• 0 Posts
  • 4 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2025

help-circle

  • Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup. With extreme overuse, maybe? Again I am talking about its use for consumer-level invasive species management or ecological/environmental applications. Glyphosate has very high sorption (basically, it binds to other molecules in the soil and becomes inactive as a pesticide). When compared with alternative pesticides it is far less dangerous and has very few if any long term effects on soil.

    So pretty much no. Actually one of the main reasons it’s so prevalent in spot-treatment at the consumer level is because it has fast, noticeable effects, and then everything goes back to normal quickly.


  • I mean, the lawsuit isn’t about, “should glyphosate ever be used.” It’s about being able to sue a company for trying to hide the harmful side effects of overexposure to their product.

    As someone who has worked professionally with pesticides for environmental and ecological restoration, glyphosate is Churchill’s democracy of pesticides - it is the worst pesticide aside from all other pesticides. There are pesticides I’ve used that I would rather take a shot of glyphosate than have them touch my skin.

    The problem is not glyphosate’s use, especially at the consumer level. The problem here specifically is whether the company producing a poison is liable to those it hid potential harms from - and Trump administration’s intention to shield them from said liability.

    The second problem, unrelated to this legal issue, is glyphosate’s overuse in the commercial setting. Modern industrial farming techniques basically use GMO varieties of crops which are resistant to glyphosate, and then douse their fields in the stuff because it will kill all the weeds while leaving their resistant cash crops intact. As a result, many of the foods we consume today are contaminated with larger doses of pesticide than they would be using traditional farming methods or spot treatment.