Well you have to use reasonable caution. I've been using these products since the 70's with no issues.

quote:

Originally posted by kramden:
Well you have to use reasonable caution.

Exactly.

Stay within the label.

Pesticide and herbicide problems occur when operating outside the label.

When mixing chemicals and loading them in aircraft, there are all kinds of precautions that can be taken, from respirators to aprons, chemical gear, chemical resistant boots, gloves, etc. When mixing in the airplane, it involves opening the hopper, getting up on the wing, and pouring chemical over the top, into the tank.

Rather than wear respirators and all manner of gear on a 104 degree day in the summer when things are running hot and heavy, it's a simple matter to stand upwind, Pour slowly so it doesn't glug and spash. Lift the containers onto the wing instead of carrying them, to keep from slipping and enable both hands when getting up and down. Likewise, in the airplane, the spray is put down in a long line, and spreads beyond the wingtips, but when going back and forth, the wingtip path overlaps...which means one is flying back and forth through the spray.

One could wear a respirator...that can be dangerous in a hot cockpit on a long day. Or one could start downwind, and make each successive pass upwind, or fly a race track pattern...simple, common sense. I've dealt with these chemicals for years, some of them so toxic that a single drop will kill, and there are farm chemicals in common use today that are easily the equivalent of a number of different military grade chemical weapons (organophosphates being the most common). Proper use and common sense is what makes them safe to handle and use.

Chemicals like glyphosate (Roundup) are not remotely in the same category as dangerous chemicals like parathion, malathion, etc, for short or long term use. They are safe to handle, and they are not damaging to the environment if used properly and within the label.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pilots go through extensive training in biochemistry, microbiology, and the effect of toxins on the human body. According to Bill Nye, Science Guy.

Bill Nye isn't an aerial applicator who's been trained in mixing, recommendation, use, chemistry, applicability, effects, and treatment of chemicals since he was a teen, and Bill Nye didn't spend six months in a full time school dealing with checmicals before embarking on several decades worth of handling them, applying them, etc.

I did, though. Those defoliants and herbicides that people passed through and had casual contact for a brief period...some of us have had decades of casual contact with them, and often much, much more (been soaked head to toe on many occasions, not simply passing through an area that was defoliated).

Your insistance that a bit more learning and study will produce a different view doesn't take into account several decades of just that, as well as having used the chemicals extensively domestically and abroad, for a big chunk of my life. Mock as you see fit if that makes you feel better (clearly it does), but as you're putting me down publicly for your guess that I have no experience with it (you're dead wrong), other than reading an article and knowing a guy who *thinks* his lesions were the result of casual contact...how much lifelong experience do you have dealing with these chemicals on a first hand, professional basis?

There are two parallel conversations going on in this thread. One, whether the use herbicides for agriculture and home use is safe if label directions are followed. The topic was started as a result of a large judgement against Bayer-Monsanto over allegations that Roundup is a carcinogenic. As I said in my page 1 post, I use the herbicide, and will continue to do so as long as it is available.

The second conversation is about what is apparently a widespread practice in large-scale grain farming, using glophosate not to control weeds, but to kill, and therefore dessicate, a grain crop like oats, to dramatically speed up the curing, drying process in an annual grain to facilitate harvest for the convenience of the farm and the corporation (sometimes one in the same) contracting for the grain. This glyphosate is not controlling weeds, it is being sprayed directly on the grain crop that will be harvested and turned into (for instance) the breakfast cereal served across the country. I did read the label for Roundup and this practice DOES seem to be within scope of uses for the herbicide. It’s this practice, on the label or not, that many of us find troubling.

From what I understand we are getting exposed to Round-Up from eating GMO foods modified to be resistant to Round-Up. Corn for example is genetically modified so Round-Up doesn’t affect it when the crops are sprayed with it to kill the weeds. In turn, we get food that has been being sprayed with Round-Up.

Bill Nye isn't really a science guy

Bill Nye isn't an aerial applicator who's been trained in mixing, recommendation, use, chemistry, applicability, effects, and treatment of chemicals since he was a teen, and Bill Nye didn't spend six months in a full time school dealing with checmicals before embarking on several decades worth of handling them, applying them, etc.

