……and that’s despite it being in large scale commercial use for at least fifty years. The basic chemical seems pretty innocuous when used as instructed, so why use aggressive litigation to close down scientific debate? Makes me wonder why the manufacturers have not just done the science. I would expect an investigation like that to take a couple of years and cost a few million. They must have made billions from this stuff, so that’s pretty small beer in global chemical terms. If the results were positive this would then reopen the markets that are currently closed off.as Tim said, at the moment there is a real mixture of evidence for and against the product.
peter
My personal conclusions are that they probably already know the investigations will bring out something they don’t want aired, or that they have already investigated and are sat on the results to keep them from becoming widely known. This is very much how the tobacco industry acted to keep lung cancer out of the public eye for as long as they did.