Jump to content


Photo

Monsanto


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#21 armchairadmiral

armchairadmiral

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 379 posts
  • LocationNgaruawahia

Posted 28 October 2017 - 12:30 PM

Worked for an outfit a few years ago that sold Monsanto / Roundup. I can verify from that experience that A J Oliver is 100 % correct. They are scum and their product is poison no matter how you dress it up !
  • 0

The ultimate result of shielding men from folly is to fill the world with fools.  Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher 1820 - 1903


#22 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,877 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 05:05 PM

Willow, sorry mate, but that article is total bogus rubbish.
Dr Seneff is Dr Stephanie Senneff and her actual profession is Research Scientist in computational modeling and analysis of the Human Auditory System to improve communication between humans and computers.
She holds a bachelor of science in biophysics, a master's in electrical engineering and a PhD in computer science. She is a senior research scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).

Clinical neurologist and skeptic Steven Novella criticized Seneff's Entropy publication for making "correlation and causation" assumptions using broad statistical extrapolations from limited data, saying "she has published only speculations and gives many presentations, but has not created any new data".Scientists and scholars such as Derek Lowe, a medicinal chemist, and Jeffrey Beall, a library scientist known for his criticism of predatory open access publishers, have separately criticized Seneff's paper for misrepresenting the results and conclusions of other researchers' work. Lowe and Beall also noted that Entropy and its publisher, MDPI have a known history of publishing studies without merit.

It is these "health blog" type websties that are one of the biggest issues that the internet has. People with absolutely no clue make some claim and next thing, it is viral and everyone believes it as factual. And this is what I meant earlier that it is articles on sites like these that I dismiss and rather look for proper university studies. So OK, studies at some Uni's may not be perfect, but it is still better than the rubbish these blogs publish.


  • 0

#23 MarkMT

MarkMT

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 595 posts
  • LocationLake Zurich, Illinois

Posted 28 October 2017 - 06:29 PM

Interesting, that name rings a bell... my own research career started in digital speech processing and I'm sure I've read papers by Senneff on that topic in the distant past. But a look at her home page at MIT shows she come a long way since then... https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/


  • 0

#24 Willow

Willow

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,422 posts
  • LocationTauranga

Posted 28 October 2017 - 06:42 PM

Willow, sorry mate, but that article is total bogus rubbish.
Dr Seneff is Dr Stephanie Senneff and her actual profession is Research Scientist in computational modeling and analysis of the Human Auditory System to improve communication between humans and computers.
She holds a bachelor of science in biophysics, a master's in electrical engineering and a PhD in computer science. She is a senior research scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).

Clinical neurologist and skeptic Steven Novella criticized Seneff's Entropy publication for making "correlation and causation" assumptions using broad statistical extrapolations from limited data, saying "she has published only speculations and gives many presentations, but has not created any new data".Scientists and scholars such as Derek Lowe, a medicinal chemist, and Jeffrey Beall, a library scientist known for his criticism of predatory open access publishers, have separately criticized Seneff's paper for misrepresenting the results and conclusions of other researchers' work. Lowe and Beall also noted that Entropy and its publisher, MDPI have a known history of publishing studies without merit.

It is these "health blog" type websties that are one of the biggest issues that the internet has. People with absolutely no clue make some claim and next thing, it is viral and everyone believes it as factual. And this is what I meant earlier that it is articles on sites like these that I dismiss and rather look for proper university studies. So OK, studies at some Uni's may not be perfect, but it is still better than the rubbish these blogs publish.

 

It appears she does a whole lot more than that, and I am going to hazard a guess that she is better qualified than you or I on the subject.

 

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/

 

From one of the presentations

 

Is Glyphosate Nontoxic?

• Monsanto has argued that glyphosate is harmless to humans because our cells don’t have the shikimate pathway, which it inhibits

• However, our gut bacteria DO have this pathway – We depend upon them to supply us with essential amino acids (among many other things)

• Other ingredients in Roundup greatly increase glyphosate’s toxic effects

• Insidious effects of glyphosate accumulate over time – Most studies are too short to detect damage


  • 0

Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt

 


#25 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,877 posts

Posted 29 October 2017 - 06:28 AM

It appears she does a whole lot more than that, and I am going to hazard a guess that she is better qualified than you or I on the subject.

 

No, I am not an expert, have never said I am, so don't go painting me as suggesting I am. You are not an expert either, and yet here you are making comment, just like I am. It's called "Discussion".
     Very simply, I am producing the evidence I have found over time that has created my view on the subject. You and others are doing the same from your point of view. If someone can produce credible proof that the stuff is bad news, then I may change my view. However, so far, none of the info from the nay side out there has been able to do so.
     Remember that this is still a Herbicide. It is designed to Kill Plants. It is not something safe enough to take a bath in. Users still need to treat it as a Poison and handle it as such.
    Re killing Bacteria in the Gut, there has not been any research into that either. But I can assure you, there is stuff we use on an almost daily scale that can cause that we don't seem to be too concerned. For instance, Fly spray and many of the Surface cleaners that say they kill 99.9% of Germs, just to name a couple.
How about Iodine in Salt. Does anyone understand that Iodine is actually a disinfectant. A Poison. It kills things in a strong enough concentration. But it is also essential for our Health. Like many chemicals are.


