Check and see if all those European countries have banned anything from Syngenta.
They are a European corp btw.
I'll wager it is more of a business move than going all "GREEN".
R
Last edited:
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
They are a European corp btw.
I'll wager it is more of a business move than going all "GREEN".
R
I respect and appreciate the view point.
Monsanto owns Bayer now, dont they.
Besides being a WWII crimes against humanity company Bayer is pretty European. Isnt Bayer the owner of Roundup?
I think Monsantos raping farmers on the seed that produces infertile plants is kind of cheesy. Not sure how many farmers actually gather seed though for their crops.
There is a lot going on and Im guessing its not so simple as it seems.
Yep, Bayer now owns Monsanto and they kept glyphosate but I think the wheels were already in motion before the merger.
I agree on the tactics that Monsanto pulled on the seed AS WELL AS charging farmers a technology fee to use their seed.
You know asbestos is a naturally ocurring mineral, not a chemical, dont you?
Craziest rock you will ever see.
There is a pit in Canada that goes to the devil mining that shit.
But if Monsanto is modifying the seed to resist their other product - Roundup - and they know the GMO plant contains more Roundup..........
Thats kind of fucked up.
Something has created issues in kids that were rare or non existant when I grew up.
The only common denominator I come up with is our food system.
We dont eat food anymore.
The EPA at one time was a needed org, but like all gov org's, it was never reigned in. The bigger the empire becomes as it branches out, the safer the top people become.
Back to Roundup, it kills.
Back to Roundup, it kills.
--This is a slight sway from the topic at hand, but 'pertaining' as well. I've commented in the past about a friend of mine that has a daughter who was born with a facial tumor. Over 25 years ago. She had to have immediate surgeries upon birth, as well as has had to travel to a Shriner's hospital in Alabama numerous times for follow-up surgeries. The point I'm making so far, is all these previous details explain WHY she has been tube-fed ALL her live, and has never eaten a single thing the way you or I eat food.
And the reason I add that here, is that you would not believe how tiny/petite she is, compared with all other folks in both her family, as well as her community. Surprise of all surprises, she looks just like the folks in pictures did, 150 years ago.
Think about that,,,, and run with it. All's ya'll.
Or, you could (try and) look at it this way;
Glyphosate was synthesized in 1950 by the Swiss. In 1970, it was "coincidentally" "discovered" by Monsanto.
OK, since 1970, there have been how many years of "Democrat" Presidents and how many years of Republican Presidents ?
Democrats; 20
Republicans; 30
So, Republicans bad, Democrats good, we get it. But, just what in the fuck were your wonderful democrat presidents doing besides sitting on their thumbs over the whole Monsanto subject ? I'd venture to guess they had their hands out, taking donations and lobbying money from Monsanto (just like Republicans were). Personally, I hate Monsanto and think their upper management should have been/be tarred and feathered.
Jesus, get a grip and some impartiality. I doubt there are many people here that think Republicans are lilly white, but I'm pretty certain that most do believe there are some pretty unsavory types in the liberal/democrat circle. It's kind of funny that you either can't see it or refuse to. Does nothing but undermine your credibility, not that you had much to begin with.
Glyphosate - Wikipedia
Oh, and a little side note of interest about the company that patented Glyphosate in 1964;
Stauffer Chemical - Wikipedia
Sounds like a great bunch of fellas......
Don't see how asbestos is any more or less dangerous than fiberglass.
That shit gets airborne too.
Don't shards of glass cause lung scarring?
Shit working on the back of an asphalt spreader has to expose workers to all kinds Of volatile carbon organics but if there is no new industry to replace the product, at least one that will feed the coffers of your political party, than everyone looks the other way.
OSHA won't even set a safe exposure level for the VOCs on a paving spreader because according to their data there likely isn't one. They are all dead.
