Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
In article , Bernard Hill
writes In article , Franz Heymann notfranz. writes To be blunt: You have not a clue what is what in the world. And quit spamming your nonsense to half the newsgroups in the world. Franz Oh! The light has suddenly dawned. I read "glycophosphate" for "glyphosphate" and really couldn't see the connection with my weak knees - I take 1g of sodium glycophosphate a day and am pretty sure it's helping. Bernard Hill Selkirk, Scotland Abort that stupid message. It's glucosamine I take. Nothing like what I said. And glucosamine sulphate at that. Bernard Hill Selkirk, Scotland |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 09:34:31 +0100, Bernard Hill
wrote: In article , Bernard Hill writes In article , Franz Heymann notfranz. writes To be blunt: You have not a clue what is what in the world. And quit spamming your nonsense to half the newsgroups in the world. Franz Oh! The light has suddenly dawned. I read "glycophosphate" for "glyphosphate" and really couldn't see the connection with my weak knees - I take 1g of sodium glycophosphate a day and am pretty sure it's helping. Bernard Hill Selkirk, Scotland Abort that stupid message. It made more sense than most of the rest of the thread! -- Paul My Lake District walking site (updated 29th September 2003): http://paulrooney.netfirms.com Please sponsor me for the London Marathon at: http://www.justgiving.com/london2004 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Franz Heymann" wrote in message ...
wrote in message s.com... See the full story http://www.ecwa.asn.au/info/glyphosb.html SNIP So what? Roundup is supposed to be used as a herbicide *on land*. How is it supposed to get into the water? Remember that it is deactivated mighty quickly when it gets into the soil. .. Would that be the same surfactant which is used in washing liquids? [snip] How long did it take you to copy that from wherever you found it. What on earth does that gaebage have to do with thre use of glyphosate as a herbicide on terrestrial plants? You must be truly short of a case if you have had to resort to copying all that here. Franz Franz, You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. This is without all the other bad logic you are using. -- Neil Jones- http://www.butterflyguy.com/ "At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog National Nature Reserve |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
" wrote:
Read that, think about it. Particularly the third sentence. Then if you still don't understand the question we can talk about it. This is not an answer to the original question. It may be a reason to look for lower toxicity detergents for use with herbicides, but it is not an argument against herbicides. I'd rather not play with words, risk my life playing Russian Roulette. the world can live without glyphosate thanks. Tell that to the New Zealand dept of Conservation (DoC), they use it to control invasive exotic species which threatent to take over sensitive habitats. It is most useful because replanting with native varieties is not inhibited. Peter |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Neil Jones" wrote in message m... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... wrote in message s.com... See the full story http://www.ecwa.asn.au/info/glyphosb.html SNIP So what? Roundup is supposed to be used as a herbicide *on land*. How is it supposed to get into the water? Remember that it is deactivated mighty quickly when it gets into the soil. . Would that be the same surfactant which is used in washing liquids? [snip] How long did it take you to copy that from wherever you found it. What on earth does that gaebage have to do with thre use of glyphosate as a herbicide on terrestrial plants? You must be truly short of a case if you have had to resort to copying all that here. Franz Franz, You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. This is without all the other bad logic you are using. Let me have some samples. If a agree that the logic was bad, I would admit it without further ado. For normal horticultural purposes, glyphosate is inactivated when it enters the soil. I have for a number of decades used glyphosate in my garden in order to kill, for example, giant hogweed, nettles and dandelions which have come up in the midst of garden plants. I have lost all the weeds and none of the garden plants, in spite of the fact that a goodly fraction of the applied glyphosate must have found its way into the soil. Franz |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Neil Jones" wrote in message m... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... wrote in message s.com... See the full story http://www.ecwa.asn.au/info/glyphosb.html SNIP So what? Roundup is supposed to be used as a herbicide *on land*. How is it supposed to get into the water? Remember that it is deactivated mighty quickly when it gets into the soil. . Would that be the same surfactant which is used in washing liquids? [snip] How long did it take you to copy that from wherever you found it. What on earth does that gaebage have to do with thre use of glyphosate as a herbicide on terrestrial plants? You must be truly short of a case if you have had to resort to copying all that here. Franz Franz, You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. This is without all the other bad logic you are using. Let me have some samples. If a agree that the logic was bad, I would admit it without further ado. For normal horticultural purposes, glyphosate is inactivated when it enters the soil. I have for a number of decades used glyphosate in my garden in order to kill, for example, giant hogweed, nettles and dandelions which have come up in the midst of garden plants. I have lost all the weeds and none of the garden plants, in spite of the fact that a goodly fraction of the applied glyphosate must have found its way into the soil. Franz |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Neil Jones" wrote in message m... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... wrote in message s.com... See the full story http://www.ecwa.asn.au/info/glyphosb.html SNIP So what? Roundup is supposed to be used as a herbicide *on land*. How is it supposed to get into the water? Remember that it is deactivated mighty quickly when it gets into the soil. . Would that be the same surfactant which is used in washing liquids? [snip] How long did it take you to copy that from wherever you found it. What on earth does that gaebage have to do with thre use of glyphosate as a herbicide on terrestrial plants? You must be truly short of a case if you have had to resort to copying all that here. Franz Franz, You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. This is without all the other bad logic you are using. Let me have some samples. If a agree that the logic was bad, I would admit it without further ado. For normal horticultural purposes, glyphosate is inactivated when it enters the soil. I have for a number of decades used glyphosate in my garden in order to kill, for example, giant hogweed, nettles and dandelions which have come up in the midst of garden plants. I have lost all the weeds and none of the garden plants, in spite of the fact that a goodly fraction of the applied glyphosate must have found its way into the soil. Franz |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Neil Jones" wrote in message m... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... wrote in message s.com... See the full story http://www.ecwa.asn.au/info/glyphosb.html SNIP So what? Roundup is supposed to be used as a herbicide *on land*. How is it supposed to get into the water? Remember that it is deactivated mighty quickly when it gets into the soil. . Would that be the same surfactant which is used in washing liquids? [snip] How long did it take you to copy that from wherever you found it. What on earth does that gaebage have to do with thre use of glyphosate as a herbicide on terrestrial plants? You must be truly short of a case if you have had to resort to copying all that here. Franz Franz, You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. This is without all the other bad logic you are using. Let me have some samples. If a agree that the logic was bad, I would admit it without further ado. For normal horticultural purposes, glyphosate is inactivated when it enters the soil. I have for a number of decades used glyphosate in my garden in order to kill, for example, giant hogweed, nettles and dandelions which have come up in the midst of garden plants. I have lost all the weeds and none of the garden plants, in spite of the fact that a goodly fraction of the applied glyphosate must have found its way into the soil. Franz |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
In message , Neil Jones
writes You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst there are some "soils" where glyphosate is not immediately bound up. They are in general so utterly infertile that you aren't likely to be using weedkiller on them in the first place. Glyphosate and for that matter several other common weedkillers are very tightly bound to clays and/or organic material in soils on first contact and so physically deactivated. The destruction of the molecule takes longer but the stuff is very effectively tied up on hitting the ground. It *has* to hit green plant material to work. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. Likewise. Regards, -- Martin Brown |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
Martin Brown wrote:
In message , Neil Jones writes You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst there are some "soils" where glyphosate is not immediately bound up. They are in general so utterly infertile that you aren't likely to be using weedkiller on them in the first place. Glyphosate and for that matter several other common weedkillers are very tightly bound to clays and/or organic material in soils on first contact and so physically deactivated. The destruction of the molecule takes longer but the stuff is very effectively tied up on hitting the ground. I am afraid you are quite wrong on your science. You appear not to have a proper understanding of the processes involved. If it were to be as tightly bound as you claim then id would not be degrated. Basically it appears that it is bound rather as phosphate is by adsorption onto the surface of certain materials. In fact it pops on and off and the soil doesn't have to be that poor for a diminution of growth to be observed. This is what just one study says. " Although glyphosate is commonly