Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   Roundup the Brinks trucks and send them to San Francisco   ( sfgate.com) divider line
    More: News, Monsanto, 2016, Monsanto Co. herbicide, Roundup, Health, Monsanto Vice President, Herbicide, United States Environmental Protection Agency  
•       •       •

7354 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Aug 2018 at 1:33 AM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



87 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-08-10 11:16:38 PM  
Couldn't have happened to many more deserving companies.
 
2018-08-10 11:18:19 PM  
Screw you, Monsanto, Ron Jeremy hasn't farked as many Americans
 
2018-08-10 11:55:21 PM  
If you have the time, please read the entire article.  It's very well-written, which is not something we see much these days.  Journalism is dying and this article gives me hope.  This guy is going to die before he sees a dime of this settlement.  I think he knows it.

"The cause is way bigger than me," he said. "Hopefully this thing will start to get the attention that it needs to get right."
 
2018-08-11 01:41:52 AM  

foo monkey: If you have the time, please read the entire article.  It's very well-written, which is not something we see much these days.  Journalism is dying and this article gives me hope.  This guy is going to die before he sees a dime of this settlement.  I think he knows it.

"The cause is way bigger than me," he said. "Hopefully this thing will start to get the attention that it needs to get right."


SCOTUS will side with Monsanto because fark you, peons.
 
2018-08-11 01:42:31 AM  
So I hear there is evidence mounting that the recent rash of gluten sensitivity is related to Monsanto chemicals grain farms spray very close to harvest. Maybe organic foods really are worth the added expense.
 
2018-08-11 01:47:25 AM  
Trump Pardon when?
 
2018-08-11 01:50:11 AM  
redqueencoder.comView Full Size

/not sure why my mind went there
 
2018-08-11 01:52:18 AM  
This is why criminal fines need to be on percentages.  $100,000 speeding tickets should exist.

Companies and people do not care about the law if they can buy it. It has to sting.
 
2018-08-11 01:57:47 AM  

foo monkey: This guy is going to die before he sees a dime of this settlement.  I think he knows it.

"The cause is way bigger than me," he said. "Hopefully this thing will start to get the attention that it needs to get right."


Yeah. This dude got farked. Monsanto just has to run out the clock on him, which is farking ridiculous and sad.
 
2018-08-11 01:59:01 AM  
wasn't there something with dioxin, then later agent orange, via monstano?
 
2018-08-11 02:00:33 AM  
Sorry, no. This is a crazy amount. I'd love to see the evidence his lawyers presented that refute not only the US but European health agencies.

First impression of mine though is that this was a case brought against a company with an over abundance of hate in a place where people are more likely to belief the anti-corporate hype.
 
2018-08-11 02:03:21 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

RIP Dwayne Johnson
 
2018-08-11 02:05:52 AM  

fragMasterFlash: So I hear there is evidence mounting that the recent rash of gluten sensitivity is related to Monsanto chemicals grain farms spray very close to harvest. Maybe organic foods really are worth the added expense.


'Organic' food requires more pesticides than GMO foods, are harsher on the land, and produce less yield per acre.

Maybe, and I only qualify it with a maybe, we need ways to spray fields with pesticides that reduce the chance for concentrated exposure, but the world population cannot eat on organic. Instead maybe some drone controlled treatment will work.
 
2018-08-11 02:06:15 AM  

lostcat: [img.fark.net image 220x284]
RIP Dwayne Johnson


Do you have the original of that?
 
2018-08-11 02:06:17 AM  
I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.
 
2018-08-11 02:13:40 AM  
Glyphosate is so prevalent that every US citizen could file a class action lawsuit. Everyone's been exposed to some degree....some waay more than others of course
 
2018-08-11 02:15:08 AM  

Hobbess: fragMasterFlash: So I hear there is evidence mounting that the recent rash of gluten sensitivity is related to Monsanto chemicals grain farms spray very close to harvest. Maybe organic foods really are worth the added expense.

'Organic' food requires more pesticides than GMO foods, are harsher on the land, and produce less yield per acre.

Maybe, and I only qualify it with a maybe, we need ways to spray fields with pesticides that reduce the chance for concentrated exposure, but the world population cannot eat on organic. Instead maybe some drone controlled treatment will work.


