Ohioguy wrote:
billy quoted:
....
Laboratory studies have shown teratogenic effects of roundup in
animals[13] [14]. These reports have proposed that the teratogenics are
caused by impaired retinoicacid signaling[15]. A 2011 report by Earth
Open Source asserts that the roundup active ingredient - glyphosate -
has caused birth defects in laboratory animal tests[16].

I would question the initial assumptions of any study done by a group
called "Earth Open Source". Most likely, they simply decided that they
wanted to see certain results, then did what they could in the study to
try to make them happen.

i have no idea how credible many of
these cites are. you're welcome to post
some actual knowledge on the subject
instead of slander.


A 2008 scientific study has shown that Roundup formulations and
metabolic products cause the death of human embryonic, placental, and
umbilical cells in vitro, even at low concentrations.

Yep, applying various chemicals directly to a human embryo will do
that. Peanut butter and jelly probably will, too. However, in real
life they are a bit less likely to come into direct contact with a human
embryo, don't you think?

heh, i always thought such studies as pretty
far fetched too, but if you want to use them as
a basis of comparison or to test mutagenisis then
they at least say "this substance is worse than
that other one". which is useful to know even if
the likelyhood of direct contact is low.

i think the most useful studies are those that
get into the liver metabolic pathways and other
organs of the body that might accumulate or
filter the substance in question. i notice not
many cite mentions actual accumulation in the
body or how the liver or other organs processes
glyphosate.


Deliberate ingestion of Roundup herbicide in quantities ranging from 85
to 200 ml has resulted in death within hours of ingestion,

Wow, I'm sure there is a whole list of various products, not meant
for human consumption, that would cause discomfort or death if we ate
them. How about that box of roofing nails out in the garage?

a good source of iron.


Now I know I'm just being a bit hard on you. Obviously it would be
safer if we didn't use any pesticides. However, that isn't going to
happen,

it happens here all the time (no pesticides).
in this case glyphosate isn't a pesticide anyways
it is a herbicide.


and there are times that crops would completely fail without
them.

unlikely to be true. many pests when left alone will
not kill the host plant completely. they will chew some
leaves and then spin a cocoon and then pupate and go on
to the next generation like many other critters.

this season i have several examples of pests doing
some damage, but not "complete failure" level damage.
i've left them alone and most of the plants have easily
outgrown the damage.


I'm just saying that I question the impartiality of any studies
out there, because the studies are often funded by groups that are
wanting to bolster a certain, pre-determined point of view. The
environmental groups want to prove that things are dangerous, while the
companies that make the products want to prove that they are not. It's
not good science. I try to see both sides of the issue, because most of
my relatives are farmers, but I also have a BS in Environmental Studies.

i wouldn't say that from what you write here.


I'm not ready to go organic, and probably never will. However, I do
try to only use insecticides, fungicides and such after I have verified
a problem that is spreading. Several times I've waited too long and
lost most of a crop.

there are few plantings i've done and lost
"most" and as of yet i've not lost "everything"
not ever. interplanting, mixed beds, paying
attention and getting at some troubles when
first noticed goes a long ways towards avoiding
later losses.


Even so, I'm not comfortable with spraying "just
in case". I figure that my "spraying as necessary" approach probably
only uses 10% of the chemicals that most of the fruits and vegetables at
the store have on them. Plus, I know which chemicals were used, and
they tend to be those that don't hang around as long.

i'm glad. it seems that much of
what people do when they put in lawns
and gardens is try to outdo the neighbors
on how many pounds of fertilizers and
poisons they can shove at the problems
and how much water they can pollute.

i don't have much good to say about
the commercial farmers here either.
the number of times they spray on a
windy day when not much reaches the
ground/weeds is sad. the way they plow
right up to the edge of the ditches
or burn and trench through ditches or
don't leave any kind of erosion
control or cover crops for the winter
is like saying they don't even care
about actually building fertile topsoil.
instead they pump fertilizers and
chemicals at the problems. all those
chemicals run off too in some form or
another.

i don't know how you can think any
of this current chemical infusion madness
is sustainable or good for the long term.


songbird