In article , "Paul E. Lehmann"
wrote:

I have been following the debate but I have not done a literature search to
determine the merits of both sides. I myself, use roundup - very
sparingly - and not in areas where I think there is a likelihood of
contaminated the ground water.

I CAN say that based on my professional experience, that I am HIGHLY
skeptical of any chemical company propaganda.

I worked for over 15 years as a Petroleum Geologist. It was a great job.
It was like looking for buried treasure and getting paid to do it. It was
very exciting and glamouous. When the bust hit the oil business in Houston
in the 1980's, I got a job as an "Environmental Geologist" with a consulting
company in Houston, Texas. I then saw the downstream part of the petroleum
business. The company I worked for had as clients companies like Dow
Chemical, BASF, Oxy Petrochemical and others. The main business of the
company I worked for was to petition the EPA to allow injection of hazardous
waste into injection wells. Congress had previously bannned injection wells
for hazardous waste but the petro chemical industry used its political
influence and got congress to allow injection if it could be proved that the
waste stream would be safe for ten thousand years. I saw first hand how our
clients would completely ignore any evidence or data that would not allow
them to get a petition for their wells. I pointed the evidence out to the
companies. They did not want to hear it and purposely left the data out of
their petitions. For example, one location in South Louisiana had faults
that faulted the injection zone AND the faults came all the way to the
surface. This was verified by numerous lines of seismic data. (Data the EPA
did not have and probably could not afford to buy with their limited budget)
In another instance I was told that I must doctor my geologic cross sections
to prove that a major fault in the Corpus Christi area was a sealing fault
at the level of the injection zone. I refused because there was already
published literature that disproved this case. In another case a very large
chemical company in the Freeport. Texas area continued to rent out storage
space in caverns created in a salt dome even AFTER they learned that the
dome was still active geologically and was shearing the casing in their own
product storage wells AND they were loosing product into the qround water
aquifer. After several years, I could no longer tolerate being a chemical
company whore and quit. I notified the USEPA of some of the things I saw
during my employment. They were sympathetic but the State of Texas had
primary control and the State enforcement agency was bought off by the petro
chem industry. The EPA and other enforcement agencies simply can not
compete with the big bucks of Industry. If you throw enough money at a
project you can "proove" almost anything. I then went to work for NOAA as a
Physical Scientist and Hydrologist where I retired a year and a half ago.
Do I think that roundup will cause the end of the world if used as
directed - no, at least I hope not. Do I think the information supplied by
the manufacturer is accurate and as safe as they claim - HELL NO.
I would advise anyone who uses ANY chemical product to have serious doubts
about the safety of said products. I know what the industry will do - or
not due to make the big bucks.

What an amazing insightful post. Thanks.

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/