I did, though. Those defoliants and herbicides that people passed through and had casual contact for a brief period...some of us have had decades of casual contact with them, and often much, much more (been soaked head to toe on many occasions, not simply passing through an area that was defoliated).

Your insistance that a bit more learning and study will produce a different view doesn't take into account several decades of just that, as well as having used the chemicals extensively domestically and abroad, for a big chunk of my life. Mock as you see fit if that makes you feel better (clearly it does), but as you're putting me down publicly for your guess that I have no experience with it (you're dead wrong), other than reading an article and knowing a guy who *thinks* his lesions were the result of casual contact...how much lifelong experience do you have dealing with these chemicals on a first hand, professional basis?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
DUDE. My comment about Bill Nye was SARCASTIC AND A JOKE!!!!

I am not putting you down publicly, not renting a billboard. It is good you have not developed cancer. BTW many people who smoke three packs of cigarettes per day do not get lung cancer. You are dealing with your own personal experience which is not exactly scientific research. Please read the scientific literature if you wish to become knowledgeable. I do not pretend to be an expert in aviation. It is obvious that you did not read the link I sent. Do some reading in the area. I doubt you have the credentials to testify as an expert witness as to the safety of Dioxin/Agent Orange. Learn about control groups, the scientific method etc.

The following is a copy of a Congressional bill concerning Agent Orange. Note the date is 1991. Please take the time to read it....


Agent Orange Act of 1991 - Presumes the following diseases to be service-connected and resulting from exposure to dioxins and other herbicide agents during service in Vietnam during the Vietnam era unless there is affirmative evidence to the contrary: (1) non-Hodgkins lymphoma, each soft-tissue sarcoma (with certain exceptions), and chloracne or other consistent acneform diseases becoming manifest to a degree of disability of ten percent or more; and (2) those additional diseases that the Secretary determines warrant such a presumption by reason of having a positive association with a herbicide agent, if they become manifest within the appropriate period.

Directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to prescribe regulations providing that a presumption of service connection is warranted whenever it is determined by the Secretary that a positive association exists between the exposure of humans to a herbicide agent and the occurrence of a disease in humans. Requires the Secretary to take into account reports received from the National Academy of Sciences, as well as other sound medical and scientific information. Outlines procedures to be followed by the Secretary in weighing evidence and report information and making conclusions for or against the positive association and, therefore, the service-connection presumption. Provides for the issuance of final regulations listing the diseases for which positive associations have been found or removing the presumption for a disease.

Directs the Secretary to enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) under which NAS shall review and summarize the scientific evidence (and its strength) concerning the association between exposure to a herbicide agent during service in Vietnam and each disease suspected to be associated with such exposure. Provides for NAS: (1) scientific determinations concerning diseases; (2) recommendations for additional studies to resolve areas of uncertainty relating to herbicide exposure; (3) subsequent reviews; and (4) reports, at least biennially, to the Secretary and the Senate and House Veterans' Affairs Committees (the veterans' committees). Terminates the agreement ten years after the fiscal year of the first report from NAS.

Directs the Secretary to enter into an agreement with another body if the Secretary cannot reach an agreement with NAS within two months after enactment of this Act.

Amends the Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 1988 to direct the Secretary to annually furnish updated information on health risks associated with exposure to herbicide agents during service in Vietnam during the Vietnam era.

Extends through 1993 the eligibility for hospital, nursing home, or domiciliary care and medical treatment of individuals who served in Vietnam and who have been determined to have been exposed to dioxin or a toxic substance in a herbicide as the result of such service and of veterans exposed to ionizing radiation while serving between September 11, 1945 and July 1, 1946.

Directs the Secretary to compile and analyze, on a continuing basis, all clinical data obtained by the Department of Veterans Affairs in connection with examinations and treatment furnished to veterans by the Department after November 3, 1981, for exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam and which is likely to be useful in determining the exposure to such agents and the disabilities suffered. Requires an annual report on such compilations and provides funding.

Directs the Secretary, for facilitating research on the effects of exposure to herbicides used in Vietnam, to establish and maintain a system for the collection and storage of voluntarily contributed blood and tissue samples of veterans who served there. Provides for: (1) specimen security; (2) authorized use; (3) limitations on acceptance of samples; and (4) authority based on specific funding.

