Now, the usual jackals are winning cases on the "CANCER!!!" scare.
We started this discussion with the premise that RfDs, not LD50s, are the appropriate comparison for chronic toxicity. Using RfDs, how do caffeine and glyphosate compare? Keeping in mind, the LOWER the number, the HIGHER the toxicity.The link contains a 15-minute read on the actual scientific method (not the lawyer/liar method) and compares the danger from coffee and glysophate.
EPA RfD for glyphosate: 0.1 mg/kg/dayThis means that caffeine is 40 times more toxic than glyphosate. However, this is only a useful number if we know our typical exposures. The exposure numbers above show that we don’t give a second thought to consuming caffeine at levels hundreds of times higher than the oral RfD, but are simultaneously worried about exposures to glyphosate that are 100 times lower than the RfD. In discussions of toxicity, we must use the correct data to back up our points to step outside the cycle of misinformation....
EPA RfD for caffeine: 0.0025 mg/kg/day
0.1 ÷ 0.0025 = 40
I'd like to see the lawyers drink a LOT more coffee. Gallons more. By force, if necessary.