Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

Re: Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

Postby Tero » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:32 pm ... ate_en.pdf

labeled as occupational hazard. Low risk to consumers of crops
Schinasi L, Leon ME (Apr 2014). "Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and occupational exposure to agricultural pesticide chemical groups and active ingredients: a systematic review and meta-analysis". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 11 (4): 4449–527. PMC 4025008 Freely accessible. PMID 24762670. doi:10.3390/ijerph110404449. (:_funny_:)
Guns? Guns: ... 9c76_z.jpg
"Can you tell me where my country lies?"
Said the unifaun to his true love's eyes
"It lies with me!" cried the Queen of Maybe
- for her merchandise, he traded in his prize

"Paper late!" cried a voice in the crowd
"Old man dies!"
The note he left was signed 'Old Father Thames'
- it seems he's drowned;
Selling England by the pound
User avatar
Just saying
Posts: 21919
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
Location: USA
About me: Something something birds

Re: Conservatives: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Data!

Postby Forty Two » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:25 pm

March 25, 2017 - ... en-by-echa

Not a carcinogen. It "...concluded that the available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria to classify glyphosate as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or as toxic for reproduction."
If you ever feel sad, remember that somewhere in the world there is a fat kid dropping his favorite ice cream cone.

I'm not Steve Bannon. I'm not trying to suck my own c**k. - Anthony Scaramucci.
User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 9701
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I identify as sexually arousing to women.


Return to Language, Culture & Anthropology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest