I hope these fools and lawyers realize that if they succeed in banning herbicides people better develope a taste for weeds instead of edible plants. Because that's what you're going to have. Just a damn money grab!

When a product is found to be highly likely to cause cancer after prolonged exposure, that's not a "money grab."

Considering how widely used Round Up is, I've used it for years, I don't think it's going away. The people who have gotten cancer from it had really high exposure levels, so how it is sold may change.

Lots and lots of products in a Home Depot type store will give you cancer or kill you.

Use common sense safety precautions and I doubt there's any issues. I have used it for 30+ years. Then again I mix carefully, wear rubber gloves, protective clothing, etc.

I'm not mixing and applying in shorts, with no protection what so ever, getting wet from the wind blowing it back, etc. I see that silliness out here all the time.

I have no problem with herbicides that are carefully and conscientiously applied (mindfully if you want to use that word), but in my own yard I will not use any type of herbicides or pesticides I can’t apply directly with a paint brush, etc.
When I first moved here 20 years ago I was able to flip any log in the yard and find a salamander or amphibian creeping about. Now, nada. All of the neighbors yards around me use herbicides- yard control, lawn service signs are posted up and down the block that they’ve just sprayed. Saw less than 15 lightning bugs in my yard last year, and a lot less bumblebees and honeybees (hornets sill going strong, those little f’ers). Top it off that I live close enough to a trout stream that empties into a large lake, and it’s a no go for me.

I understand that on a commercial level we have to use some methodology control in order to competitively grow crops, but on my small scale, I’ve certainly seen the damage herbicides cause
(This property has been in my family since the early 1900s, I’ve been around since the 70’s, so I’ve had the opportunity to watch it change over decades).

That’s not to say there aren’t other factors, but this seems a pretty obvious contributor.

I too have used Round-Up (generic, glyphosate) for years, and still have it in a cabinet in my garage. I’ll continue to use it for controlling both grasses and broadleafs in areas I’m trying to keep clean. A story from the past week disturbs me though. It said that in fields under contract to General Mills (think Cheerios in all its iterations), it was common practice to spray oat fields with glyphosate to kill/desiccate the crop in order to facilitate harvest.

At least 3 days/week, I try to eat a higher fiber breakfast than eggs and toast and that means oatmeal or Cheerios—a staple on American breakfast tables (and on the trays of toddlers) my entire life.

The legal team at General Mills is giving the legalese response, “EPA standards, blah, blah, blah,” but it doesn’t inspire confidence in me. I imagine I’m old enough not to be impacted by the practice, but my wife and I aren’t about to keep putting a little bowl of Cheerios in our granddaughter’s hands for a morning snack.

Here’s one article:
Link

My wife is multi-chemical sensitive so she does a lot of reading on the use of chemicals in use in today's world.
Just the other day she mentioned, again, that Quaker & General Mills have Glyphosate showing in their products. Do you really want to eat that stuff? I don't. We get to many chemicals in our food & drink as it is.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/g...redient-study-finds/

As far as I am concerned there are no safe levels as chemicals can build up (think lead) and/or combine with other chemicals to cause problems.
Not enough research has been done to say anything is safe.

Might have mentioned this before but in case I didn't:
The vet that cared for my pets in the 60s & early 70s told me (in the 80s) that as the use of lawn chemical increased so did the cancer and other tumors in cats & dogs.
Food for thought.

Last I heard the stock for Bayer (sp?), who owns Round Up now, was down 44%.
3 large lawsuits have been won over Round Up, Robert Kennedy Jr has 13,000 more cases in the works.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: gjgalligan,

quote:

Robert Kennedy Jr has 13,000 more cases in the works.

Not a terrific argument in your favor, IMO.

Yes,
I’m not able to post a pic (because I’m not savvy enough), but there was just a post on social media I’d read from the “Environmental Working Group” (not sure of their legitness or affiliations, but nonetheless, taking everything else together, it was concerning):

Regular Cheerios was 729 ppb
Honeynut was 147ppb



Children’s benchmark is 160 ppb

Www.ewg.org

quote:

The people who have gotten cancer from it had really high exposure levels, so how it is sold may change.

This a great commonsense summary of the situation. Big difference between spaying around your shrubs a couple of times a year and working with it 5 days a week for 20 years.

I would like to see comparisons of the number of people who have used Roundup (millions) against the few who have developed N-H-lymphoma, and a similar comparison of those with N-H-lymphoma against the entire population. I'll bet there is not a smidgen of difference in the incidence rate between the 2 populations. Some folks are going to be afflicted, whether they used Roundup or not (my sister contracted it--I don't know if she used Roundup, though).

flashguy

Class action suits are big money for attorneys, therfore all the ads for various products and the use of pseudoscience to back up the claims. Cause and effect are pretty much tossed to the wind for emotional arguments and dramatic presentations of victims with various ailments.

The EPA still maintains that Roundup is not a carcinogen.

Standing in sunlight causes cancer. Living can result in cancer, and always results in dying.

For fuck’s sake, use care whenever handling any chemical, chlordane and agent orange included.

Bleeding hearts will bleed

As a cardiologist, I’m pissed to see the lawyers ambulance-chasing for people who had side effects from medications such as “blood thinners”. Everything we do and everything we don’t do in cardiology is risky. Side effects are known but unpredictable in their occurrence.
Expecting perfection from today’s medications is foolish.
However, don’t get me started on foreign-made generics.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
The EPA still shills for the highest dollar.

FTFY

I don't know what FTFY means (teen-speak), but I've been spraying glyphosate and a lot of other chemicals for a lot of years, since I was a teen.

I'm sickened when I hear the agent orange claims...which are bullshit. Agent Orange was better known as 2,4,5-T, which is a defoliant, used widely in the USA for many years, cousin to the most widely used ag chemical in the US for decades, 2,4-D, both of which I've used extensively as an aerial applicator.

Glyphosate, or Roundup, has been a target of various groups and interests for a long time. It was a political favorite in certain south american locations as it was the chemical used in Plan Colombia (et al), and eventually the wild, ridiculous claims about skin sluffing off an lesions on children won out, ending the spray program. It was all bullshit, too.

Roundup is a useful, effective chemical, and while some organizations and groups have labeled it a carcinogen and harmful, others have not jumped on the political bandwagon to abandon the evidence and side with the ambulance chasers.

I'm sorry that someone got cancer. Trying to choke money out of the chemical company because the cancer patient had occasionally used the product is utterly ridiculous. Jury battles aren't about evidence or intelligence; they're about convincing an otherwise ignorant crowd to vote one way; a preponderance is second to who can throw the most money at it, and back seat to who can sound more convincing or sway sympathy. It doesn't equate to truth. Settlements, of course, throw all that out the window in favor of balancing risk and reward, and have nothing to do with the science.

quote:

I don't know what FTFY means (teen-speak)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is kind of like pilot speak, you know flying into ORD out of MSY. Taking off to LAX later. I had to GOOGLE as well. I am not one of the cooool kids yet.

quote:

I'm sickened when I hear the agent orange claims...which are bullshit. Agent Orange was better known as 2,4,5-T, which is a defoliant, used widely in the USA for many years, cousin to the most widely used ag chemical in the US for decades, 2,4-D, both of which I've used extensively as an aerial applicator.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That comment is going to piss off a lot of Vietnam vets. There are clear claims of Agent Orange causing birth defects, infertility and chloracne. I have seen these guys. Look up Operation Ranch hand, and read the story of Admiral Zumwalt's son. For the most part, proper precautions were not taken and lots of people were soaked with the stuff.

The evidence with Roundup is MUCH less definitive at this point in time.

LINK to Zumwalt story:

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/m...ii-and-john-pekkanen

It means "fixed that for you" & I'm very far removed from being a teen, although I still have some of those kind at home. I'm not a cooool kid, either.

My original point being that just because a gubmint agency said something is "ok", doesn't really mean squat to me. I'm no chemist, doctor, or biologist, but I think a little common sense says most chemicals can be carcinogenic, if one carelessly exposes oneself to them, in meaningful amounts, repeatedly. That doesn't mean I think someone who chooses to engage in that potentially risky behavior should get a big, fat check, either. I was simply laughing at the absurdity that the EPA or any other agency acts in a fair, unbiased manner. There's too much dough floating around for that.