Glyphosate on BBC website!

willy

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Rutland
They forget to mention how many billions of lives that round up has saved through helping to reduce starvation, but a few snowflake Californian judges and its deemed evil.
How many people have died from cancers caused by petrol or alcohol or tobacco, or any main stream product the list is endless, and so as society we need to get a perspective on risk and not get knee jerk reactions with silly sums of money being paid out.
 

bovrill

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
East Essexshire
In California - where a judge had ruled that coffee must carry a cancer warning - the agriculture industry sued to prevent such a label for glyphosate, even though the state lists it as a chemical known to cause cancer.

At least they put that at the bottom . . . most un-BBC-like!
 
They forget to mention how many billions of lives that round up has saved through helping to reduce starvation, but a few snowflake Californian judges and its deemed evil.
How many people have died from cancers caused by petrol or alcohol or tobacco, or any main stream product the list is endless, and so as society we need to get a perspective on risk and not get knee jerk reactions with silly sums of money being paid out.

The big problem is they basically didn't label it saying "could cause cancer" and lobbied against it. That is the crux of it. It doesn't mean it will cause cancer etc. I think the average persons chance of getting NHL is about 1% and the average roundup user may be 1.2% and maybe a ultra heavy roundup user with no ppe, spraying all day every day could be 2% - but when using hazardous material you need to know to expect potential risks.

A farmer working outside in the sun all day probably has a 10% higher chance of skin cancer than a person sitting in an office all day who probably has a 20% higher chance of heart disease etc.

I totally agree we need perspective. Roundups problem is its popularity, its a shame when there are so many worse chemicals out there.
 

willy

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Rutland
The big problem is they basically didn't label it saying "could cause cancer" and lobbied against it. That is the crux of it. It doesn't mean it will cause cancer etc. I think the average persons chance of getting NHL is about 1% and the average roundup user may be 1.2% and maybe a ultra heavy roundup user with no ppe, spraying all day every day could be 2% - but when using hazardous material you need to know to expect potential risks.

A farmer working outside in the sun all day probably has a 10% higher chance of skin cancer than a person sitting in an office all day who probably has a 20% higher chance of heart disease etc.

I totally agree we need perspective. Roundups problem is its popularity, its a shame when there are so many worse chemicals out there.

They don’t put that on sausages and they are proved to be if you eat enough
 

mwj

Member
Location
Illinois USA
The use of words is the big problem. Contribute to cancer could be applied to almost anything in life that we come in contact with. This was another case that a jury punished a wealthy corporation and was sympathetic to a common citizen. Jurors can rule against the evidence to make the finding they are looking for.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.0%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 66 35.1%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.0%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,291
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top