The plant that the county sprayed was knotweed which I saw my bees working last night. Does the herbiside get into the nectar? If so, what does that effect if anything when its fed to the larva? Anyone know of reserch on that?
>But nobody is putting these substances in their coffee (hopefully), so that really isn't a good way to look at it.
But you are getting exposed to all of those, including lead, on a daily basis. Even if you don't TAKE aspirin it's in the water because of people who DO take aspirin, and salt, caffeine, and acetic acid are on your food and Glyphosate is also in the water. I think it's the only realistic way to look at it... what matters isn't how much it takes for a single dose to kill you, what matters is what it does in small doses over the long run.
>I guess what I was saying is that the hypothetical "what would you rather put in your coffee" question isn't a good way to assess toxicity.
Of course. It's not a question of what sounds appetizing, but what the long term effects of exposure are. But the long term effects of caffeine and lead are pretty well know. People have been exposed to them for centuries now... The long term effects of Glyphosate are not known.
All these new & recent lineup of pesticides are advances from what was used in the past. Perhaps the next generation of chemicals or whatever will be better yet. Choose your path through life as best you can.
Ironically that's the type of thinking that people used initially to reject electricity at the turn of the 19th century. Imagine when the Polio vaccine might have been released if that type of testing was required. Ebola? We're willing to give it a 30-50 year head start as we continue testing all possibilities? Cell phones? Uh, we'd still be using dial up... It would absolutely destroy our economy as others would rocket past.
Is new always good? Nope. But once a product has passed the tests it's been required to and undergone the required regulatory oversight the barn doors are open for business.
Ninja, is not in the dictionary. Well played Ninja's, well played...
Exactly. Glyphosate has been in use for 40 years. From Wiki: In 2007 glyphosate was the most used herbicide in the United States agricultural sector, with 180 to 185 million pounds applied, and the second most used in home and garden market where users applied 5 to 8 million pounds; additionally industry, commerce and government applied 13 to 15 million pounds.
That’s about 100,000 tons per year in ’07 alone. With a little extrapolation I can estimate that total use in the US exceeds TWO MILLION TONS since the ‘70’s. And what has been the results of all this data? Opinionated links to CCD?
Real world data beats anything that a lab could provide. How could additional laboratory testing possibly add anything to this?
Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3
>We may well find out in the future that drinking bottled water is bad for us......who knows?
I'm pretty sure it is bad for us and I'm pretty sure we already know that from the things that crystal clear plastics add to our diet... biphenols...
>People have been exposed to them for centuries now... The long term effects of Glyphosate are not known.
+/-40 years of real world use isn't long term?
It may have been around since 1970, but it has only been used in large enough amounts to start exposing all of us at some level since 1994 when roundup ready soybeans were invented. And not at near the current levels until about 2010 when roundup ready corn was in full production. Until then roundup was just something used to clear a field now and then, not routinely sprayed on every field multiple times a year. We have never been exposed to this extent. In 2001 production of Roundup had climbed to 85 million pounds. By 2007 it had climbed to 185 million pounds. It's hard to find a substantiated number since 2007 (that 2007 number is well documented by the EPA) but Wikipedia has this: "A 2012 study found that over the 16 year period since genetically modified crops were introduced, "herbicide-resistant crop technology has led to a 239 million kilogram (527 million pound) increase in herbicide use in the United States between 1996 and 2011"--Charles M Benbrook Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. - the first sixteen years Environmental Sciences Europe 2012, 24:24 http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/24
Yes. That is recent.
I don't know whether Round-Up is good, bad, or indifferent...
What I do know is that I smoked cigarettes for about 35 years. I thank God for helping me quit about eight years ago...as of this moment I've not been diagnosed with cancer. Over the last couple of decades smoking has gotten some needed bad publicity and for the last several years the number of people smoking in the US has continued to decline as has lung cancer...think there's a connection there? Liver (and pancreatic) cancer, though, are on the rise. Being as the liver is one of our body's filters it makes me wonder if the cause of increased liver cancer cases is due to something it is filtering....
There are not any GMO wheat, barley, or oats in production, so that can not be the cause of the increased incidence of Celiacs disease. They are in the research phase and are not in the food chain at all. All of the cereal varieties have been developed by conventional plant breeding. So look back through this thread and look at the all of the mis-information given by the sky is falling group. Maybe what we should be more concerned with are the natural toxins that are present in our food chain. The same natural toxins that have been reduced by conventional plant breeding. I am retired now, but spent 28 years in cereal plant breeding.
Dave it appears then that spammy got caught in a lie about GMO wheat?
i have no problem with weeds i just keep running them over with my lawn mower and eventually they don't show up anymore.especially when it snows
Back on topic - couple of articles people can read and use to form their own opinions.
Essence - Roundup is now being used to help dry crops which increases residue in food. Linked to celiac/gluten intolerance, but likely early days of the research.
Related in a way - modern wheat strains don't cause any more issues than "ancient" strains, despite numerous popular (but unscientific claims) to the contrary (part 1 can be found at the link)
>There are not any GMO wheat, barley, or oats in production
There is not SUPPOSED to be: