RFK Jr.

[fakie nollie]

Someone earlier in the thread was saying how ridiculous it was for RFK Jr. to say that wifi is dangerous (or words to that effect), and while he admitted he isn't an expert on the topic he's not wrong that there are dangers to having wifi be so prevalent in our homes and on devices that we keep in pockets next to our genitals or next to our ears/brains. Google it. I always have my phone on airplane mode whenever it's in my pocket. We just don't know the dangers yet because all this shit is so new to us, and that goes for so much stuff in our current world, not just wifi. Why would you take the risk? In his Rogan podcast he talks about Glyphosate too which you can research for yourself and see how dangerous that herbicide is to your gut. The companies developing these things clearly aren't worried about our health, they just want to make money and that's the bottom line. If you're fine with being part of the treatment group in this huge global experiment then that's on you but don't shoot people who are just trying to protect us.

So he’s our savior “just trying to protect us”? You really think a fucking Kennedy is a martyr? Just go vote for the idiot already. This isn’t even about defending him anymore. You’re just spewing a bunch of bullshit that, coincidentally, perfect aligns with a qanon boomer’s Facebook posts… and RFK

[mindfuzz]

they just want to make money and that's the bottom line.

That's capitalism for you.

[sle_epy]

Someone earlier in the thread was saying how ridiculous it was for RFK Jr. to say that wifi is dangerous (or words to that effect), and while he admitted he isn't an expert on the topic he's not wrong that there are dangers to having wifi be so prevalent in our homes and on devices that we keep in pockets next to our genitals or next to our ears/brains. Google it. I always have my phone on airplane mode whenever it's in my pocket. We just don't know the dangers yet because all this shit is so new to us, and that goes for so much stuff in our current world, not just wifi. Why would you take the risk? In his Rogan podcast he talks about Glyphosate too which you can research for yourself and see how dangerous that herbicide is to your gut, and that shit is in pretty much any inorganic vegetable/vegetable product in the USA. It's on the road to being banned in several European countries. The companies developing these things clearly aren't worried about our health, they just want to make money and that's the bottom line. If you're fine with being part of the treatment group in this huge global experiment then that's on you but don't shoot people who are just trying to protect us.

I don't think he'll win but I hope his run for presidency makes a lot more people aware of just how fucked our health is becoming in the West and there are real people who can be held accountable for it.

Fried 🍤

[oyolar]

Someone earlier in the thread was saying how ridiculous it was for RFK Jr. to say that wifi is dangerous (or words to that effect), and while he admitted he isn't an expert on the topic he's not wrong that there are dangers to having wifi be so prevalent in our homes and on devices that we keep in pockets next to our genitals or next to our ears/brains. Google it. I always have my phone on airplane mode whenever it's in my pocket. We just don't know the dangers yet because all this shit is so new to us, and that goes for so much stuff in our current world, not just wifi. Why would you take the risk? In his Rogan podcast he talks about Glyphosate too which you can research for yourself and see how dangerous that herbicide is to your gut, and that shit is in pretty much any inorganic vegetable/vegetable product in the USA. It's on the road to being banned in several European countries. The companies developing these things clearly aren't worried about our health, they just want to make money and that's the bottom line. If you're fine with being part of the treatment group in this huge global experiment then that's on you but don't shoot people who are just trying to protect us.

I don't think he'll win but I hope his run for presidency makes a lot more people aware of just how fucked our health is becoming in the West and there are real people who can be held accountable for it.

Where are you finding this info on the dangers of glyphosate and WiFi? What are your sources? Because when I Google “glyphosate human health” and “WiFi human health,” the first things that pop up are how they’re not harmful to human health except for ML Pall’s work on WiFi which it is easy to find critiques of and then from there find literature reviews substantiating that there does not appear to be health issues caused by WiFi based on exposure below regulatory limits. You and RFK are just echoing a slightly updated version of the conspiracy that cellphones cause cancer that has been around since cellphones became widely adopted in the 90s, which is bunk.

