Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: TerrifyingTechnofascist Acts Against Health Freedom You’ll Probably Never Learn About

  1. #1
    Administrator Islander's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2007
    Location
    Maine, USA. The way life should be.
    Posts
    18,022

    Default TerrifyingTechnofascist Acts Against Health Freedom You’ll Probably Never Learn About

    Maryam Henein
    August 7, 2019

    Content is literally disappearing from the Internet. High-quality online health sites that have been negatively affected include HoneyColony, Greenmedinfo, Dr. Axe, Erin Elizabeth of Health Nut News, SelfHacked and Dr. Joseph Mercola.
    The stifling of natural remedies in favor of peddling pharmaceuticals and monetizing medicine isn’t new. We gave our health over to the faux faith of maligned science and technology ages ago, back in 1910, when a teacher—not a doctor—wrote the so-called Flexner Report. Since WWII, the pharmaceutical industry has steadily netted increasing profits to become the world's second largest manufacturing industry after war toys.

    Read more: https://www.organicconsumers.org/new...B+633+Saturday
    ➤ Happiness is the frosting on the cake of contentment.

  2. #2
    Administrator Islander's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2007
    Location
    Maine, USA. The way life should be.
    Posts
    18,022

    Default Re: TerrifyingTechnofascist Acts Against Health Freedom You’ll Probably Never Learn A

    You have been reading, here and elsewhere, about Google's attempt to bury "alternative and natural" health sites. I read some examples of such attempts and to me they seemed contrived. Ever curious, I decided to do my own experimentation. I chose the three most popular search engines, Google, Bing and Duck Duck Go. I used the same search terms for each (glyphosate toxic) and compared the results. I was looking for a mention of one particular fact... but we'll come to that in a minute. I looked at the top three results for each. Here is what they looked like.

    Google: Glyphosate is a moderately toxic herbicide and carries the signal word WARNING on the label. Even though the LD50 values show the compound to be relatively non-toxic it can cause significant eye irritation. The toxicity of the technical product (glyphosate) and the formulated product (Roundup) is nearly the same.

    Bing: Glyphosate toxicity. Glyphosate poisoning. They generally consist of an aqueous mixture of the isopropylamine (IPA) salt of glyphosate, a surfactant, and various minor components including anti-foaming and colour agents, biocides and inorganic ions to produce pH adjustment. The mechanisms of toxicity of glyphosate formulations are complicated.

    Duck Duck Go: Of course glyphosate is toxic! It is a herbicide after all - the whole point of glyphosate is to kill unwanted plants. Like all chemicals, including water and salt, glyphosate is going to be toxic to animals (including humans) at some dose. Compared to other herbicides, though, glyphosate is a pretty safe option for killing weeds.

    So there are the thumbnails. Next I read the top three entries, looking for specific information.

    Google: (1) Carcinogenic Effects. Rats and dogs and mice fed glyphosate over a wide range of doses showed no cancer related effects directly due to the compound (4). EPA has stated that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that glyphosate is not carcinogenic in humans.
    (2) Is glyphosate likely to contribute to the development of cancer? Animal and human studies were evaluated by regulatory agencies in the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the European Union, as well as the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues of the United Nations and World Health Organization (WHO). These agencies looked at cancer rates in humans and studies where laboratory animals were fed high doses of glyphosate. Based on these studies, they determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic. However, a committee of scientists working for the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the WHO evaluated fewer studies and reported that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic.
    (3) Carcinogenicity: The U.S. EPA classified glyphosate as "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans." Human carcinogenic potential was evaluated by reviewing available epidemiological, animal carcinogenicity, and genotoxicity data.30,39 See the text box on Cancer. There followed a series of 7 bullet points, all but one claiming no tumoregenic risk. The exception: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as Group 2A, "probably carcinogenic to humans."49
    Note: you have to scroll to the 8th entry before finding a "yes" to cancer..


    Bing: (1) Published study, Glyphosate poisoning; abstract makes no mention of carcingenicity.
    (2) Same as Google's second entry.
    (3) Is glyphosate likely to contribute to the development of cancer? Animal and human studies were evaluated by regulatory agencies in the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the European Union, as well as the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues of the United Nations and World Health Organization (WHO). These agencies looked at cancer rates in humans and studies where laboratory animals were fed high doses of glyphosate. Based on these studies, they determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic. However, a committee of scientists working for the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the WHO evaluated fewer studies and reported that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic.
    Note: 4th entry is Mercola's: "Roundup and Glyphosate Toxicity Have Been Grossly Underestimated"

    Duck Duck Go:

    (1) As interesting as a single study may be, we must look at the totality of evidence. And so far, the evidence does not show that that glyphosate causes – or cures- cancer.
    (2) Same as Bing's #3.
    (3) Mercola's: "Roundup and Glyphosate Toxicity Have Been Grossly Underestimated"

    So...Google gets there on the 8th entry; Bing gets there on the 3rd entry, followed by the Mercola story; and Duck Duck Go gets there in three. My conclusion, which took way too much time, pretty much met expectations. When the WHO evaluated studies and determined that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic, the news made headlines, but Google seems the most reluctant to admit that. If your search was satisfied with the first three results, you'd never know the truth.
    Last edited by Islander; 2 Weeks Ago at 03:57 PM.
    ➤ Happiness is the frosting on the cake of contentment.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-06-19, 02:42 PM
  2. Will Codex Alimentarius Undermine Global Health Freedom?
    By Islander in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-08-15, 12:30 PM
  3. We Become Silent: The Last Days of Health Freedom
    By Islander in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-20-14, 07:55 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-20-11, 01:51 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-05-10, 05:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
<<<<<<<< Your Customized Value <<<<<<<<