![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Holy shit guys, this group has gone wild.
So, today, someone posts an Sydney Morning Herald article about council workers protesting the use of RoundUp after the decision against Monsanto. The first three comments are people who are vehemently pro-Monsanto - pretty much 'juries are stupid' and 'this isn't scientific' and a bunch of other ranty stuff. And, again, within hours, the post is gone.
*twilight zone music*
I got involved, less because I'm panicky about Monsanto, and more because someone was complaining it was old news, and someone else was saying that it wasn't a right decision. I said it was only 2 weeks old and I hadn't heard of it, and that given the jury decision and the likelihood that they'd be working with the stuff for weeks/months at a time, it was fair for the workers to protest. And, of course, one of the pro-Monsantos promptly snotted, "FYI. Judicial deicision isn't scientific decision. What scientific evidence is there? I'll wait."
And so I went and looked up articles about the Edwin Harding vs. Monsanto case, and discovered that not only did the guy win, but the judge in charge took out the "probable bias" aspect for all the science that Monsanto brought to prove that glysophate only hurts insects and herbs rather than humans.
That is, the jury was instructed to treat the scientific evidence as though it had been brought by an independent body and not as a result of Monsanto paying organisations and testing labs to do the science (which dodgy AF but typical in our world these days: the foxes in charge of the henhouse).
And the jury still said that it was highly probable that the glysophate contributed to Harding's non-Hodgkins lymphoma.
Unfortch by the time I researched all this and tried to post it, the post was GAWN.
Relevant links below:
What The Science Says About Monsanto's Roundup
Bayer and Monsanto Defend Themselves With Science They Funded
For an independent take, Science Daily lists a study that makes a reasonable connection.
I don't think I'm a conspiracy theorist. I am, however, inclined to be more cynical about people who hold power than trusting of them - that's one part Australian upbringing, one part Christian worldview, one part natural cynicism, and all parts life experience. So, yeah, I fall on the side of "Monsanto probably has known that RoundUp is a health hazard, but so long as they can handwave it and make money in the now, they don't particularly care," but not quiiiiite of the "their goal is to neuter white masculinity so the ravaging hordes of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East can come and take our women" persuasion...
Anyway, here I thought it was a nice, happy gardening group...
So, today, someone posts an Sydney Morning Herald article about council workers protesting the use of RoundUp after the decision against Monsanto. The first three comments are people who are vehemently pro-Monsanto - pretty much 'juries are stupid' and 'this isn't scientific' and a bunch of other ranty stuff. And, again, within hours, the post is gone.
*twilight zone music*
I got involved, less because I'm panicky about Monsanto, and more because someone was complaining it was old news, and someone else was saying that it wasn't a right decision. I said it was only 2 weeks old and I hadn't heard of it, and that given the jury decision and the likelihood that they'd be working with the stuff for weeks/months at a time, it was fair for the workers to protest. And, of course, one of the pro-Monsantos promptly snotted, "FYI. Judicial deicision isn't scientific decision. What scientific evidence is there? I'll wait."
And so I went and looked up articles about the Edwin Harding vs. Monsanto case, and discovered that not only did the guy win, but the judge in charge took out the "probable bias" aspect for all the science that Monsanto brought to prove that glysophate only hurts insects and herbs rather than humans.
That is, the jury was instructed to treat the scientific evidence as though it had been brought by an independent body and not as a result of Monsanto paying organisations and testing labs to do the science (which dodgy AF but typical in our world these days: the foxes in charge of the henhouse).
And the jury still said that it was highly probable that the glysophate contributed to Harding's non-Hodgkins lymphoma.
Unfortch by the time I researched all this and tried to post it, the post was GAWN.
Relevant links below:
What The Science Says About Monsanto's Roundup
Bayer and Monsanto Defend Themselves With Science They Funded
For an independent take, Science Daily lists a study that makes a reasonable connection.
I don't think I'm a conspiracy theorist. I am, however, inclined to be more cynical about people who hold power than trusting of them - that's one part Australian upbringing, one part Christian worldview, one part natural cynicism, and all parts life experience. So, yeah, I fall on the side of "Monsanto probably has known that RoundUp is a health hazard, but so long as they can handwave it and make money in the now, they don't particularly care," but not quiiiiite of the "their goal is to neuter white masculinity so the ravaging hordes of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East can come and take our women" persuasion...
Anyway, here I thought it was a nice, happy gardening group...
Tags:
no subject
Yeah: companies that cover up or handwave science about asbestos [for example James Hardie company]; tobacco; climate-change; or in this case Roundup, are motivated 100% by profit and the profit-motivated desire to avoid retooling for a different product; one doesn't need to attribute any additional sinister or complex motives to them.
There was an article in Scientific American in 2014 suggesting that pesticides may be linked to Parkinson's disease.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/parkinsons-disease-and-pesticides-whats-the-connection/
no subject
And there are of scientific studies that have linked RoundUp to cancer, at least here in the USA. This is why Pat and I stopped drinking the well water at our house 24 years ago. Our Landlord is a lovely man, but he uses RoundUp constantly. I told Pat that shit is in the groundwater, and we began buying water to drink and cook with. I can't do anything about showering and washing dishes, but I can make sure I'm not consuming it in great amounts!