Feds consider upping allowable pesticide residue limits on our food - eviltoast
  • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Are you sure?

    I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. Unless there is some evidence of corruption within Health Canada I believe that the scientists are working independently.

    You must be aware of the way lobbying works.

    Lobbying is very well regulate in Canada, as it should be. In Canada, we have the lobbying act which has broader definitions of lobbyists than the US. Every interactions including details between a lobbyist and a politician is reported to the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada. You can request access to this data.

    Again, I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. Canada has well established and trustworthy institutions. We are lucky enough to live in a country where most people can’t name a single Supreme Court justice. This isn’t the US, we have our own problems to solve, stop importing problems from down south.

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      What conspiracy? The article clearly states that Syngenta requested the increase in MRL for fludioxonil. We don’t even need to reach for the lobbying registry to get that information. On the question of independence of scientists, what does Health Canada do in this context? Conduct their own human toxicity studies on the new MRL? As far as I know the manufacturer is responsible to do that and government bodies such as Health Canada review that data. Unless there’s something that appears to cause harm after the fact which necessitates independent study. Unless I’m totally wrong about this and Health Canada does independent studies on these compounds, we have a manufacturer creating the product, the safety studies around it and government agencies just review and approve or deny its use based on those studies. This is just business as usual, no conspiracies involved, and no independent science on Health Canada’s part. Unless you count reviewing the manufacturer studies as science, which technically is science, except there are obvious pitfalls with it.