I have no qualms with GMO food, especially if it reduces the amount of herbicide/pesticide residue on the food I consume. I only suggested organics as I assume there are still local "hippie" growers who adhere to a more minimalist ethos than the large scale producers.
 
2018-08-11 02:15:53 AM  
Laid the smack down on Monsanto's candy asses.
 
2018-08-11 02:16:36 AM  

nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.


Exactly. This sounds like they awarded him money because the company couldn't prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the spray didn't cause his cancer. That and they were jerks and didn't call him back after his inquiry.

Monsanto is a corporate company out to make profits and could hardly be called a font of generosity, but it's not the cabal controlling mega-corp that it gets demonized as either.
 
2018-08-11 02:23:08 AM  

nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.


The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.
 
2018-08-11 02:24:45 AM  

nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.


Jurors who don't understand the discrete details of the scientific process. It's just a simple logic to them:

This substance causes cancer.
This guy has cancer.
ergo This substance gave this guy cancer

Why these defendants keep insisting on jury trials, I'll never know. Do they even have the option?
 
2018-08-11 02:25:25 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.


Is there a single oncologist on that jury?
 
2018-08-11 02:26:35 AM  

fusillade762: foo monkey: If you have the time, please read the entire article.  It's very well-written, which is not something we see much these days.  Journalism is dying and this article gives me hope.  This guy is going to die before he sees a dime of this settlement.  I think he knows it.

"The cause is way bigger than me," he said. "Hopefully this thing will start to get the attention that it needs to get right."

SCOTUS will side with Monsanto because fark you, peons.


Shhhh. Don't ruin my masterpiece.
 
2018-08-11 02:28:31 AM  
I'm glad that this guy can now buy a 2 bedroom house in the Bay Area at least.
 
2018-08-11 02:30:24 AM  
Hobbess: Exactly. This sounds like they awarded him money because the company couldn't prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the spray didn't cause his cancer. That and they were jerks and didn't call him back after his inquiry.

Monsanto is a corporate company out to make profits and could hardly be called a font of generosity, but it's not the cabal controlling mega-corp that it gets demonized as either.


Another thing to consider is that in civil cases there is a lower standard of proof. Even for criminal cases the standard is not "beyond a shadow of doubt". It is beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil case the standard is "a preponderance of the evidence".

I suspect that the "shadow of a doubt" issue causes many juries to improperly let guilty criminals go free. The assertion that an insane cosplayer killed your wife in your home is not reasonably creditable without supporting evidence.
 
2018-08-11 02:31:57 AM  
What line of rat was used in the cancer trials?  Was it sprauges dawley?  Sprague dawley gets cancer when you look at it sideways.  The control groups have a high rate of cancer.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/inn​o​vation/scientific-experiments/lab-rats​-cancer.htm

The link above details how a GMO corn causes cancer study was retracted partially due to this lab strain.

Does GMO corn (or round up) cause cancer?  Maybe, but it it is hard to tell when the line is spontaneously sprouting tumors all over the place.
 
2018-08-11 02:37:04 AM  

LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?


The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.
 
2018-08-11 02:39:14 AM  

zjoik: wasn't there something with dioxin, then later agent orange, via monstano?


They were one of a few companies that made Agent Orange, iirc.
 
2018-08-11 02:43:43 AM  
The case was won when the Bay Area was chosen as the venue.

The rest was formalities.
 
2018-08-11 02:44:28 AM  

Weatherkiss: lostcat: [img.fark.net image 220x284]
RIP Dwayne Johnson

Do you have the original of that?


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-08-11 02:45:36 AM  

Hobbess: Sorry, no. This is a crazy amount. I'd love to see the evidence his lawyers presented that refute not only the US but European health agencies.

First impression of mine though is that this was a case brought against a company with an over abundance of hate in a place where people are more likely to belief the anti-corporate hype.


If it takes a silly, exaggerated civil court award to more proportionally penalize a billion dollar company then so be it.

I don't agree with many civil ruling, however, a $5 mil EPA fine for monsanto is a farking rounding error for them. This goes beyond cliched corporate hate, monsanto IS a cancer and literally nothing but affecting their bottom line will correct their behavior.
 
