You're aware that she's right, of course. Glyphosate is a highly toxic organo-phosphate fertilizer that is implicated in a host of cancers. Monsanto, the producer of glyphosate, is under class action lawsuit as a result. I suppose you actually weren't aware of this.
Cont: Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories Part IV
- Thread starter AcesHigh
- Start date
- Status
You're aware that she's right, of course. Glyphosate is a highly toxic organo-phosphate fertilizer that is implicated in a host of cancers. Monsanto, the producer of glyphosate, is under class action lawsuit as a result. I suppose you actually weren't aware of this.
And yet, we know that type I Interferons are crucial to immune response in general, and the experimental gene therapies have an adverse effect on them. How do you know the incidence of cancer would be affected so quickly? You probably have a few years yet to hope that we're all wrong, and that the risk you took for a disease that carries an infection survival rate of at least 99.74% was worthwhile.
Last edited:
Dangerous disinformation.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
She is a computer scientist. Exactly zero qualifications to evaluate medical issues. The school she works at is irrelevant. So of course you think it is good because it supports your fantasies.
Last edited:
Don't believe the Russian guff.
Sounds like you don't know what "at the end of the day" means.
Once again, the crackpots you cherish aren't helping.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
It's the author of the article Bubba linked to who is suggesting that, not me. I merely suggested a far more reliable way to find out if it's true than the one he is stupidly using.
Gulled again!
Same old disinformation, different day; it's the manipulative media he consumes.
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 6,416
Glysophate is a herbicide, not a fertilizer. It is a killer, not an enrichment. It only "increases" crop production by way of removing unwanted competition.
But, more on point...
Glysophate's impact on cancer potential is related to dosage and frequency. This is why most (successful) cases are from actual farmers coating many hectares a year.
While I still personally avoid them and steer homeowners away from them, the tiny presence necessary for this particular application is entirely negligible.
As usual, when it comes to really large or infantesimally small numbers, many humans have trouble understanding where the greater risk lies.
Last edited:
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Oh my, Tippit. How can you even stand being so wrong so frequently?
I think this is how it works:
Step 1: embrace Libertarianism...
Step 2: believe that you are special beyond all reason...
goto Step 1:
According to this conceptual model, reality is just a distraction, and public health policy is an annoyance put forth by lesser beings.
Last edited:
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Seems to be ample evidence that he is indeed *special*.
It's always a bad idea for anyone to think so. Science will remain relevant long after we are gone and forgotten. Covid-19 will be a footnote in history, and those who've been denying the science as the pandemic unfolded will live on as case studies in psychopathology, but the smarter of us will do what we can to survive. That means taking precautions as suggested by public health policy informed by the best science we have.
For the others, I wish them luck, because they'll need it.
Last edited:
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him
Once again:
- mRNA vaccines have been in development for decades and are now fully approved for use by the relevant regulators in most countries including the United States. They are not experimental.
- mRNA vaccines do not touch your genes. They do not modify or alter your genome in any way. They are not gene therapy.
I think this is relevant here.
Public outrage over the unvaccinated is driving a crisis in bioethics (cbc.ca)
I understand the feeling. I think that those who believe that their freedom to choose is more important than the health of my loved ones and myself are selfish jackasses. This is where the tire hits the road. I have no patience with those who swallow Russian, Libertarian, QAnon, scammer, and other quack propaganda. Who with any sense would?
Indeed it's a problem, but it's the fools and worse who create the problem.
Public outrage over the unvaccinated is driving a crisis in bioethics (cbc.ca)
I understand the feeling. I think that those who believe that their freedom to choose is more important than the health of my loved ones and myself are selfish jackasses. This is where the tire hits the road. I have no patience with those who swallow Russian, Libertarian, QAnon, scammer, and other quack propaganda. Who with any sense would?
Indeed it's a problem, but it's the fools and worse who create the problem.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,578
Stephanie Seneff on glyphosate
As part of looking into glphosate 2016, Derek Lowe wrote, "Seneff has done no actual studies on glyphosate; she doesn't work in a lab. Those papers are rehashes of stuff from the literature, piles of speculation and dot-connecting, and they're invariably published in low-quality pay-to-play journals that do little or no actual refereeing of their contents." The glyphosate story itself is complex, as the rest of his essay shows.
Glyphosate is not an alkylating agent, nor an intercalating agent. Its target is the aromatic amino acid biosynthetic pathway, a pathway not found in humans. I do not say that these things prove it does not cause cancer; I do say that in lieu of strong data, I would at least like to know a proposed mechanism. Given her track record, I would not trust Dr. Seneff as a source regarding Covid-19.
As part of looking into glphosate 2016, Derek Lowe wrote, "Seneff has done no actual studies on glyphosate; she doesn't work in a lab. Those papers are rehashes of stuff from the literature, piles of speculation and dot-connecting, and they're invariably published in low-quality pay-to-play journals that do little or no actual refereeing of their contents." The glyphosate story itself is complex, as the rest of his essay shows.
Glyphosate is not an alkylating agent, nor an intercalating agent. Its target is the aromatic amino acid biosynthetic pathway, a pathway not found in humans. I do not say that these things prove it does not cause cancer; I do say that in lieu of strong data, I would at least like to know a proposed mechanism. Given her track record, I would not trust Dr. Seneff as a source regarding Covid-19.
Last edited:
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
And, of course, it has nothing whatsoever to do with covid.
MBDK
Muse
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2018
- Messages
- 678
Indeed. This is why I point out that these so called freedom-lovers do not advocate responsible freedom at all. They are actually anarchists. It is precisely because of their irresponsible self-gratifying actions that we have laws in the first place, as their version of "freedom" becomes a hazard to the public at large.
- Status