RUSKA TV: JEZIVA ISTINA o posledicama NATO bombardovanja Srbije ; 21:09 min.

ČIČINA MAGAZA
Published on Apr 4, 2018
Category
News & Politics

POSLEDICE NATO BOMBARDOVANJA: General Božidar Delić, dr Milovan Bojić i Alek Račić (24.03.2017) ; 1:06:04 min.

Dokumentarne Emisije Balkan
Published on Mar 31, 2017
Molimo Vas da podržite naš rad, tako što ćete se prijaviti za primanje obaveštenja o snimcima koje objavljujemo. [subscribe]
To možete učiniti klikom na sledeći link:: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c...

- DOKUMENTARNE EMISIJE BALKAN -

Web sajt: http://www.vzstudio.me/youtube
Twitter nalog: http://www.twitter.com/vzstudiotv
Facebook stranica: https://www.facebook.com/balkandokume...

Naš cilj je da blagovremeno i tačno prenosimo vesti i aktuelnosti iz sveta politike za više od 20 miliona ljudi na Balkanu i veliki broj naših ljudi u dijaspori. Zbog naših vernih pratilaca, tim koji vodi kanal će, kao i do sada, težiti očuvanju integriteta, tačnosti i kvaliteta sadržaja, kao i nepristrasnom izveštavanju.
******************************************
Video zapisi na našem kanalu se koriste u informativne i edukativne svrhe. Za pojedine video zapise nemamo autorska prava.

Autorska prava za korišćene video zapise, fotografije i muzičke zapise trećih lica su u vlasništvu njihovih autora i vzstudio.me/youtube ne preuzima autorska prava nad njima.

Ukoliko polažete prava na video zapise, fotografije i muzičke zapise i želite da isti budu uklonjeni sa našeg YouTube kanala molimo Vas da nam se obratite putem privatne poruke na sajtu YouTube ili putem kontakt forme na našem sajtu.
****************************************­­**
Category
News & Politics

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/14/australian-farmers-body-says-roundup-cancer-ruling-is-in-blatant-ignorance-of-science

 

Australian farmers body says Roundup cancer ruling is 'in blatant ignorance' of science

National Farmers’ Federation says US court ruling that weedkiller causes cancer sets a ‘reckless precedent’

 The National Farmers’ Federation president, Fiona Simson, said of the Roundup ruling: ‘No other herbicide has been tested to the lengths that glyphosate has.’

Australia’s National Farmers’ Federation has rejected the finding of a US court that the weedkiller Roundup causes cancer, saying it set a “reckless precedent” that could harm agriculture.

On Monday, Greenpeace urged the Australian government to start restricting the sale of Roundup – which is widely available in supermarkets and hardware stores – after a Californian court found it caused the cancer of a terminally ill man.

The jury ruled that Dewayne Johnson, a school groundskeeper, developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma due to regularly using Roundup. It also found that the manufacturer, Monsanto, knew of the product’s potential health risks, and acted “with malice or oppression” by failing to warn users.

The active chemical in Roundup – glyphosate – has been classified as “probably carcinogenic” by the World Health Organisation but is still approved for use in Australia and the US.

On Tuesday, the NFF said the US court decision was “in blatant ignorance” of science.

“No other herbicide has been tested to the lengths that glyphosate has,” the NFF president, Fiona Simson, said. “After four decades of evaluations, no regulatory agency in the world considers glyphosate to be carcinogenic.”

She said glyphosate – the world’s most common herbicide – had an environmental benefit.

“Through the use of glyphosate, farmers are able to practise minimum tillage – protecting soil structure and nutrients and ultimately increasing the storage of soil carbon,” she said.

Australia’s chemical regulator, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, classifies Roundup as safe.

“The APVMA is aware of the decision in the Californian superior court,” a spokesman said on Monday. “APVMA approved products containing glyphosate can continue to be used safely according to label directions.”

Paul Pharoah, professor of cancer epidemiology at the University of Cambridge, said the court’s finding did not mean that glyphosate necessarily caused cancer.

“These medico-legal cases are always difficult to make because the concepts of risk and cause in a scientific sense are different to those concepts in a legal sense,” he said.

“The epidemiological evidence that glycophosphates are associated with an increased risk of lymphoma is very weak ... From a purely scientific point of view I do not think that the judgement makes sense.”  

Ian Rae, a professor of chemistry at the University of Melbourne, said the risk of developing cancer from Roundup was “very, very low”.

He said the categorisation of glyphosate as a carcinogen was based on very high exposure levels in workplaces.

“The basic measure is that if the exposure is low, there is very little risk ... I don’t think there is a case for stopping using it at all.”

Monsanto’s vice-president, Scott Partridge, has also insisted that Roundup is safe, and the company intends to appeal against the decision.

But Friday’s ruling in the US was scathing of Monsanto’s behaviour. 

Johnson’s lawyers produced internal Monsanto emails that they said proved the corporation knew of the risks, ignored expert warnings, “ghostwrote” research that was favourable and targeted academics who spoke up against Roundup.

They alleged that Monsanto “fought science” for decades to have the product’s health risks downplayed.

Patridge said the internal emails had been taken out of context.

Johnson, a 46-year-old father of three, was awarded US$289m in damages and compensation. He worked for a school district near San Francisco, spraying herbicides on weeds for several hours a day. Doctors say he has months left to live.

Another trial against Monsanto is scheduled to begin in Missouri in the coming months.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/14/australian-farmers-body-says-roundup-cancer-ruling-is-in-blatant-ignorance-of-science

 

How can you guarantee that every member of a food production supply chain has used these chemicals ‘according to the label’, asks Craig Sams

 Demonstrators march for agroecology and civil resistance against pesticide maker Monsanto in Bordeaux, France, last year. Photograph: Georges Gobet/AFP/Getty Images

Your article (One man’s suffering exposed Monsanto’s secrets to the world, 11 August) is the tip of the iceberg. Glyphosate is considered a “probable carcinogen” by the WHO. The Netherlands banned its use in 2014. This isn’t the first time a “safe” agrichemical has been exposed as potentially dangerous.

The European Food Safety Authority has launched a review into the safety of herbicides, pesticides and fungicides, as so many have been permitted without proper testing. In February iprodione, a fungicide used in professional sports turf, was banned by the EU. Golfers have been unwittingly exposed for decades.

We cannot trust science that was paid for by the manufacturers. Bayer’s statement in glyphosate’s defence illustrates the risk to which we have been exposed: “Bayer is confident … that glyphosate is safe for use and does not cause cancer when used according to the label.”

How can you guarantee that every member of a food production supply chain has used these chemicals “according to the label”? How can you guarantee that, even though you wore gloves as you sprayed fungicides on your turf, a child won’t do a cartwheel on the grass later, or a golfer won’t pick up a ball with their bare hands and unknowingly violate the label’s conditions?

When people buy cigarettes, they know the risks. But when people eat food or sit on grass treated with probable carcinogens, they don’t. That’s why the industry is turning to bio-stimulants, like enriched biochar, which are as effective as chemicals but are natural and pose no risk of being outed as harmful down the line.

When it comes to consumer choice, health and welfare, isn’t it better to be safe than sorry?
Craig Sams
Executive chairman, Carbon Goldformer chairman, Soil Association

 Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

 Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters

 Do you have a photo you’d like to share with other Guardian readers? Click here to upload it and we’ll publish the best submissions in the letters spread in our print edition

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/14/better-safe-than-sorry-on-chemicals-used-in-agriculture