2018-08-11 02:46:28 AM  

lostcat: [img.fark.net image 220x284]
RIP Dwayne Johnson


Came here for a Rock reference. Leaving happy and drunk.
 
2018-08-11 03:00:42 AM  

fragMasterFlash: So I hear there is evidence mounting that the recent rash of gluten sensitivity is related to Monsanto chemicals grain farms spray very close to harvest. Maybe organic foods really are worth the added expense.


"Terminator" seeds were just the beginning of the takeover years ago. And people thought farmers were just being paranoid hillbillies...

But it's Bayer now, so I'm sure they will play the "that was them, this is us, so we're not culpable" card.
 
2018-08-11 03:08:56 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.


Yup. Courts don't care if there was any actual evidence or not.
 
2018-08-11 03:14:57 AM  

Naido: Screw you, Monsanto, Ron Jeremy hasn't farked as many Americans


Thom Hartman has been saying this for years! Lol him up!
 
2018-08-11 03:15:57 AM  
Look him up! Fark spellcheck
 
2018-08-11 03:16:28 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?

The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.


In cases like this, the quality of the verdict does depend on the qualifications of the jury. Most juries simply aren't capable of making a correct decision in a case like this.
 
2018-08-11 03:18:41 AM  

AckAckAck: Hobbess: Sorry, no. This is a crazy amount. I'd love to see the evidence his lawyers presented that refute not only the US but European health agencies.

First impression of mine though is that this was a case brought against a company with an over abundance of hate in a place where people are more likely to belief the anti-corporate hype.

If it takes a silly, exaggerated civil court award to more proportionally penalize a billion dollar company then so be it.

I don't agree with many civil ruling, however, a $5 mil EPA fine for monsanto is a farking rounding error for them. This goes beyond cliched corporate hate, monsanto IS a cancer and literally nothing but affecting their bottom line will correct their behavior.


Sooo punish the company for no reason?
 
2018-08-11 03:28:58 AM  

mrschwen: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?

The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.

In cases like this, the quality of the verdict does depend on the qualifications of the jury. Most juries simply aren't capable of making a correct decision in a case like this.


I don't know what other grounds Monsanto might have for appeal, but I guaranfarkingtee you that "the jury were laypeople" will not be a winning legal argument for them.
 
2018-08-11 03:31:18 AM  
CSB: Before I moved for work and rented my house out I used to kill the weeds growing in the cracks in the driveway and sidewalk with boiling water.  I'd just get a tea kettle, boil some water in it, and pour it on the weeds.  Worked like a charm.  I'd bet a steam gun would be just as effective and more controllable.
 
2018-08-11 03:34:27 AM  
So the Round Up label says...

KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN.
HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED.
HARMFUL IF INHALED.
CAUSES EYE AND SKIN IRRITATION.
Avoid contact with eyes, skin or clothing.
Avoid inhaling spray mist.
Wear a long-sleeved shirt and long pants during mixing, loading, application, clean-up
and repair. In addition, wear goggles or a face shield and chemical-resistant gloves during
mixing and loading, clean-up and repair."


This guy admits that the only reason he got "drenched" by the stuff was due to faulty work equipment.  He should be suing the school or his employer for equipment that was faulty.  But of course they don't have the deep pockets like Monsanto.  Bottom line, some lawyers got $ in their eyes, and a group of absolutely braindead jurors.
 
2018-08-11 03:50:03 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: mrschwen: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?

The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.

In cases like this, the quality of the verdict does depend on the qualifications of the jury. Most juries simply aren't capable of making a correct decision in a case like this.

I don't know what other grounds Monsanto might have for appeal, but I guaranfarkingtee you that "the jury were laypeople" will not be a winning legal argument for them.


They'll argue that the monetary award was excessive relative to his damages. And they will win on appeal. No human life is worth that much except maybe Kate Beckinsale.
 
2018-08-11 04:19:02 AM  
The award isn't going to stand.  The verdict probably will remain against Monsanto but the dollar amount awarded will get adjusted as is the standard practice in most cases. I wouldn't be surprised if it went down to only a couple million.
 
