paghat wrote:
In article , Alexander Pensky
wrote:


I'm not disputing whether or not Roundup is safe or
desirable to use in one's garden.
(I don't use it, personally.)

My point is that, of all the nasty synthetic chemicals you and
I might be tempted to use anywhere in our homes or gardens, some
are more dangerous than others, but NOT A SINGLE ONE has been
tested on human beings, and NEVER WILL BE, because that is NOT
an "accepted scientific method" for product safety testing. It
is in fact an UNETHICAL and ILLEGAL method of testing.

So, if you ever plan to use any product, whether Roundup or
anything else, you're just gonna have to trust the animal tests.

- Alex


This is not entirely true Alex. There are no valid models for human
allergy responses, or human headache responses, besides the fact that no
animal studies are regarded as having broad applicability to human
physiological responses even for things that can be measured without a
speaking subject who can tell the researchers what they are experiencing.
So herbicides & pesticides get tested as a matter of course on human
volunteers. "Only tests using human volunteers have the broad specificity
and relevance to human physiology needed to detect the wide range of
allergens & toxins that might result from unexpected side-effects of the
genetic engineering process" notes Dr John Fagan, who purports to be an
activist for safety in such human testing, but primarily argues like a
lobbyist trying to keep Congress from banning scientists from feeding
toxins to people desparate for the fifty dollars.

Human test subjects volunteered to breathe extremely high levels of toxic
fumes from the resins used in those yellow pesticide strips, trade-name
Vapona. It had already been done on dogs & all sorts of other mammals &
always found that when delivered as a gas it could not reacha toxic level
in the bloodstream, even though with long-term physical contact with the
resins one's liver can be completely destroyed. The manufacturers found
out all they could with animals then wanted to try it on people too, &
you'd be surprised how easy it is to get volunteers -- mainly unemployed
students & the homeless.

[other examples snipped]

Such studies were in fact MOST necessary because
Monsanto wants to "prove" it is safe to eat fruits & vegetables that have
been genetically engineered to survive glyphosate dosings. In fact
Monsanto has the lion's share of their future invested in the idea that
future crops will be so resistant to glyphosate, that all the weeds can be
poisoned by just dumping HUGE amounts of the toxins in agricultural
fields. So of course Monsanto is paying for & orchestrating a number of
studies the intent of which is to prove you can eat a lot of herbicide &
not get sick & die.
[...]
Any of us who do not radically seek out & pay more to restrict ourselves
to organicly grown produce are already the non-volunteer human test
subjects, with a few independent studies in progress to track how bad off
we get.

I don't disagree with anything you said here, Ms. paghat. Perhaps
I should rephrase what I'm trying to say. I don't mean literally
that these products are never tested on humans. I mean that, since
it is extremely unethical to test them on humans, and since (as you
state) the main proponents of human testing are often the manufacturers,
it is disingenuous for someone who opposes the use of the products
to cite lack of human testing as part of their argument.

Moral consistency can be a good thing. Each of us must make our own
decision whether a particular product is safe to use or harmful.
I believe it is better to make these decisions based on imperfect
information resulting from animal testing, than to insist on
human testing in order to increase our certainty. I would certainly
not consider Monsanto to be acting "more responsibly" if the human
testing practices you've described were to become an "accepted
scientific method" for demonstrating the safety of the products.

- Alex

I have to use basic garden tools, no power tools. Can I just turn the soil
over
with a shovel, burying the grass, and then break up the soil? Will the grass
die under the soil or grow back? (The grass that was under the piles of soil
from the fence post holes sure seems dead after only a week.)

Or must I somehow kill or remove the grass first, before turning the soil?
Removing the grass without also taking a lot of top soil seems almost
impossible. Any advice on this would be appreciated.

You said no power tools...but if you could get hold of, if only to
borrow it for an hour, a weed eater will strip that grass off and make
it a lot easier to turn that soil. Horribly messy, but it works.

dementia13 wrote in
:


I have to use basic garden tools, no power tools. Can I just turn the
soil over with a shovel, burying the grass, and then break up the
soil? Will the grass die under the soil or grow back? (The grass that
was under the piles of soil from the fence post holes sure seems dead
after only a week.)

