Pesticides: standard agriculture cohabitation - dwellings

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

A new Inserm study clarifies the link between pesticides and six serious diseases. The researchers notably analyzed the impact of chlordecone in the West Indies.

A new study published by the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (Inserm) confirms that there is a "strong presumption" of a link between occupational exposure to pesticides and six serious diseases, including certain cancers and disorders of the brain. The study focuses in particular on the case of chlordecone, a pesticide long used in the West Indies and now banned. Expertise confirms a "strong presumption of a link between exposure to chlordecone in the general population and the risk of developing prostate cancer". The link is "considered probable" by the experts, in view of the "epidemiological and toxicological data available".

It is estimated that at least a third of the agricultural land in the West Indies and nearly half of the freshwater resources and the marine coastline are polluted by chlordecone.

In Guadeloupe and Martinique, the incidence rate of prostate cancer (standardized on the age of the world population) is 173 and 164 per 100 people per year, respectively, over the period 000-2007. This incidence rate in the West Indies is nearly twice the estimated incidence rate in France over the same period (2014 per 88,8 people per year).

https://la1ere.francetvinfo.fr/une-nouv ... 49305.html
When these INSERM scoundrels start talking about "strong presumption" and "plausibility", it is therefore a certainty!

CHLORDECONE YOU UNCONNECT

[humus]

[izentrop]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ1vPYC3KAY

one more thing against agriculture which cites the IARC and Stéphane Foucart as credible arguments.

a few days ago, a large study accused him of causing serious diseases, including cancer and Parkinson's.

What is this important study whose source is not even cited?

[humus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ1vPYC3KAY

one more thing against agriculture which cites the IARC and Stéphane Foucart as credible arguments.

a few days ago, a large study accused him of causing serious diseases, including cancer and Parkinson's.

What is this important study whose source is not even cited?

There is no worse blind man than the one who does not want to see.
Do not watch the entire documentary, it might give you pimples, on the other hand pesticides are good for your health.

Again the lobbying at work and you to see nothing. (same for vaccines)

Yes I know, it hurts to see the reality of the decaying world we live in.

Is it better to be happy in ignorance or unhappy in knowledge?
After all, you may be right for the time we have left to live.
As long as your tractors don't come and pee at my house or what I eat.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

What is this important study whose source is not even cited?

I was already talking about it above, but the link to the study not working, I put it here. You're welcome, Izy.
https://presse.inserm.fr/publication-de ... ees/43303/

To go further on the six pathologies in adults for which a strong presumption has been established with occupational exposure to pesticides

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: links between exposure to malathion, lindane, DDT and organophosphates (++) had been identified in 2013. Recent data allow us to conclude a presumption of a stronger link in 2021 for diazinon ( ++) and chlordane (+). For glyphosate, the presumption of link is reinforced for occupational exposure (+). A low level of presumption is reported for the first time for dicamba (±). The data also suggest links between subtypes of NHL and certain pesticides.

Multiple myeloma: for the first time, links with active substances are demonstrated for permethrin (+) and for carbaryl, captan, DDT and glyphosate (±).

Prostate cancer: this analysis reinforces the role mentioned in 2013 of occupational exposure to certain organophosphate insecticides such as fonofos (+) and highlights that of terbufos (+) and malathion (+) as well as an insecticide organochlorine (aldrin, +). It highlights a higher risk of developing an aggressive form of the disease, thus suggesting a possible role in the progression of the disease and not just in the onset. For chlordecone, the expert opinion found a strong level of presumption (++) and considers that a causal relationship is likely.

Parkinson's disease: data confirms the link with paraquat (+) and new studies suggest links with a weak presumption (±) with active ingredients of the dithiocarbamate fungicide family (zineb, ziram and mancopper). New studies on the exposure of residents of agricultural land suggest a weak presumption of the link with pesticides in general.

Cognitive disorders: the presumption of a link has increased from medium to strong (++) with exposure to pesticides, mainly organophosphates, among farmers. The most recent studies have been extended to residents of agricultural areas or to the general population and have led to the conclusion of an average presumption (+).

Respiratory health (not treated in 2013): a strong presumption between occupational exposure to pesticides and the occurrence of COPD and chronic bronchitis has been established. A link has been identified between seventeen active substances and a pathology or impairment of a parameter of the respiratory function with mostly a low level of presumption (±). To assess the biological plausibility of this link, three effects were studied in toxicology (oxidative stress, mitotoxicity and immunomodulation) and among these 17 pesticides, 11 are associated with at least two toxicological effects and two, permethrin and chlorpyrifos, with the 3 effects.

[izentrop]

What is this important study whose source is not even cited?

I was already talking about it above, but the link to the study not working, I put it here. You're welcome, Izy.
https://presse.inserm.fr/publication-de ... ees/43303/

You're right to think it's serious, coming from INSERM

Multiple myeloma: for the first time, links with active substances are demonstrated for permethrin (+) and for carbaryl, captan, DDT and glyphosate (±).

The (±) just means that we don't know anything about it, no proof.

The experimental studies of carcinogenesis in rodents show an excess of cases, but are not convergent. There are different tumors, for males or females, but which only occur at very high doses of glyphosate and only on certain strains of rodents.

Very high doses that are not found in nature therefore, since in agriculture we use 2 to 3 liters of concentrated product, mix with water per hectare, which amounts to 0.3 mg / m² which will disappear quickly in a few days.
The risks are fair for those who handle the concentrated products, the professionals like all that you put in red. The individual does not take any risk now that he is no longer authorized for them and the green spaces.

Nothing new and glyphosate remains a great tool to cultivate without tillage, which induces less use of oil, less mineralization allowing more carbon storage and the safeguard of humus, it is obvious for the conservation agriculture.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

The (±) just means that we don't know anything about it, no proof.

Yeah, yeah, if your corrupt INSERM mark (±) it's rather twice than ... for years they've been lying, but then they can do more then they bias ...

[izentrop]

A new international study concludes that overall, farmers have fewer cancers than the general population.

Need we remember that he is the “star” of activism and legal piracy against glyphosate and Bayer / Monsanto?
“The meta-SIR for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) was less than 1,0 in males and females combined (n = 5; meta-RIS = 0,92, 95% CI = 0,86-0,98, 2, I0 = XNUMX%). There too less than the general population ...

The activists will have to revise your judgment

5. conclusions
This analysis of eight AGRICOH cohorts provides insight into cancer incidence trends among agricultural workers, suggesting a lower incidence of cancer overall, including cancers of the bladder, breast (female), colorectum , esophagus, larynx, lung and pancreas and a higher incidence of prostate cancer in men and multiple myeloma and melanoma of the skin in women compared to the general population. Despite the large variations in geographic locations and farming practices, the results were largely consistent across cohorts, with some variation, suggesting the presence of some common underlying risk or protective factors among farm workers, men and women. women. ..

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 5?via=ihub

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

"Study" more than doubtful, with paradoxical conclusions. (ANSES participates ...) Trash ... Usual Izyesque smoke

[humus]

Proof that you haven't watched the RTS documentary.
there is the solution to glyphosate-free and labor-free.

I will not reveal the solution to you, I leave you the pleasure of discovering it for yourself

It's Sunday, gift, timing the video on the solution:https://youtu.be/YJ1vPYC3KAY?t=1849
Be careful, it takes your breath away!