For glyphosate, just because the EU does something doesn’t make it good. The EU is pushing to expand organic farming, even though organic farming by itself offers no environmental or nutritional benefits.

Also, putting your phone on airplane mode in your pocket likely will have no effect since it’s not turning off the WiFi that is just existing around you from all of the modems and routers that are everywhere now.

[noselid]

modern life is war, how old are you?

lol putting your phone on airplane mode is crazy dude

[sle_epy]

modern life is war, how old are you?

lol putting your phone on airplane mode is crazy dude

Depends on what calendar conspiracy theorists find valid rn probably.

[fuhkin_powahfood_kid]

glyphosphate aka Roundup isn't what I want in my water supply or in the food I eat. And, I too try to keep a cellphone and lap top not next to my nut sack.

Just like vaccines v no vaccines, however, Brogan and this Kennedy creep aren't starting a new thread of conversation. they're not spreading new info to save the masses. These have been topics of conversation for far, far longer than these clowns have been mixing them with their brand of late stage capitalist bigotry and encouragement of violence.


@oyolar

here's a fresh off the presses story concerning glyophosphate law suits

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2023/06/roundup-manufacturers-had-no-evidence-for-claiming-its-weedkillers-were-safe/

there's a mixed bag on all the talk about this sort of stuff, chemical fertilizers and herbicides. Perhaps the sway and power of the chemical companies that created zyklon b and agent orange is just that powerful that they're still raking in the bucks for shareholders while fucking people up.

 

[oyolar]

Lawsuits aren’t how we settle science. Scientific reviews are how we settle science, but I’ll look into it more. Thanks.

I’d avoid the appeal to history though. Because a company previously created a dangerous chemical (in a time with less testing and regulation) does not mean that all chemicals they create (in a time with more regulation and testing) must therefore be dangerous

[smellsdead]

some real know it all cunts in here

[linty]

Expand Quote

🍤

[close]

Where are you finding this info on the dangers of glyphosate and WiFi?

It was revealed to him in a dream.

[fuck_that_guy]

fuck that guy

[cky enthusiast]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgBxaeHvKwk

[modern life is war]

Expand Quote

Someone earlier in the thread was saying how ridiculous it was for RFK Jr. to say that wifi is dangerous (or words to that effect), and while he admitted he isn't an expert on the topic he's not wrong that there are dangers to having wifi be so prevalent in our homes and on devices that we keep in pockets next to our genitals or next to our ears/brains. Google it. I always have my phone on airplane mode whenever it's in my pocket. We just don't know the dangers yet because all this shit is so new to us, and that goes for so much stuff in our current world, not just wifi. Why would you take the risk? In his Rogan podcast he talks about Glyphosate too which you can research for yourself and see how dangerous that herbicide is to your gut, and that shit is in pretty much any inorganic vegetable/vegetable product in the USA. It's on the road to being banned in several European countries. The companies developing these things clearly aren't worried about our health, they just want to make money and that's the bottom line. If you're fine with being part of the treatment group in this huge global experiment then that's on you but don't shoot people who are just trying to protect us.

I don't think he'll win but I hope his run for presidency makes a lot more people aware of just how fucked our health is becoming in the West and there are real people who can be held accountable for it.

[close]

Where are you finding this info on the dangers of glyphosate and WiFi? What are your sources? Because when I Google “glyphosate human health” and “WiFi human health,” the first things that pop up are how they’re not harmful to human health except for ML Pall’s work on WiFi which it is easy to find critiques of and then from there find literature reviews substantiating that there does not appear to be health issues caused by WiFi based on exposure below regulatory limits. You and RFK are just echoing a slightly updated version of the conspiracy that cellphones cause cancer that has been around since cellphones became widely adopted in the 90s, which is bunk.

For glyphosate, just because the EU does something doesn’t make it good. The EU is pushing to expand organic farming, even though organic farming by itself offers no environmental or nutritional benefits.

Also, putting your phone on airplane mode in your pocket likely will have no effect since it’s not turning off the WiFi that is just existing around you from all of the modems and routers that are everywhere now.