2018-08-11 04:28:13 AM  

AmbassadorBooze: What line of rat was used in the cancer trials?  Was it sprauges dawley?  Sprague dawley gets cancer when you look at it sideways.  The control groups have a high rate of cancer.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/inno​vation/scientific-experiments/lab-rats​-cancer.htm

The link above details how a GMO corn causes cancer study was retracted partially due to this lab strain.

Does GMO corn (or round up) cause cancer?  Maybe, but it it is hard to tell when the line is spontaneously sprouting tumors all over the place.


If only there was some way to control for that....
 
2018-08-11 04:29:24 AM  

jmr61: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: mrschwen: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?

The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.

In cases like this, the quality of the verdict does depend on the qualifications of the jury. Most juries simply aren't capable of making a correct decision in a case like this.

I don't know what other grounds Monsanto might have for appeal, but I guaranfarkingtee you that "the jury were laypeople" will not be a winning legal argument for them.

They'll argue that the monetary award was excessive relative to his damages. And they will win on appeal.


That much is probably true.

/if there are indeed thousands of these cases waiting in the wings, they do not need to land for $200M each to be a pain in the ass for Monsanto
 
2018-08-11 04:34:55 AM  

Sasquach: AmbassadorBooze: What line of rat was used in the cancer trials?  Was it sprauges dawley?  Sprague dawley gets cancer when you look at it sideways.  The control groups have a high rate of cancer.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/inno​vation/scientific-experiments/lab-rats​-cancer.htm

The link above details how a GMO corn causes cancer study was retracted partially due to this lab strain.

Does GMO corn (or round up) cause cancer?  Maybe, but it it is hard to tell when the line is spontaneously sprouting tumors all over the place.

If only there was some way to control for that....


Or, use any of the lines that are not as prone to spontaneous tumor formation for studies like this.

You know what sprauge dawley is good for?  For studies that need cancers.  They are legitimately good for tons of studies.  Just not all.
 
2018-08-11 04:35:08 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: jmr61: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: mrschwen: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: LoneWolf343: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: nigeman: I'd be surprised if it stood up on appeal, working out the reason for lymphoma is pretty difficult. In mesothelioma cases you can find asbestos particles still in the lungs, usually surrounded by the tumour. This man used a chemical for 4 years that people use for decades without developing cancer. Also non hodgkins can be caused by a whole host of things from infections, family history, suppressed immune system but most people who get it don't have any of these. Like most people with cancer you just get cancer.

The difficulty for Monsanto on appeal is that they had opportunity to argue all of that and present expert testimony and yet there is a specific finding of fact from the jury that the product caused the lymphoma.

Is there a single oncologist on that jury?

The effect of a jury's findings of fact does not depend on the professional qualifications of the jurors.

In cases like this, the quality of the verdict does depend on the qualifications of the jury. Most juries simply aren't capable of making a correct decision in a case like this.

I don't know what other grounds Monsanto might have for appeal, but I guaranfarkingtee you that "the jury were laypeople" will not be a winning legal argument for them.

They'll argue that the monetary award was excessive relative to his damages. And they will win on appeal.

That much is probably true.

/if there are indeed thousands of these cases waiting in the wings, they do not need to land for $200M each to be a pain in the ass for Monsanto


And Monsanto can and will appeal each and every award, run out the clock, keep right on reformulating Roundup, make billions, and not think twice about it.  The courts will again rule that corporations are people, and people can't afford to be bullied financially like this poor, pitiful individual named Monsanto, and all awards will get knocked down.
 
2018-08-11 04:46:33 AM  
I was about to say that this amount really is not a lot. Monsanto had a profit of about 8 billion dollars in 2017. But when you break it down, the 289 million is about 4% of their profit. That's probably an annoying amount of money for them to have to cough up. Of course, they will slow roll the payments and hope he dies first so they do not have to make a full payout.

Really, the fine should be higher, about 800 million would be more of "Hey shiatheads, you are not getting off that easy"
 
2018-08-11 04:58:40 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: /if there are indeed thousands of these cases waiting in the wings, they do not need to land for $200M each to be a pain in the ass for Monsanto


It would be interesting if even one of those cases provides a single piece of actual evidence that the herbicide caused the claimed injury.  Since just about every regulatory agency worldwide lists glyphosate as "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans". And the U.N. World Health Organization said "mammal animal models showed that oral applications of glyphosate at doses as high as 2000 mg/kg was not associated with genotoxic effects in an overwhelming majority of studies"

And of course, those other cases won't all be tried in Braindead Central, USA, so there's that.
 
