Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

KT2000

(20,544 posts)
16. this paper describes areas
Sat Apr 27, 2013, 02:09 PM
Apr 2013

of research needed to fully understand the effects of glyphosate. It has exposed pathways for illness to result. They have pointed researchers into the direction that further testing should go.

There are many toxic products in our environment and that has been caused by the failure of our so-called science establishment. By allowing itself to become trapped in the "causation" standard, science has proved to have become neutered in its ability to protect health. As you know, definitive causation is impossible to prove but it keeps everyone employed and the products pouring into the market.

The trending illnesses in our society deserve attention - chronic illnesses, autoimmune diseases, brain impairment (ADD, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's etc.) increased childhood cancers because we cannot support this level of disability (see Sequester solutions).
This paper looks at the potential role of glyphosate - a product that is ubiquitous in our environment, including food.

Whatever. bunnies Apr 2013 #1
that study was also bogus.... mike_c Apr 2013 #2
Its a "personal bias" to say that poison is poison? bunnies Apr 2013 #5
it is when the actual evidence doesn't support that bias.... mike_c Apr 2013 #8
Its only called that by monsanto representatives socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #9
What about Monsanto's own studies, Mike? appal_jack Apr 2013 #20
oh no, it's well understood that self study is about as objective... mike_c Apr 2013 #22
I agree that most scientists are good, ethical people. appal_jack Apr 2013 #23
Xenoestrogens are known to be toxic BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #3
and yet folks doing bad science rely upon confirmation bias rather than... mike_c Apr 2013 #4
I'm not a chemist BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #6
The body produces the estrogens we need socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #10
You don't have to try to convince me xenoestrogens are horribly toxic BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #11
Just giving you more ammo for your arsenal to use against monsanto reps socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #12
More ammo is always good BethanyQuartz Apr 2013 #13
The wealthy can afford organic, free range food. socialsecurityisAAA Apr 2013 #19
No. Zoeisright Apr 2013 #15
K&R Progressive dog Apr 2013 #7
You have completely ignored the important part of that study. Zoeisright Apr 2013 #14
with all due respect... mike_c Apr 2013 #17
The academy protects its own shava May 2013 #24
Welcome to DU my friend! hrmjustin May 2013 #25
long time listener first time caller shava May 2013 #27
We are glad you came aboard! hrmjustin May 2013 #28
for more discussion on this on my G+ shava May 2013 #29
this paper describes areas KT2000 Apr 2013 #16
Thanks, Mike. (And, TBH, I wish Mrs. Haspel could do a similar article on the AGW issue as well.) AverageJoe90 Apr 2013 #18
I don't like Monsanto's practices either, uriel1972 Apr 2013 #21
That is a reasonable Newest Reality May 2013 #26
I assume you have a plan to fund this then? shava May 2013 #30
I appreciate your Newest Reality May 2013 #31
When people respond to a news story, it's as though it weren't to a real situation shava May 2013 #32
Ok, then. Newest Reality May 2013 #33
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»condemning Monsanto with ...»Reply #16