Glyphosphate – much ado about nothing…

Billy_T wrote:

I don’t know, Nittany. Can we really say it’s nothing to worry about? From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate

While glyphosate and formulations such as Roundup have been approved by regulatory bodies worldwide, concerns about their effects on humans and the environment persist.[9][5]

Many regulatory and scholarly reviews have evaluated the relative toxicity of glyphosate as an herbicide. The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment toxicology review in 2013 found that “the available data is contradictory and far from being convincing” with regard to correlations between exposure to glyphosate formulations and risk of various cancers, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).[10] A meta-analysis published in 2014 identified an increased risk of NHL in workers exposed to glyphosate formulations.[11] In March 2015 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic in humans” (category 2A) based on epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in vitro studies.[9][12][13]

Hi Billy. Actually the WHO and the FOA have said that glyphosphate probably doesn’t cause cancer in humans.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-who-glyphosate-idUSKCN0Y71HR

The IARC says it could cause cancer but they are looking at the question from a different angle than the WHO and FOA. The WHO and FOA are saying there is no credible evidence that it is causing cancer in humans. The IARC is saying there is a chance that it could cause cancer under the right circumstances. The thing is, the likelihood of those circumstances being met are remote. the IARC has assigned glyphosphate to category 2A, which means that there is evidence from studies conducted on animals but limited/insufficient evidence from humans. As a link in author’s article points out, other category 2A carcinogens include being a hair dresser and working night shift. They are saying it’s a hazard, but there’s always a question of hazard vs risk. For example, is a shark a hazard? Yes. What is your risk of being attacked by a shark if you live in Iowa? Almost zero. What is your level of risk if visit an aquarium where they have a shark? It’s still incredibly low, but it’s an order of magnitude higher than if you’re standing in a cornfield in Iowa.

Besides that, many scientists don’t agree with the IARC’s ruling…

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/does-monsantos-pesticide-glyphosphate-cause-cancer-2015-3

And glyphosphate is not killing bees…

Study Finds Glyphosate and Acetamiprid to Have Relatively Low Toxicity for Honey Bees

Glyphosate is no bee killer

Oh, and an effective way to kill weeds without using herbicides?

Use boiling water.

Zooey wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I’ve used boiling water, but it’s not practical for large areas.

I have a big patch of poison ivy growing next to the house that I’m going to dig out today. It’s labor intensive but digging them up (must get the majority of the roots too of course) is the quickest and most effective way to manage weeds.

Of course it is. It just takes a lot more time. And I have 3/4 acre of yard that is all overgrown and needs to be brought to heel.

Then perhaps you’d be better served by a little less whining and a little more digging, m’kay?

Chop, chop.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 12 months ago by nittany ram.