Courts Rule Against California Crying Wolf on Cancer

1448
SHARE

There’s no clear reasonable explanation for why California defers to the WHO on health matters for any reason. When the policy was enacted in 1986 there may have been greater optimism surrounding the UN. It’s the only thing that I can think of that makes sense. If that’s the case, it no longer applies as the UN has been exposed repeatedly for its ineptitude.

Enter Email to View Articles

Loading...

Labels, labels everywhere but not a drop of safety to be found

Before this ruling, most California based manufacturers were placing warning labels on anything with even a hint of glyphosate. They found it was easier to risk some loss in sales rather than face a class action lawsuit. The only ones winning in this climate are the lawyers in charge of filing the suits. It certainly isn’t good for the average Californian.

In California, we value our health and public safety. So, we expect stricter standards on the types of products that can be sold to consumers and we often lead the way. We take environmental protection and the health of our citizens seriously. That’s something to be proud of, but labelling products hazardous for no apparent reason is not something any of us should support.

1
2
3
4
SHARE
Previous articlePennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf Introduces Election Reforms
Next articleTrump Reportedly Wants To Go After Amazon Tax Treatment; AMZN Stock Falls
Charles Laverty
Charles Laverty is a contributing writer to USA Herald and entrepreneur focused on health along with wellness. Charles passion is writing and has a knack for covering tough stories that other journalists shy away from, including but not limited to the fitness industry's profiteering over fixing the obestity epidemic. Charles Laverty is an advocate for health, wellness, and fitness. He has a knack for calling out government for bad policies, incompetence, and anti-democratic actions.