ST Alpha - "That article discusses things other than cancer (which was what the court case focused on) and agrees that glyphosate is nontoxic, but that in " (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 171

In response to "We need more testing and research but things don't look all that good. -- (link)" by Krusty

That article discusses things other than cancer (which was what the court case focused on) and agrees that glyphosate is nontoxic, but that in

Posted by TWuG Oct 23 '18, 06:51

formulation with other additives, those additives *may* produce some added risk for neurological issues, but it says nothing about any additional cancer risk.

And it doesn't even discuss whether this "maybe" risk is a relative risk or an absolute risk, which is pretty important when determining health effects.

Responses:

I posted it to show that science hasn't decided anything on this and that it needs more testing and research. The previous post talks about cancer. -- nm - Krusty Oct 23, 06:53 2
- Which is why a court decision makes no sense. "Conflicted" science doesn't become unconflicted because of a court decision, but that decision - TWuG Oct 23, 07:00 1
  - See, I mostly agree with you in that the court was not the right place for this to be decided. But with their being so much ambiguity - Krusty Oct 23, 07:07

Post a message top

That article discusses things other than cancer (which was what the court case focused on) and agrees that glyphosate is nontoxic, but that in

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.