Bombshell Secret Documents Show Monsanto Knew About Glyphosate Cancer Link Over 35 Years Ago…

So the link between Glyphosate and Cancer is BS … sure it is … NOT

Just like the cigarette companies knew about cancer. How hard is that to fathom.

Your correct Ecosnippets rarely does fact checks. There is no evidence this is purely hearsay. “Probable” is not a direct link in the real science world.

sorry, but the links between glyphosate and cancer, along with a myriad of other health issues, gets stronger every day.

ever heard of the precautionary principle?

Ok please provide scientific evidence …

So far it’s one of the most tested pesticides and have been shown to be the safest when used properly

Claus Jensen these people don’t want to accept things like facts. It’s been lowered in probability of causing cancer other than by psuedo science quacks. Well done or slightly burnt food is more likely to cause you cancer or driving in traffic. I love it when a person talks about all this GMO stuff causing cancer then goes and has a smoke lol.

Caffeine is perfectly fine for us in moderation. However, even a dog can easily die from it . Humans can overdose from it and can die from the overdose though death is rare. I’ve overdosed on caffeine out of pure youth and stupidity. A human can also completely overcome any addiction to caffeine within 3 days of abstinence.

Caffeine if applied as an insecticide in its natural form is far deadlier then Roundup The LD50 dosage of caffeine is 150 mg/kg. Roundup is around 4000 mg/kg. These are pure forms not diluted. You could consume 200 mg/kg/day straight roundup and still have no effect. Not saying you wouldn’t be puking your guts up.

Who do you work for?

Construction company as a Environmental Engineer and Manager 20 years o environmental resource management .

Hia John – we lost our farm manager to leukaemia a few years ago after he started doing a lot of blackberry spraying – he was very healthy before that. Didn’t drink, smoke or do any drugs, etc., and was a vego mostly. I have stopped using that Garlon and Roundup stuff many years ago and feel great at 68. I know a lot of sickly people who use Roundup, etc., around here. In the North of NSW where the banana plantations are heavily sprayed by law, there is the highest level for population of intellectually handicapped children in daytime care. Local carers in the field gave me those figures thirty years ago.

Kay Schieren According to four sources I looked at including Leukemia. Number one genetics and number two long exposure to radiation including the sun. Leukemia Society doesn’t recognize the ingredients in round up as the cause. Leukemia was diagnosed in 1845 for the first time it’s believe to have been around since the first man. There are also many causing for intellectually handicapped children including lead poisoning from paints from back in the 70’s and early 80’s. That’s about thirty years. My point is there are thousands of things that can cause cancer man made, genetics, and natural. Everyone focusing on one item because a pair of quacks say so is insane. There have been thousands of studies by third parties nothing has come up. Roundup is a scapegoat you’re not truly finding the cause or the cure.

John Baker It’s like cancer is 25 percent environment and 75 genetics or something. Don’t get me wrong if you expose yourself daily to a chronic and acute poison you’ll likely get cancer IF you are dumb and get it on you constantly. One of my former jobs people were getting cancer a lot. It was literally Jet Fuel. But only people that got it on them repeatedly because their skin absorbed it and also you can breathe in the fumes or if real dumb you can also ingest it by not washing your hands or accidentally swallowing it.

Bob Mhidden I agree a good friend of mine died from working in the ship yards in Philly from Asbestosis. So I’m well aware things cause cancer. My grandfather had melanoma from being exposed to the sun from construction work. But there is no proof here except two guys that have been exposed to use faulty test methods constantly, to get money to sell their books.

What about the pesticides approved for organic farming?

Organic pesticides are more deadly.

Because the organic industry works for free and aint greedy at all

Name something that you eat, that isn’t made of chemicals 🙂

people are gullible and you are one of them… prone to chemical propaganda…. yhea round up is less lethal than sun ? you really got it right Mr enviromental engineer….

Davide Calamia actually do some research before opening your month. The sun is the leading cause of cancer in the world. This you can find from sources like the American Cancer society. Glyphosate is listed as probable but no studies on humans to prove. Sorry to bust the bubble of an activist with no science back ground.

This is based on studies with rats that where prone to have cancer. You better live in a cave because the sun is a class 1.

John Baker I’m totally on your side, I meant “of no concern”.

Well put, I will be quoting you in future.

Shills here, shills there, shills, shills everywhere.

Joyce Ann Still wondering where my shillbux are. Any idea where I’m meant to turn in order to cash in on defending basic science?

But Joyce Ann HAS to be right, she has a flag.
?

Earnings have nothing to do with it. Why even bring it up?

Don Matthews Because it’s one of the chief complaints by the anti-GMO/glyphosate crowd – the cash made by corporations on the technology, while they choose to completely ignore how much Whole Foods or what have you rake in each year on their gullibility.

You’re right! Because correlation literally always means causation.

