| The EPA considers glyphosate to be noncarcinogenic and relatively low
| in dermal and oral acute toxicity. The EPA considered a "worst
| case" dietary risk model of an individual eating a lifetime of food
| derived entirely from glyphosate-sprayed fields with residues at their
| maximum levels. This model indicated that no adverse health effects
| would be expected under such conditions.
I realize that you've already made up your mind
that you don't want to worry about this sort of thing,
so you're going to cherry pick any data you find, and
thus you'll find the data you want to know.
For anyone else reading this thread, there are other
points to consider:
1) First is the obvious point: Why would anyone decide to
trust a gov't agency that says it's safe to eat poison?
2) The issue being discussed here is not specifically
how dangerous glyphosate might be, but rather the
general issue of GMO crops. Roundup Ready GMO
crops are designed to tolerate *even more*
herbicide than other crops.
3) At the EPA's own site they make clear, as they
always have, that they see their job as one of balanced
assessment and action. They don't just decide whether
something is poison and should therefore be banned.
They weigh economic and other factors.
Risk assessment provides "INFORMATION" on potential health or ecological
risks, and risk management is the "ACTION" taken based on consideration of
that and other information, as follows:
a.. Economic factors inform the manager on the cost of risks and the
benefits of reducing them, the costs of risk mitigation or remediation
options and the distributional effects.
4) The referenced EPA fact sheet is *22*
Why, when glyphosate is so common in the food
supply, has it not been looked at in 22 years? Could
that possibly have anything to do with Monsanto's
clout in gov't? Maybe not. But if one searches for
'monsanto revolving door' a lot of interesting links