceedances were found for apples (2.7%) and tomatoes (2.6%).


  • Options
    #75
    Fakediamond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,054 ✭✭✭Fakediamond


    Discodog wrote: »
    Because these are often the "Organic" people who use Vinegar, salt etc as alternatives because they see them as "natural" products & ignore the toxicity.
    I’m interested to know the posters opinion Monsanto owning the rights to seeds thereby denying farmers the right to save a portion of their harvest for planting as next years crop. That is highly alarming, they are developing varieties that can only thrive using their products to control weed growth, blight etc. Is that not cause for concern. I find it chilling, to be honest, especially with our history of famine. My granny always said, don’t put all your eggs in one basket.


  • Options
    #76
    YFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    Discodog wrote: »
    Good question but apparently a motorised vehicle so definitely more that 3.8 litres. I suspect that, as it's in the US, the gallons is correct.

    I see now. 3.8 litres equal to 1 US gallon.


  • Options
    #77
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    A pesticide is a pesticide.

    As part of its annual report, EFSA analyses the results of the EU-coordinated control programme (EUCP), under which reporting countries analyse samples from the same “basket” of food items and for the same pesticides.

    For 2016 the products were apples, head cabbage, leek, lettuce, peaches, strawberries, tomatoes, rye, wine, cow’s milk and swine fat.

    The lowest MRL exceedance rates were identified for rye (0.7%), followed by head cabbage (1.1%) and strawberries (1.8%). The highest exceedances were found for apples (2.7%) and tomatoes (2.6%).

    If the highest is only 2.7% above the mrl then that's pretty good.


  • Options
    #78
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    jh79 wrote: »
    If the highest is only 2.7% above the mrl then that's pretty good.

    An (cumulative) apple a day...

    From the 1,143 samples in Ireland, there was still nearly 2% (1.7%) of items 'above MRL', Hope it's not your favourite snacks or daily food stables.


  • Options
    #79
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    A pesticide is a pesticide.

    As part of its annual report, EFSA analyses the results of the EU-coordinated control programme (EUCP), under which reporting countries analyse samples from the same “basket” of food items and for the same pesticides.

    For 2016 the products were apples, head cabbage, leek, lettuce, peaches, strawberries, tomatoes, rye, wine, cow’s milk and swine fat.

    The lowest MRL exceedance rates were identified for rye (0.7%), followed by head cabbage (1.1%) and strawberries (1.8%). The highest exceedances were found for apples (2.7%) and tomatoes (2.6%).

    Hopefully they have questioned why. I can sort of see for tomatoes but weeds don't grow in trees.


  • Options
    #80
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Fakediamond wrote: »
    I’m interested to know the posters opinion Monsanto owning the rights to seeds thereby denying farmers the right to save a portion of their harvest for planting as next years crop. That is highly alarming, they are developing varieties that can only thrive using their products to control weed growth, blight etc. Is that not cause for concern. I find it chilling, to be honest, especially with our history of famine. My granny always said, don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

    I don't know enough to express an opinion but in principle I would agree. But these companies have to recoup their costs & return healthy profits. The famine was caused by blight. Surely a blight resistant potato is a good thing.

    GM, Chemicals, Companies & Profits aren't always bad.


  • Options
    #81
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    An (cumulative) apple a day...

    From the 1,143 samples in Ireland, there was still nearly 2% (1.7%) of items 'above MRL', Hope it's not your favourite snacks or daily food stables.

    Is that 2% above the MRL or 2% of apples sampled?

    Either way , it's the total intake that is important , any overage is canceled out by food that is below the MRL. When an item is consistently above the MRL a risk assesment is done to ensure total intake from diet is still safe.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    jh79 wrote: »
    Is that 2% above the MRL or 2% of apples sampled?

    Either way , it's the total intake that is important , any overage is canceled out by food that is below the MRL. When an item is consistently above the MRL a risk assesment is done to ensure total intake from diet is still safe.

    Referred (by 'food/product'), across Europe.
    The Ireland part refers to the 1.7% figure above limits (by country)
    https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/interactive_pages/Pesticides_report_2016

    The EFSA chart shows the worst items are all daily staples of:
    Apples±, Tomatoes^, Milk, Tea, Baby Products, Wheat, SweetPeppers* & Olives.
    *Highest: 4.5%, ^4%, ±3%.

