Glyphosate in your palm garden?

[DoomsDave]

BUT

We'll continue to use glyphosate, except for a few die-hards.

[Dypsisdean]

3 hours ago, Keith in SoJax said:

Dean, I personally do not like using pesticides, but I know this; without them, billions of people are going to starve.  

Agreed, I hate toxic chemicals and avoid them whenever possible. My gripe is that an emotional sensationalized trial is no place to arrive at sensible public policy.

The plantiff in this case testified that he sprayed 150 gallons of Roundup 20-30 times a year. During gusty winds, he said the product would cover his face. And he had two accidents in which he was soaked with the product. Is the product to blame, or the school district that employed, trained, and supervised the plantiff? What other horrendous practices and chemicals did this poor man endure?

The bottom line is that without sufficient caution and responsible use there are many substances that probably cause cancer. Gasoline is a known carcinogen, with warning signs everywhere. Yet we use it responsibly. And the benefits far outweigh the potential negatives.

Let the feeding frenzy begin. There are thousands of cases waiting in the wings, and the courts just put out a big welcome sign. If history repeats, the days of purchasing Round Up may be limited. There will be other weed killers. But whether they are safer, or if homeowners will be allowed to use them, remains to be seen.

 

 

 

[Tyrone]

7 hours ago, Dypsisdean said:

Agreed, I hate toxic chemicals and avoid them whenever possible. My gripe is that an emotional sensationalized trial is no place to arrive at sensible public policy.

The plantiff in this case testified that he sprayed 150 gallons of Roundup 20-30 times a year. During gusty winds, he said the product would cover his face. And he had two accidents in which he was soaked with the product. Is the product to blame, or the school district that employed, trained, and supervised the plantiff? What other horrendous practices and chemicals did this poor man endure?

The bottom line is that without sufficient caution and responsible use there are many substances that probably cause cancer. Gasoline is a known carcinogen, with warning signs everywhere. Yet we use it responsibly. And the benefits far outweigh the potential negatives.

Let the feeding frenzy begin. There are thousands of cases waiting in the wings, and the courts just put out a big welcome sign. If history repeats, the days of purchasing Round Up may be limited. There will be other weed killers. But whether they are safer, or if homeowners will be allowed to use them, remains to be seen.

 

 

 

I doubt that roundup will be banned. The economic ramifications would be just catastrophic across the world. Farmers would have to resort to much more dangerous products and heavy tillage of soil that just leads to massive soil erosion.

I don't want to use 2,4,D here either if they did ban roundup. I might as well have a nuclear reactor powering my house, and drive at 300mph on the highway. 

I agree that proper training is likely required in some cases for sensible use of the product. That's true of anything. 

[Keith N Tampa (ex SoJax)]

8 hours ago, Dypsisdean said:

Agreed, I hate toxic chemicals and avoid them whenever possible. My gripe is that an emotional sensationalized trial is no place to arrive at sensible public policy.

The plantiff in this case testified that he sprayed 150 gallons of Roundup 20-30 times a year. During gusty winds, he said the product would cover his face. And he had two accidents in which he was soaked with the product. Is the product to blame, or the school district that employed, trained, and supervised the plantiff? What other horrendous practices and chemicals did this poor man endure?

The bottom line is that without sufficient caution and responsible use there are many substances that probably cause cancer. Gasoline is a known carcinogen, with warning signs everywhere. Yet we use it responsibly. And the benefits far outweigh the potential negatives.

Let the feeding frenzy begin. There are thousands of cases waiting in the wings, and the courts just put out a big welcome sign. If history repeats, the days of purchasing Round Up may be limited. There will be other weed killers. But whether they are safer, or if homeowners will be allowed to use them, remains to be seen.

 

 

 

I agree with what you said here.  

[Keith N Tampa (ex SoJax)]

1 hour ago, Tyrone said:

I doubt that roundup will be banned. The economic ramifications would be just catastrophic across the world. Farmers would have to resort to much more dangerous products and heavy tillage of soil that just leads to massive soil erosion.

I don't want to use 2,4,D here either if they did ban roundup. I might as well have a nuclear reactor powering my house, and drive at 300mph on the highway. 