Or must I somehow kill or remove the grass first, before turning the
soil? Removing the grass without also taking a lot of top soil seems
almost impossible. Any advice on this would be appreciated.

You said no power tools...but if you could get hold of, if only to
borrow it for an hour, a weed eater will strip that grass off and make
it a lot easier to turn that soil. Horribly messy, but it works.



hehe, you don't have to use power tools if the weed eater is a goat ... and
only 'messy' if you wait too long before returning. :-)

"Alexander Pensky" wrote in message
...
I'm not disputing whether or not Roundup is safe or
desirable to use in one's garden.
(I don't use it, personally.)

My point is that, of all the nasty synthetic chemicals you and
I might be tempted to use anywhere in our homes or gardens, some
are more dangerous than others, but NOT A SINGLE ONE has been
tested on human beings, and NEVER WILL BE, because that is NOT
an "accepted scientific method" for product safety testing. It
is in fact an UNETHICAL and ILLEGAL method of testing.

So, if you ever plan to use any product, whether Roundup or
anything else, you're just gonna have to trust the animal tests.

- Alex

Exactly. And, I hate to be blunt, but only a complete idiot would use such
products anyplace humans (and especially children) might come into contact
with the soil, grass, etc. With kids, that means "anyplace on the property".

"Alexander Pensky" wrote in message
...

I don't disagree with anything you said here, Ms. paghat. Perhaps
I should rephrase what I'm trying to say. I don't mean literally
that these products are never tested on humans. I mean that, since
it is extremely unethical to test them on humans, and since (as you
state) the main proponents of human testing are often the manufacturers,
it is disingenuous for someone who opposes the use of the products
to cite lack of human testing as part of their argument.

Disingenuous? No. Perhaps you're misunderstanding what I said, or perhaps I
wasn't clear about it.

Let's try again: Based on my definition of "valid", there will never be a
valid human testing program for these chemicals. This is the sole reason for
my opinion that home gardeners should never use chemicals.

To me, valid means:

1) A sufficient number of human participants

2) Participants randomly selected so the sample is not heavily weighted with
people who are desperate for the money. *

3) Control groups

4) Placebos

5) Testing to be conducted by an organization not known to the manufacturer
of the chemical.

6) Dietary monitoring to exclude other risk factors.

* Based on an article I read some years back - if memory serves, it was
Bristol Meyers that permitted large numbers of "street people" to
participate in a drug experiment. The numbskull who ran the tests was
surprised to discover that something like 30% of those participants were
alcoholics who began their day with a bottle of Thunderbird. This skewed the
liver damage statistics and made the whole test null and void. Sorta. Kinda.
Duh. If this same mistake was made while testing a garden chemical, it would
be very easy for the manufacturer to say "Well...of course there was liver
damage, but not from our product. These people have been drinking heavily
for the past 20 years".

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:14:11 -0500, zxcvbob
typed these words:

Doug Kanter wrote:
For instance, it's KNOWN that x amount of crap is
sprayed by Chem Lawn each year, at the behest of homeowners...

O, that they were spraying crap, instead of ammonium phosphate, 2,4-d,
and dursban (or whatever). Hey. That might be the solution to the hog
farm lagoon problem. A "natural" alternative to Chem Lawn -- load those
tanker trucks with pig s! from the waste lagoons and spray city lawns
with that. The solution to pollution is dilution!

Best regards,
Bob


Love this response. You should turn it into a sig file.

Julie



http://www.bobsloansampler.com/

Bearskin to Holly Fork: Stories from Appalachia
by Bob Sloan ISBN: 1-893239-21-7

(GSHATTERHAND) wrote in message ...
I really appreciate all the information on using layers of newspaper over the
sod, and compost and soil over that. But I want to be certain of one
thing......once I've laid down the newspaper, and covered it with compost and
soil, is there any reason I can't immediately plant annuals in my new flower
bed? Do I have to wait for any reason? I'm hoping to put my couple dozen
house-grown giant celosia in my new full sun flowerbed.

