197
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/science@lemmy.world

The popular weedkiller has also been found in 80% of Americans' urine, according to a 2022 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Liar.

Their own documents proved that RoundUp causes cancers. Review them for yourself.

What you think they paid out $10,000,000,000.00 in settlements because of something you have figured out, but they can't prove at trial?

No, it's that their shit causes cancer and they knew it and sold it anyway without a warning.

https://www.wisnerbaum.com/documents/monsanto-documents-chart-101217.pdf

The lawsuits are not about glyphosate, they are about RoundUp™.

[-] BigDickEnergy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

I'm not a liar, you just have a very simplistic view of things.

They knew glyphosate (aka RoundUp) causes cancer and did not disclose it. This likely led to some severe exposure cases and thus they had to pay out (although I strongly believe prison sentences should also have been part of it). This is just as terrible as if I sad sold you lye and never told you it is corrosive, thus endangering you.

None of this means you cannot use lye for making pretzels/ uncloging your sink. For those uses it is safe. Same for Glyphosate.

I'd clarify I'm not Bayer fanboy - genetic modification for the sale of a herbicide is a poor use of modern genetic technology. But I cannot deny the measurable climate benefits of using it (in terms of CO2 emissions and soil degradation) source

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's two different things. The second point is very interesting.

First, Monsanto's own documents say there is no safe level of glyphosate. The mechanism of action is antibiotic and genotoxicity. It was patented as an antibiotic. Small amounts kill gut bacteria, for example. You're oversimplifying and underestimating the safety of any amount of glyphosate and NNG, a contaminate inherent to all glyphosate.

Second, no doubt the overall benefit to agribusiness is massive, but to humanity as a whole, who can say? What might have been developed if not this? Even with this, people are still starving to death and the planet is overheating. I agree everything requires a balance of risks and benefits. The allies would have lost WWII without asbestos. The manipulations of science and failures to follow the science because of "company product objectives" is inexcusable. No corporations should have such influence over science and medicine.

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
197 points (90.2% liked)

science

14597 readers
79 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS