Forum home The potting shed

Taking the p*ss: Glyphosate study

wild edgeswild edges The north west of south east WalesPosts: 7,528
Maybe people have seen this already but Wild Justice are running a testing campaign for glyphosate levels in people. Just linking it here to see if anyone is interested in getting involved.
The initial test costs about £40 but then if you share results with WJ they'll pay for further testing to track how the levels change. I must admit the cost is off-putting but it would be interesting to see what my levels are as I think I should have relatively low exposure to the stuff. Maybe someone here has used a lot of it over the years and would be interested in finding out if they've been adversely effected.
A great library has something in it to offend everybody.
«134

Posts

  • Pete.8Pete.8 Billericay, EssexPosts: 8,541
    It was @Dovefromabove (I think) posted some years ago that alerted me to the fact that glyphosate is typically used by farmers to ripen their grain. 
    So levels may be higher than some thought.
    I've bought organic porridge and flour ever since

    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
    Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.
  • FireFire LondonPosts: 14,084
    edited 21 January
    "Maybe someone here has used a lot of it over the years and would be interested in finding out if they've been adversely effected."

    But it hasn't yet been established that having a lot in your system would have an adverse effect. People may freak out that they are carrying high levels, but nobody has determined yet what that means, like microplastics. No doubt we are all carrying a lot of that too.

    An interesting project, though. I might get involved.
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 31,622
    I don't know anyone who " uses a LOT of glyphosate ". It's too flippin' expensive to slosh about willy nilly
    Devon.
  • KT53KT53 Posts: 6,431
    Isn't this still dragging through the courts in the USA?  The research was done using many times the typical exposure and is claimed by the manufacturers to have no relationship to real world exposure.
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 31,622
    I reckon the car fumes in the air are doing us more harm than glyphosate
    Devon.
  • wild edgeswild edges The north west of south east WalesPosts: 7,528
    True
    Fire said:
    "Maybe someone here has used a lot of it over the years and would be interested in finding out if they've been adversely effected."

    But it hasn't yet been established that having a lot in your system would have an adverse effect. People may freak out that they are carrying high levels, but nobody has determined yet what that means, like microplastics. No doubt we are all carrying a lot of that too.

    An interesting project, though. I might get involved.
    That was poorly worded sorry. I just mean adverse as in they might have retained higher than average levels in their blood. The link has all the disclaimers about not reading too much into results at the moment though.
    The study would benefit from a broad range of lifestyles I imagine. Farmers and professional gardeners, that bloke on the quad bike who drives down the pavements spraying the stuff all over the place, but it would also be interesting to see if people who try to eat as organically as possible are still picking the stuff up from somewhere.

    A great library has something in it to offend everybody.
  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 31,622
    I think society would be much healthier if we banned tobacco and alcohol rather than glyphosate
    Devon.
  • FireFire LondonPosts: 14,084
    Hostafan1 said:
    I reckon the car fumes in the air are doing us more harm than glyphosate....
    I think society would be much healthier if we banned tobacco and alcohol rather than glyphosate

    We don't need to binary world - it's not about cars fumes v glyphosate v tobacco v alcohol. No doubt a lot of all of them are not a good idea. We don't have to choose a Top Evil Bastard.

    It's always an argument that rolled out about recreational drug use - that the impacts of alcohol or tobacco is worse - as if that vindicates drugs.

    It's not about being punative, it's about trying to live wiser, healthier lives.


  • Hostafan1Hostafan1 Posts: 31,622
    Fire said:
    Hostafan1 said:
    I reckon the car fumes in the air are doing us more harm than glyphosate....
    I think society would be much healthier if we banned tobacco and alcohol rather than glyphosate

    We don't need to binary world - it's not about cars fumes v glyphosate v tobacco v alcohol. No doubt a lot of all of them are not a good idea. We don't have to choose a Top Evil Bastard.

    It's always an argument that rolled out about recreational drug use - that the impacts of alcohol or tobacco is worse - as if that vindicates drugs.

    It's nota about being punative, it's about trying to live wiser, healthier lives.


    so why the paranoia about glyphosate?and NOT tobacco and alcohol?
    Devon.
Sign In or Register to comment.