Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Scary Study - Roundup
Roy wrote:
songbird wrote: .... a short term study with rats isn't going to reveal long term effects. some effects may not appear for more years than you'll be alive. who cleans it up if a mistake is made? all those acres you spray stuff on, what happens if it is shown to be contaminated and the food you grow is no longer acceptable for animal or human consumption? do you think those companies that sell you that stuff are going to have deep enough pockets to make things right? to decontaminate the soil? to pay for whatever healthcare you and/or your decendants might need as a result? what about people you might be poisoning downwind? groundwater? or people who buy your food? an insurance company can only cover so much before they go under. here is an example of what is actually going on: http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/det...?rsnpid=214316 a clear sign that poisons do not work in a sustainable manner. this process has been demonstrated over and over again in many ways yet here we have yet another poison and plants being modified so that such poisons can be used to spray fields. i'm really glad i'll have more poison to breath in coming from the fields around me, going into the water, etc. I doubt that you and Billy will ever believe ANYTHING that ANY Authority publishes. well as it appears that many authorities can be bought and sold and their research is flawed why would people believe them? i've actually worked at a university for many years. i know how a lot of research is done and how it is funded and how the research can be skewed to not upset the research sponsor. does a scientist do the public any good by ignoring evidence? for the education i paid for and accomplished i'll certainly not accept shoddy work or pure BS from others. if my criticisms are invalid then please state where i'm wrong. i've left it in above so you can actually answer my questions instead of ignoring them. The NPIC has issued some pretty good investigative studies on a plethora of pesticides and I would not hesitate in trusting their literature as a guide for usage. that's fine for you. i haven't read all their studies and can't say much about them, but the one you quoted in part said something about rats and those are not long lived creatures. They also know how to use "Capital Letters" when they begin sentences. you are very good at ignoring simple questions and always have to reach for stuff that has little to do with the topic at hand. did you look at the wiki page for glyphosate? did you look at the article i linked to above? did you notice the admission of failure and the desire to step up to using yet another herbicide to deal with glyphosate resistant weeds? did you notice that this new herbicide is likely to be more toxic than glyphosate? notice that they say nothing about Monsanto being responsible for the creation of these weeds and the damage that this is doing to farms? sure Monsanto will sue anyone who uses those genes in crops without license, but once a plant comes up with those genes that they can't profit from they run away with their heads up their kiesters and say "we're not responsible!" that's their answer when something else goes wrong too in the future... you can bet on it. songbird |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Scary chicken foot looking. | Gardening | |||
Scary chicken foot looking. | Gardening | |||
The scary insects - possibly large marsh horseflies? | United Kingdom | |||
Scary crown rot's keeping me up at night | Orchids | |||
Biodemocracy - long and scary | Edible Gardening |