Forum home The potting shed
This Forum will close on Wednesday 27 March, 2024. Please refer to the announcement on the Discussions page for further detail.

Roundup/glyphosate being phased out in the US

12467

Posts

  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 34,889
    edited July 2021
    I wonder how many tobacco, alcohol and pharmaceutical companies would survive if THEY had to compensate those addicted to THEIR products and the harm they've done to the individuals and society. 
    How many of us have ever met anyone made ill by weedkiller compared with those who we know have been made ill by smoking or alcohol? 
    How often are A&E departments full of weedkiller victims compared with those full of people suffering the effects/ cosequences of alcohol?
    I think some  need to get a grip on what the real dangers are.
    I've heard it said that "half of all smokers die from it" can the same be said of weedkiller?
    Devon.
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    edited July 2021
    "I wonder how many tobacco, alcohol and pharmaceutical companies would survive if THEY had to compensate those addicted to THEIR products and the harm they've done to the individuals and society. "

    There have been some major class actions taken against fag companies. Tobacco companies in America have had to commit £10b a year to mitigate against medical expenditures.
    And BigPharm too has lost major suits.

    Booze and fags are a bit different as govts warn against using them, loudly, so the companies can claim that the users are well informed. Weedkillers not so much. They are usually either sanctioned or withdrawn nationally.

    I suspect that once there is full and concrete science to say that gylphosphate is carcenogenic the courts will be full.

    How often are A&E departments full of weedkiller victims compared with those full of people suffering the effects/ cosequences of alcohol?

    The illnesses are long term, and the awareness not high as yet - more mysteriously high incidence of cancers, not panics that would fill an A&E ward.


  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 34,889
    Fire said:
    "I wonder how many tobacco, alcohol and pharmaceutical companies would survive if THEY had to compensate those addicted to THEIR products and the harm they've done to the individuals and society. "

    There have been some major class actions taken against fag companies.

    but nobody is talking about banning it, are they? Why not?
    Might it be the revenue governments get from taxes  and duties?
    Devon.
  • Busy-LizzieBusy-Lizzie Posts: 24,043
    Hit the nail on the head @Hostafan1
    Dordogne and Norfolk. Clay in Dordogne, sandy in Norfolk.
  • TopbirdTopbird Posts: 8,355
    edited July 2021
    Oooh @Hostafan1 - what a cynical old soul you are😁

    Unfortunately, I think you also happen to be correct. 🤨

    And I second your argument regarding how many cases of glyphosate harm have been proven. The only case that a human probably contracted cancer as a result of using glyphosate I've ever seen proven, was some American idiot who used it day in, day out for years whilst wearing shorts and T-shirt and allowing prolonged skin contact.

    I don't personally know anybody who has suffered a single ill-effect from using glyphosate - whether following sensible precautions or not.

    I do, however, know several who are paying the price for using tobacco and a few (myself included) who have a slightly worrying love affair with the demon drink. Nothing anybody would think requires immediate intervention - but we don't like to go for too long without a little drinkey-poos and none of us wants to be the designated driver....
    Heaven is ... sitting in the garden with a G&T and a cat while watching the sun go down
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    Hostafan1 said:

    "nobody is talking about banning it"

    There's endless talk about banning it. If people have marches and smash up shops when asked to wear a mask for a few months, I don't hold out much hope for restricting alcohol and tobacco or sugar. People scream about 'sovereignty' and 'fascism', 'nanny state' and all that. The UK is a land of the Daily Mail through and through. Asking people to care for others through not malleting the NHS with diseases of alcohol, fags and obesity never plays well. Our citizens cling with cold and clammy fists to the right to kill themselves in a variety of preventable ways that make everyone else suffer. As with Covid, as with environment, tobacco, booze etc. "I'll hit my wife with a mallet if I want to and nobody can tell me otherwise. It's my house and my business" ad nauseum.

    And so ... Hosta moves the conversation away from glyphosphate.
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 34,889
    Fire said:
    Hostafan1 said:

    "nobody is talking about banning it"

    There's endless talk about banning it. If people have marches and smash up shops when asked to wear a mask for a few months, I don't hold out much hope for restricting alcohol and tobacco or sugar. People scream about 'sovereignty' and 'fascism', 'nanny state' and all that. The UK is a land of the Daily Mail through and through. Asking people to care for others through not malleting the NHS with diseases of alcohol, fags and obesity never plays well. Our citizens cling with cold and clammy fists to the right to kill themselves in a variety of preventable ways that make everyone else suffer. As with Covid, as with environment, tobacco, booze etc. "I'll hit my wife with a mallet if I want to and nobody can tell me otherwise. It's my house and my business" ad nauseum.

    And so ... Hosta moves the conversation away from glyphosphate.
    Im not moving it away, I'm asking for a direct comparison on which is actually the more dangerous, and therefore which should be banned. 
    You clearly refuse to engage in that discussion.
    You seem obsessed with glyphosate. Just don't buy it.
    I'll leave you all to it. 

    Devon.
  • raisingirlraisingirl Posts: 7,093
    edited July 2021
    Hostafan1 said:
    Im not moving it away, I'm asking for a direct comparison on which is actually the more dangerous, and therefore which should be banned. 

    We don't know. Monsanto and now Bayer will not permit their research into the toxicity of Round Up to be published, on the basis of commercial (dis)advantage. Therefore the information which would allow us to make this judgement is not in the public domain. Possibly the court cases in progress will force the release of relevant data - you would think that if it shows it is safe if used properly, it would be in their interests to publish, so hopefully they will
    Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon

    “It's still magic even if you know how it's done.” 
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 34,889
    edited July 2021
    @raisingirl how many people do you , personally, know have ever had any illness diagnosed as being related to weedkillers generally, and glyphosate in particular? 
    Any sense of perspective has been forgotten in this discussion. 
    Devon.
  • FireFire Posts: 19,096
    You seem obsessed with glyphosate.
    Oddly, this is a thread about glyphosphate (see title).

    Just don't buy it.
    This is not a national or international solution. As ever, we need collective solutions to collective problems. US farmers use it to dessicate crops before harvesting. Buyers of corn will not know how much spray they are consuming unless it's organic. Drinkers of tap water do not know how much has got into water sources.

    Any sense of perspective has been forgotten in this discussion.
    Mr Wild was flagging up up the ground breaking development the US has now banned the use in gardens. Debate has been raging for years over this interesting topic - the science, the lobbying, personal use v farming use, the EU perspective, the fact that it's now de-patented and free for anyone to make. Arguably, the irrefutable science is not there yet on widespread public harm. Like neonics, we see the data and legislation acrue before our eyes, which I why I think it's so interesting.
Sign In or Register to comment.