The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-13-2013, 11:20 AM   #1
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,903
Default GMO weed killer found in human urine

This story gets bigger each day


GMO and Monsanto: Glyphosate Weed Killer Found in Human Urine across Europe

By Friends of the Earth

http://www.globalresearch.ca/gmo-and...europe/5338868
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-13-2013, 11:22 AM   #2
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,903
Default

Why does this matter?

Because GMO corn products are in everything, beef, pork, soft drinks, coffee creamer...on and on...

And because glyphosate is a powerful carcinogen.
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 11:49 AM   #3
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,693

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Those ****ers have to be stopped. If you're seeing this **** in human urine, you can't imagine how much is ending up in the ocean. Human beings aren't getting the big picture here. Kill the oceans and we kill ourselves.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 12:38 PM   #4
Pony Boy
"Whoa Nellie"
 
Pony Boy's Avatar
 
Omaha !!!

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,562

Adopt-a-Bronco:
mellon head
Default

My neighbor’s dog has grass killer in its urine
Pony Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 12:41 PM   #5
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Trace amounts of everything are everywhere.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 12:44 PM   #6
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,693

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Trace amounts of everything are everywhere.
We need a head smacking emoticon for brilliant statements like this. This is right up there with Bachmann's " But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas."
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 12:50 PM   #7
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
We need a head smacking emoticon for brilliant statements like this. This is right up there with Bachmann's " But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas."
Trace amounts of many things aren't necessarily dangerous, and in some cases are needed for healthy life, such as radiation, so...

I chalk it up to environmentalist extremism that any amount of anything anywhere is necessarily cause to poop on the rooftops.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 12:53 PM   #8
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,693

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Trace amounts of many things aren't necessarily dangerous, and in some cases are needed for healthy life, such as radiation, so...

I chalk it up to environmentalist extremism that any amount of anything anywhere is necessarily cause to poop on the rooftops.
That's just fine when you're talking about naturally occurring organic compounds, like arsenic for example. We're talking about Roundup here. How many ppm of Roundup in the human body is needed for healthy life?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 01:14 PM   #9
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 22,978

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Princes of Tara
Default

A couple shots of Roundup a day makes my hair grow super fast!
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 01:21 PM   #10
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
That's just fine when you're talking about naturally occurring organic compounds, like arsenic for example. We're talking about Roundup here. How many ppm of Roundup in the human body is needed for healthy life?
How much is needed to harm it? That's the question.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 01:22 PM   #11
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
A couple shots of Roundup a day makes my hair grow super fast!
Great. Can we start calling you Cousin Itt?
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 01:24 PM   #12
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,409
Default

Oh my god what are we going to do?
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 01:42 PM   #13
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Oh my god what are we going to do?
Ban everything?
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 02:48 PM   #14
B-Large
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Don't buy the stuff... Don't eat meat, don't drink soda, do everything from non GMO based ingredients.. Then you don't have to worry about it, let the people who don't care take the risk....
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 03:30 PM   #15
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,693

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Read the article. The weeds are building up an immunity to it anyway. When it no longer works and you've created a super-weed, then what do you do? For all their brains, humans are the stupidest creatures imaginable. This thread simply proves the point. It is possible to work with nature to control weeds and pests, but our arrogance and greed won't allow us to do that.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 03:33 PM   #16
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Read the article. The weeds are building up an immunity to it anyway. When it no longer works and you've created a super-weed, then what do you do?
Quote:
It is possible to work with nature to control weeds and pests, but our arrogance and greed won't allow us to do that.
Question, meet answer
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 03:37 PM   #17
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 53,693

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Question, meet answer
It's like antibiotics. Once you've created a super Staphylococcus bacteria, you're screwed. Why? Because you've changed the rules of the game. You have set up the conditions that caused a species to evolve into something more powerful. Now you have to deal with the new species because the old laws no longer apply. File this under Leave Well Enough Alone.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 03:44 PM   #18
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
It's like antibiotics. Once you've created a super Staphylococcus bacteria, you're screwed. Why? Because you've changed the rules of the game. You have set up the conditions that caused a species to evolve into something more powerful. Now you have to deal with the new species because the old laws no longer apply. File this under Leave Well Enough Alone.
I agree with you in some ways (especially when it comes to antibiotics) But the risk of a herbicide-resistant 'super weed' doesn't necessarily mean much if your alternative is to just not use herbicides. Having herbicide resistance doesn't suddenly make them Cyborg-Weeds, immune to the laws of nature.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 04:01 PM   #19
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,903
Default

William Engdahl gives a great summary of the GMO problem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWAB1K4lOsw
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 04:14 PM   #20
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,903
Default

Here is a story about the recent INDEPENDENT study mentioned by Engdahl. Nyuk Nyuk should pay attention: even trace amounts caused cancer.

Check out the shocking photos of the tumors.
MHG

findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early

Wednesday, September 19, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_GM...#ixzz2W8nDVieJ
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 04:32 PM   #21
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,882

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Here is a story about the recent INDEPENDENT study mentioned by Engdahl. Nyuk Nyuk should pay attention: even trace amounts caused cancer.