Well, first of all, I disregard almost any study on Glyphosate that is funded by Monsanto or a similar corporations with a vested interest in the product. I also don't trust the US government so I disregard any publication or anything they say on a federal website that says glyphosate is safe.

Here's an interesting study on glyphosate that found glyphosate depletes Manganese in cows. Manganese deficiency in humans leads to several neurological diseases including autism.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4392553/

The author of that study, Stephanie Seneff, also appeared on this podcast which is really interesting. Ignore the clickbait title.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_YsxUbUUyQ

modern life is war, how old are you?

lol putting your phone on airplane mode is crazy dude

I'm somewhere close to the average age of this forum

[oyolar]

She is who you trust?

Not surprising at all, Dr. Seneff is not a biologist, biochemist, or anything relatedly relevant to studying glyphosate. She's a computer scientist and electrical engineer who has decided late in her career to pivot to biological studies and publishes in middling to low-impact journals and peddles pseudoscience such as mRNA vaccines are worse for you than COVID, works with naturopaths (i.e. quacks) and COVID denialists and misinformation peddlers, claims glyphosate causes autism, and all sorts of other bullshit. Her one book seems to imply (based on the cover and Amazon description) that vaccines, sunscreen, GMOs, and EMF cause autism as well.  She publishes articles that cite authors who claim that her work misquotes and misunderstands their work, and nearly every expert in the field disagrees with almost all of her claims.

She appears to have published at least two books on glyphosate and "dangerous" chemicals. Chelsea Green, one of her publishers, peddled a bunch of COVID denial, anti-vaccine, and other junk science books. New Voice Publications, the other publisher, I can't find anything about except for one Christian publisher and one self-publishing house under the same names.

This took literally 2 minutes of googling.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200611191320/https://www.alternet.org/2014/02/meet-controversial-mit-scientist-who-claims-have-discovered-cause-gluten-sensitivty/
https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/when-media-uncritically-cover-pseudoscience
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00316/full
https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/11/09/not-even-wrong-seneff-and-samsel-debunked-seralini-crew-12126
https://web.archive.org/web/20150419004339/http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/30/is_glyphosate_poisoning_everyone.php
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/glyphosate-the-new-bogeyman/
https://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/cover/inside-chelsea-green-the-publishing-house-peddling-covid-19-misinformation-and-other-conspiracies/article_670bdfbc-52dd-11ec-9722-773514a11392.html
https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2023/01/06/free-to-fabricate-or-barred-from-teaching-disagreements-over-covid-underscore-threats-to-science-academic-freedom-and-the-public/
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2023/01/17/viewpoint-mit-turns-blind-eye-to-misinformation-on-agricultural-biotechnology-and-vaccines-promoted-by-infamous-crank-computer-scientist-stephanie-seneff/
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-pseudoscience-environment/dr-stephanie-seneff-strikes-out-again-glyphosate-and-covid-19
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/scientific-review-articles-as-antivaccine-disinformation/

The link to the article you provided is in a journal that I can't even find ranked on a rank of impact scores to see how often it's referenced and cited, but it is open access, which is an academic journal practice plagued by issues: https://web.archive.org/web/20160606170517/https://scholarlyoa.com/2015/01/08/anti-roundup-glyphosate-researchers-use-easy-oa-journals-to-spread-their-views/

Her co-author on that paper, I can't find out much about. I found his LinkedIn but weirdly, he doesn't include any information about any degrees he holds, either in this field or any other. He does seem to have co-authored a lot of papers with Seneff, but that shouldn't mean anything.

[fuhkin_powahfood_kid]

the following are concerned with glyphosphate and toxicity.