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ScreenHunter_04-Jan.-07-23.11.jpg

I always remind people that like to bend statistcs instead of doing scientific research that the vast majority of those that die between the ages of 15 and 25 drank water…which is an ingredient in latex paint.

So stop eating. Ld50 of caffeine is 150mg/kg and glyphosate is 1538 mg/kg in mice so what’s actually more dangerous

If only someone had done some studies to prove that theory

Dan Johnstone there has been a study done, it’s not a theory. You are just intellectually lazy. https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/01/09/study-pesticide-residue-food-risky-one-glass-wine-every-7-years/

Bob Mhidden so sad you are actually defending one of the most toxic companies in the world and then calling others ingellectully lazy. Shame how your freedom has been wasted.

Bob Mhidden who paid for the study???

Mo Moshiri haha one of the most toxic companies, you do realize their are companies that make toxins intentionally right? You are the poster child of anti-intellectual. There’s no shame on how my freedom, projecting much?

Bob I really don’t care to convince you. Just sad for you.

Trisha Spinelli there’s a link to the study in the article you can find out from there. Similar studies though and 3rd party testing have proved pesticides in low doses don’t harm humans.

Mo Moshiri your incorrect I don’t care to convince your ignorant opinion either, I’m stating facts not feelings.

Your facts are laughable but I reckon you will learn soon enough.

Mo Moshiri no they aren’t I have a study and can find others. Even the Government knows it’s safe for you. You have nothing but nonsense and fear mongering propaganda.

Cool man. Good luck with that.

Bob Bob Bob, then I so wonder why so many countries are banning Monsanto and more doing so by the month, and please don’t tell me they ignorant, they have brilliant scientists who prove that Monsanto is bad news. You sound like a Palestinian trying to claim Israel belongs to them. Keep on dreaming.

Selwyn Lloyd we are talking pesticides not GMO’s which are what are banned in those countries. You don’t even know what you are talking about. They are ignorant for banning them btw. Science has proven organic and GMO’s are no different health wise. European scientists have even wrote letters in support of GMOs and Monsanto. Kale and Broccoli and many other plants all come from the same plant if it weren’t for genetic modification. No one is eating organic.

Bob Mhidden you are very literal when you say gmo. Surely you would have to admit that interspecies genetic modification would never happen and is not on par with breeding by pollination techniques.

Bob Mhidden the study is interesting. I like that it takes into account lots of trace amounts. I haven’t gotten to the part where they say how they know what levels effect people and how. I stopped when they mentioned animal products were not included as they don’t contain any pesticides. I am a sheep farmer not a scientist but I find that statement hard to swallow. Organophosphate used as sheep dip is very persistent in the environment, how it would not be in the sheep when it is used externally and kills parasites inside the sheep baffles me. Maybe I am again ignorant as you did produce exactly the study i didn’t think existed lol.

Mo Moshiri He is probably a monsatan shill, you can’t argue with them. Money is what drives them.

Dan Johnstone yeah I am extremely literal, either a flaw or quality depending lol. Glad you are actually interested and intelligent to read it.

I am not specialized or an expert enough to know if that genetic modification would have happened but I can certainly admit not to the degree we humans have with our husbandry and labs (etc) today. We also wouldn’t have corn, broccoli, kale and the list goes on if we didn’t modify the plants ourselves. Starvation and poverty would also be much much worse.

From everything I have seen and heard from food preparation side all pesticides don’t affect humans. Most gets washed off or cooked and things made to affect RNA doesn’t often affect DNA if a weed killer and bug killers typically don’t harm us unless your out spraying it all over your body all day. Petroleum if used in them could kill you if so in that case, which I do know a bit about.

With your sheep, what kills a parasite like weeds and bugs doesn’t mean it kills a human. We humans can take medicine to kill parasites inside us and be perfectly fine. If you eat sheep hopefully you are cooking it out anyways and the body will likely dispose of it since it doesn’t have any need for it. They probably don’t use pesticides on their animals there. My local cattle nearby and farmer I know doesn’t use them unless they need to. Little different setup close by than normal though.

Joyce Ann you are clearly not over burdened with intellect or education. I get paid nothing from Monsanto nor am affiliated to them in any way. I do know someone in food safety with the Government and many health codes and am in the business of knowing about food.

I actually have even said negative things about Monsanto, specifically their seed licensing. I am talking pesticides originally which many companies make. Also more than one companies make GMO’s. I have a friend that works as an engineer for a completely different company. I know the basics on how these things are tested and are safe.

I don’t know, sad that they are on the generally right side of things but in the specifics go off the rails and insist on using fake facts and conspiracy theories.

That kind of ‘reasoning’ is what got Trump elected and keeps the Republicans going at all.

I can only assume most people here are appalled by the direction Trump and the Republicans take things (especially environmentally) so I really can’t understand supporting the use of the same ‘alternative facts’ type tactics!

There are plenty of real things to worry about in this sphere to not need to resort to this. This kind of thing unnecessarily puts the environmental agenda, that they rightly want to push, at risk of ridicule!

