Round-up / Cancer

Discussion in 'Health & Wellness' started by Martin Alonzo, Jan 31, 2017.

  1. Martin Alonzo

    Martin Alonzo Supreme Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2015
    Messages:
    6,536
    Likes Received:
    6,852
    #1
  2. Chrissy Cross

    Chrissy Cross Supreme Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2015
    Messages:
    19,089
    Likes Received:
    18,921
    I don't know what Alfonso uses, if he uses anything at all....I don't have weeds though.
     
    #2
  3. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Supreme Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    9,297
    Likes Received:
    10,629
    Monsanto has made billions of dollars over the years by profitting from the development and sale of chemical products beneficial and harmful both at the same time. A choice must be made by individuals both private sector as well as commercial, as to whether future human safety is of more value than present profiteering. "Must be made", but we know deep down it will not.

    In the case of another chemical giant, Johns-Manville, which through it's efforts world-wide to provide building and insulating products, filled the environment with Asbestos. J-M was sued successfully by groups and individuals due to the cancer-producing qualities so extensively, that the company filed for bankruptcy.
    Frank
     
    #3
  4. Doc James

    Doc James Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    54
    Hello there!.Most products in the market,nowadays,have a lot of chemicals which may be carcinogenic. LArge companies usually have clinical trials before putting the products in the market, however, in small amounts these chemicals may appear harmless, but over time and with continuous usage, these will accumulate in the body and become hrmful. I think it is up to the consumer to read the labels before using, and seek professional opinion before trying out products.
     
    #4
    Frank Sanoica likes this.
  5. Frank Sanoica

    Frank Sanoica Supreme Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2016
    Messages:
    9,297
    Likes Received:
    10,629
    @Doc James
    Agreed, and Understood, Doc! If only a greater portion of the population were technically-able to understand the implications......one example which comes to mind is the warning I see on many products, required by the State of California: CA Proposition 65, "WARNING: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm."

    Obviously, It is affixed to product sold also outside of CA, as multiple-labeling would be cost prohibitive, and anyway, if Californians are to be warned of danger, why should not the rest of us outside of CA be also warned? I have a can of Apricots, which is imprinted with the warning. It contains Apricots, sugar, water, and Ascorbic Acid, and is marked "Product of China". Bought at our 99-cent store for 99 cents; "homegrown similar product is around $4.00. It was bought in Arizona. The contents are perfect, good color, taste, the inner part of the can is plated with what appears to be a "wash" of Zinc-plate, looks galvanized. There seems to be no other coating applied, and since the only other material, Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C) is surely not likely to Prop./ 65 sensitive, the can's lining must be the culprit. If it IS Zinc, which is an essential nutrient for humans, albeit in very small quantity, is not healthful in large quantity.

    I may be way off, but suspect if 100 folks were picked randomly, perhaps 1 or 2 would be at all concerned about a label warning of Prop. 65.
    Frank
     
    #5
  6. Doc James

    Doc James Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    54
    I see your point, Frank. I agree with your sentiment 100%. If you ask me I would just rather put a label that the product contains chemicals that may cause cancer or other serious conditions regardless of what state it was manufactured in because whether it is from a different state or a different country, a chemical which is carcinogenic will always be carcinogenic
     
    #6
    Frank Sanoica likes this.

Share This Page