thought to exhibit no residual activity, recent field work with tomatoes has shown that phytoactive residues can persist, at least in sandy soils. Adsorption may also be low, and phytoactivity high, in soils with a low unoccupied P-sorption capacity. This paper reports experiments designed to re-assess the threat of glyphosate residues to crop plants. http://www.regional.org.au/au/asa/19...636cornish.htm So it may depend on the amount of phosphate present. Very fertile soils may have a lot and therefore it is not adsorbed. It *has* to hit green plant material to work. You keep going on about green plants as if this is something significant. You said previously, "It is extremely specific to green plants that are conducting photosynthesis." I think this demonstrates that you don't understand the issue. Glyphosate or N-phosphonomethylglycine, to give its chemical name, does not have a direct effect on photosynthesis and also affects other non-photosynthetic organisms. N-phosphonomethylglycine works by blocking the action of an enzyme called 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase which catalyses an imporant step in the production of amino acids. This metabolic pathway is NOT exclusive to photosythetic organisms and occurs in a wide range of other creatures. For example it does occur in the bug that causes malaria. I certainly cannot judge the validity of whether Glyphosate is safe or not on what you are saying. Whilst I don't necessarily concur with the original posters conclusion, It is not a good idea for you to poke fun and call people clueless when you post things which, to me at any rate, look as if it is YOU who does not understand the processes at work. Likewise. Regards, -- Martin Brown -- Neil Jones- http://www.butterflyguy.com/ "At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog National Nature Reserve |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Neil Jones" wrote in message ... Martin Brown wrote: In message , Neil Jones writes You are being hoisted on your own petard. You continually repeat a statement which is OBVIOUSLY not truthfull. Glyphosate is not necessarily inactivated on contact with soil. There are several studies which show this and I have posted references before. You don't need studies to show this because it is an OBVIOUS conclusion from the nature of the chemistry involved. Whilst there are some "soils" where glyphosate is not immediately bound up. They are in general so utterly infertile that you aren't likely to be using weedkiller on them in the first place. Glyphosate and for that matter several other common weedkillers are very tightly bound to clays and/or organic material in soils on first contact and so physically deactivated. The destruction of the molecule takes longer but the stuff is very effectively tied up on hitting the ground. I am afraid you are quite wrong on your science. You appear not to have a proper understanding of the processes involved. If it were to be as tightly bound as you claim then id would not be degrated. Basically it appears that it is bound rather as phosphate is by adsorption onto the surface of certain materials. In fact it pops on and off and the soil doesn't have to be that poor for a diminution of growth to be observed. This is what just one study says. " Although glyphosate is commonly thought to exhibit no residual activity, recent field work with tomatoes has shown that phytoactive residues can persist, at least in sandy soils. Adsorption may also be low, and phytoactivity high, in soils with a low unoccupied P-sorption capacity. This paper reports experiments designed to re-assess the threat of glyphosate residues to crop plants. http://www.regional.org.au/au/asa/19...636cornish.htm So it may depend on the amount of phosphate present. Very fertile soils may have a lot and therefore it is not adsorbed. I bet the effect was at a trivial level, otherwise, since glyphosate is used on a truly vast scale, its deleterious effects would have made themselves visible on a macroscopic scale, via, for example, reduced crop sizes. [snip] Franz |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
In article ,
"Franz Heymann" wrote: So it may depend on the amount of phosphate present. Very fertile soils may have a lot and therefore it is not adsorbed. I bet the effect was at a trivial level, otherwise, since glyphosate is used on a truly vast scale, its deleterious effects would have made themselves visible on a macroscopic scale, via, for example, reduced crop sizes. I remember using glyphosate (Roundup) to kill a nasty lawn, after the grass was dead I simply raked the soil, no new soil added, and re sowed with dwarf ryegrass. Apart from needing to scare the birds we had no problems. At the time we lived 300m from the sea on a reclaimed salt marsh that had been market gardens. So very fertile, highly sandy soil. If glyphosate was as persistant as claimed under such circumstances why did my new lawn come up fine? Peter -- Peter Ashby School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland To assume that I speak for the University of Dundee is to be deluded. Reverse the Spam and remove to email me. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 16:41:21 +0100, Peter Ashby
