Cause I am awesome

Seems like I am entirely vindicated by the fact that the authors of this study are being accused of mass media manipulation. My original complaint was that reporting on this type of study in this manner encourages unscientific conclusions.

Really? Because I think I supplied a great deal of information. I also stopped a lot of knee-jerk over-reaction.

Atrazine is banned in the US now as well. It causes deformation of amphibians.

Well, in fairness Samsung's real defense was that there were only a few ways to make the icon anyway....and that they just happened to be similar because there are only 5(or whatever) different icons that are recognizable. That little lollipop on the second hand is pretty damning.

Oh, I thought it was incoherent as soon as you accused me of being a corporate shill.

You corporate trolls disgust me.

Seriously, if you want to assume everyone with an opposing viewpoint on something is working with a secret agenda. I don't know why I can't assume you have an even more nefarious agenda

That is exactly what a shill would say when caught.

Its ok, you are clearly a corporate shill for Syngenta

I absolutely couldn't find the paper, only the previous study from 2009.

You caught me, I am a deeply planted corporate shill. I have commented on gawker for years just so that I can occassionally defend Monsanto.

Who peed in your organically-grown granola?

I don't think Europe has a ban on glyphosate. I could be wrong. If they do have a limitation, I imagine it is because of a fear of resistance rather than a fear of harm.

It was a play on the term "conspiracy theory", as in conspire by creating conspiratorial fantasies. Perhaps not the best, but I assure you I understand the English language.

GM residue? Is that better known as DNA from your food? I would imagine there is some in your intestine. Why do all of you people think genetic engineering works like the green ooze in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

Right, that was the issue with the study I posted. This study being discussed is a followup study to that one that looks at full lifespan(the 2009 study looks to only be 3 months). However, I would think we would see some evidence in these larger populations of cattle. At least, this would be an interesting avenue.

Yeah, assume that. Everyone who tries to point out a problem is a "shill". Conspire much?

The purpose of studies like this one are to say "We now have evidence that we should do research". It doesn't say "We now have evidence of a link, and we should do more research to validate". This type of study doesn't even really prove that it is bad for rats. It just starts the ball rolling.

1) The product being tested isn't in our food supply. It is feed maize for animals