I agree that proper training is likely required in some cases for sensible use of the product. That's true of anything. 

Tyrone, this whole kerfuffle over the neonicitinoids is a case study of poorly informed public driving illogical change.  Any insecticide applied to bee-pollinated plants while they are blooming will kill bees.  Some neonicitinoid alternatives are even more likely to kill them.  Its exasperating when these issues take hold and they are driven my mis-information, or incomplete information, or context, or all 3.  

[Gonzer]

It all goes back to my opening salvo in this post; proper PPE's, training, and thorough spraying techniques. The guy was spraying in gusty winds? How do YOU spell 'idiot'?

[DoomsDave]

13 hours ago, Dypsisdean said:

6 hours ago, Tyrone said:

I doubt that roundup will be banned. The economic ramifications would be just catastrophic across the world. Farmers would have to resort to much more dangerous products and heavy tillage of soil that just leads to massive soil erosion.

I don't want to use 2,4,D here either if they did ban roundup. I might as well have a nuclear reactor powering my house, and drive at 300mph on the highway. 

I agree that proper training is likely required in some cases for sensible use of the product. That's true of anything. 

Agreed, I hate toxic chemicals and avoid them whenever possible. My gripe is that an emotional sensationalized trial is no place to arrive at sensible public policy.

The plantiff in this case testified that he sprayed 150 gallons of Roundup 20-30 times a year. During gusty winds, he said the product would cover his face. And he had two accidents in which he was soaked with the product. Is the product to blame, or the school district that employed, trained, and supervised the plantiff? What other horrendous practices and chemicals did this poor man endure?

The bottom line is that without sufficient caution and responsible use there are many substances that probably cause cancer. Gasoline is a known carcinogen, with warning signs everywhere. Yet we use it responsibly. And the benefits far outweigh the potential negatives.

Let the feeding frenzy begin. There are thousands of cases waiting in the wings, and the courts just put out a big welcome sign. If history repeats, the days of purchasing Round Up may be limited. There will be other weed killers. But whether they are safer, or if homeowners will be allowed to use them, remains to be seen.

 

 

 

There will be a temporary feeding frenzy, but Bayer is well-prepared to deal with it. I'm not shedding any tears for them. And, as you appear to point out, @Dypsisdean, it would seem that the plaintiff's employer ought to answer for at least some of the damage because of what appears to be faulty practices on its part. There's all kinds of reasons why they might not be in the judgment, most of which are more a matter of litigation strategy than policy.

I started this thread, because a few anti-glyphosate folk were trying to get me to stop using it based on the verdict in the recent case. I just laughed, and pointed out, for starters, how fact-specific the recent case was, and that I was going to keep "glyphing" the weeds. They could run and hide if they wanted when I was out weeding. I'd use it safely, and if they wanted to make glyphosate margaritas, they'd have to buy their own.

There's no telling what the California Court of Appeal will do with the verdict in the most recent case. Sometimes, jury awards go on the chopping block, especially when they're big like this.

Each new case will be decided on its merits, unless there's a class action, and even then, there's a possibility of many types of classes. I really think it's going to be very very hard for a casual Roundup user, like most of us on the board are, to prove cancer causation. Bayer knew all of this when they bought Monsanto. Monsanto is god to many farmers, and Roundup is only part of the reason.

Remember when everyone was hanging crepe for asbestos? Johns Manville bit the dust, but asbestos is alive, well, and incorporated into more products than ever. Lawsuits rarely result in public policy. Sometimes that's good, sometimes, not.

[Gonzer]

Hell, I don't eat Cheerios anyway!

[DoomsDave]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/monsanto-trial-dewayne-johnson-who-was-awarded-dollar289-million-by-a-jury-accepts-dollar78-million-instead/ar-BBPdlLQ?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=spartanntp

Looks like the Court of Appeal will have a more limited appeal. But there will be an appeal. No doubt about that. Monsanto has nothing to lose, even if it faces very long odds of success.

Everyone can agree that non-Hodgkins lymphoma is terrible. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Here's a picture of Mr. Johnson's hand.

[Dave-Vero]

I use Roundup to control weeds in pavement cracks.  There ant control around the house and sidewalks (the crazy ants would excavate under everything), but no lawn disease or insect control.