> > Try to find a HN thread about glyphosate where no one gaslights, deflects, toxifies or baits.
> That's an impossible barrier.
I know, right?
The notion Monsanto and Bayer would never stoop so low as to employ propagandists to protect their profits is literally unbelievably naive. As in, I don't believe that you believe that.
> Given the prevalence and duration of glyphosate use, compelling evidence should be readily available, just like it was with lead or asbestos.
You'll never guess what people who sold lead and asbestos used to say about lead and asbestos. Also see the denials of PFAS dangers. And fracking. And lobotomies, thalidomide, tobacco, mercury, etc etc.
> That's an impossible barrier.
I know, right?
The notion Monsanto and Bayer would never stoop so low as to employ propagandists to protect their profits is literally unbelievably naive. As in, I don't believe that you believe that.
> Given the prevalence and duration of glyphosate use, compelling evidence should be readily available, just like it was with lead or asbestos.
You'll never guess what people who sold lead and asbestos used to say about lead and asbestos. Also see the denials of PFAS dangers. And fracking. And lobotomies, thalidomide, tobacco, mercury, etc etc.