Directs the Secretary to establish a scientific research feasibility studies program for conducting research on health hazards resulting from: (1) exposure to dioxin; (2) exposure to other toxic agents in herbicides used in Vietnam; and (3) active military service in Vietnam during the Vietnam era. Outlines program and report requirements. Directs the Secretary to consult with NAS.

Directs the Secretary, upon the request of a Vietnam veteran who has applied for Department medical care and filed a claim for, or is in receipt of, disability compensation, to obtain a blood sample to conduct a test for the presence of a specified dioxin. Provides for notification to the veteran of test results and significance and requires such blood sample to be maintained as part of the collection of blood and tissue samples required under this Act. Makes conforming amendments and provides for alternative effective dates.

Congress.gov
Site Content

ANOTHER Study:

Dioxins and dioxin-like chemicals in blood and semen of American Vietnam veterans from the state of Michigan.
Schecter A1, McGee H, Stanley JS, Boggess K, Brandt-Rauf P.
Author information
Erratum in
Am J Ind Med 1997 Mar;31(3):370-1.
Abstract
This exposure assessment pilot study tested the hypothesis that elevated blood levels of the dioxin congener 2,3,7,8-TCDD ("TCDD"), due to Agent Orange exposure, in American Vietnam veterans could be demonstrated two to three decades after Vietnam service. A second objective was to determine if dioxins, including TCDD, are present in the semen of adult males. In the early 1990s, blood samples from 50 Vietnam veterans and three pooled semen samples from 17 of them were analyzed by high-resolution gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy for dioxins, dibenzofurans, and the dioxin-like PCBs. Fifty volunteers from the Michigan Vietnam veteran bonus list, which documented Vietnam service, were invited to participate based on their self-reported exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam. Screening of military and medical records was performed by an epidemiologist and a physician to assure that Agent Orange exposure was possible based on job description, location of service in Vietnam, and military Agent Orange spray records. Elevated 2,3,7,8-TCDD levels, over 20 ppt on a lipid basis, could still be detected in six of the 50 veterans in this nonrandomly selected group. The dioxin and dibenzofuran congeners commonly found in the U.S. population, including TCDD, were also detected in the three pooled semen samples. Quantification and comparison on a lipid basis were not possible due to low lipid concentrations where levels were below the detection limit. Therefore, semen samples were measured and reported on a wet-weight basis. Elevated blood TCDD levels, probably related to Agent Orange exposure, can be detected between two and three decades after potential exposure in some American veterans. Original levels were estimated to be 35-1,500-fold greater that that of the general population (4 ppt, lipid) at the time of exposure. In addition, the detection of dioxins in semen suggests a possible mechanism for male-mediated adverse reproductive outcomes following Agent Orange or other dioxin exposure.

If I was an aerial applicator I would have my blood tested regularly for Dioxin. Think about it. It would be a prudent thing to do.

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

This is the current list of 15 conditions linked to Agent Orange:{The studies you previously called bullshit}

VA began recognizing diseases associated with herbicide exposure in Vietnam beginning in 1991, naming 15 diseases as presumed to be related, including Hodgkin's disease, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, early-onset peripheral neuropathy, porphyria cutanea tarda, prostate cancer, respiratory cancers, soft-tissue sarcoma, chloracne, type-2 diabetes mellitus, light chain amyloidosis, ischemic heart disease, chronic B-cell leukemias, Parkinson's disease, and spina bifida in offspring of veterans.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:

DUDE. My comment about Bill Nye was SARCASTIC AND A JOKE!!!!

That's funny. Mine wasn't.

I've been using glyphosate for the past couple years. This year I am trying a natural weed killer of white vinegar, epsom salt, and dish soap. Probably will need to be applied more frequently but I am okay with that.

Data linking to cancer are far from compelling...many studies have found no linkage but the IARC focused only on the ones that did.


https://www.reuters.com/invest...phosate-cancer-data/

http://theconversation.com/sto...causes-cancer-104554

Above data are for Roundup. Just to clarify. My posts have been for Agent Orange.