And I continue to have disturbing flashbacks to the 1990s, when Dow-Corning was driven to bankruptcy by scientifically ignorant rulings like this one. There is no good evidence that glyphosate causes cancer, the 2015 @IARCWHO report notwithstanding. 1/https://twitter.com/Evan_Rosenfeld/status/1128077773984026630 …
-
Show this thread
-
Glyphosate does not appear to cause non-Hodgkins lymphoma. There is a weak association began the highest exposure to glyphosate in agricultural workers but it is small, only weakly supported, and most likely spurious. 2/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/update-on-glyphosate/ …
2 replies 4 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
Basically, the science says that, although not impossible, it's incredibly unlikely that glyphosate caused or contributed to the Pilliods' non-Hodgkins lymphomas, not more likely than not—not even close. That's even if the Pilliods' exposure to glyphosate was very high. 3/
1 reply 7 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Most likely, the jury was swayed more by emotion than science. Here we have a couple in their 70s who both developed non-Hodgkins lymphoma within a few years of each other. They blame glyphosate, and juries, like all human beings, have a hard time accepting coincidence. 4/
2 replies 4 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
If there was a 1% chance that glyphosate caused the Pilliods' cancers, is that worth $2 billion, noting that 1% is almost certainly orders of magnitude higher than the actual chance? 5/
1 reply 4 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
It's all well and good to be sympathetic to a nice old couple work cancer. It's all well and good to dislike Monsanto/Bayer. It's a big company. As is the case for most big companies, it's done some shady things. 6/
3 replies 3 retweets 19 likesShow this thread
Nice old couple WITH cancer. 
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.