Check out the shocking photos of the tumors.
MHG

findings in new GMO study: Rats fed lifetime of GM corn grow horrifying tumors, 70% of females die early

Wednesday, September 19, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_GM...#ixzz2W8nDVieJ
That "study" was shown to be total B.S. quite some time ago. horrible test design, cherry picking of data, no statistical analysis, illogical leaps, etc.

poor test design:
Quote:
There is little to suggest they are. Tom Sanders, head of nutritional research at King's College London, says that the strain of rat the French team used gets breast tumours easily, especially when given unlimited food, or maize contaminated by a common fungus that causes hormone imbalance, or just allowed to age. There were no data on food intake or tests for fungus in the maize, so we don't know whether this was a factor.

...
in any case, there should be at least as many controls as test rats – there were only 20 of the former and 80 of the latter – to show how variably tumours appear. Without those additional controls, "these results are of no value", he says.
Some nice cherry picking of data:
Quote:
It wasn't that rats fed GM maize or herbicide got tumours, and the control rats did not. Five of the 20 control rats – 25 per cent – got tumours and died, while 60 per cent in "some test groups" that ate GM maize died. Some other test groups, however, were healthier than the controls.
and illogical leaps:
Quote:
Furthermore, the team claims to see the same toxic effects both with actual Roundup, and with the GM maize – whether or not the maize contained any actual herbicide. It is hard to imagine any way in which a herbicide could have identical toxic effects to a gene tweak that gives the maize a gene for an enzyme that actually destroys the herbicide.

...

But even more damning from a pharmacological perspective, the team found the same effect at all doses of either herbicide or GM maize. That's unusual, because nearly all toxic effects worsen as the dose increases – it is considered essential for proving that the agent causes the effect.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...1#.UbpXlJx4ieY

Last edited by Fedaykin; 06-13-2013 at 04:37 PM..
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 04:43 PM   #22
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,882

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Take 20 control rats, 80 test rats, all from a breed of rats known to be very prone to tumors. Say, at a 25% rate.

Feed them X for a while, then take all 20 control rats of which 25% got cancer, and then just 20 test rats (the 25% of the population that got cancer), and violà! you have a control group with a 25% chance of cancer and a 'test group' where 100% got cancer.

Last edited by Fedaykin; 06-13-2013 at 05:18 PM..
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 05:05 PM   #23
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,903
Default

Typical knee jerk by Feydakin -- who always assumes that industry -- in this case Monsanto -- got it right.

This hit piece by New Scientist is disgraceful -- and shows just how powerful Monsanto is.

According to New Scientist:

Tests like this have been done before, more rigorously, and found no effect of GM food on health. The French team claims to be the first to test for the animal's whole lifespan. But "most toxicology studies are terminated at normal lifespan – 2 years", as this one was, says Sanders. "Immortality is not an alternative." And those tests did not find this effect.

This is wrong. The tests done by Monsanto only ran for 90 days. But in the new French study which replicated the Monsanto research and ran longer -- the cancers only showed up after 4-7 months.

The French study was peer reviewed and published in a highly respected international scientific journal.

New Scientist also exposes itself by citing unnamed toxicologists. This is a dubious trashing of good science. Why is it happening? Because this new evidence threatens a too big to fail corporation -- which now has a near monopoly on food production.

Before you believe Fedaykin, check out Engdahl's analysis:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/stench-...tewash/5316294
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 05:50 PM   #24
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,882

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Typical knee jerk by Feydakin -- who always assumes that industry -- in this case Monsanto -- got it right.

This hit piece by New Scientist is disgraceful -- and shows just how powerful Monsanto is.

According to New Scientist:

Tests like this have been done before, more rigorously, and found no effect of GM food on health. The French team claims to be the first to test for the animal's whole lifespan. But "most toxicology studies are terminated at normal lifespan – 2 years", as this one was, says Sanders. "Immortality is not an alternative." And those tests did not find this effect.

This is wrong. The tests done by Monsanto only ran for 90 days. But in the new French study which replicated the Monsanto research and ran longer -- the cancers only showed up after 4-7 months.

The French study was peer reviewed and published in a highly respected international scientific journal.

New Scientist also exposes itself by citing unnamed toxicologists. This is a dubious trashing of good science. Why is it happening? Because this new evidence threatens a too big to fail corporation -- which now has a near monopoly on food production.

Before you believe Fedaykin, check out Engdahl's analysis:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/stench-...tewash/5316294
As always, I point out serious flaws in your understanding of a topic, and you launch into ad hominem.

The study you cite is grossly flawed (as previously discussed), and contradicts all other studies (of which there have been dozens, including long terms studies and even multi-generational studies:

Quote:
There were requests that the paper be retracted. Mark Tester, Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics, University of Adelaide, noted that Seralini’s research is anomalous. Previous peer-reviewed rat feeding studies using the same products (NK603 and Roundup) have not found any negative food safety impacts. The Japanese Department of Environmental Health and Toxicology released a 52-week feeding study of GM soybeans in 2007, finding “no apparent adverse effect in rats.” Earlier this year, a team of scientists at the University of Nottingham School of Biosciences released a review of 12 long-term studies (up to two years) and 12 multi-generational studies (up to 5 generations) of GM foods, concluding there is no evidence of health hazards. - See more at: http://www.geneticliteracyproject.or....0lqi8VDo.dpuf
The only way to combat the abuses of corporations like Monsanto is with good, honest science not fabricated B.S.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2013, 07:17 PM   #25
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,617
Default

Gotta love it. The righties are enraged that the their emails aren't private, but corporations poisoning us? Who cares!
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:04 AM.


Denver Broncos