Re: What's The Latest On Roundup Herbicide?

Page 8 of 10  


BWAHAHAHA, which is why they finally banned it outright. -paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
'They' meaning the EPA? No, the EPA didn't ban cca treated lumber paghat.
Dave
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
opined:

You must be joking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Joking? No, I'm not joking.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 03:08:06 GMT, "David J Bockman"

Thanks for proving my point davey.....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No problem tommy...
Dave
" EPA is reviewing CCA under two different tracks which will result in the most rigorous risk assessment ever done on a wood preservative pesticide... It is important to note.. that EPA has not concluded that CCA-treated wood poses unreasonable risks to the public for existing structures made with CCA-treated wood."
Testimony of Jack E. Housenger, Associate Director, Antimicrobials Division Office of Pesticide Programs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Before the Consumer Product Safety Commission Hearing on Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) Treated Wood March 17, 2003
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/chemicals/ccatestimony1.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 03:26:20 GMT, "David J Bockman"

Effective December 31, 2003, the use of CCA-treated wood will be limited to certain industrial and commercial applications. This change reflects increased concerns in the marketplace about the safety of treated wood containing arsenate and chromium, particularly in applications such as playground equipment. Residential applications affected by the change include play structures, decks, picnic tables, landscaping timbers, residential fencing, patios, and walkways/boardwalks. CCA-treated wood has been the overwhelmingly dominant preservative-treated wood in the United States, particularly in residential applications. The applications affected by the CCA settlement are the major markets for treated wood and major markets for the Southern Pine industry. Some applications not affected by the settlement include highway construction, marine (saltwater) applications, utility poles, pilings, and selected engineered wood products.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It could be that the little "EPA never banned CCA" chappy was lying on purpose, or it may be like a lot of other arguing-in-favor-of-big-business in this thread, if it is "true" the ban never occurred, it becomes so by playing convoluted semantic games avoiding actualities. The industry did a proper end-run in agreeing with EPA to voluntarily stop selling the product -- thereby making any EPA ban a unecessary. This is how EPA usualy gets bad stuff off the market, years & years of negotiation rather than strong-arming. The industry comes out ahead on two levels, first, by settlement they got to select the phase-out period & keep selling all existing stocks of CCA lumber for a couple more years & even make more of it for market right up to the end of 2003. Second, for lawsuits already in progress & more certain to occur in the future, the industry won't have the issue of the EPA having forced them against their will. A settlement is not a ban -- a ban would only follow a failure to compromise -- therefore, semantically speaking, EPA having forced the industry to stop poisoning people isn't the same as EPA banning the industry from doing so. Semantics are feeble things for covering lies, but it permits the lies to be carried over even into courts of laws without some judge slamming the attorneys in the clink.
-paghat the ratgirl
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I guess you're referring to me with your snide label, so I'll respond: No, I'm not lying, purposefully or otherwise. If you have any evidence to refute the claim that the EPA never banned CCA treated lumber, please feel free to post it.

'convoluted semantic games avoiding actualities'.... interesting.
"In early 2002, the CCA manufacturers, or registrants as we call them, approached EPA about their individual decisions to voluntarily phase-out virtually all CCA residential uses, including CCA intended for use in treating wood destined for decks, picnic tables, landscaping timbers, gazebos, residential fencing, patios, walkways and play structures."
I guess 'individual decisions to voluntarily phase out virtually all CCA residential uses'='convoluted semantic games avoiding actualities' in Paghat's book. I'm glad she was never my editor!

The EPA never approached CCA lumber manufacturers *to* stop selling their product paghat. It never happened.
Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
opined:

Prove it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 03:26:20 GMT, "David J Bockman"

FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY, MARCH 20, 2003
EPA FINALIZES VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION OF VIRTUALLY ALL RESIDENTIAL USES OF CCA-TREATED WOOD
David Deegan 202-564-7839/ snipped-for-privacy@epa.gov
On March 17, EPA granted the voluntary cancellation and use termination requests affecting virtually all residential uses of chromated copper arsenate (CCA) treated wood. Under this action, affected CCA products cannot be used after Dec. 30, 2003 to treat lumber intended for use in most residential settings. This transition affects virtually all residential uses of wood treated with CCA, including play structures, decks, picnic tables, landscaping timbers, residential fencing, patios and walkways/boardwalks. This action was proposed in February 2002 by the registrants of CCA-pesticide products used to treat wood. Phase-out of the residential uses will reduce the potential exposure risks to arsenic, a known human carcinogen, thereby protecting human health, especially children's health and the environment.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 17 Aug 2003 23:14:50 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@radix.net (Bill Oliver) opined:

