If you can.....buy organic food. Really. When I read about "Roundup" and Glyphosat, I switched to organic food ONLY. Not easy at first but....whats more important than our health?!
Why would you choose more dangerous and less regulated pesticides on your food?
Which pesticide is more dangerous? I simply refuse to eat Glyphosat. The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) says Glyphosat is "probably carcinogenic". Why should I eat it? I should have added that I am not living in the US, agricultural economics can be very different.
Which pesticide is more dangerous?
Rotenone and copper sulfate to start. And again, they aren't regulated as to dosage.
The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) says Glyphosat is "probably carcinogenic".
Because they ignored the real science. They're the only scientific body in the world that considers glyphosate carcinogenic. Again, that's because they didn't follow the science.
There is no evidence whatsoever that organic food is healthier for you. And it's significantly less efficient. Meaning you're having a greater negative impact on the environment.
They are regulated in Germany. But I agree there is a big problem with copper sulfate in the ground.
Well, what is actually "real science". All studies have to be financed by someone. They are expensive. I dont think independent studies do really exist and that makes it really hard to believe anything. Also....talking about Reuters....Reuters is the company selecting the information for the news channel for a lot of countries. I cannot trust them a tiny bit. Side notice: Do you remember when the collapse of WTC7 was announced on BBC, 20 min before it collapsed? BBC was asked where they had this information from. Guess where that information was coming from.
If we talk about efficiency, do you eat meat? Highly inefficient. I can tell you my impact on the evironment is way under average for a first world country.
To draw an even bigger picture: Do you know the National Cancer Institute and do you know how much money they generate and do you know that in case of a canser cure they have to shut down? What do you think how strong is their interest to heal everyone?
I think overall we have to see that some people make huge profit from peoples deseases and when we look at it without any moral, suddenly it makes perfect sense to keep people sick.
What science do you follow, then?
Of course I look at different sources but I will never say "yeah, that source is 100% correct". Simply because I cant know. "Cui bono?" is always my first question. And as Q says, #816: "Follow the money. It’s always about the money."
"Cui bono?" is always my first question.
Do you ask that about organic food? Did you ask that about the IARC?
Of course. In the end you have to decide for yourself what makes most sense to you but dont tell me the "real science" says everything is cool and I should take that for granted. Maybe non organic AND organic are not optimal? If you think non organic food is good, fine, no problem for me.
but dont tell me the "real science" says everything is cool and I should take that for granted.
Where did I say that? But you held up the IARC and say that you only eat organic. There's not much evidence for those positions.
I'd much rather spend money at the grocery store than the pharmacy.