<Citation Needed>
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
-
-
Doesn't glyphosate break down relatively quickly from UV exposure anyway?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
i have no idea how they can justify that decision. The sad fact is that the vast majority of people get cancer due to genetic reasons, that's it. No one wants to admit they're doomed from the start though.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The IARC study was a farce though, it was intentionally manipulated and should be retracted. It doesn't even deserve a mention, bringing the total studies linking glyphosate to cancer back to zero. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/who-iarc-glyphosate/ …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Exactly (and the IARC excluded studies, including the largest human epidemiological study) which would have changed their conclusion.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You might want to keep Paracelsus in mind here
End of conversation
-
-
-
Don’t know about cancer, but doesn’t glyphosate cause genetic abnormalities with some wildlife—like frogs?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Imagine one of the leading pharmaceutical companies (Bayer) not being able to prove so in the courts system. You would think these billion dollar companies could afford decent litigation team to be able to provide such an easy defence. Me thinks you're talking out your arse !!!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.