BANG! And there it is. What just about everyone else is advocating is that, Roundup is NOT safe if used as directed. MONSANTO lies. University tests funded by MONSANTO are LIES. Yes, LIES.
I can hardly wait for Al Franken's new book:
"Lies and the lying liars who tell them." On stands soon. Also, Molly Ivan's new book: "Bushwhacked." Her first book "Shrub" should be put into required reading in school. Elementary school. More to prepare the young of how many lies and liars there are.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In other words, your claim that I advocate using glyphosate as table salt is untrue. You cannot find a post where I say that any more than you can find an article in a peer-reviewed scientific article that makes the claim that Roundup is unsafe if used as directed.
Not one post.
Not one article.
billo
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You do realize that after a sentence like that, the rest of your post is completely worthless.
Shampoo is also as safe as table salt, but I don't see you advocating that folks should using shampoo as table salt. There are thousands of items just as safe, or safer, than table salt that probably wouldn't work too well in place of salt.
I'm also pretty sure that "Billo" never advocating using ANYTHING in place of table salt.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, I did not. Please provide the quote.
My claim was, and is, that Roundup is not dangerous to humans when used as directed. I have challenged you to provide a single scientific article in a peer-reviewed journal that claims to show otherwise. You cannot. Instead, you launch into this bullshit personal attack.
But, of course, all you have is personal attack. You certainly don't have science on your side.
My challenge stands.
billo
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David J Bockman wrote:

I'm one of them! Rick Defray. There! I've revealed my *true* identity on the internet. Where's me $50,000?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yep. Eventually glyphosate will be banned. But not until Monsanto has made BILLIONS selling increasingly toxic mixes of RoundUp to spray on genetically engineered glyphosate-resistant crops. And the permanent after-effect will be new generations of glyphosate-resistant weeds. But imagine glyphosate's told-you-so arguments when they cook up more dubiouis statistics: "Weeds were less trouble back when RoundUp was legal!" "But that's because your glyphosate-resistant crops bled resistant into the weed population." "You can't prove that! No you can't!" Hell, Monsanto would like to bring back Agent Orange, & Monsanto "scientists" are still producing "proof" that dioxins (one of the most toxic substances known) is 100% safe at much higher parts per million than allowed by the government today. And why after all these years would Monsanto STILL be making the same Agent Orange arguments? Because glyphosate is generally contaminated with dioxins! And so the same lies are needed by Monsanto for its currant products.
They never do give up -- because their profits from lying vastly outpace their PR and legal costs every time they're caught. And the clean-up costs are picked up by the taxpayers. Some people predict Monsanto will fall entirely. I'm afraid more likely they'll pay off Congress to get them completely off the hook for all costs of the vast harm they're doing right now, then introduce a BRAND NEW chemical brew that'll give them ANOTHER twenty to forty years of profits in the high billions before the cost in human welfare is too extravagant to keep covering up.
-paghat the ratgirl
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Paghat, you do not do your cause any good when you state obvious untruth. I have stated over and over again that my position is that Roundup is safe when used as directed. That you try to pretend I claim what I do not claim is an indication of the weakness of your position, not mine.
billo
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you want to finally retract one of your stupid statements, do so, but don't call me the liar while you lie your ass off saying you didn't psot what you posted. Perhaps you did too many cut & pastes to even realize what gibberish you put your name to, but you did put your name under it. Your position STARTED very clearly that unless great huge gobs of glyphosate were injested, it was no more dangerous than table salt. That was YOUR statement on August 11. Not a very original statement I grant you -- nothing you've said has been that -- but you posted it with your name on it & the only liar here is you to keep denying it. Yes, it was stupid beyond belief, but so has been much else you posted. So live with it.
-paghat the ratgirl
--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You, yet again, are telling an untruth.
Please post the quote. You cannot. You can search for that as you vainly look for an article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that claims to show that Roundup is dangerous to humans when used as directed.
billo
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.