2018-08-11 05:05:02 AM  

berylman: Glyphosate is so prevalent that every US citizen could file a class action lawsuit. Everyone's been exposed to some degree....some waay more than others.


Consider, as well, that Monsanto has been promoting "Roundup 2 ready" seed stock for a few years, now; The out of patent original is just another ingredient in weed killers for suburbanites.  No doubt, here, about exposures, given we've been up and down every stream drainage, over a three couinty area, following flooding events, going on thirty years (no silicified specimens that aren't of Paleozoic origin!).

The formatting of EPA's "personal products" page has been degraded, recently.  From plastic beads in bath scours, to p*ssing out antibiotics, etc. mixed in with "AG Run-off" and, around here, the leaching of sulfur/iron/bit of Radium, etc. the abandoned (slightly rehabbed - Nemo/Peabody Coal had to pay for planting Blackberry starts...) surface coal mines that stretch along the local anticline for twenty miles, now representing "a tax" incurred decades ago, slow corporate degradation requiring local resources ($$$) for remediation, Ameren UE has been operating a LW Reactor about fifteen miles to our SE, without drama, since the early '80's, while the Water District's biannual analysis posts up the hormetic doses of Madame Curie's fave in the water, elevated, without  argument, by the ease of leaching of such from "disturbed" soil (coal seams/beds).  Then there is Panhandle Eastern, big gas transfer complex "up the road". pipelines fail (the gas pipeline fatality counts are still up at the Dept. Of Transportation: https://hip.phmsa.dot​.gov/analyticsSOA​P/saw.dll?Portalpages .  Had an early dawn in '97, enough shock to crack a couple of windows.  Pipe had ruptured and bled, and bled.  Windless night for pooling...  crater thirty feet deep and three hundred feet in diameter.  Can't help but reflect on comparative indemnification requirements of the "competing" power sourcing in this region.

As the flushing by flood removes stagnant concentrations of who knows what sort of "cocktail", that pools discretely along the incised meanders, evaporating into expanses of orange slime, our fossil hunts, mud boots & good skin integrity, over three decades have been adequate protection from p*ss flushed BCP hormone induced man tit*s, or antibiotic resistance... and now, with an attentuated EPA - some "patriot" will start dumping truckloads of car batteries upstream.

/continue search out two-three acre parcels to acquire, where the two streams, that serve as primary drainages for hundreds of square miles, rise; attempt being made to park Audubon Land where the Planning & Zoning Commission's is dreaming of designating "residential" - Mrs. Lee & I are slowing them down (I hope) - was wrong about the likelihood of suburban development in the vicinity of the biggest (many neutrons, amen) on campus research reactor in the Country.   Now the sancrosanct ag land and surface water, and those, few, multi-acre sections of hardwood forests/grasslands that provide some token filtering & ground stabilization will emerge flush with HOA''s atop every bluff.

//in Czech Republic, waste water output at poultry producer revealed trillionths of a gram of breakdown product of the banned (in livestock) antibiotic, Nitrofurasone.  More extensive testing revealed that this breakdown product was entering the poultry houses from the city supply.  Apparently, humans prescribed Nitrofurasone, metabolized the med and peed liters of contaminated waste, the chemical in question passing through treatment plant and served up to the unsuspecting flocks - and, of course, "blame it on the producer.  However, the most important takeaway were the ruminations, of the EU scientists who wrote this up,  wondering at the utility of ever more exacting precision in identifying and subsequently quantifying substances.  Greatest concern was that, though the scientific import of trillionths of a gram was subject of further, studied, scrutiny, whereas the press/media could but  stand on their back legs, pressing against common sense, seeking a week of daily installments - exploiting the FUD factor of "chemical(poison!) X, that has been implicated in development of tumors in rats" (yeah, often left swimming in the stuff.. - don't provide deadly dose level in articles), "has been detected by researchers in our city water supply!!!"

*TL/DR?  maybe
 
Displayed 50 of 87 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report