glyphosate use in a permaculture environment...

[Arby]

So cutting and pasting freely available information provides credibility?

You can't possibly be serious!! :lol: The GAO is a well known source of credible information. You're an anonymous poster on an Internet forum.

As are you, though you have stated repeatedly that.... and the way you wanted me to "display some credibility", apparently was to cut and paste freely available information. Perhaps I have misinterpreted your request, but in almost every one of your posts you have stated that I know nothing based on the fact that I didn't cut and paste:

This is probably pointless but I'll try one last time...in elementary fashion. Yes, we're both anonymous posters. The difference though is that I provide a credible reference. You provide nothing but long rambles that do not coincide with with GAO. You say all is dandy. I say no THEN cut and paste excerpts for proof. You ignore and/or sidestep then continue rambling.

I could go on and on with stuff like this pulled from the GAO reports (I have been following them for years and you what, 2 days?) but you will still cling to your claim that testing is done and chemicals are safe and all that....even though you have not provided a single source of information to back up your assertions. And by your own admission, you do not have an in depth knowledge of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Funny how you'd know all that you claim. It's akin to a child learning to run hurdles before learning to crawl or walk.

I am quite sure you could cut and paste forever, we all could.

Why don't you than? Prove me wrong by cutting and pasting from a credible source substantiating your claim...and provide the reference link so I and other readers can verify. You haven't already because you can't!!!

As for my claim that testing is done, well yes I will cling to it.

"EPA and ITC had identified for testing less than 1 percent of the more than 60,000 chemicals in the TSCA inventory; since the enactment of TSCA, EPA had completed test data for only six chemicals and had not finished assessing those".

With less than 1% of 60,000+ chemicals, you are not clinging to much now are you??? :lol:

I have also given examples (from the GAO reports you have quoted) of everyday chemicals ("Vitamin A") that have been listed as troublesome, though you have chosen to ignore those "chemicals" as presumably you realise that for you their benefits outweigh their disadvantages

I do not take vitamins.

....- as you are not in a position where herbicides provide any great benefit (I'm assuming here that you grow all your own food, and use no man-made products etc.)

I grow about 25% of my own food and I grow that with ZERO synthetic chemicals. Of the remaining 75% of my food, I buy "certified organic" only. I know the latter doesn't come with any guarantees but four independent studies have shown "certified USDA organic" to consistently have fewer chemical residues compared to conventionally grown food. Not only am I trying to minimize my chemical body burden, I will not support conventional farming if I can help it. I have been there and contributed to its known problems. In good conscious though, I can say I have learned differently.