"Therefore, although the concentrations of glyphosate residues that persist over time are relatively low, it is possible that due to extensive use on a large scale they may accumulate and become a risk to animal and human health, as they are chronically exposed to residues in the water and food they consume"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9101768/

"The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as “Category 2a,” which specifies probable carcinogenic to humans [14]. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) classifies this herbicide as “Group E carcinogen,” which means non-cancerous for humans [4]. In contrast to the European Food Safety Authority, which determines glyphosate as a potent carcinogen for humans"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7602795/

"The increase in glyphosate consumption over the years has also brought increased concerns about the possible toxicity effects of this herbicide and possible consequences for human health. Therefore, in recent years, studies on the effects of glyphosate on human health have increased. This discussion has a major drawback, which is the fact that some toxicity studies have the participation of the herbicide industry, which has a commercial interest in maintaining the authorization of its best-selling herbicide. Nonetheless, there is currently no consensus among the scientific community, and there is controversy over the safety of glyphosate and its health consequences."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8622992/

[oyolar]

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

[Puddy Smally]

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

I always refer to my politician of choice to confirm my health care decisions. What kind of simple idiot doesn’t?

[fuhkin_powahfood_kid]

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

Merely posting on the science of glyophosphate toxicity.

RFK, the so-called shit posters, covid-deniers and anti-vaccine hit parade, etc suck.

[oyolar]

Gotcha - thanks for the info! I do find what you shared genuinely helpful so I'll probably add it to my list of things I occasionally google to see what's new so I have another thing to worry about.

[fuhkin_powahfood_kid]

yeah, no prob, dude. also, just saying about organic veggies and stuff, which i believe you mentioned, stuff such as glyophosphate isn't applied to the plants. Glyophosphate and similar chemicals however, while not quite forever chemicals, remain in soils, root systems, and watersheds for a long, long time. So, while it's not happening on the industrial level, smaller scale, regenerative organic agriculture is quite excellent for the environment/ecosystem/habitat/watershed within which it occurs.

On a slightly different note, I don't know if you like eating vegetables or fruits, but man, tomatoes are a great way to taste the difference between organic and conventional foods- snag an organic heirloom tomato variety, fresh and locally grown at a farmers market if possible, and then grab a conventional slicer or vine tomato. You could probably even get one of each from the same grocery store. In my experience, the og heirloom will blow you away.

I'm done. I can geek out about organic veggie farming and soil for days. peace 

[modern life is war]

@IusedToSkateMore thanks for the studies you posted on glyphosate, I'm glad we could find some common ground. Totally agree about heirloom vegetables too, my favourites are heirloom pumpkins because they are so weird and fun to grow. I also think you had some great takes in the Wagner group thread but I don't want to get involved in that topic so I'll just say that here instead of there.

Expand Quote

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

[close]

I always refer to my politician of choice to confirm my health care decisions. What kind of simple idiot doesn’t?

You say this but you probably unironically believe everything Fauci says HAH

[oyolar]

yeah, no prob, dude. also, just saying about organic veggies and stuff, which i believe you mentioned, stuff such as glyophosphate isn't applied to the plants. Glyophosphate and similar chemicals however, while not quite forever chemicals, remain in soils, root systems, and watersheds for a long, long time. So, while it's not happening on the industrial level, smaller scale, regenerative organic agriculture is quite excellent for the environment/ecosystem/habitat/watershed within which it occurs.

On a slightly different note, I don't know if you like eating vegetables or fruits, but man, tomatoes are a great way to taste the difference between organic and conventional foods- snag an organic heirloom tomato variety, fresh and locally grown at a farmers market if possible, and then grab a conventional slicer or vine tomato. You could probably even get one of each from the same grocery store. In my experience, the og heirloom will blow you away.

I'm done. I can geek out about organic veggie farming and soil for days. peace 

Nah, I've done that and notice no major differences personally. Taste varies across and within organic and non-organic products too widely to consistently see a difference in my opinions. Breeds and species make a larger difference, for sure but organic vs. non-organic heirloom tomatoes means little to nothing. But that comes down to taste, so it's whatever.

My larger point is that organic food is not healthier or more nutritious than non-organic (which is a common claim) and that organic farming is less efficient than non-organic farming and so has major environmental impacts across a variety of spaces because it requires more land to be transformed and reworked into farmable land in order produce the same yield as non-organic farming. This food is also then more expensive, pricing it out of many people's budgets, furthering social and economic divisions and punishing vulnerable populations that will only get worse if adopted widescale.

