Jurors mull 'day of reckoning' in Roundup cancer trial

NOYDB

Senior Member
Monsanto is an imaginary entity for legal purposes. "it" doesn't want anything."it" doesn't have an agenda, pure or otherwise. It serves the purposes of giving lawyers a target. Glyphosate is a chemical that has been tested out the yin-yang. It does the function of a herbicide and does so very well. Responsible for crops that feed so many.

Lawyer wants to steal some money and found a victim of an ailment to be the face of the attempt to steal.
 
Thread starter #22
I don't know. It may have been an issue un be known to man.

There are studies saying it is and studies saying it isn't. Who is paying for those studies is the real question. That's where the agenda is.

If you don't think Monsanto has an agenda.. Do you think their agenda is pure?
We've heard the "Who is paying" strawman argument for decades now. The question is not who is paying. The question is is the science behind the study good science or not? The answer to that is independent peer review.

I will guarantee you if you drink enough Gly you will die. If you use it regularly and apply simple prudent precautions (you know, like don't touch your face with your hands until you have washed your hands thoroughly after coming in contact with the Gly, etc) you're going to be just fine.

As for the amount of Gly in foods and the risk it poses there is the cost/benefit equation to be considered. Herbicides and pesticides are huge contributors to the stable, affordable supply of food we enjoy with minimal risk. Take them away and we will all be faced with the opportunity costs of not using them.

As an afterthought I'm pretty sure after 44 years of study if there was a causal relationship between Gly and cancer it would be well established by now.

I'm headed to the country shortly to apply some Gly to my food plots. Prolly use a 2% solution. That's 2.5 oz of 41% Gly concentrate/gal of water. I should get a good kill with that. May toss in some 2-4-d to make sure I get everything. I got milk thistle and it's persistent.
 
Last edited:

drhunter1

Senior Member
We've heard the "Who is paying" strawman argument for decades now. The question is not who is paying. The question is is the science behind the study good science or not? The answer to that is independent peer review.

I will guarantee you if you drink enough Gly you will die. If you use it regularly and apply simple prudent precautions (you know, like don't touch your face with your hands until you have washed your hands thoroughly after coming in contact with the Gly, etc) you're going to be just fine.

As for the amount of Gly in foods and the risk it poses there is the cost/benefit equation to be considered. Herbicides and pesticides are huge contributors to the stable, affordable supply of food we enjoy with minimal risk. Take them away and we will all be faced with the opportunity costs of not using them.

As an afterthought I'm pretty sure after 44 years of study if there was a causal relationship between Gly and cancer it would be well established by now.

I'm headed to the country shortly to apply some Gly to my food plots. Prolly use a 2% solution. That's 2.5 oz of 41% Gly concentrate/gal of water. I should get a good kill with that. May toss in some 2-4-d to make sure I get everything. I got milk thistle and it's persistent.
You have a ton more trust in the the FDA and other outlets than I do. Even if gly causes cancer or it's "inert" ingredients cause cancer I doubt it would be allowed to come to light.

There is too much money involved and our lives aren't worth it.
 

Miguel Cervantes

GON Severe Weatherman
You have a ton more trust in the the FDA and other outlets than I do. Even if gly causes cancer or it's "inert" ingredients cause cancer I doubt it would be allowed to come to light.

There is too much money involved and our lives aren't worth it.
Glyphosate is the least of my worries and should be the least of most large neighborhood dwellers. I was on a property in Braselton this morning sitting in my buggy on the curb with the windows down. Had to roll them up. All of the lawns were manicured and looked like a golf course, but this is because they were all under chemical treatment programs and the stench of chemicals was so strong that you couldn't stand it, or at least I couldn't.

People don't realize there is just as big a hazard to breathing chemicals as their is bathing in it. Having that air quality for your hood is bound to result in elevated cancer cases.
 

PopPop

Senior Member
You have a ton more trust in the the FDA and other outlets than I do. Even if gly causes cancer or it's "inert" ingredients cause cancer I doubt it would be allowed to come to light.

There is too much money involved and our lives aren't worth it.
Round Up has dramatically increased yield on food crops. That yield feeds a hungry planet. Right or wrong it may be as simple as math. A few cancers or many more starvations. Dealing with either on a personal basis sucks.
 

NOYDB

Senior Member
Round-up causes weeds to complain. I just didn't know weeds went online.
 

NOYDB

Senior Member
Glyphosate is a herbicide. It affects plants. All you plant people should be worried.
 
Well they did find a jury of morons, so the lawyers make some money
 
the jury said it caused his cancer and awared 289 million bucks.

wanna bet Monsanto appeals?
 
We've heard the "Who is paying" strawman argument for decades now. The question is not who is paying. The question is is the science behind the study good science or not? The answer to that is independent peer review.
By Big Ag, environmental activists, Govt. agencies, egg head academics, independent researchers, and ancdote from part time farmers. Riffling through all that ought to get you to the truth.
 
By Big Ag, environmental activists, Govt. agencies, egg head academics, independent researchers, and ancdote from part time farmers. Riffling through all that ought to get you to the truth.
So if a farmer resorted to spraying straight vinegar concentrate on weeds and was diagnosed with cancer, how long before a law suit was brought against vinegar manufacturers and a jury of useful idiots found to award him a nice retirement?
 

jimbo4116

Retired Moderator
The question is will glyphosates come off the market. If they do the corn, soybean, cotton producers will be devastated. Most don't have the equipment to return mechanical cultivation for weed control.
 
We've heard the "Who is paying" strawman argument for decades now. The question is not who is paying. The question is is the science behind the study good science or not? The answer to that is independent peer review.

I will guarantee you if you drink enough Gly you will die. If you use it regularly and apply simple prudent precautions (you know, like don't touch your face with your hands until you have washed your hands thoroughly after coming in contact with the Gly, etc) you're going to be just fine.

As for the amount of Gly in foods and the risk it poses there is the cost/benefit equation to be considered. Herbicides and pesticides are huge contributors to the stable, affordable supply of food we enjoy with minimal risk. Take them away and we will all be faced with the opportunity costs of not using them.

As an afterthought I'm pretty sure after 44 years of study if there was a causal relationship between Gly and cancer it would be well established by now.

I'm headed to the country shortly to apply some Gly to my food plots. Prolly use a 2% solution. That's 2.5 oz of 41% Gly concentrate/gal of water. I should get a good kill with that. May toss in some 2-4-d to make sure I get everything. I got milk thistle and it's persistent.
If you stick with 1oz per gallon it will kill it just as dead as using 2.5. Throw in some scythe and you can back down to 1/2 ounce. But don’t get scythe on yourself.
 
Top