use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~4 users here now
Long-term Study Finds That the Pesticide Glyphosate Does Not Cause Cancer
submitted 1 year ago by [deleted] from self.science
view the rest of the comments →
[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (3 children)
And probably causes other problems beyond just cancer. Like ulcerative colitis and digestive issues. I don't think the "gluten free" trend is for nothing. Look up wheat desiccation (where they coat the plant in round-up before harvest), and see how the practice has exploded in the last 2 decades. Correlating exactly with the rise in gluten-free. People are getting sick, imo.
I even have doubts about the study. Monsanto is well-known for faking scientific studies to make their products look less dangerous.
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (2 children)
I agree. I am reminded of when I first learned how despicable Monsanto is from the book Biopiracy by Vandana Shiva. It was assigned reading for a pretty awesome course I took on Global Issues in the 3rd World. It was my first opportunity to study these kinds of issues in depth. I've forgotten most of the details, but the general issues are still with me.
Do you have any insight on what kind of chemical treatments, if any, of crops are required to feed 8 billion people? I'd like to hope we can go back to smaller scale farming without all the herbicides and pesticides.
[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (1 child)
Well I know plenty of countries have banned Monsanto products, and are able to grow crops just fine. I don't know that there's some ideal chemical we can swap out, or else people would've done it already, but it does seems like we over-use pesticides in the first place.
The native americans used to use a technique called the "Three sisters", where they grow beans, corn, and squash. The squash leaves are huge, and lay low on the ground, so they block sunlight for weeds, so they don't grow. The corn gives it a tall vertical structure. And the beans also help keep away pests.
The three combined create a mini eco-system that protects itself. Combined with other practices, like promoting good bugs that get rid of the bad bugs, we can create an entire biome that can feed us, without having to spray any chemicals. It will probably still have a higher failure rate than monsanto crops (as it's not killing everything) but it will take these pesticides out of our environment, atmosphere, biome, and digestive systems.
Combined with other practices like more intelligent crop rotation, I think we could have no problem producing enough food to feed the world without dousing it in chemicals constantly.
Not to mention all the food that is going merely to feed livestock... which is like 70% of all US crops go straight in to the mouths of livestock.
There's a lot of angles of approach, and there's no one golden solution, it'll take a network of small solutions put together to create a new status quo.
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (0 children)
Wow. Thanks for the info, I appreciate it. I am fully advocate for reducing our meat consumption. I know a lot of people say that is one of the best ways we could immediately reduce our environmental destruction.