General Discussion

pnwmom

(110,265 posts)

38. Suspicion based on past history is a compelling enough reason, IMO,

Fri Sep 11, 2015, 08:58 AM

Sep 2015

and in the opinion of most people who want labeling.

I see no reason to trust those companies to be the arbiter of whether their own products are safe or not. You are comfortable with the 1992 decision that delegated that determination to the companies themselves. Many of us are not.

I think they set up a conflict of interest when they charged the FDA with the dual mission of both protecting food and drug safety and promoting the industry.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

California EPA Moves to Label Monsanto's Roundup 'Carcinogenic' [View all] villager Sep 2015 OP

Great news and past due. n/t L. Coyote Sep 2015 #1

K&R awoke_in_2003 Sep 2015 #2

Well, when the only permissible "science" is that in the service of the bottom line... villager Sep 2015 #4

I always though Roundup should come in an orange container Capn Sunshine Sep 2015 #3

Agent Orange is a mixture of 24D and 245T, phenoxy herbicides. PufPuf23 Sep 2015 #11

Agent Orange was a mixture of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D muriel_volestrangler Sep 2015 #12

I must have been posting while you were researching. PufPuf23 Sep 2015 #41

This puts it in the same category as aspirin, oral contraceptives, and alcohol. Nailzberg Sep 2015 #5

And coffee too. progressoid Sep 2015 #6

You are free to swap out your "Morning Joe" with Monsanto's finest.... villager Sep 2015 #7

Which would you rather drink? n/t pnwmom Sep 2015 #9

You ask that question as if the answer is supposed to be somehow signficant Major Nikon Sep 2015 #22

If you're not prepared to use a product incorrectly NuclearDem Sep 2015 #24

It's kinda like asking someone why they wouldn't want to shove a toothbrush up their ass Major Nikon Sep 2015 #25

And working third shift. NuclearDem Sep 2015 #10

You guys really *are* working third shift, villager Sep 2015 #14

You know, when it comes to these accusations of being paid posters NuclearDem Sep 2015 #15

Am waiting for an example of "understanding" rather than snarkery, villager Sep 2015 #16

From what I've seen of your posts on this matter NuclearDem Sep 2015 #17

More of your scientific understanding and rational discourse! villager Sep 2015 #18

I just always wonder arikara Sep 2015 #19

Because it's an issue worth debating. NuclearDem Sep 2015 #23

Well I guess that cuts both ways arikara Sep 2015 #27

Because 1 in 5 US children live below the poverty line and I want families to afford to eat. Nailzberg Sep 2015 #29

Thank you for acknowledging. All of those products must be labeled. So should GMO's. n/t pnwmom Sep 2015 #8

Those products will be labeled as carcinogens. GMOs aren't carcinogens. Nailzberg Sep 2015 #28

LOL. Aspirin, alcohol, and birth control aren't labeled because they're carcinogens pnwmom Sep 2015 #30

I think you're thinking of two different things Orrex Sep 2015 #32

You're right -- and I'm not saying that aspirin, etc., are labeled for GMO content. pnwmom Sep 2015 #34

Sure they could. Orrex Sep 2015 #35

There is no compelling reason if you are convinced by the GMO producers research. pnwmom Sep 2015 #36

Suspicion isn't a compelling reason. Orrex Sep 2015 #37

Suspicion based on past history is a compelling enough reason, IMO, pnwmom Sep 2015 #38

Suspicion is not sufficient because it's not a matter of trust Orrex Sep 2015 #39

If you don't mind, what is your response to the fact that until a few years ago GMO researchers pnwmom Sep 2015 #40

No. They are labeled as required by Prop 65 as carcinogens. Nailzberg Sep 2015 #33

But what about "SCIENCE" ??!!11!!?? GreatGazoo Sep 2015 #13

Ever since CA made Disneyland put up "substances here may cause cancer" signs all over the place, Nye Bevan Sep 2015 #20

Or conversely, the line in the movie "Bliss" is increasingly correct: villager Sep 2015 #21

my son hides the round up MFM008 Sep 2015 #26

If he objects to doing his job, then he should quit or be fired Orrex Sep 2015 #31