Billo states: " The abstract does not claim that Roundup is dangerous to
humans when used as directed. Your implication, by including it is that it
does."

H. Kuska reply: the topic of this thread is not determined by you, it is
determined by the original August 26 post:
-------------------------------------------
"Mindfully.org note:
Roundup Unready just barely touches on the problems with Roundup.
Its target genetically engineered crops are commingling with weedy
relatives, thus creating super weeds. This is indeed a major problem for
commercial farmers around the world. In his article on Jan. 14, 2003, Andrew
Pollack wrote that Roundup-tolerant crops are now found in "Delaware,
Maryland, California, western Tennessee and at the edges of the Corn Belt in
Ohio and Indiana." Canadian canola farmer, Percy Schmeiser says superweeds
are ubiquitous throughout Canada.
But I'd like to broaden the scope of discussion here by including
the human and animal health effects of Roundup. It is both a carcinogen
(non-Hodgkin's lymphoma) and an endocrine disruptor (inhibits
steroidogenesis). The testing that revealed those two points looked at
glyphosate, the key ingredient in Roundup, by itself. The complete
formulation is even more toxic.

One of the premises for Roundup and genetically engineered crops was that
they would reduce the use of toxic pesticides. And Roundup was billed as
being "as safe as table salt," until the Attorney General of the State of NY
won a suit against Monsanto for such lies.
Some farmers have had to use as much as 6 times the recommended
amount of Roundup to come close to killing some of those super weeds. To
sidestep the lost efficacy, Monsanto is mixing the good 'ol standard
pesticides into Roundup that it was supposed to safely replace as well as
tweaking the concentration of glyphosate in the mix. The result is that more
toxic chemicals are used in spite of the "official" reports of lowered
quantities.
The Roundup story is also political, but that can wait for another
day."
------------------------------------------------------------
H. Kuska reply, continued: your key word seems to be based on the word
"imply",
See http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=imply for a definition.
Notice the "To involve by logical necessity;".
I am sorry but your use of logic escapes me.

Henry Kuska, retired

http://home.neo.rr.com/kuska/