I note the proposed ban does not cover " commercial use" so farmers, councils and the like who use the stuff by the gallon can carry on. Gardeners who might have the same pack for years will be the only people banned.
If you just google 'banning Glyphosphate' and 'Councils banning glyphosphate' you will see how global the actions are to ban/propose bans - nations and local councils .....
I have had muscle and joint problems lately and doing heavy weeding regularly is not an option but a weed killer can keep the worst of it at bay. I use glyphosate but I do not spray it around in the manner the big agricultural companies do.
I work in the research department of a large chemical etc company!
I amongst others do the actual physical testing for the senior research scientists where the results are meant to match the experiment not the experiment match the results!
As with all experiments things do not always go as expected and they then pretend that was what they wanted, especially when we tell them that was not what we had been told to achieve!
When they chance their arm and try to pass it off to their bosses as successful the hob nail boots come into operation, ,dented reputation for them, back to work for us again,those above them are not easily fooled!
Do i believe someone whose title is "Scientist". most certainly not always, look no further than the evil mad scientist who had for his own reason condemned MMR vaccine,and the harm that did!
There is no "decision to ban". The European Parliament passed a resolution that "calls upon the Commission" to take into account several wishes of the Parliament, but that resolution is not even a binding one.
In any case, they proposed to renew the approval of glyphosate. With several restrictions, some of which are completely unsupported by any evidence. And ALL of the government scientists, none of whom are prejudiced by commercial interests, supported a non-restricted renewal. Only a small group of IARC scientists, led by a US anti-pesticide campaigner, concluded that glyphosate is a "probably carcinogen", but ignored all of the regulatory tests that were conducted under government-scrutinised quality control...
It is only the governments of some countries that ignored their own scientists' conclusions and bent for the pressure of misinformed parliaments that were reluctant to vote for renewal in March.
A decision will have to be taken by the European Commission, in the coming weeks, and nobody knows yet what they will propose...
There is no "decision to ban". The European Parliament passed a resolution that "calls upon the Commission" to take into account several wishes of the Parliament, but that resolution is not even a binding one. The European Parliament does not decide on things like these.
In any case, they proposed to renew the approval of glyphosate. With several restrictions, some of which are completely unsupported by any evidence, and not even legally possible. And in any case, ALL of the government scientists who evaluated the glyphosate dossier, none of whom are prejudiced by commercial interests, supported a non-restricted renewal. Only a small group of IARC scientists (a little un-monitored loose cannon of an Institute), led by a US anti-pesticide campaigner, concluded that glyphosate is a "probable carcinogen", but chose to ignore the majority of regulatory tests that were conducted under government-scrutinised quality control...
And even if the Commission renews the approval of glyphosate: that is NOT the same as an authorisation... Real authorisations are granted by national competent authorities: in the UK by CRD, based in York. And they still have to conduct a complete risk assessment, for each and every use. So people shouldn't get so worked up about the EU approval of an active substance. It is nothing more than a prerequisite for the authorisation of products containing that active substance.
A decision will have to be taken by the European Commission, in the coming weeks, and nobody knows yet what they will propose...
Posts
I note the proposed ban does not cover " commercial use" so farmers, councils and the like who use the stuff by the gallon can carry on. Gardeners who might have the same pack for years will be the only people banned.
Effect on nature overall.... nowt.
If you just google 'banning Glyphosphate' and 'Councils banning glyphosphate' you will see how global the actions are to ban/propose bans - nations and local councils .....
the decision to " ban " is non binding, so can be ignored by governments.
Sorry to bring reality into things.
Not in all cases Hostafan1.
I have had muscle and joint problems lately and doing heavy weeding regularly is not an option but a weed killer can keep the worst of it at bay. I use glyphosate but I do not spray it around in the manner the big agricultural companies do.
'You must have some bread with it me duck!'
I work in the research department of a large chemical etc company!
I amongst others do the actual physical testing for the senior research scientists where the results are meant to match the experiment not the experiment match the results!
As with all experiments things do not always go as expected and they then pretend that was what they wanted, especially when we tell them that was not what we had been told to achieve!
When they chance their arm and try to pass it off to their bosses as successful the hob nail boots come into operation, ,dented reputation for them, back to work for us again,those above them are not easily fooled!
Do i believe someone whose title is "Scientist". most certainly not always, look no further than the evil mad scientist who had for his own reason condemned MMR vaccine,and the harm that did!
There is no "decision to ban". The European Parliament passed a resolution that "calls upon the Commission" to take into account several wishes of the Parliament, but that resolution is not even a binding one.
In any case, they proposed to renew the approval of glyphosate. With several restrictions, some of which are completely unsupported by any evidence. And ALL of the government scientists, none of whom are prejudiced by commercial interests, supported a non-restricted renewal. Only a small group of IARC scientists, led by a US anti-pesticide campaigner, concluded that glyphosate is a "probably carcinogen", but ignored all of the regulatory tests that were conducted under government-scrutinised quality control...
It is only the governments of some countries that ignored their own scientists' conclusions and bent for the pressure of misinformed parliaments that were reluctant to vote for renewal in March.
A decision will have to be taken by the European Commission, in the coming weeks, and nobody knows yet what they will propose...
There is no "decision to ban". The European Parliament passed a resolution that "calls upon the Commission" to take into account several wishes of the Parliament, but that resolution is not even a binding one. The European Parliament does not decide on things like these.
In any case, they proposed to renew the approval of glyphosate. With several restrictions, some of which are completely unsupported by any evidence, and not even legally possible. And in any case, ALL of the government scientists who evaluated the glyphosate dossier, none of whom are prejudiced by commercial interests, supported a non-restricted renewal. Only a small group of IARC scientists (a little un-monitored loose cannon of an Institute), led by a US anti-pesticide campaigner, concluded that glyphosate is a "probable carcinogen", but chose to ignore the majority of regulatory tests that were conducted under government-scrutinised quality control...
And even if the Commission renews the approval of glyphosate: that is NOT the same as an authorisation... Real authorisations are granted by national competent authorities: in the UK by CRD, based in York. And they still have to conduct a complete risk assessment, for each and every use. So people shouldn't get so worked up about the EU approval of an active substance. It is nothing more than a prerequisite for the authorisation of products containing that active substance.
A decision will have to be taken by the European Commission, in the coming weeks, and nobody knows yet what they will propose...