  • 0

#26 Willow

Willow

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,422 posts
  • LocationTauranga

Posted 29 October 2017 - 08:49 AM

Fair point, (I don't use fly spray or surface cleaners either because of it's affect on my health) 

There does seem to be enough concern about the product to believe that there is a problem.

It seems utter madness to spray a crop with poison then harvest it and eat it, simply defies common sense. Most people probably don't realize this happens and the shear scale of it's use.

 

There isn't any shortage of evidence that it's a problem. This one a study with lab animals showing liver and kidney damage.

 

https://ehjournal.bi...2940-015-0056-1


  • 0

Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt

 


#27 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,877 posts

Posted 29 October 2017 - 10:18 AM

 

There does seem to be enough concern about the product to believe that there is a problem.

It seems utter madness to spray a crop with poison then harvest it and eat it, simply defies common sense. Most people probably don't realize this happens and the shear scale of it's use.

 

Depends on the info and the tests and so on. For instance, drink too much water and it will kill your Kidneys. But obviously no one says we should not drink water at all. Everything in some quantity will damage or kill. There is not one single thing on this earth that is totally safe to us. Even Oxygen is Poison. Our bodies have adapted to be able to handle pretty much everything as long as the dose of whatever is not too much. Even the WHO have stated Glyphosate is safe under a certain amount.
And the concern? well that really is the issue. Because as I said, all the negative reports are not credible. And in fact, most of the issues with Monsanto are the same as several other humoungous scale companies. They get attacked by people that do not like the idea they make such huge profits and are such a huge company with fingers in so many pies. You have to consider that kind of motive toward these businesses. In fact, why is it Monsanto and their Roundup that is targeted. There are some 1500 Gplyphosate products around the world now. Most people would not even know what Glyphosate was in the bottle if the country did not require it printed and even for us where it is required, you need to read some fairly small print. And I tell ya what, there are some real nasty sprays available off the shelf I will not consider using because they are plain nasty and last in the environment for a long long time. In fact as an emplyee, you cannot use some of these unless you have done a course. But you can go home and become the Home gardener and wander off to the local plant shop and buy the stuff off the shelf and spray it around with out knowing anything about how toxic/Hazardous the product is.
 


  • 0

#28 wheels

wheels

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,877 posts

Posted 29 October 2017 - 10:25 AM

Which brings me to a question. In a comment I just made and worded slightly different to be clear here.
Large corporations being targeted in smear campaigns.
We all now of the action groups that target places like Caged Hens and the Pig Farms and the Green Peace organisations. But has it ever been known if slightly more sinister groups, like say the Telleban/ ISIS, or even a Foreign power has deliberately made claims on the internet to try and smear large companies in the view to try and destroy or damage it, or even go about setting distrust. I mean, this is or could be a very powerful form on Terrorism. It can do a lot of damage. Even the argument of Vaccines. What a great way to attack your enemies. Cause fear and distrust in things that can save.
 


  • 0

#29 Willow

Willow

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,422 posts
  • LocationTauranga

Posted 29 October 2017 - 03:20 PM

You may have a different opinion if your health was directly affected buy all these sprays. I don't want any of them. But some people have no issue with them.

 

Personally I think we are headed down a bad path and believe all these chemicals are responsible for the increase in cancer rates and mental health problems we are having in our societies. Not to mention the weird genetic defects they cause along with low sperm counts in males but going down a rocky road there.


  • 0

Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt

 


#30 Willow

Willow

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,422 posts
  • LocationTauranga

Posted 29 October 2017 - 04:31 PM

Which brings me to a question. In a comment I just made and worded slightly different to be clear here.
Large corporations being targeted in smear campaigns.
We all now of the action groups that target places like Caged Hens and the Pig Farms and the Green Peace organisations. But has it ever been known if slightly more sinister groups, like say the Telleban/ ISIS, or even a Foreign power has deliberately made claims on the internet to try and smear large companies in the view to try and destroy or damage it, or even go about setting distrust. I mean, this is or could be a very powerful form on Terrorism. It can do a lot of damage. Even the argument of Vaccines. What a great way to attack your enemies. Cause fear and distrust in things that can save.
 

 

Slipped into crazy there, I don't think an Elderly woman who works at MIT would be an ISIS operative despite how many papers she writes about the harm Glyphosphate does.


  • 0

Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users