Last edited:
Or, you could (try and) look at it this way;
Glyphosate was synthesized in 1950 by the Swiss. In 1970, it was "coincidentally" "discovered" by Monsanto.
OK, since 1970, there have been how many years of "Democrat" Presidents and how many years of Republican Presidents ?
Democrats; 20
Republicans; 30
So, Republicans bad, Democrats good, we get it. But, just what in the fuck were your wonderful democrat presidents doing besides sitting on their thumbs over the whole Monsanto subject ? I'd venture to guess they had their hands out, taking donations and lobbying money from Monsanto (just like Republicans were). Personally, I hate Monsanto and think their upper management should have been/be tarred and feathered.
Jesus, get a grip and some impartiality. I doubt there are many people here that think Republicans are lilly white, but I'm pretty certain that most do believe there are some pretty unsavory types in the liberal/democrat circle. It's kind of funny that you either can't see it or refuse to. Does nothing but undermine your credibility, not that you had much to begin with.
Glyphosate - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Oh, and a little side note of interest about the company that patented Glyphosate in 1964;
Stauffer Chemical - Wikipedia
Sounds like a great bunch of fellas......
Compared to Obama's picks to head the EPA....just take a gander at Trump's picks, who all fit the standard class of criminality, in relation to supporting corporate polluters and deniability of human caused climate change. They are all eco-terrorists in my book, and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
So prove climate change is human caused without saying "many scientists feel".........
Inhaling asbestos fibers that travel to the lungs, do not decompose in the human body. Same goes for cervical cancer victims, like with the use of asbestos laden talcum powder.
Fuck I've been wearing wool to my boys baseball games, so much for "global warming".....
So climate change is because you "feel" sweat on your brow.
So glass decomposes in the human body?
I dug up glass at a construction site that had been buried debris from when Charlestown, MA burned to the ground. Shit was ver a hundred years old.
I thought talc was chalk. Who put asbestos in it?
Krugman won the Noble Peace Prize some years back.
You should at least pick-up on his twitter feed...
Paul Krugman won the Nobel prize as the sole recipient in economics in 2008.
Last edited:
Okay, then I put no stock in anything coming from a bias rag like the NYTimes. If the source was science based and non-political then that would be a different story.
Emo;
Or without saying "who all fit the standard class of criminality". Whatever the fuck that means. Really, provide some perspective, proof and backup. I'll listen, really I will.
Did you read far enough down my post (#59) above to see that I really dislike Monsanto ? Did you see my remark about Stauffer Chemical ? Those bastards should have been jailed a long time ago, particularly for what they did in terms of polluting their factory site in Florida. Oh, and this was a real crowd pleaser;
The company was in the headlines in the mid-1980's for selling its design for a chemical plant to make phosphorus trichloride to Krebs A.G., a Swiss company. The plant modeled after a Stauffer plant in Pennsylvania, was subsequently built by Krebs for El Nasr Pharmaceutical Company of Egypt. Phosphorus trichloride is well known for its dual use capacity as a starting material for pesticide products as well as Sarin.[13]
Just what the M/E needs. Another way of putting Sarin into the hands of those who want you dead because you do not belive in Muhammed. All for nothing other than the almighty buck.
See, that's what impartiality looks like. It's not so difficult. Quit regurgitating the bullshit that you have been spoon fed and think for yourself. If you do, you'll come across as being far more intelligent than what you are presently appearing.
Remember, we are all being bombarded by partisan, biased bullshit, wrapped up to look like "news". You're buying into a particular agenda and I'm buying into an agenda that is quite different from yours. Doesn't mean that I immediately embrace everything I read though.
Has the EPA done some good ? Yes. Are they well beyond their stale date and are no longer finding ways to help mankind, without harming mankind ?.......umm......jury is out on that one.
Don't project. Anyone that takes scientific advice from any source that has a political bias should not be involved in science based discussions. There is ample non-biased data available on any topic that has been discussed on this site if people put the effort into looking for it.
