In article ,
Henry Kuska wrote:
billo said: "That's what comes from drawing conclusions from inconclusive
studies. It's what comes from taking a limited study and pretending that it
is definitive. Early results are commonly reversed by definitive studies.
It's as common as dirt. But people who use these early results as if they
were definitive do it because they have an agenda."

H. Kuska comment: billo again appears to be using a modified criteria: (this
is the original one - "come up with a single scientific article that claims
to show that Roundup is dangerous to humans when used as directed") to one
where the scientific study must be "definitive".


No, Henry. I am answering the question of why I bother with you.

In fact, my challenge still stands. None of the articles you
have posted deal with use as directed. In fact, that is one of
the stated limitations in the large population studies.


billo