But all that is to say that the agriculture space is fucked all around and drastic changes need to take place. I just don't think that shifting to "organic argiculture" will fix it. I don't know what to do, but I know that just attempting to scale up back-to-land, quasi-mystical organic or biodynamic practices won't solve the problem. This is particularly true as large agriculture businesses and monopolies will just greenwash themselves but not fundamentally change how food is produced to make it better for the environment and cheaper and more accessible to people.

[Gray Imp Sausage Metal]

Slap on glyphosate

[Puddy Smally]

@IusedToSkateMore thanks for the studies you posted on glyphosate, I'm glad we could find some common ground. Totally agree about heirloom vegetables too, my favourites are heirloom pumpkins because they are so weird and fun to grow. I also think you had some great takes in the Wagner group thread but I don't want to get involved in that topic so I'll just say that here instead of there.

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

[close]

I always refer to my politician of choice to confirm my health care decisions. What kind of simple idiot doesn’t?

[close]

You say this but you probably unironically believe everything Fauci says HAH

Anthony Fauci is a top academic in his field of study, he’s not a politician dipshit.

You’re a Florida native, aren’t you?

[SneakySecrets]

Sounds like Monsanto needs to up their media funding… people are still permitting themselves to discuss it like adults without calling each other names.

[modern life is war]

Expand Quote

@IusedToSkateMore thanks for the studies you posted on glyphosate, I'm glad we could find some common ground. Totally agree about heirloom vegetables too, my favourites are heirloom pumpkins because they are so weird and fun to grow. I also think you had some great takes in the Wagner group thread but I don't want to get involved in that topic so I'll just say that here instead of there.

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

OK, so the science is currently debating glyphosate's toxicity. That doesn't mean, then, that RFK and people like Seneff are suddenly legitimate researchers or experts that we should listen to, particularly in the wide range of topics they portray themselves to be.

[close]

I always refer to my politician of choice to confirm my health care decisions. What kind of simple idiot doesn’t?

[close]

You say this but you probably unironically believe everything Fauci says HAH

[close]

Anthony Fauci is a top academic in his field of study, he’s not a politician dipshit.

You’re a Florida native, aren’t you?

Haha no I'm not, but I did marry one and all my best American friends are Floridian. Do you not like Florida? Geographically it is a little flat for me and parts of it are way too developed but I love the people, they're some of the most honest and friendly people I have met in the USA.

[bartlaser]

Here's an interesting piece about the royalties public health officials receive from pharma companies.
https://youtu.be/hF5sZjIlFB0

I think it's worth checking out if you've been visiting this page, to understand some of the behind-the-scenes of the pharma industry.

Also.  Florida is tight.  don't be a cunt.  Wherever you go, you're going to find shitty people and awesome people.  Reserve judgment until you actually know a person, and even then, be kind.

[Atiba Applebum]

We’re just basing FL dogging off those the residents have chosen to represent them - the DeSantises, Rubios, Scotts and the politics that majority Floridians must tacitly approve of

[Puddy Smally]

Here's an interesting piece about the royalties public health officials receive from pharma companies.
https://youtu.be/hF5sZjIlFB0

I think it's worth checking out if you've been visiting this page, to understand some of the behind-the-scenes of the pharma industry.

Also.  Florida is tight.  don't be a cunt.  Wherever you go, you're going to find shitty people and awesome people.  Reserve judgment until you actually know a person, and even then, be kind.

Nah, the state of Florida deserves any/all criticism and ridicule it receives. Until that state finds a way to redeem itself I’m going to continually paint it with the broad brush strokes it deserves.

[KC_Rookie]

In most red states, the major cities are Democrat strongholds and the rural country folk vote Republican.
In Florida it's similar, but even in the major cities that vote blue it's typically by a pretty damn tight margin.
There are essentially no progressive strongholds in Florida, even the most diverse, metropolitan areas can turn red at any given moment.