Rob Sampson couldn’t agree more. Thanks

Guy Wagner you do realize these guys have been producing quack research for years.

Charlie Biel products perfectly fine. It’s the falsehoods coming from garbage blogs like Ecosnippets are to blame.

The shill claimers and antiGMO people will be along shortly. You’re still right though.

Nice try trolls.

Yeah you’re right.. the organizations and individuals who were paid by Monsanto didn’t reach a consensus with any other study.. but the rest of the scientific community does agree that its a carcinogen. Its not safer then other available products, it’s just cheaper.

There are other Available ways to control pests and that is and always has been adopting Better FARMING practices, from Planting, to diversification of ‘SISTER’ plants / flowers / herbs, to using ducks or chickens, to even installing (Classical) Music. Keeping a healthy crop also deters the bad bugs. Again, it takes more labor; but your crops; your livestock, you and your neighbors and all the folks that eat your produce BENEFIT from adhereing to healthy farming practices.

Matt Witt *sigh* the criteria that the WHO used to classify glyphosate & spark bans would also apply to drinking coffee, using tartar control toothpaste, most soaps & detergents, etc…there are various levels of carcinogens (sunlight is a much more deadly carcinogen FYI). *SMH* too for the “but only the bad guy corporate scientists say its safe” which is a total lie, but it fits your narrative so why bother with the truth eh? It is much safer than the pesticides that farmers now use because it is banned, & no Georgann Putintsev you can’t produce enough food to feed the planet with “good farming practices” – they help, but you still loose between 30-50 % of your crop yield to pests.

Karrilyn McPhee Yes. So right. Look what happened with DDT, also banned due to public opinion not science. DDT had almost eradicated malaria. Yes, in massive doses it causes cancer, but many “natural” substances do too. It is popular to go after big “bad” corporations and their “deep pockets”, forgetting that these companies have shareholders and are made of everyday employees like us.

Karrilyn McPhee Enough food to feed the planet? We already produce enough grain for 10 billion people (look it up if you don’t believe it). Lets not forget about all of the overconsumption and food waste. Plenty of farmers have lots of success without pecticides or GMO’s. One rarely mentioned problem with typcial farming practices too is the fact that petro fertalizers and almost all pesticides kill benfical life in the soil thus destabilizing it, causing topsoil errosion and eventually desertification…not exactly a good long term strategy …most definitly terrible stewardship for future generations.

Kye Kendall just because the first world wastes food doesn’t mean the rest of the world isn’t going hungry. (& I defy you to feed the planet on grain alone, hence the need for things like golden rice.) Most desertification is due to climate change & lack of irrigation water (like in Imperial Vally CF where we turned a desert into farmland by taking so much water out of the rivers that a portion of Mexico’s agriculture collapsed.)

Karrilyn McPhee I’m well aware how much the rest of the world is going hungry thanks. And yes grain alone is not going to fix malnutrition within a population, however it does have a long shelf life and can provide some relief to starving people. My point is that these companies claiming that their technology is going to “feed the world” are more concerned about their bottom line than actually helping poorer nations. People starve because they are either dirt poor or live in a food dessert (or both). If these companies can develop a crop that is more nutritious or more drought resistant than all the more power to them (few would be against such a scientific advancement if the safty was proven in a reliable and trustworthy manner). Lets be honest though, while the drought resistance and nutrition boosting crops are in developmental stages we have an industry that almost exclusivly uses questionable “roundup ready” GMO technology strictly for the economic value it provides to richer people and richer nations. There can be (and even is) some economic value to poor nations as well however the economic situaition of the world is typically a scenario where the rich exploit the poor, whether that is a rich country exploiting a poor country, or some rich people exploiting a group of poor people within their own country etc etc. This is documented in countless instances and occasions. If any one, or any company for that matter, really cared about feeding the world than one of the first things that should be adressed is the socio and econmic problems that creat such inequality. Technology is great but it can’t fix explotation and greed.

Karrilyn McPhee Also saying that most desrtification is caused by climate change and lack of irrigation ignores the fact that our agrigultural and forestry practices perpetuate climate change. If you look into the causes of desertification, agricultural use is in the top 4, yes along with climate change however once again they unfortunately complement each other. When it comes to irrigation it can be noted that good stewardship of soil literally creates a topsoil that retains water and nutrients with superior efficiency – meaning crops need signifiganlty less irrigaition. Your example of Imperial Valley only highlights the explotation and overconsumption issue does it not? We use another nations water recsources to produce crops that end up getting wasted or overconsumed. While also growing said crops with agrigultural technology that wasts water…All because it fits best with an economic model that could give two shits about the problems of poverty and climate change.

True and sad.

David Naylor Monsanto still exist, alive and kicking, still making millions in Africa selling their Glyphosate, otherwise known as “Roundup” in Africa.

Abdullah Abram Molefe ok. So is this article recent? Since they were taken over by Bayer?