"billo" said: "Despite the fact that the doses used in this study would
never expected to
correspond to human exposure levels under normal circumstances, as
reported by
Williams et al. (2000) for glyphosate and polyoxyethyleneamine in adults
or children
(margins of EXPOSURE=5420, 3370 and 461577, respectively), this results
shows that the
commercial formulation poses an increased potential risk for the rat
skeletal system."

In other words, the dosage required for this does *not* translate into
danger to humans. Of course, I am sure that you know *much* better
than those silly scientists know.

billo

Sorry, I cannot follow the logic of your "in other words" unless you are
trying to use a strict reading that this was done on rats so it has no
meaning for humans (I doubt that the scientists who did the research were
worried about the health of rats only, I also doubt that the reviewers and
the editor would have accepted the paper for publication if they agreed with
your "interpretation".

As you stated they said: "results shows that the commercial formulation
poses an increased potential risk for the rat skeletal system." If you
decide not to utilize the Precautionary Principle after reading this, that
is your choice.

Henry Kuska, retired

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