Maybe not the environment, but did rid us of a bunch of Obama bumperstickers.........?
Q
QuickNDirty
Guest
NPP doesn't mean shit since bamby won it for doing literally nothing.
If anything, winning a peace prize is just another indicator that you're a bootlicking cocksucker.
All of that state and government agency officials can be bought by the large corporations done every day..
They make a fuss with small players to justify their jobs.
Former corporate employees now working at government agencies and the other way around.
Sometimes they go back and forth getting a raise each time.
Have had recent experience with the results of contacting the feds and ensuing cover up including buying off the union.
It is all a big snake pit of lies and cover ups.
Done 24/7/365 have seen it in more than one industry as a bystander one time on a holiday.
There is nothing off the table for these guys, nothing!
They make a fuss with small players to justify their jobs.
Former corporate employees now working at government agencies and the other way around.
Sometimes they go back and forth getting a raise each time.
Have had recent experience with the results of contacting the feds and ensuing cover up including buying off the union.
It is all a big snake pit of lies and cover ups.
Done 24/7/365 have seen it in more than one industry as a bystander one time on a holiday.
There is nothing off the table for these guys, nothing!
Q
QuickNDirty
Guest
That's no bullshit.
https://googletransparencyproject.org/articles/googles-revolving-door-us
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...the-revolving-door-spins-from-fda-to-industry
https://www.globalresearch.ca/how-m...nd-now-controls-government-regulators/5535501
And then there's this:
https://www.ehn.org/monsanto-science-ghostwriting--2597869694.html
We don't go outside anymore either.
I'm sure all the head drugs everyone is on that end up in your water are helpful also.
That's not how any of this works. If a quart of roundup doesn't work 2 quarts won't help. People don't use more roundup to kill resistant weeds, they use different chemistrys like Liberty or Dicamba.
And you can't make a plant "more resistant" to roundup. If corn or beans are "roundup ready" ie you can spray round up on them, you don't make them more resistant.
GMO is simply genetically modified organism. Plants, specifically corn and soy, we modified by pesticide companies one of two primary ways. First, as Monsanto did, was gene insertion to induce tolerance to a given pesticide. Secondly, like the old American Cyanamid company did, was to plant a field of a crop, spray with a herbicide that crop was not tolerant to and harvest the seeds of the plants that survived the application. Plant a large enough field and there would always be some plants that survived. Keep planting those seeds and cross pollination would increase the naturally occurring tolerance to the pesticide being applied. Both methods had the same outcome at the end of the day.
@deersniper is correct in his explanation of the approach to using Roundup. Once a plant is resistant applying more pesticide does not overcome that resistance. Then a process called Integrated Weed Management should be applied to combat and minimize resistance.
GMO does not mean specifically inducing resistance to RoundUp. Years ago DuPont produced GMO corn that contained more Vitamin A to help malnutrition induced blindness in Africa. GMO is simply a genetic modification to yield a desired outcome.
@deersniper is correct in his explanation of the approach to using Roundup. Once a plant is resistant applying more pesticide does not overcome that resistance. Then a process called Integrated Weed Management should be applied to combat and minimize resistance.
GMO does not mean specifically inducing resistance to RoundUp. Years ago DuPont produced GMO corn that contained more Vitamin A to help malnutrition induced blindness in Africa. GMO is simply a genetic modification to yield a desired outcome.
Last edited:
And Obama won the peace prize for.........not much respect for that institution anymore.
Last edited:
From one of the 3 letter agencies you worship.......
Talc
FDA information on cosmetics and the common ingredient talc: FDA has received questions about the safety of talc and whether talc contains harmful contaminants.
Asbestos is "like" talc as in it's a mineral but it is not in talc.
Do women have lungs in their vaginas?
