[syhprum (OP)]

Glyphosate has been in use for at least 40 years if it is carcinogenic surely there would be firm evidence by now.
 

[Bored chemist]

My understanding is that it is a very weak carcinogen in animals (probably rats)
If you give enough of them high enough doses then you will find a statistically (but not "clinically") raised rate of cancer.
It's impossible to rule out the idea that it may be responsible for some cancers in humans. It is also impossible to attribute any particular human cancer to glyphosate.

What I can't understand is how the  guy won his case.
The instructions will say something like "keep off skin, eyes + clothing; do not breathe spra!" .
If the man claims he was exposed then he also admits he didn't follow the "safety instructions".

There has been some "news" today asking Monsanto's reps if they would drink glyphosate.
Well, if the choice is 2,4 D, paraquat or glyphosate, I know what I'd choose.
And the idea that we should ban it is economically unworkable.

[wolfekeeper]

There was a guy that used to go around eating a small spoonful of DDT at rallies to show how safe it was. This was during the 'Silent Spring' time when they were spraying DDT around from aeroplanes, just everywhere.

A couple of decades later some reporters tried to find out what happened to him in the end.

He was still alive, in good health, and he promptly ate some more of it for them!

The relationship is that all the scientific evidence is that glyphosate is much less toxic than DDT!

[Bored chemist]

IIRC in terms of acute toxicity, glyphosate s about as toxic as salt.

[syhprum (OP)]

Good lawyers seem to be able to convince juries of anything look at the number of people who "got cancer" because they lived near power lines or mobile phone relay towers of maybe a nuclear power station.

[alancalverd]

At least 30% of the population will develop a potentially lethal cancer as a result of just living long enough.

Pretty well anything is toxic if you ingest enough of it.

Admitting that you didn't follow the instructions would have any damages case dismissed instantly in a proper court.

[guest45734]

There has been some "news" today asking Monsanto's reps if they would drink glyphosate.
Well, if the choice is 2,4 D, paraquat or glyphosate, I know what I'd choose.
And the idea that we should ban it is economically unworkable.

The bee population is in decline, across America FACT. It may have a link to pesticide usage. Glycophosphate is used across America clearly there can be no link to this pesticide.

Cigarette sales reps smoke cigarettes and suffer no ill consequences for years, whilst others get cancer. Cigarettes are now known to be a huge contributor to various cancer, a helath warning is now printed on the packet poining out they can cause ill health if smoked.

I have used glycophosphate and smoked myself and suffer no ill effects whilst a friend of the family who was a agricultural spray contractor now has cancer which is suspected related to pesticide usage, he never smoked.

The bee population decline may not be linked to cancer, but it is very possibly linked to pesticides. To argue we can not do without Glycophosphate is a nonsense, also arguing that a Monsanto rep drinks the stuff makes it safe, is lunacy. Its a chemical and poisons plants, how can it not be a poison when ingested in large quantities. I suspect the Monsanto rep is a idiot.

[Bored chemist]

The bee population is in decline, across America FACT. It may have a link to pesticide usage. Glycophosphate is used across America clearly there can be no link to this pesticide.

Are you aware that we have a pretty good idea which pesticides are killing bees?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid

The use of herbicides does remove a lot of wildflowers that might benefit the bees- but that's an issue of modern farming practice rather than about glyphosate.

how can it not be a poison when ingested in large quantities.

It blocks photosynthesis.
I'm not green.
So from my point of view it is roughly s toxic as salt- which I add to my food.

Did you not realise they target biocides in that way?

I suspect the Monsanto rep is a idiot.

How come?
You don't have any evidence of that because there's no report here of what he said.

It was me that said

Well, if the choice is 2,4 D, paraquat or glyphosate, I know what I'd choose.

Are you calling me an idiot?
If so there's a simple way to check; you drink the paraquat, and I will drink the glyphosate.
For teh record
"The oral LD50 of paraquat, in its various forms, for rats ranges from about 20 mg/kg (10) to 150 mg/kg"
from
http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/metiram-propoxur/paraquat-ext.html

vs
"The acute oral LD50 in the rat is 5,600 mg/kg. Other oral LD50 values for glyphosate are 1,538 to greater than 10,000 mg/kg for mice, rabbits mg/kg, and goats"
from

http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/dienochlor-glyphosate/glyphosate-ext.html

[guest45734]

Are you calling me an idiot?

Nope, what gives you that idea

I only drink approved substances, paraquat is not one and neither is glycophosphate. I dont smoke and smoking a cigarette does not normally cause cancer, although it is recognized now that smoking does raise the risk of cancer, in many susceptible people, having said that some people smoke all their lives and dont die of cancer. I myself like every other person reading this thread given the option would take a cigarette rather than drink glycophosphate.

The longevity of a lab rat is much shorter than your average human subject. Stating that, at high dosages some rats get cancer in their short life time when fed glycophospate does not fill me with confidence, when compared with a creature with much longer longevity.

I prefer gardening without pesticides or chemicals of any kind, my food tastes better etc.

Edit The jury may have decided but the scientific jury is still out https://www.snopes.com/news/2018/08/17/cancer-juries-scientific-certainty-monsanto-roundup-ruling-explained/
 

[Bored chemist]

prefer gardening without pesticides or chemicals of any kind

I always found that the use of H2O improved yields- but feel free to try to do "chemical free" gardening if you want.

The point remains that for commercial large scale agriculture, we need herbicides and  glyphosate is one of the less environmentally damaging ones (and also one with a relatively low human toxicity).
I presume the court's decision will be overturned on appeal.

The guy's lawyer will get paid  whatever happens.

[chiralSPO]

without pesticides or chemicals of any kind

All "stuff" is made of chemicals. Fertilizers, dirt, water, air, pesticides... doesn't matter--they are all made of chemicals.

[guest45734]

without pesticides or chemicals of any kind

All "stuff" is made of chemicals. Fertilizers, dirt, water, air, pesticides... doesn't matter--they are all made of chemicals.

Agreed, but not all chemical occur naturally in the environment. Man made chemical are not naturally occurring.

[guest45734]

I presume the court's decision will be overturned on appeal.

I am more inclined to think he will be paid to drop the cae, and we will hear no more about it The EU and America view thing differently. I did add the chemical H2O to my pepper thi morning, they are thriving without glycophophate and are muito caliente.

[guest45734]

Glycophospate highlighted for harming bees guts.

https://phys.org/news/2018-09-common-weed-killer-linked-bee.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly-nwletter