Monsanto Roundup deadly to humans - Glyphosate

[izentrop]

The promotion of fruits and vegetables goes in this direction, their favorable effects in the prevention of various diseases being the object of a consensus (in spite of the presence, in almost all, of residues of pesticides otherwise much criticized!)

he says himself that everything is polluted by pesticides

Always the conspiratorial pirouette to distort the words.

[izentrop]

Continuation of the soap

Glyphosate is NOT carcinogenic. Certainly there is the IARC classification, which considers glyphosate as a "probable" carcinogen. But it is the only expert agency in the world to consider this product in this way, and this classification was obtained following the infiltration of the competent committee by a lobbyist from an environmental NGO. His name is Christophe Portier, and he was also working for a law firm interested in setting up a Class Action against Monsanto - a manifest and grotesque conflict of interest that the interested party failed to declare [iii]. Porter did his job well and in two years he received 160 euros for it. Glyphosate episode XXIII: the return of terror that is very very scary.

[Janic]

Léon Guéguen is Honorary Research Director of INRA, former director of the Nutrition and Food Security Laboratory of the Jouy-en-Josas Research Center, member of the French Agricultural Academy, administrator of the French Institute for Nutrition and rapporteur at Afssa. wrote :
The promotion of fruits and vegetables goes in this direction, their favorable effects in the prevention of various diseases being the object of a consensus (despite the presence, in almost all, of pesticide residues otherwise much criticized !)

Janic wrote:
he says himself that everything is polluted by pesticides

Always the conspiratorial pirouette to distort the words.

2 remarks;
1) you rush too much into your readings which makes you escape and distort the meaning. Unless you consider that all these residues are not pollution? So your case is hopeless.
2) stop using the word conspiracy all the time that you don't even seem to have understood the meaning of and it is not the first time
http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/complot

[izentrop]

Unless you consider that all these residues are not pollution? So your case is hopeless.

The whole problem is to differentiate between what is toxic and what is not. The dose and the benefit / risk ratio ...

[Janic]

Continuation of the series:
"
Glyphosate is NOT carcinogenic. Certainly there is the IARC classification, which considers glyphosate as a "probable" carcinogen. But it is the only expert agency in the world to consider this product in this way, and this classification was obtained following the infiltration of the competent committee by a lobbyist from an environmental NGO. His name is Christophe Portier, and he was also working for a law firm interested in setting up a Class Action against Monsanto - a manifest and grotesque conflict of interest that the interested party failed to declare [iii]. Porter did his job well and in two years he received 160 euros for it. Glyphosate episode XXIII:
the return of terror which is very very scary.

this mediapart article is made under the responsibility of its author as indicated at the bottom of the page which as if by chance, which author refers to pseudo science and the cosmic teapot, that says it all!
Author Yann Kindo
Teacher in history geography.
Which makes him a specialist in agriculture and biology, of course! as for this article on measles. (Probably from the same sites)

https://blogs.mediapart.fr/yann-kindo/b ... ele-rivasi
Completely stupid!
As for Professor Joyeux and others, it is not against vaccines, no more than wakefied, regardless of its author, but it is the precautionary principle that prevails until further research on those who are the subject of questioning.
https://www.lejdd.fr/politique/michele- ... es-3363521
Michèle Rivasi is an EELV MEP, associate biologist and co-author of the book "The Racket of pharmaceutical laboratories and how to get out of it" (Les Petits Matins, 2015).
I know what vaccines have brought in terms of health progress in the XNUMXth century, the fight against infant mortality… I never questioned their usefulness. I am interested in the causes of this distrust and try to remedy it by proposing solutions. I am also wondering about the windfall effect of vaccines for the pharmaceutical industry: this compensates for the failure of major therapeutic innovation (apart from anti-cancer treatments) by the marketing of vaccines not always helpful.

Janic wrote:
Unless you consider that all these residues are not pollution? So your case is hopeless.

The whole problem is to differentiate between what is toxic and what is not. The dose and the benefit / risk ratio.

you see that you can think when you want!
So who draws up this risk benefit report? The state? no! Health services? no! Labs? YES, won! Judge and party at the same time, that says it all.
In the United States, there is not even any more risk since the vaccine lobby succeeded in making vote the impunity of the labs!

[izentrop]

An alternative to weed killers:

https://winebaa.com/

[Benjamin69]

And I speak not because thanks to them hunger will be eradicated in the world !!!!
Monsanto thank you, thank you gmos !!!!!!!

The other solution is aquaponics

[izentrop]

Séralini affair: six years later, counting time
Jean-Yves Nau - July 5, 2018 at 14:36 p.m. - updated on July 5, 2018 at 15:30 p.m.

A media staging suggested that he had demonstrated a causal link of the utmost importance. What remains of the results of this French researcher? http://www.slate.fr/story/164159/cancer ... ndissement

Three French and European expert opinions invalidate the results and conclusions of the GE Séralini study on GMO corn

1- The results of these research programs confirm the absence of health effects on corn carrying MON 810 and NK 603 in the 90-day studies. This lack of effects had already been observed in previous studies and taken into account in the assessments made by EFSA.

2) - The long-term studies (one year and two years), do not highlight any toxic effect of the corn analyzed and provide nothing more than the 90-day studies, as predicted by toxicologists.

The AFBV therefore notes that these new studies refute the main conclusions drawn from GE Séralini's studies on the toxicity of the “GMO” maize analyzed: no potential risk has been identified. In addition, they contradict his proposals on the need to carry out long-term studies. http://www.biotechnologies-vegetales.co ... s-mais-ogm

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

I didn't follow too much ...

Is Glyphosate harmful or not?
Are GMOs harmful or not?

[izentrop]

Well it's clear, nothing proves it.