Monsanto says panel to review WHO finding on cancer link to herbicide
Source: Reuters
Monsanto Co, whose Roundup product is one of the world's most widely used herbicides, said on Tuesday it has arranged for an outside scientific review of a World Health Organization finding that the weed killer's key ingredient probably causes cancer.
The WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said in March that it had concluded that the ingredient, called glyphosate, was probably carcinogenic after reviewing a range of scientific literature. [ID:nL2N0WM2I4]
Monsanto reacted to the finding by demanding a retraction, labeling the findings by a team of international cancer scientists as "junk science." [ID:nL2N0WP0UM]
On Tuesday, Monsanto said it had hired Intertek Scientific & Regulatory Consultancy to convene a panel of internationally recognized scientific experts to review IARC's work. The experts include medical doctors, cancer experts, and individuals with doctoral degrees who are specialists in public health, the Creve Coeur, Missouri-based company said.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/14/us-monsanto-herbicide-idUSKCN0PO2FM20150714?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews
Gee, I wonder what a Monsanto-sponsored study will find
Moostache
(9,897 posts)Monsanto is an evil corporation and they should be driven out of business and their board of directors hanged.
Tea Potty
(27 posts)You aren't Ready 4 President Monsanto?
KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)FOH!!
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Personally I'm not going to give up my morning cup of joe based on their "evidence". YMMV.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)It's entertaining to pretend your allegation is relevant.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)A chemical used in RoundUp at 15% of the volume of the substance, is polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA) which degrades into dioxane - a seriously carcinogenic chemical.
Composition of Roundup is purported by the company itself to be glyposate at 41%, POEA at 15% and the rest supposedly water.
However, without formaldehyde or some other aldehyde being part of the composition, the product would not be sprayable, and would remain in a cake like form.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)postulater
(5,075 posts)I couldn't find his name among the editors back to 2006.
And I couldn't find any snake oil for sale on his site.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)You will find all sorts of gibberish about POEA and dioxane on Mercola's website, but no mention of it on Wiki or any citations to creme-de-la-quack Mercola. Imagine that.
What you'll also find on Mercola's website are plenty of references to homopathic snake oil, so if you didn't find it, you weren't looking hard enough.
Mercola is such a snake oil selling quack the FDA ordered him to stop making his snake oil quackery claims numerous times. That's some serious quackery right there.
Living Fuel Rx, claimed to offer an "exceptional countermeasure" against cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, etc.
Tropical Traditions Virgin Coconut Oil, claimed to reduce the risk of heart disease and has beneficial effects against Crohn's disease, irritable bowel syndrome, and many infectious agents
Chlorella, claimed to fight cancer and normalize blood pressure.
In 2006, the FDA sent Mercola and his center a second warning that was based on product labels collected during an inspection at his facility and on claims made on the Optimum Wellness Center Web site [16]. This time the claims to which the FDA objected involve four products:
Vibrant Health Research Chlorella XP, claimed to "help to virtually eliminate your risk of developing cancer in the future."
Fresh Shores Extra Virgin Coconut Oil, claimed to reduce the risk of heart disease, cancer, and degenerative diseases.
Momentum Health Products Vitamin K2, possibly useful in treating certain kinds of cancer and Alzheimer's disease.
Momentum Health Products Cardio Essentials Nattokinase NSK-SD, claimed to be "a much safer and effective option than aspirin and other pharmaceutical agents to treating heart disease."
In 2011, the FDA ordered Mercola to stop making claims for thermography that go beyond what the equipment he uses (Medtherm2000 infrared camera) was cleared for. The warning letter said that statements on Mercola's site improperly imply that the Meditherm camera can be used alone to diagnose or screen for various diseases or conditions associated with the breast, they also represent that the sensitivity of the Meditherm Med2000 Telethermographic camera is greater than that of machines used in mammography. The statements to which the FDA objected included:
"Revolutionary and Safe Diagnostic Tool Detects Hidden Inflammation: Thermography"
"The Newest Safe Cancer Screening Tool"
"because measuring inflammation through thermal imaging is a proactive, preventative method you can use for detecting disease, which significantly improves your chances for longevity and good health."
Additionally, thermograms provide: "Reliable and accurate information for diagnosis, treatment, and prognosisâ¦"
"Yes, it's true. Thermograms provide you with early diagnosis and treatment assistance in such problems as cancer, inflammatory processes, neurological and vascular dysfunction, and musculoskeletal injury."
Thermography can benefit patients by detecting conditions including: Arthritis: "[d]ifferentiate between osteoarthritis and more severe forms like rheumatoid." Immune Dysfunction, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue, "Digestive Disorders: Irritable bowel syndrome, diverticulitis, and Crohn's diseaseâ¦" and "Other Conditions: including bursitis, herniated discs, ligament or muscle tear, lupus, nerve problems, whiplash, stroke screening, cancer and many, many others." [17]
http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Does not make the statement un-true.
If Mercola says the sun sets in the West, would you then start saying the sun sets in the East?
The truth in a statement is in the truth in the statement.
Find me a major scientists at a major university whose specialist is organic chemistry who can state that POEA is not a substance that breaks down into dioxane, and then you will have credibility.
Other wise I call bullshit.
(John Marchand, who has a Masters degree in science and was a principle witness against MTBE being in water supply, was one of the top people in water chemistry for MUDD (thew ater agency for Alameda County) in the East Bay of San Francisco, he often spoke of how POEA breaks down into dioxane.
So Mercola is only saying what some of the major researchers I have known have been saying - as far as the POEA.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)"Thrillers" on this site.
As Mercola is only saying what some of the major researchers I have known have been saying - as far as the POEA, it seems ill advised that major Nikon would utilize only Mercola's statements rather than the research of many others.
But he will try to prove his point, which is mainly that his sweetheart, Monsanto is good for us (just like MTBE was good for us, just like asbestos was good for us, just like big tobacco was good for us, without working that hard at being logical or scientific.
.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)YMMV.
The non-technical term for argumentum ad ignorantiam is bullshit, BTW.
Just sayin'
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)chemical he used on his ranch. He sits frozen from Parkinson's disease for many years.
I would never use round-up.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)and they can get it independently certified by outside scientists who say that questioning GMOs will bring down a second Dark Ages on our heads!
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)to confirm that their dangerous product isn't so dangerous.
Seems Legit!
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)They are kinda like UL, except bigger and they specialize in such things.
If what the IARC said is true, it kinda makes you wonder why so many are freaking out over an independent review of the available information.
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)Which makes us wonder how they're going to skew the results to make their product (that haven't been tested other than its effect on the enviorment) look safe.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)The government requires pesticide manufacturers to do their own licensing testing just like pretty much every other industry. As such Monsanto would have the official source of all that information and no comprehensive review of the product could be complete without it.
The only question that really matters is whether the testing company is producing a truly independent opinion, and since that's what Intertek is in the business of doing exactly that there's no reason to believe otherwise. It's no different than companies that hire Underwriters Laboratories to do product certification. The only reason that certification means anything is due to UL's independence and reputation. What makes it even more interesting is that Monsanto is announcing this move before Intertek even starts its evaluation.