wrote: In article , "Franz Heymann" wrote: So it may depend on the amount of phosphate present. Very fertile soils may have a lot and therefore it is not adsorbed. I bet the effect was at a trivial level, otherwise, since glyphosate is used on a truly vast scale, its deleterious effects would have made themselves visible on a macroscopic scale, via, for example, reduced crop sizes. I remember using glyphosate (Roundup) to kill a nasty lawn, after the grass was dead I simply raked the soil, no new soil added, and re sowed with dwarf ryegrass. Apart from needing to scare the birds we had no problems. At the time we lived 300m from the sea on a reclaimed salt marsh that had been market gardens. So very fertile, highly sandy soil. If glyphosate was as persistant as claimed under such circumstances why did my new lawn come up fine? Peter What a stupid, pathetic, completely illogical argument to support your nonsense cause. I once knew a nip who argued the same for the bomb on Hiroshima. Today Hiroshima LOOKS a fine city, he thinks bombs are now necessary to build fine cities. Needless to say the original bomb obviously affected his marbles, glyphosate has obviously affected yours. . . . . . . . . The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The distinction is yours to draw... /( )` \ \___ / | /- _ `-/ ' (/\/ \ \ /\ / / | ` \ O O ) / | `-^--'` ' (_.) _ ) / `.___/` / `-----' / ----. __ / __ \ ----|====O)))==) \) /==== ----' `--' `.__,' \ | | \ / ______( (_ / \______ ,' ,-----' | \ `--{__________) \/ I'm a horny devil when riled. pete who? -=[ Grim Reaper ]=- 6/97 .""--.._ [] `'--.._ ||__ `'-, `)||_ ```'--.. \ _ /|//} ``--._ | .'` `'. /////} `\/ / .""".\ //{/// / /_ _`\\ // `|| | |(_)(_)|| _// || | | /\ )| _///\ || | |L====J | / |/ | || / /'-..-' / .'` \ | || / | :: | |_.-` | \ || /| `\-::.| | \ | || /` `| / | | | / || |` \ | / / \ | || | `\_| |/ ,.__. \ | || / /` `\ || || | . / \|| || | | |/ || / / | ( || / . / ) || | \ | || / | / || |\ / | || \ `-._ | / || \ ,//`\ /` | || ///\ \ | \ || |||| ) |__/ | || |||| `.( | || `\\` /` / || /` / || jgs / | || | \ || / | || /` \ || /` | || `-.___,-. .-. ___,' || `---'` `'----'` I need a drink, feel all giddy...hic! |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
"Peter Ashby" wrote in message news In article , "Franz Heymann" wrote: So it may depend on the amount of phosphate present. Very fertile soils may have a lot and therefore it is not adsorbed. I bet the effect was at a trivial level, otherwise, since glyphosate is used on a truly vast scale, its deleterious effects would have made themselves visible on a macroscopic scale, via, for example, reduced crop sizes. I remember using glyphosate (Roundup) to kill a nasty lawn, after the grass was dead I simply raked the soil, no new soil added, and re sowed with dwarf ryegrass. Apart from needing to scare the birds we had no problems. At the time we lived 300m from the sea on a reclaimed salt marsh that had been market gardens. So very fertile, highly sandy soil. If glyphosate was as persistant as claimed under such circumstances why did my new lawn come up fine? Almost ditto: I used to live on the Bagshot sand. I killed a has-been lawn with two applications of glyphosate and raked up the dry stuff after some weeks. I immediately resowed the patch, without even attempting to cultivate the soil. Within a few months I had a luxurious new lawn. ( I did start feeding it after it had got off to a start). I simply cannot understand why folk continue to bring up negligible second order effects ascribable to the use of glyphosate, except if they do it in order to grind axes. Franz |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Glyphosate & its side effects
Quote:
The soil must have been saturated wtih glyphosate, but I managed to get grass seed germinating there within two months. Also, the edge was so sharp and visible I'm convinced it only killed the grass it touched and did not leach in to the ground killing plants via their roots. However, in comparison I have a few dead patches in the lawn over a year old where my 'helpful' step dad sprinkled a little salt on the slugs to kill them. No ammount of grass seed or watering to wash the salt down below the root level will revive these patchs. I'm going to have to dig them out with a trowl and discard the soil as it's useless and toxic to plants. In summary, four pints of glyphosate proved less toxic to my lawn than a teaspoon (perhaps desert spoon if you want to be generous with the estimate) of table salt. I suspect the adversion to these products is more psychological than scientific because people assume something sold to kill plants/bugs/rodents must be really toxic and full of bad chemicals. Bizarely, those fear inspiring lables with skull and cross-bone symbols and warnings in huge red lettering have to be on weed killers regardless of what's in then, in fact if I was to mix vinegar and salt from my kitchen cupboard with water and sell it as weed killer I would have to by law put one of those lables on it, even though you could safely eat it on chips! |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Flowers: side by side | Gardening | |||
Glyphosate && its side effects | United Kingdom | |||
Banned Herbicides &&&& Pesticides | United Kingdom | |||
south side of a solo tree in open field is the best side | Plant Science | |||
Explanation of "edge effects" | Permaculture |