In article ,
Henry Kuska wrote:

For those who are not familar with scientific methods and therefore wonder
if "billo" has a point about dosage (that the scientists themselves and the
editor and the reviewers missed), the following is a very simplified
explanation: To see if a chemical causes long term problems one can often
study exposure to a small amount for many years, or one can study a shorter
term exposure to a larger amount.


Since I know you will not actually bother to read the articles
you pretend to know about, lets see what the authors say about
the human interpretation of the data:

"Despite the fact that the doses used in this study would never expected to
correspond to human exposure levels under normal circumstances, as reported by
Williams et al. (2000) for glyphosate and polyoxyethyleneamine in adults or children
(margins of EXPOSURE=5420, 3370 and 461577, respectively), this results shows that the
commercial formulation poses an increased potential risk for the rat skeletal system."

In other words, the dosage required for this does *not* translate into
danger to humans. Of course, I am sure that you know *much* better
than those silly scientists know.

billo