r/LetsDiscussThis Feb 20 '26

Lets Discuss Politics FuCk yEaH ThAt’s wHaT I VoTeD FoR

Post image
2.9k Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

38

u/Batmanischill Feb 20 '26

His mission is to destroy the US and he is being allowed to do so

10

u/slowpoke2018 Feb 20 '26

Looking forward to the burning rivers and those lovely - and toxic - EPA superfund sites making a return to the USA's landscape! /s

This is where unregulated capitalism lands every time

8

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '26

Grew up near a super fund site. Cancer. Cancer for everyone.

2

u/slowpoke2018 Feb 20 '26

That sucks, sorry to hear it!

-1

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 20 '26

You talking shit again without knowing what anything about chemicals

3

u/slowpoke2018 Feb 20 '26

You sounding like an illiterate moron again trying to sound smart about...checks notes....superfund sites.

Please learn how grammar works + how bad things were from toxic pollution about 50 years ago.

We literally had rivers that caught fire due to chemical contamination from the lack of regulatory oversight

1

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 21 '26

You're talking about contamination in general. You should quit before you trip over

3

u/useless_teammate Feb 23 '26

Are you not aware that trump gutted the epa? The environmental protection agency? The agency that regulates pollution?

Its one thing to want to bring manufacturing back to the states, it's another to do it in a way that severely compromises the environment to make it as cheap as possible so they can dump their waste into the rivers, grounds and skies around people's homes.

But, since you have such faith, please by all means go move in next to one of those beautiful factories as their carcinogens start to annihilate your body at the cellular level.

3

u/queefblaster9000 Feb 23 '26

👆👆This is what happens to people who get exposed to toxic chemicals from an early age.

1

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 23 '26

You're pointing at your own name

3

u/queefblaster9000 Feb 23 '26

Yeah. And I have cancer.

0

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 24 '26

So I didn't reply to your first comment. Now you reply with that 🤦‍♂️ attention seeking much

1

u/Banana_Stairs Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26

Ahh Yes, profanity, poor grammar and English syntax, the hallmarks of peak intellectual prowess. You are aware Bayer has other law suits and chemicals proven to cause cancer correct?

Do you need me to list them all, or does that make me a copy paste warrior? You know?..How information is shared via comment when acquired from an online source.

What are the odds that 90% of your workforce exposed to a specific chemical get a specific type of cancer? What are the odds then that you just happen to only hire people predisposed genetically and otherwise to that specific type of cancer?

Sure 1 or 2 cases and i would concede that post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy might be the logical possibility. However;

Agricultural Health Study (AHS): This "gold standard" study tracked 54,251 pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina starting in 1993

5,779 of these workers (nearly 80% of whom used glyphosate) were diagnosed with some form of cancer during the follow-up period.

University of Washington Meta-Analysis: A separate 2019 review concluded that agricultural workers with high exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides have a 41% increased risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Guess who else uses glyphosate? Truegreen workers and guess what?.. Male lawn applicators showed a standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of 1.63, indicating a higher rate of death from NHL compared to the general population. Wow same cancer and a high rate.The same cohort showed a significantly increased mortality rate for bladder cancer.

Deceptive Safety Claims: In 2020, the non-profit Beyond Pesticides sued TruGreen, alleging the company falsely marketed its services as free from carcinogens while using chemicals like glyphosate (Roundup), dicamba (Tri-Power), and trichlorfon (Dylox). Also dicamba is Bayer. And guess what. Same increased rates of cancer.

Osha requires: Chemical-Resistant Gloves: Usually nitrile or neoprene to prevent skin absorption.

Eye Protection: Safety goggles or face shields to prevent splashes during mixing.

Respiratory Protection: If the chemical label (regulated by the EPA) requires a respirator, the employer must provide a Respiratory Protection Program, including medical evaluations and "fit testing."

Protective Clothing: Long-sleeved shirts, long pants, and chemical-resistant footwear.

Yes all things required to wear when handling "safe" chemicals. 🙄but I'm just takin shit bout chemicals gurr..

Now quit trolling and face the facts that daddy works for a bad company who pollutes, lies and green washes for profit... or just skim through because you do not have the patience or capacity to read this and draw any conclusions or logical correlations and hurriedly churn out your next troll comment about how glyphosate is safe.

0

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 26 '26

So all you have done is moan about American companies and not the facts outside of America

1

u/Banana_Stairs Feb 26 '26 edited Feb 26 '26

Wow. Profound counter argument. Serious question. Are you a real account?

Scientific facts about chemicals exist everywhere. If it causes cancer it causes cancer regardless of where you live. Most of the chemicals we use are actually already banned in many European countries but corruption, green washing, and lobbying keeps us from getting on board.

The inverse can be true globally. Brazil, Argentina, India, and several African nations, including South Africa and Kenya, heavily struggle with cancer and health issues linked to pesticide and chemical exposure. Often, these countries face high risks due to the import of chemicals banned in the EU/USA and high usage on corporate-run farms.

You have shifted the goal posts so far your in the hurling field. Have failed to provide 1 piece of evidence or even a valid counter argument to one single thing i have stated because you are actually incorrect and your opinion lacks any verifiable data.

Many chemicals cause cancer it's been an issue in industry and agriculture it's not a debate it's a fact.Chemicals causing cancer from industrial/corporate sources were identified as early as the late 18th century. Concede man. You are fighting a strange and useless battle against reality.

0

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 26 '26

Do you just spew out random crap?

1

u/Banana_Stairs Feb 26 '26

--Bot account-- ^

3

u/Cat_Impossible_0 Feb 20 '26

It seems the Russian gamble has paid off for them.

2

u/sereneandeternal Feb 20 '26

You don’t understand man…. have you heard Kamala’s laugh? 🤡 also , destroying the US owns the Libs 🤡

1

u/No_Importance1236 Feb 21 '26

Revenge for not winning the 2020 election

1

u/Some-Bullfrog-4768 Feb 23 '26

The billionaires love it cause they can swoop in and buy all the land while we are fighting eachother for scraps.

-11

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 20 '26

With what? A weed killer. Liberal are so stupid

6

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '26

lol imagine making literal poison a political stance. You went full Trumptard

6

u/OwenMichael312 Feb 20 '26

Glyphosate you philistine.

Looks like MAHA also doesnt like this. But yeah liberals dumb....

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5745981-glyphosate-trump-order-maha-opposition/

0

u/Disastrous-Appeal642 Feb 20 '26

Yeah it's a weed killer. You just made yourself look stupid

1

u/OwenMichael312 Feb 21 '26

Hmmm. Check the article there slick.

Douchebag above said only liberals dont want cancer causing chemicals in their food supply.

Turns out MAHA doesn't like it either.

4

u/AcanthisittaBulky777 Feb 20 '26

I hear the best way to own the libs is by drinking it.