Pesticide and health studies

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Pesticide and health studies




by izentrop » 15/01/19, 12:47

Pesticide has become a good word to express the phytosanitary products used in agriculture, even in organic to fight against crop pests. It is interesting to know if the residues pose a health risk.

This 1990 American study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC54831/ concludes:
We calculate that 99,99% (by weight) of the pesticides in the U.S. diet are chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves. Only 52 natural pesticides have been tested in high-dose animal cancer tests, and about half (27) are rodent carcinogens; these 27 are found in many common foods. We conclude that natural and synthetic chemicals are also likely to be positive in animal cancer tests. We also conclude that at low doses from most human exposures, the comparative dangers of synthetic pesticide residues are insignificant.


This one more recent Evaluation and refined perspectives of the cumulative risk resulting from dietary exposure to pesticide residues in the Danish population.
This study provides additional support to the evidence showing that the adverse health effects of chronic exposure to pesticide residues in the Danish population are very unlikely. The HI for pesticides for a Danish adult was comparable to that for alcohol for a person consuming the equivalent of a glass of wine every seven years.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by Did67 » 15/01/19, 13:46

It is not a discovery that natural products can have health effects.

The deadly effects of certain potions have been known since prehistoric times. It's not just the hemlock, even if it is known. As are a number of mushrooms.

Colchicine is one of the most potent mutagens.

Curare, a natural substance, is a violent poison ...

Three examples of radical effects among thousands without doubt!

The effects in the broadest sense are probably millions of substances. Digitalis, cloves, etc ...

No need to do research to enact such truisms!

But what do you want to demonstrate, that synthetic pesticides are not more dangerous ??? It depends on which. And it depends on what dangers. As for the researchers who demonstrate ... ???? A study has appeared today which shows how biased the trials on glyphosate are!


Why such discrepancies in the expertise on the dangerousness of glyphosate? The journal Environmental Sciences Europe published on Monday January 14 a most enlightening study on the reasons for the disagreement between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The famous herbicide is indeed genotoxic and "probable carcinogen" for the first and ... none of this for the other.
Read also Glyphosate: more than forty new complaints against its use

A former professor at Washington State University, Charles Benbrook limited his analysis to genotoxicity, that is, the ability of a substance to damage DNA, one of the mechanisms responsible for carcinogenesis. The author has inventoried and classified the hundreds of studies taken into account by both of the two organizations to conduct their expertise. Its inventory shows, for the first time in figures, the depth of the gap between the results of independent studies published in scientific journals and confidential regulatory tests, provided by industry to the authorities.

In its 2016 assessment, the EPA took into account 52 genotoxicity tests carried out by manufacturers on pure glyphosate and 52 independent studies published in the scientific literature, also on the unmixed active ingredient. A single industrial test, ie 2% of this corpus, indicates a genotoxicity of the product; all others are negative. Conversely, 67% of published studies show a genotoxicity of the controversial molecule.


In: https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html


Surely chance ???
1 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by izentrop » 15/01/19, 19:33

Did67 wrote:No need to do research to enact such truisms!
The studies relate to agricultural and market garden products. In general, producers do not have fun using curare or colchicine and respect the regulations in force.
What is most to be feared for the health of consumers is https://www.economie.gouv.fr/dgccrf/con ... -lergot-et
Did67 wrote:In its 2016 assessment, the EPA took into account 52 genotoxicity tests carried out by manufacturers on pure glyphosate and 52 independent studies published in the scientific literature, also on the unmixed active ingredient. A single industrial test, ie 2% of this corpus, indicates a genotoxicity of the product; all others are negative. Conversely, 67% of published studies show a genotoxicity of the controversial molecule.

In: https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html
I notice that the journalist is Stéphane Foucart http://alerte-environnement.fr/2018/04/ ... ologistes/
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by Did67 » 15/01/19, 19:58

So he says bullshit ??? Is that what you mean ??? What a crime to be close to green people!

To repeat the stupidities of the studies of industrialists, that would be virtuous ??? Or to think that an industrialist, who has a big stake at stake, will produce an "irreparable" study, has nothing to do with naivety ???

I admit that I did not go to see the original study. But I will give you this pleasure, and go look at it, in English in the text ... (if I find on the internet).
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by izentrop » 15/01/19, 22:35

I put the latest EPA findings under the topic "glyphosate".
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by Did67 » 16/01/19, 17:19

izentrop wrote:
I notice that the journalist is Stéphane Foucart http://alerte-environnement.fr/2018/04/ ... ologistes/[/ Quote]

Should not be !!!

Because this type of implication, very common today, puts me out of me. It is implied that Foucart is close to the green, therefore what he writes has no value.

However, I was researched the original article.

Here it is : https://enveurope.springeropen.com/arti ... 018-0184-7

And for those who read English, this article says what Foucart summed up. The latter is therefore in no way concerned by the allegation published in this review. He does his job as a journalist (let's admit ecolo, wouldn't he have the right?) And faithfully reports information.

If you want to attack this information attack the original article.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 16/01/19, 17:25

izentrop wrote:I put the latest EPA findings under the topic "glyphosate".


I don't care about the EPA's conclusions.

Since precisely what we are talking about, it is this "curious" chance that the studies on which it is based are those produced by the industry, which as if by chance conclude, with one exception, to be harmless.

While the Agency against Cancer, has taken into account the majority of trials with public protocol, the publication of which is subject to reading committees, arrives at the opposite conclusion.

I am obviously unable to decide scientifically.

But quite frankly, a thief who shouts "it's not me", I know. And I have very limited confidence in his word when he is caught hand in the bag.

It is completely regrettable that the States - or Europe - no longer have the means to finance public research, independent of the industrialists. It is even a scandal!
1 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by izentrop » 16/01/19, 18:31

Did67 wrote:While the Agency against Cancer, has taken into account the majority of trials with public protocol, the publication of which is subject to reading committees, arrives at the opposite conclusion.
There is a lot of contradictory information on this subject. Moreover, they assessed a risk, not a danger, the WHO does not adopt their conclusions and the famous conflicts of interest of Christopher Portier, ... irregularities widely documented in the subject concerned.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by Janic » 19/01/19, 08:52

WHO does not adopt their conclusions and the famous conflicts of interest of Christopher Portier, ... irregularities widely documented in the subject concerned.
the WHO since it is dependent on the financial lobbies of chemistry, does nothing but follow the news and its health scandals, but does not precede them for a long time, so as not to displease its sponsors; At its beginnings its conclusions would not have been probable, but certain. the court decision ends the debate by banning this product on French soil. For now, justice is independent of lobbies and even political bodies ... provided it lasts a long time!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Studies on pesticides and health




by Exnihiloest » 12/03/19, 16:29

Janic wrote:..the WHO since it has been financially dependent on the chemical lobbies ...


I forgot the conspiracy theories, another great cliché of reactionary obscurantism.
0 x

 


Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 271 guests