Not sure where you got beamed down from please feel free to have scotty beam you back. Our current commander in chief has only had a short time to accomplish the IMPOSSIBLE for the UNGRATEFUL with little help from the right and virtually zero help from the left (apparently you side) if you think he is a Putin lover I have a big news flash NOT. Does he have to be somewhat diplomatic with any country's leaders yes I believe he's not there for any monetary gain unlike the Clinton's. I pretty sure he has zero control over your filthy rich "oligarchs" in Russia . I didn't hear from the left bitching when Obama said he would have more to offer (paraphrasing) after he was reelected? Just exactly who are his evil cohorts? And what did they do to piss off your kind? What too many people working in AMERICA is bad for the economy and environment? Trump didn't create any of your delusional problems fact. I think you are Just trolling call that a guess. I hope you are stuck with him for another 4 very long years after he completed his first. That is what America had to deal with enduring 8 with Obama. Curious to know who you think can do better?
Missed the story about the EPA fine that resulted on this one......
en.m.wikipedia.org
2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill - Wikipedia
Ok...forgive me, for I skimmed. I have been working in an environmental industry for over 32 years. I do not have a degree, but my certifications and experience are equivalent to masters level in science and biology. I know bullshit science from political theatre.
Farmers get cancer from Roundup.
Hmmm......it's like saying the thousand other things they are exposed to are thrown out the window. That isn't scientific method.
Many cancer studies are bunk, they have to be. In order to prove one particular thing is causing cancer, you have to rule out, or eliminate exposure to everything else. That is fairly well impossible in a human, and likely any other creature.
Right now there are hundreds of "emerging contaminants" being studied. Oh they aren't new, emerging means we are only recently looking at them. Particularly PFAS (polyflouroalkyl substances) and pharmaceutical substances are a virtual unknown player. THEY ARE IN YOUR WATER.
"We did a study on breast cancer and found women whose diet consisted of greater than 35% fat had x% increase in breast cancer."
That was an actual study. If you can't find the flaw in a statement or study like that, you don't understand scientific method.
How many times have the dieticians told us butter is bad? Eggs are bad? Wait...they are good...now they are bad. Their tests are fucked is why.
In 1890 per Capita sugar usage in US was Les than 10lbs. Today per Capita sugar usage is over 200lbs. That seems high....until you start reading labels. I personally believe that such a glaring statistical bit shouldn't be ignored, yet in the woman's breast cancer study it was completely ignored. This information was in the first Atkin's diet book I ever read.
Back to emerging pollutants:
What we know so far is some folks build them up and some don't. They seem to reside in fat cells, my knowledge is limited, but can they affect ones metabolism? What affects are they having? I don't know. I hope their studies are sound, but there are so many other chemicals and environmental factors at play.
I have some serious doubts about glyphosphate being the boogie man. My uncle who was a farmer all his life, died with a fairly rare cancer called bile duct cancer.
He had brown lung from breathing dirt, he smoked for many years but quit later in life. He handled many different kinds of chemicals necessary in productive farming. He ate sugar, he ate pork, he drank water from a well on his farm, and many other things humans are exposed to in life. What caused his cancer oh science sages of the easy chair?
Farmers get cancer from Roundup.
Hmmm......it's like saying the thousand other things they are exposed to are thrown out the window. That isn't scientific method.
Many cancer studies are bunk, they have to be. In order to prove one particular thing is causing cancer, you have to rule out, or eliminate exposure to everything else. That is fairly well impossible in a human, and likely any other creature.
Right now there are hundreds of "emerging contaminants" being studied. Oh they aren't new, emerging means we are only recently looking at them. Particularly PFAS (polyflouroalkyl substances) and pharmaceutical substances are a virtual unknown player. THEY ARE IN YOUR WATER.
"We did a study on breast cancer and found women whose diet consisted of greater than 35% fat had x% increase in breast cancer."
That was an actual study. If you can't find the flaw in a statement or study like that, you don't understand scientific method.
How many times have the dieticians told us butter is bad? Eggs are bad? Wait...they are good...now they are bad. Their tests are fucked is why.
