Monsanto Roundup deadly to humans - Glyphosate

[Janic]

As it's the dose that makes the poison, it's a good joke like the one I posted just before

it's the dose that makes the poison is largely exceeded, even if it is not inaccurate so far; the mere presence of any element contrary to biological functions is enough to cause disturbances at different levels. For example allergies to minute elements to which others will not react. So glyphosate, or any other chemical, can, by osmosis, cause pathogenic reactions and also have a cumulative effect given the number of diapers with which babies are equipped.

[izentrop]

Elisabeth Mandart, associate professor at the IAM of Montpellier and researcher in biology, deciphers the problem of Glyphosate which has been mentioned in the media in recent times ...

[Janic]

Elisabeth Mandart, associate professor at the IAM of Montpellier and researcher in biology, deciphers the problem of Glyphosate which has been mentioned in the media in recent times ...

Excellent, very relevant! She is right across the board and particularly in her conclusion.
This problem of adjuvants, which she evokes, is much more important than this glyphosate in question, apart from some of its toxic components by accumulating effect which are added to the toxic of adjuvants. It is the same problem as for chemical drugs, which she also evokes, and more particularly vaccines whose toxicity comes precisely from these, plus preservatives, antiseptics such as mercury.
With this MAJOR difference except that this glyphosate, or more generally Rondup, is filtered by the pulmonary system and does not enter not directly in the blood and therefore with immune barriers which limit its deleterious effects, which is not the case of products directly injected into an organism like many biologically or chemically active drugs and therefore toxic and damaging to the living.

[izentrop]

You have a fertile imagination.
AMPA also comes from detergents and does not bio-accumulate in animals, eliminated directly in the urine. Glyphosate also elsewhere.
She says that it is an effective and inexpensive product, we understand the interest of the lobby to see it disappear from the market.

She would like to have the composition of the product imposed on the labels, as for the drugs it would really be a step forward and that is especially why I shared.

[Janic]

You have a fertile imagination.

above all, the reality is often worse than optimistic speeches.

AMPA also comes from detergents and does not bio-accumulate in animals, eliminated directly in the urine. Glyphosate also elsewhere.

to find out if a product accumulates in living organisms, you need detailed studies over long periods. however this is not the rule in phytosanitary on chemicals. PCB, DDT, which had little impact on a first generation, have shown their effects on subsequent generations. You should have listened at all!

She says that it is an effective and inexpensive product, we understand the interest of the lobby to see it disappear from the market.

as far as I know the only lobbies concerned are those who manufacture these products like Bayer which took over Monsanto. Unless the lobby in question is the farmers themselves.

She would like to have the composition of the product imposed on the labels, as for the drugs it would really be a step forward and that is especially why I shared.

For that we agree! but do not be misled, the labels of the drugs indicate only a few components, not secret, and above all indicate only few side effects, much less than those noted by the manufacturer. here again there is immense hypocrisy intended not to frighten users and consumers.

[izentrop]

She says that it is an effective and inexpensive product, we understand the interest of the lobby to see it disappear from the market.
as far as I know the only lobbies concerned are those who manufacture these products like Bayer which took over Monsanto. Unless the lobby in question is the farmers themselves.

The usual blinders not to see those of environmental NGOs like Greenpeace and future generation who are not left behind in disinformation. http://www.lasyntheseonline.fr/developp ... ,6888.html

[Janic]

Unless the lobby in question is the farmers themselves.

The usual blinders not to see those of environmental NGOs like Greenpeace and future generation who are not left behind in disinformation. http://www.lasyntheseonline.fr/developp ..., 6888.html

as a nut site you are in your usual line, like nonsense on nonsense, like this among others (and your dirty habit of misinforming which takes over.)
Let us recall here that any product, of natural or synthetic origin, is toxic and that it is the quantity (the dose) which determines its toxicity.
This effect is in particular the basis of vaccination during which the patient is inoculated with extremely toxic, even fatal, compounds, but at doses so low that he fortunately does not die. side ignorance and misinformation they are strong, there too!
moreover with an article on vaccines of the same kind which manifests a complete ignorance of the subject (ie everything that is voluntarily hidden from the public) http://www.lasyntheseonline.fr/developp ... ,6241.html
or this one which is also a pinnacle of nonsense
http://www.lasyntheseonline.fr/developp ... ,5918.html
the less they know the subject, the more dogmatic they are!

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

Document added to the file

Jean-Claude Terlet, a French peasant against Monsanto

https://www.geo.fr/reportages/jean-clau ... n=20180824

[izentrop]

In France, it is money thrown out of the windows, in the USA, it would be more likely to succeed

In criminal proceedings, they must then rule on the guilt of the accused "beyond a reasonable doubt". It is therefore a heavy task for the jury, which often debates and discusses things other than the trial during its sessions. https://frenchdistrict.com/articles/etr ... tats-unis/

He still works is that he does not have too much money.

[Janic]

He's still working, he doesn't have too much money

another reasoning with nuts! He probably knows that he will die soon and it is not a few tens of thousands of Euros that would save him. The objective is the recognition of the person responsible for his situation and that of other farmers in his case, by this product or others.
As E Mandart says, the basic problem is all these chemicals responsible for many pathologies and which are not about to disappear from the landscape, but which will only decrease if they are gradually blamed, one after the other. another, by this kind of "lobbyist" sickened by these poisons.