@Australis2000 @FC_Julianus @brutofficiel 2/ c'est vrai. Je ne l'ai pas appris j'ai lu puis tiré des conclusions. Puis quelque source sur le glyphosate histoire vous rappeler que la science n'est pas un avis, que je ne me l'approprie pas juste que je la co
@BertrandM19 @brutofficiel 2/ toute personne qui n'est pas d'accord est au choix payé, intéressé ou idiot... Tenez un peu de lecture pour la soirée : https://t.co/r6tDFbtvQb https://t.co/kGmf9CnPUR https://t.co/qaCZOkzp7B https://t.co/r64G8HlnMH
O resto está ok mas glifosato não causa câncer https://t.co/4zdAjU4AiK
@Rafal_Gorski Na który dokładnie? Że roundup / glifosat to najlepiej / najczęściej badany środek do oprysków upraw? Metanaliza ponad 1000 badań wykazała, że glifosat nie jest rakotwórczy. Tu scientist: https://t.co/arqKO4NHCK tutaj inne badania: https://t
@phytonaut @tazgezwitscher Ich fand als Naturwissenschaftler aber toxikologischer "Laie" die Zusamenfassung und Gegenüberstellung der #EFSA bei dem Thema sehr interessant und verständlich, um die die Aussagen einzuordnen https://t.co/WbNhgawETy Btw, always
@Damkyan_Omega I don't have an overview of the positions of all these authorities (I doubt anybody has), but here's a detailled assessment & comparison from @JVTarazonaE , the head of @EFSA_EU 's #pesticide unit. 1/2 https://t.co/DwGEkrXDwB
@mrdiogon @Breizh29720 @GeWoessner @jdflaysakier Merci pour ces reponses. Je suis en train de lire un article qui confirme ce que vous m'expliquez. (https://t.co/ludI3vqNlW)
@GeWoessner Vous êtes quand même culottée, cette étude d’une agence de santé américaine justement précisait déjà les étranges résultats du rapport de l’UE , plagié sur celui de Monsanto . https://t.co/AxanIoQUVP
@Homiedino @cenkuygur @farronbalanced @TYTNetwork @AnaKasparian @johniadarola @TheYoungTurks More references: https://t.co/Bmqn93W5so Long-term Study Finds That the Pesticide Glyphosate Does Not ... https://t.co/juubxubGIo Facts and Fallacies in the Deba
RT @gregoriopatino: @LuchyB @mabeto04 Acá un estudio que va en otra vía respecto al que todos los progres usan como sustento. Aún hay tela…
@ClaraLopezObre Dudo que la corte los use pa algo. Acá hay uno de esos estudios por los cuales usted pregunta https://t.co/FVcZTewvs2
@LuchyB @mabeto04 Acá un estudio que va en otra vía respecto al que todos los progres usan como sustento. Aún hay tela por cortar en el tema https://t.co/FVcZTewvs2
@BandieriMaria Si es o no es cancerígeno es motivo de debate… ante la duda sobre cosas que se siguen investigando, me parece que está bien la precaución. Suerte y feliz año! https://t.co/wNjAJdEWwm
Since glyphosate was introduced in 1974, all regulatory assessments have established that glyphosate has low hazard potential to mammals... https://t.co/VPmE9usV3A
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
@KatBarclay2 @Blake_Lemberg @TruthRocksOut @george_capen Here is a decent recent review. https://t.co/pPKH6u6qMv
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
RT @gominolasdpetro: @nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No e…
@nuriadelamo1 @farmagemma @carloscasabona @JulioBasulto_DN El glifosato no es cancerígeno https://t.co/1TKHEhc7ud No es peligroso en animales https://t.co/OcWuTaTG4R y tampoco en humanos https://t.co/k5ipVCXchN siempre que se cumplan los límites máximos de
RT @OGMPourTous: 5) L’EFSA a présenté l’évaluation du glyphosate lors d’une multitude de conférences scientifiques et a facilité l’examen a…
RT @OGMPourTous: 5) L’EFSA a présenté l’évaluation du glyphosate lors d’une multitude de conférences scientifiques et a facilité l’examen a…
5) L’EFSA a présenté l’évaluation du glyphosate lors d’une multitude de conférences scientifiques et a facilité l’examen approfondi de cette évaluation dans une étude publiée dans une revue scientifique réputée. https://t.co/0KtwoIhhl2
@beachvetlbc @ryarmst @carrie_kollias @CaulfieldTim @DrPChouinard @DocMCohen @picardonhealth @IARCWHO One thing you forget is that the WHO is one agency. Their assessment is not perfect. Look, a review paper that says the exact opposite: https://t.co/o6t7D
@nickykylegarden @foodborn @fghays22 Currently, the state of science is that it's probably carcinogenic but safe in current regulation limits. https://t.co/5PgeZeu2kb
Thread intéressant… https://t.co/XUbLIPFqCf
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
@CauriePutnam @DandC @freep Important to understand who says glyphosphate is carcinogenic, and what the evidence standard is. This is a good, peer reviewed summary. I, personally, have other reasons I would want to avoid glyphosphate treated foods, but I'm
@Elyos9 @Kopecz93 @XRobichon @nikopol @yjadot @OuestFrance @BFMTV il y a avant AHS cette review : Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC https://t.co/Y8qZTQAM
@AndresPastrana_ @DebateCol Este estudio puede ser de interés para el debate https://t.co/FVcZTewvs2
@EldoRhaan @KawaSK_ @misterjul94 @GeWoessner Alors je ne suis pas d'accord une décision de justice n'est en aucun cas une preuve scientifique, je te conseil cet article comme début de preuve https://t.co/XCrE9nRj9l
@maurotoroo @cataortizcamara el tema aún tiene mucho de controversia el el ámbito científico y es bueno recordar que los herbicidas han estado en nuestros cultivos lícitos desde varias décadas, en muchos casos con aspersión aérea. https://t.co/FVcZTewvs2
