Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

User avatar
Just saying
Posts: 26740
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA

Re: Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

Post by Tero » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:32 pm ... ate_en.pdf

labeled as occupational hazard. Low risk to consumers of crops
Schinasi L, Leon ME (Apr 2014). "Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and occupational exposure to agricultural pesticide chemical groups and active ingredients: a systematic review and meta-analysis". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 11 (4): 4449–527. PMC 4025008 Freely accessible. PMID 24762670. doi:10.3390/ijerph110404449. (:_funny_:)
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14776
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon

Re: Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

Post by Forty Two » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:25 pm

March 25, 2017 - ... en-by-echa

Not a carcinogen. It "...concluded that the available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria to classify glyphosate as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or as toxic for reproduction."
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest