so you are still trying to say the stuff is harmless,
when it is scheduled as a toxic substance......wow and u say im slow. Go drink a bottle of it, will make me no longer have to argue with u
Pretty sure we were talking about Forbid, the bayer branded pesticide
Spirodiclofen
"Spirodiclofen has been shown to have endocrine disruptive effects resulting in direct and indirect endogenously-mediated toxicological response. Testicular effects were observed in dogs, rats and mice, manifested as Leydig cell vacuolation in dogs, hypertrophy in dogs and mice, and hyperplasia progressing to adenomas in rats following chronic exposure. In female rats, increased incidence of uterine nodules and uterine adenocarcinoma were observed at terminal sacrifice in the chronic study. Cytoplasmic vacuolation in the adrenal cortex, accompanied by increased adrenal weight, was consistently observed in rats, dogs, and mice of both sexes."
https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/registration/fs_PC-124871_11-Aug-05.pdf
If it fucks up a dogs testicles i wouldnt call it harmless. I guess the Europeans have a different definition of harmless than the EPA.
WRONG ONE !!!! SPIROMESIFEN = CORRECT ONE!
You looked up the wrong one!
This taken from the Government report - The CORRECT one!
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.
Spiromesifen was classified as having low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It was neither an eye nor dermal irritant, but showed moderate
potential as a skin contact sensitizer. In short- and long-term animal toxicity tests, the critical effects observed were loss of body weight, adrenal effects (discoloration, decrease in fine vesticulation, and the presence of cytoplasmic eosinophilia in zona fasciculata cells), thyroid effects (increased thyroid stimulating hormone, increased thyroxine binding capacity, decreased T3 and T4 levels, colloidal alteration and thyroid follicular cell hypertrophy), liver effects (increased alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase (ALT) and decreased cholesterol, and triglycerides), and spleen effects (atrophy, decreased spleen cell count, and increased macrophages). There were no developmental or reproductive effects of concern following oral administration of spiromesifen in rats or rabbits. EPA concluded that spiromesifen is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans based on a lack of evidence of cancer in bioassays in rats and mice. There were no
in vivo or
in vitro mutagenic effects in mutagenicity testing with spiromesifen. Spiromesifen is not considered a neurotoxic chemical based on the chemical's mode of action and the available data from multiple studies, including acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies.
To further understand what this says past the
having low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure.
Please read:
(By the way, I had THIS paper listed in a link that I supplied as part of what you asked for! You obviously didn't bother to read what I posted and I'm starting to believe you made your mistake on pupose!)
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/01/16/2013-00728/spiromesifen-pesticide-tolerances
Your quote of " I guess the Europeans have a different definition of harmless than the EPA." Is a telling statement! It translates to "I didn't read that either!"
Here's the other one you didn't read - The European one's: I gave you the whole email reply from the EFSA so you can see it was an actual request for information directly to an EU governmental authority....
You requested access to the draft risk assessment report of the active substance "Spiromesifen".
Please, find below the URL linking to the files of the rapporteur Member State assessment report.
Public consultation has not been started yet or is now closed on this active substance and no further comments can be accepted by EFSA or the respective rapporteur Member State.
Rapporteur Member State assessment report documents:
The documents regarding this substance are provided in compliance with the provisions of the relevant legislative framework
1.
EFSA would like to draw your attention to the preliminary nature of the risk assessment presented in the rapporteur Member State assessment report, as it represents the initial evaluation of the data by a rapporteur Member State which is subsequently peer reviewed by EFSA.
Yours sincerely,
The European Food Safety Authority
Have fun and happy reading - ABOUT THE RIGHT ONE!