#Glifosfato Los europeos no confirman lo anterior: "EU assessment did not identify a carcinogenicity hazard, revised the toxicological profile proposing new toxicological reference values, and conducted a risk assessment for some representatives uses" htt
RT @alain_co: Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its difference…
Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC. - PubMed - NCBI https://t.co/lfvB4XWJnw (Diplomatiquement dit, l'avis du CIRC/IARC reste difficile à justifier)
@Nemo_III @realiwasframed @doctorsensation Well that is weird...what do I have here? A study that says glyphosate is safe. But I thought you said they do not study the safety. https://t.co/lbMMcYEu6q
@Repris2justess @clementbaillon @FredericSays D'un point de vue scientifique, sa suppression n'a pas de sens: dangerosité non-démontrée(https://t.co/riI3bd5RgT) avec des produits de remplacement à la toxicité plus importante. Ce sujet est une excuse pour c
Was this article ghost-written? https://t.co/X2YU0LbmGr
@Olivefarmer No. It’s not. https://t.co/X2YU0LbmGr
@Olivefarmer @SenSchumer The EU regulatory assessment (Review available at https://t.co/WAHIgCbfn9) weighed much more scientific evidence than the flawed IARC assessment. Conclusion: GLYPHOSATE IS NOT CARCINOGENIC. Cherry-picking data to fit your conclusio
Document. https://t.co/gIxx4oCxDY
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
@DelthiaRicks @ScientistMel Just so I feel better, I'm leaving this here: https://t.co/6okmJESExP Industry interests CAN mess with scientific results, but that isn't what's happening here.
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @ScientistMel: Did you actually read this? It talks about the divergence and how people do not agree with the IARC...the people who did…
Did you actually read this? It talks about the divergence and how people do not agree with the IARC...the people who did the World Health Organization report. Also...the WHO and UN have a joint report saying there is no risk with glyphosphate... https://t.
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
Of course not...BfR used Glyphosate Task Force data.The recent European Review involved far too much Monsanto meddling...
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
RT @Pvincell: Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity…
Many interesting posts recently about glyphosate and cancer. This recent European review “did not identify a carcinogenicity hazard” https://t.co/urlyEvrHwz
@BeatrizTalegon https://t.co/mkSUDGuZ9Z "[..] actual exposure levels are below these [glisophate] reference values and do not represent a public concern". Algo muy importante en la ciencia es la revisión de pares. Quizás debería usted buscar consejo cientí
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
RT @Ferrier_Inst: Read a scientific assessment regarding the toxicity and carcinogenicity of glyphosphate, the active ingredient of Roundup…
Read a scientific assessment regarding the toxicity and carcinogenicity of glyphosphate, the active ingredient of Roundup. https://t.co/m9VwSLjGFZ
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
@zerohedge The jury is still out on whether glyphosate is actually a carcinogen. However, even if we assume that it does cause cancer, this is a matter of tradeoffs between costs and benefits of its use. IMO, we're still better off using it, than not. ht
@markstory_ @rob_trevino @ewg From a quick scan of this paper, tumors observed in small numbers at doses of >100 mg/kg body weight per day. Here we are talking ppb in the product (and probably not eaten every day) https://t.co/aSzC7seBTs
#Glyphosate the most widely used herbicide was concluded to probably be carcinogenic by IARC. A EU assessment did not confirm this and the conclusion divergence is probably due to methodological study differences. https://t.co/ICFaDjHZSD
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
RT @NonScientifique: "#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its d…
"#Glyphosate toxicity and carcinogenicity: a review of the scientific basis of the European Union assessment and its differences with IARC." #Tarazona JV, et al. Arch Toxicol. 2017. https://t.co/B3VwNQpqp3
@BraveTart @bmo985 I think it's probably harmless (e.g. https://t.co/siapwZKvSL ) but I want it more tightly regulated because resistance to it is "horizontally" transferring to weeds genetically where it is applied every growing season https://t.co/8FiB3J
RT @stolosa1: @pandralilla @ecopijusmaximus @yayo_herrero @VickyRosell Pues vamos a eso, con info del NIH y el IARC: "a recent report from…
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…
@gorskon As an experiment, I posted this article on @thefoodbabe blog about the case on her website.. It was taken down as I figured she would. Still cannot handle actual facts and studies. https://t.co/lbMMcYEu6q
@careygillam Try some facts. https://t.co/lbMMcYEu6q
@thefoodbabe How about something factual for once. https://t.co/lbMMcYEu6q
Thanks @joeschwarcz for providing an excellent reference regarding Glyphosate. https://t.co/lbMMcYEu6q
RT @joeschwarcz: Glyphosate on trial Many of you have asked for my opinion on the awarding of $289 million to a former groundskeeper who c…