Obelix Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I'm fairly certain they wont kill everything as that's unnecessary, and expensive, and you need insects to pollinate rapeseed to get the best yields. Why on earth would you think they kill everything anyway? And just what is the apparent hatred of glyphosate - or have you some objection to what is one of the safest herbicides ever created? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Serious article on the subject here: https://risk-monger.com/2016/06/02/goodbye-glyphosate-why-science-doesnt-matter-in-the-age-of-stupid/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemcewan Posted June 3, 2016 Author Share Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) Obelix, I don't disagree with you vis "kill everything"-that's why I took it out. I never said I hated glycols. I said caution would be my watch word. You see, not everybody agrees (in farming) the innocuous import of glycols. In the early days of pesticides there was great enthusiasm for all kinds of chemicals that later proved to be harmful. Better safe than sorry. ---------- Post added 03-06-2016 at 15:58 ---------- Obelix, "Studies have shown that glyphosate can kills fish in concentrations of lower than 10 parts per million,that it reduces,growth of earthworms and increases their mortality and that it is toxic to many of the beneficial mycorrhiza fungi which help plants to take up nutrients from soils.It is also the third most commonly reported cause of pesticide-related illness among agricultural workers in California,the only state that which produces such statistics. Symptoms include eye and skin irritation,cardiac depression and vomiting" (Genetic Engineering Food And Our Environment. Luke Anderson.Pub. Green Books,p25, ISBN 1 870098 78 1.Glyphosate:Environmental Health Criteria ,159, World Health Organisation. United Nations Environment Programme. International Labour Organisation. Geneva. 1994. J.A. Sprignett and R.A.J Gray.Effects of repeated low dosages of biocides on the earthworm.Aparrectodea coliginasa in laboratory culture,Soil,Bio,Biochem.Vol 24 (12).pp1739-1744 " . Edited June 3, 2016 by petemcewan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Just FYI Glycols are alcohols, they are not the same thing as glyphosate - I presume you mean glyphosate. Roundup and it's derivatives have been in the market 40 plus years with no apparent problems at all despite an immense number of studies. The precautionary principle if applied to everything would have us still sat in caves deciding if we should light a fire to stop freezing to death, on the offchance it may burn us. ---------- Post added 03-06-2016 at 16:08 ---------- "Studies have shown that glyphosate can kills fish in concentrations of lower than 10 parts per million,that it reduces,growth of earthworms and increases their mortallity and that it is toxic to many of the beneficial mycorrhiza fungi which helps plants to take up nutiments from soils.It is also the third most commonly reported cause of pesticide-related illness among agricultural workers in California,the only state that which produces such statistics. Symptoms include eye and skin irritation,cardiac depression and vomiting" (Genetic Engineering Food, And Our Environment. Luke Anderson.Pub. Green Books,p25, ISBN 1 870098 78 1.Glyphosate:Enviromental Health Criteria ,159, World Health Organisation. United Nations Enviroment Programme. International Labour Organisation. Geneva. 1994. What studies? I don't trust any hatchet job rag that just says "studies" unless it can be bothered to properly reference them. After all pepper causes "eye and skin irritation,cardiac depression and vomiting" if you eat a couple of grammes of the stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemcewan Posted June 3, 2016 Author Share Posted June 3, 2016 Serious article on the subject here: https://risk-monger.com/2016/06/02/goodbye-glyphosate-why-science-doesnt-matter-in-the-age-of-stupid/ Quite interesting. I'll conduct my life without a care in the world . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Not got any links but my wife buys our weedkiller and according to her Gordon Brown banned weedkiller with sodium chlorate in, so now instead of being able to go to Wilkos and get £5 worth of weedkiller that did an excellent job we now have to pay £20 for inferior weedkiller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemcewan Posted June 3, 2016 Author Share Posted June 3, 2016 (edited) Just FYI Glycols are alcohols, they are not the same thing as glyphosate - I presume you mean glyphosate. Roundup and it's derivatives have been in the market 40 plus years with no apparent problems at all despite an immense number of studies. The precautionary principle if applied to everything would have us still sat in caves deciding if we should light a fire to stop freezing to death, on the offchance it may burn us. ---------- Post added 03-06-2016 at 16:08 ---------- What studies? I don't trust any hatchet job rag that just says "studies" unless it can be bothered to properly reference them. After all pepper causes "eye and skin irritation,cardiac depression and vomiting" if you eat a couple of grammes of the stuff. "What studies" ? The studies quoted. Of course they are referenced. The WHO is a "hatched job rag" is it. I don't think so. Probably back in the day you'd be an enthusiast for borax in the milk . Edited June 3, 2016 by petemcewan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Not got any links but my wife buys our weedkiller and according to her Gordon Brown banned weedkiller with sodium chlorate in, so now instead of being able to go to Wilkos and get £5 worth of weedkiller that did an excellent job we now have to pay £20 for inferior weedkiller. Sodium chlorate was quite a nasty poison though that did kill people quite easily - same goes for paraquat which was why they were banned. ---------- Post added 03-06-2016 at 16:42 ---------- "What studies" ? The studies quoted. Of course they are referenced. The WHO is a "hatched job rag" is it. I don't think so. They don't appear referenced above to me. There's been the last time I did a literature search about 300 serious studies on glyphosate. One - only one - showed any issues with human health and that was biased by the author and shown to be demonstrably corrupt. There are no health concerns with using glyphosate in the manner in which is prescribed, not withstanding the idiotic theologically driven whining of the greenies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 one of the safest herbicides ever created? I work on the assumption that all chemicals are harmful, if not in their delivery, then in their production. In the past I have used salt to eliminate slugs, but I think twice now that I have a dog, she may ingest too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I work on the assumption that all chemicals are harmful, if not in their delivery, then in their production. In the past I have used salt to eliminate slugs, but I think twice now that I have a dog, she may ingest too much. I bet you still breath in one of the most reactive, corrosive and acidic chemicals known to man though quite willingly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now