    For pesticides, so use may be for killing all 'pests' not just weeds.

    A totally separate report ranked 'Cheerios' as the single highest product,
    likely due to the 'multi/mixed-grain' aspect.


  • Options
    #83
    jace_da_face
    Registered Users Posts: 480 ✭✭jace_da_face


    freedominacup wrote: »
    I don't consider roundup to be risk free but there's much more harmful sprays being used on food crops every day that never get a mention. Some of the research is laughable. I showed one particular paper to a relation of mine. She has a phd in an ag science field and would have a good understanding of the science involved. The paper showed a link between glyphosate and birth defects in laboratory rats. Her comment was that if they had administered folic acid to the rats in the same concentrations it would also have caused birth defects. Folic acid, you know the stuff women are advised to take if they are thinking of having a baby and in early pregnancy to prevent birth defects. I'm not an apologist for Monsanto or glyphosate but you'd have to wonder if it's almost a distraction from other more dubious products at this stage.

    I think your post-grad relative might be a little on the naïve side. I am sure there are many nasty chemicals that could be administered to rats that could produce birth defects. Does that make glyphosate's effect any less harmful? I don't understand the logic.

    "The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) classified glyphosate as causing serious eye damage and toxic to aquatic life" - source Wikipedia.

    I am sure there are many household chemicals damaging to aquatic life. I wouldn't pour bleach into a pond for example. But I'm pretty sure we don't spray our fields with bleach or folic acid for that matter.

    The WHO's position on this is that glyphosate is a 'probable human carcinogen'. This suggests they are satisfied that it is a carcinogen in animals.

    As for the effects on bee populations: Link

    But when the bees are all gone I am sure they will have a patent on seeds that do not require pollination.


  • Options
    #84
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    Referred (by 'food/product'), across Europe.
    The Ireland part refers to the 1.7% figure above limits (by country)
    https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/interactive_pages/Pesticides_report_2016

    The EFSA chart shows the worst items are all daily staples of:
    Apples±, Tomatoes^, Milk, Tea, Baby Products, Wheat, SweetPeppers* & Olives.
    *Highest: 4.5%, ^4%, ±3%.

    For pesticides, so may use may be killing all 'pests' not just weeds.

    Very relevant user name :)


  • Options
    #85
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Discodog wrote: »
    Very relevant user name :)

    That's for my long-term novelty mixed e/w Accumulator bets.
    Backed Trump and Brexit (naturally of course) during 2016.

    Next longer-term novelty is Italy to leave the EU, followed by Denmark
    (long story), circa 2025 & 2027 (or before!).


  • Options
    #86
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    Referred (by 'food/product'), across Europe.
    The Ireland part refers to the 1.7% figure above limits (by country)
    https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/interactive_pages/Pesticides_report_2016

    The EFSA chart shows the worst items are all daily staples of:
    Apples±, Tomatoes^, Milk, Tea, Baby Products, Wheat, SweetPeppers* & Olives.
    *Highest: 4.5%, ^4%, ±3%.

    For pesticides, so use may be for killing all 'pests' not just weeds.

    A totally separate report ranked 'Cheerios' as the single highest product,
    likely due to the 'multi/mixed-grain' aspect.

    Unless there is a report linking these levels to adverse effects i wouldn't be concerned.


  • Options
    #87
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    jh79 wrote: »
    Unless there is a report linking these levels to adverse effects i wouldn't be concerned.

    So maybe the European Commission that fixes MRLs of pesticide residue for all food and animal feed is wasting it's time, expense and effort by even compiling such data :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #88
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Messiah Limited Jackhammer wrote: »
    So maybe the European Commission that fixes MRLs of pesticide residue for all food and animal feed is wasting it's time, expense and effort by even compiling such data :rolleyes:

    Didn't say that, the MRL are set so that the total consumed is of no risk to health.

    Have you any evidence that these % above the MRL's are a health risk?


  • Options
    #89
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,216 ✭✭✭jh79


    Also, studies have shown less pesticides in "organic" food but no health benefits so no reason to be concerned with levels slightly above the MRL's.


  • Options
    #90
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    toxic is toxic and as it can be avoided, better to do so. period..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Discodog
    Registered Users Posts: 15,829 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Graces7 wrote: »
    toxic is toxic and as it can be avoided, better to do so. period..

    How can it be avoided ? My clients want weed free driveways, patios etc.


Advertisement