In 1890 per Capita sugar usage in US was Les than 10lbs. Today per Capita sugar usage is over 200lbs. That seems high....until you start reading labels. I personally believe that such a glaring statistical bit shouldn't be ignored, yet in the woman's breast cancer study it was completely ignored. This information was in the first Atkin's diet book I ever read.
Back to emerging pollutants:
What we know so far is some folks build them up and some don't. They seem to reside in fat cells, my knowledge is limited, but can they affect ones metabolism? What affects are they having? I don't know. I hope their studies are sound, but there are so many other chemicals and environmental factors at play.
I have some serious doubts about glyphosphate being the boogie man. My uncle who was a farmer all his life, died with a fairly rare cancer called bile duct cancer.
He had brown lung from breathing dirt, he smoked for many years but quit later in life. He handled many different kinds of chemicals necessary in productive farming. He ate sugar, he ate pork, he drank water from a well on his farm, and many other things humans are exposed to in life. What caused his cancer oh science sages of the easy chair?
Last edited:
Agreed.
A hybrid plant could fit the definition of a GMO.
We, humans, have been doing that for a while...
I'd wager much of the health problems farmers deal with later in life
were the result of exposure when the earlier chems were introduced coupled with
long term exposure to average things.
R
Cancer is a natural thing - cell mutation or cell regeneration out of control.
Good cell mutations lead to survival of the fittest.
Good cell regeneration replaces the old with the new.
Getting rid of cancer to some extent means stopping Darwin and early aging.
Correct me if that is wrong.
Now cell mutation of the bad kind has certainly been caused by nuke stuff so environmental cancer happens no doubt, but what other factors need to be involved is the thing, other environmental factors perhaps genetic.
I agree its tough to say definitively "this caused cancer".
As an aside regards statistics....
Learned something about drug labeling.
Ive been told the drug companies will say something about their drug like "Reduces incidences of cancer up to 50%".
but the real fact behind that data is the incidence of the cancer will be "2 in 100,000" and they through their data say their drug will bring cancer to the level of "1 in 100,000".
So what if the side effects of the drug are "loss of sleep, frequent uncontrolled anal leakage and urinary incontinence"
So you think it means "Well Ive increased my chances of surviving cancer by half" but in reality your chance of getting cancer was slim "2 in 100,000" but now you are more likely to don soiled shorts daily than you ever were to get cancer.
What I am horrible at and Im sure what farmers are horrible at is exposure to automotive maintenance type chemicals.
Solvents to clean parts, oils, used and new, fuels, etc. When I worked on my bike I would bathe in that shit.
I can only imagine farmers do more so working on their gear.
Now a days its pretty much just Hoppes I expose myself to.
Im an idiot but life, if lived, entails risk.
Genetics unfortunately are not my thing. My oldest daughter has lots of knowledge, but that doesn't make me an authority. I do know a bit about the Roundup resistant strains, not enough to comment with any conviction.
I do know cloning has been around a very long time. Ever plucked a sucker from a tomato plant, and planted it? You just cloned that plant.
Excise a hunk of the meaty part of a mushroom, careful not to get any spores in the sample. Has to be done in a clean room with specific knowledge of sample contamination.
Place sample on agar media in petri dish, incubate. Use mycelial growth to innoculate a growing substrate. Viola! You cloned the particular mushroom, from which the sample was taken.
I digress.
The average citizen is easily duped, as the needs of the puppet masters dictate.
Yup. Stuff like carb cleaner is awful for your health. I've heard of mechanics that break out when they come in contract hyd fluid because they have been exposed to it on their skin so much they have developed a allergic reaction to it.
Disposable gloves are around $0.16 a pair but it's difficult to get help to wear them even when provided free.
FDA says no asbestos in talc they checked.
Stop buying chinese mined minerals and you will be okay.
Support Trump - MAGA!
