Glyphosate: message from Chemigrow

[Bill Wright]

GLYPHOSATE
THE CURRENT POSITION



As a valued customer ,we felt we ought to highlight the current
glyphosate situation.
NOW COMES THE BORING BIT AND POTENTIAL BAD NEWS....
No doubt you are aware there is considerable attention being paid to the
EU glyphosate renewal. It has been highlighted in the press on a
National and Global level
Glyphosate as an active substance is due to expire on the 30th June 2016
and so for products to remain on the market into 2017 the AS approval
must be either renewed for up to 15 years or extended for a shorter
period until further studies are evaluated.
As the world’s largest pesticide, glyphosate is very high profile. There
is a lot of pressure coming from NGOs to prevent the renewal. The
campaign by the NGOs has gained a lot of traction politically, despite
the fact that the European Food Safety Authority has concluded that
glyphosate is unlikely to pose hazards to humans.
It is a battle of politics versus science. The EU Commission has tried
to stay out of it by relying on the member states to perform their role
and collectively make the renewal decision. The result is 20 of the 28
MSs are in favour of renewal, while 7 are abstaining and Malta is
against. Abstaining is counted as a negative and as this group includes
Germany, France and Italy the overall result does not reach qualified
majority (need to represent >65% of EU population, as well as at least
55% of the member states.
If the qualified majority vote cannot be reached by member states, the
decision will be pushed back on the EU Commission. As the Commission are
not appointed by an election process it is much more likely they will
make a decision based on science rather than politics and take into
consideration the importance of glyphosate to agriculture. This would
either be to renew glyphosate for up to 15 years, or more likely to
extend the current approval for ~18 months until further studies can be
evaluated and Europe has a definitive scientific position.
HERE'S THE GOOD NEWS!
After consideration of the information above, you may take the decision
to forward order product whilst it remains available and we are
permitted to supply it.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. We
will do our best to answer them.

Regards
The Chemigro Team
in...@chemigro.co.uk

[Scott]

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 16:45:11 +0100, Bill Wright
<wrights...@f2s.com> wrote:

> GLYPHOSATE
>THE CURRENT POSITION
>
[snip]

And the relevance to this newsgroup is ...

[Bill Wright]

Sorry I thought you'd be knowledgeable enough to realise. All satellite
dish installers carry this product to reduce foliage attenuation.

Bill

[Brian Gaff]

Not once in this do they actually put the pros and cons for the user to
appreciate the issues so what is the point?
I'm sure those who are not farmers who use it will not even know there
is/was a ban.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Bill Wright" <wrights...@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:nkebq1$14vo$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

[pinnerite]

A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate was being accused of
damage to babies etc.

Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan river had
narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending that she
check what the authorities there use.

Suddenly remembering that my Aussie grandchildren are often taken to
Centennial Park in Sydney, I asked my daughter to do the same.

Next I read that the city of Bristol here in the UK were dropping
glycophosphates in favour of vinegar. Next I read complaints that the
parkland now smelt like fish and chips.

Finally, I went kill off some garden weeds with a spray can of Roundup.
What
did it contain?

Glycophosphates!

--
Mageia 5 for x86_64, Kernel:4.4.13-desktop-1.mga5
KDE version 4.14.5 on an AMD Phenom II X4 Black edition.

[Norman Wells]

"pinnerite" <pinn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nkgsva$pnc$3...@gioia.aioe.org...

>A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate was being accused of
> damage to babies etc.
>
> Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan river had
> narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending that she
> check what the authorities there use.
>
> Suddenly remembering that my Aussie grandchildren are often taken to
> Centennial Park in Sydney, I asked my daughter to do the same.
>
> Next I read that the city of Bristol here in the UK were dropping
> glycophosphates in favour of vinegar. Next I read complaints that the
> parkland now smelt like fish and chips.
>
> Finally, I went kill off some garden weeds with a spray can of Roundup.
> What did it contain?
>
> Glycophosphates!

No it doesn't. It contains glyphosate, ie N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine.

Your ignorance for one so sure of himself is quite remarkable. It shines like a
beacon.

[Max Demian]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:50:19 +0100, pinnerite <pinn...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate was being
accused of
> damage to babies etc.

> Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan
river had
> narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending
that she
> check what the authorities there use.

> Suddenly remembering that my Aussie grandchildren are often taken
to
> Centennial Park in Sydney, I asked my daughter to do the same.

> Next I read that the city of Bristol here in the UK were dropping
> glycophosphates in favour of vinegar. Next I read complaints that
the
> parkland now smelt like fish and chips.

> Finally, I went kill off some garden weeds with a spray can of
Roundup.
> What
> did it contain?

> Glycophosphates!

You should have used a flamethrower.

--
Max Demian

[Bob]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 18:14:16 +0200, Martin wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:12:36 +0100, Max Demian <max_d...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:

>>
>>You should have used a flamethrower.
>

> That only upsets weeds it doesn't kill them.

I thought for one moment we were talking about Usenet and Trolls :-)

[Scott]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:02:47 +0200, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 15:50:19 +0100, pinnerite <pinn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>>A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate

>???

>>was being accused of
>>damage to babies etc.
>>
>>Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan river had
>>narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending that she
>>check what the authorities there use.
>>
>>Suddenly remembering that my Aussie grandchildren are often taken to
>>Centennial Park in Sydney, I asked my daughter to do the same.
>>
>>Next I read that the city of Bristol here in the UK were dropping
>>glycophosphates in favour of vinegar. Next I read complaints that the
>>parkland now smelt like fish and chips.
>>
>>Finally, I went kill off some garden weeds with a spray can of Roundup.
>>What
>>did it contain?
>>
>>Glycophosphates!
>

>Roundup is the original 3M product glyphosate based weed killer.
>The copyright expired in 2003. Many companies make weed killers that contain
>glyphosate including Bayer who are/were in the process of taking over 3M
>agricultural products. There is no evidence that glyphosate kills babies.
>WHO says a ban is not needed.

Monsanto surely? 3M was Minnesota Manufacturing and Mining Company.
And patent surely? Copyright relates to literary works.

[Andy Burns]

pinnerite wrote:

> A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate was being accused of
> damage to babies etc.
>
> Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan river had
> narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending that she
> check what the authorities there use.

If you spray grass with Glyphosate to get rid of weeds in it, you won't
have any grass left afterwards ...

[Norman Wells]

"Andy Burns" <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote in message
news:dt34fd...@mid.individual.net...

I did say his ignorance shone like a beacon.

[pinnerite]

I sprayed the weeds (2) of them with a small hand spray. One was bindweed.
It took a while but they both died. When my dog was alive I wouldn't use
anything that might cause her harm or I would have had to answer to my three
daughters and my wife! Frightening.

[Norman Wells]

"pinnerite" <pinn...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:nkk1iu$1rb4$1...@gioia.aioe.org...

> Norman Wells wrote:
>> "Andy Burns" <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote in message
>> news:dt34fd...@mid.individual.net...
>>> pinnerite wrote:
>>>
>>>> A few weeks ago I became alarmed that glycophosphate was being accused
>>>> of damage to babies etc.
>>>>
>>>> Remembering that the grass between the city of Perth and the Swan river
>>>> had narry a weed anywhere I wrote to my cousin in Perth recommending
>>>> that she check what the authorities there use.
>>>
>>> If you spray grass with Glyphosate to get rid of weeds in it, you won't
>>> have any grass left afterwards ...
>>
>> I did say his ignorance shone like a beacon.
>
> I sprayed the weeds (2) of them with a small hand spray. One was bindweed.
> It took a while but they both died.

They would. It's to do with the way it works.

> When my dog was alive I wouldn't use
> anything that might cause her harm or I would have had to answer to my three
> daughters and my wife! Frightening.

Then you'd have been absolutely fine with glyphosate. A 20kg dog would have to
consume over 100 grams (4 oz) of pure glyphosate, or drink 14 litres of your spray
formulation to have even a 50% possibility of death. The chances of it doing that
are zero.

It is in fact incredibly safe.

[Scott]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 22:20:01 +0100, "Norman Wells" <h...@unseen.ac.am>
wrote:

Sounds like the scare over saccharin. Was it not determined this was
a very dangerous product that could cause death, based on giving rats
saccharin as a third of their daily diet. As someone put it at the
time: 'Warning: the Surgeon General has determined that this product
could be injurious to the health of your pet rat'.

[Scott]

PS When we leave the EU will sodium chlorate be returned to the
shelves? :-)

[Indy Jess John]

On 25/06/2016 11:57, Scott wrote:

>
> PS When we leave the EU will sodium chlorate be returned to the
> shelves? :-)

I wouldn't bet on it. It has other non-gardening uses that I wouldn't
want to be in close proximity to.

Jim

[Geoff Pearson]

"Scott" wrote in message news:poosmbpjiq3fisqt7...@4ax.com...

Nothing of the EU Environment framework will be unpicked - too difficult and
where would we get the stuff? If we leave the EU nothing much will change,
and certainly not for the better.

[Max Demian]

On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 15:28:58 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
<gspear...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> PS When we leave the EU will sodium chlorate be returned to the
> shelves? :-)

> Nothing of the EU Environment framework will be unpicked - too
difficult and
> where would we get the stuff? If we leave the EU nothing much will
change,
> and certainly not for the better.

What they'll do is copy all the EU laws into English law, and *maybe*
start changing the English law if and when they feel like it. (This
is what countries do when they win independence from a colonial
power.)

--
Max Demian

[Another John]

In article <almarsoft.5365...@news.plus.net>,

There was a geezer on the radio 2-3 weeks back (not sure if it wasn't
the venerated Beeb Legal Correspondent Joshua Rosenberg) who was saying
that some of EU law was adopted from laws made in the UK: iow, "we" were
ahead of "them".

j.

[Max Demian]

Of course we are. But there's no need for laws to be made through the
EU, unless the UK government wants to 'bind' future administations.

--
Max Demian

[Scott]

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 09:49:40 +0200, Martin <m...@address.invalid> wrote:

>EU laws don't take effect until they are copied into English laws. They are
>already in English law. To change things they have to revise 40 years of EU
>legislation.

I seem to remember form my EC law lectures (a long time ago) that
Directives have 'direct effect' so that if the contracting state does
not incorporate them into domestic law it is then possible to rely on
the Directive itself.

[Scott]

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 17:53:24 +0100, Max Demian
<max_d...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

Indeed, I think Ireland adopted English law in 1921 with the exception
of maybe three statutes, one of which was I think the treason laws.

[Scott]

I thought about this, but sodium chlorate was not banned in the 1970s
and 1980s and when the ban came it was on environmental grounds. Are
the non-gardening uses not now overtaken by superior products that are
lighter and safer to handle?

[Peter Duncanson]

That "adoption" was a continuation of the laws already in force in
Ireland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Statute_law

Article 50 of the Constitution of Ireland carried over all laws that
had been in force in the Irish Free State prior to its coming into
force on 29 December 1937. A similar function had been fulfilled by
Article 73 of the Constitution of the Irish Free State, which
carried over all legislation that had in force in Southern
Ireland. As a result, while the Irish state has been in existence
for less than one hundred years, the statute book stretches back in
excess of 800 years. By virtue of the Statute Law Revision Act 2007,
the oldest Act currently in force in Ireland is the Fairs Act 1204.
<snip>

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

[Scott]

I thought there was objection to the Treason Act but I cannot find any
authority for this. Maybe they repealed it the next day?

[Indy Jess John]

Mostly yes.
But availability and obtainability (is there such a word?) will also be
a factor affecting preference.

Jim

[Peter Duncanson]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 13:20:52 +0100, Scott

I don't know. The Constitution of the Irish Free State (1922) refers to
treason:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1922/act/1/enacted/en/print

Article 18.

Every member of the Oireachtas [parliament] shall, except in case of
treason, felony, or breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest
in going to and returning from, and while within the precincts of
either House, and shall not, in respect of any utterance in either
House, be amenable to any action or proceeding in any Court other
than the House itself.

That parliament made the "TREASONABLE OFFENCES ACT, 1925" which would
have superceded previous legislation.

[charles]

In article <9ar6pb5uiiundod3t...@4ax.com>,

It is possible that the UK legislation on this suject included "High
Treason". This involves the Crown and Ireland had left that behind.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

[Peter Duncanson]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 14:27:55 +0100, charles <cha...@candehope.me.uk>
wrote:

Ireland hadn't left the Crown behind at that time.

The constitution of the Irish Free State (1922) includes:

Article 17.

The oath to be taken by members of the Oireachtas shall be in the
following form:—

I _______________ do solemnly swear true faith and allegiance to the
Constitution of the Irish Free State as by law established, and that
I will be faithful to H. M. King George V., his heirs and successors
by law in virtue of the common citizenship of Ireland with Great
Britain and her adherence to and membership of the group of nations
forming the British Commonwealth of Nations.

The country had Dominion status in the same way as Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, etc.

It didn't legally become a republic until 1948. It was then
automatically out of the Commonwealth because of the rules for
Commonwealth memebership at the time.

[R. Mark Clayton]

Bit OT,but AIUI Ireland chose not to join the Commonwealth then or since.

If it did it could move things forward especially as regards NI uniting with the south inside the EU.

[charles]

In article <480ac924-aa6d-4a63...@googlegroups.com>, R. Mark

In NI a month ago and I heard rumours that Ireland might apply to rejoin
the Commonwealth.