To make a flower bed and survive the event, buy enough bags of compost
and manure at WalMart to cover the new bed. Lay the bags unopened over
the area leaving NO space uncovered. Come back in the spring. Slit the
bags and dump the contents over the "flower bed." Rake smooth and
plant. NO work. No newspapers. No digging. NO heart attacks or heat
stroke. I speak from experience here. NEVER will I EVER dig sod out
again LOL.
KSHULLER

On 28 Jun 2003 22:29:41 -0700, (kathy) typed these
words:

(GSHATTERHAND) wrote in message ...
I really appreciate all the information on using layers of newspaper over the
sod, and compost and soil over that. But I want to be certain of one
thing......once I've laid down the newspaper, and covered it with compost and
soil, is there any reason I can't immediately plant annuals in my new flower
bed? Do I have to wait for any reason? I'm hoping to put my couple dozen
house-grown giant celosia in my new full sun flowerbed.

To make a flower bed and survive the event, buy enough bags of compost
and manure at WalMart to cover the new bed. Lay the bags unopened over
the area leaving NO space uncovered. Come back in the spring. Slit the
bags and dump the contents over the "flower bed." Rake smooth and
plant. NO work. No newspapers. No digging. NO heart attacks or heat
stroke. I speak from experience here. NEVER will I EVER dig sod out
again LOL.
KSHULLER

NO $. What I want for a flower bed is probably 10' x 120' Thatsa
lotta mulch bags.

Julie


http://www.bobsloansampler.com/

Bearskin to Holly Fork: Stories from Appalachia
by Bob Sloan ISBN: 1-893239-21-7

NO $. What I want for a flower bed is probably 10' x 120' Thatsa
lotta mulch bags.

Julie


http://www.bobsloansampler.com/

Bearskin to Holly Fork: Stories from Appalachia
by Bob Sloan ISBN: 1-893239-21-7







I do the newspaper thing then put a layer of mulch over it, I have even watered
it to soften the paper and planted right through the paper... I do have pretty
good soil already so little to no amendments are needed.
Colleen
zone 5 CT

On 29 Jun 2003 12:50:58 GMT, (GrampysGurl) typed
these words:


NO $. What I want for a flower bed is probably 10' x 120' Thatsa
lotta mulch bags.

Julie



I do the newspaper thing then put a layer of mulch over it, I have even watered
it to soften the paper and planted right through the paper... I do have pretty
good soil already so little to no amendments are needed.
Colleen
zone 5 CT


Hi Colleen, and thanks for the response. I'll try the newspapers
soon. We have a nicely seasoned mulch pile (given us last year when
tree-trimmers were making the rounds) which should cover a good-sized
area. Our soil is rich but rocky.

Julie (NE Kentucky, zone 6/7)


http://www.bobsloansampler.com/

Bearskin to Holly Fork: Stories from Appalachia
by Bob Sloan ISBN: 1-893239-21-7

Subject: How Does A Lawn Become A Flower Bed?
From: (kathy)
Date: 6/29/03 1:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time

To make a flower bed and survive the event, buy enough bags of compostand
manure at WalMart to cover the new bed. Lay the bags unopened over
the area leaving NO space uncovered. Come back in the spring. Slit thebags
and dump the contents over the "flower bed." Rake smooth andplant. NO work. No
newspapers. No digging. NO heart attacks or heatstroke. I speak from
experience here. NEVER will I EVER dig sod outagain LOL.
KSHULLER

I like that idea! If I had the patience, and didn't have a utility room full of
flowers waited to be planted, I would use your method.

(I started this post. I didn't want to dig out all that sod. But the darn thing
is, I ended up digging it all out anyway! Once I dug a few shovel fulls it
became a macho challenge and I just kept going. Took about 4 days and was a LOT
of sweaty, nasty work. I would NOT do it again but would use the
new-soil-over-newspapers-method or the method described above. The new flower
bed is beautiful though.)