Top
Best
New

Posted by bikenaga 12/15/2025

Thousands of U.S. farmers have Parkinson's. They blame a deadly pesticide(www.mlive.com)
456 points | 351 commentspage 5
senectus1 12/16/2025|
Dammit, this is one thats allowed in Australia.
bikenaga 12/15/2025||
Here's some of the research linked in the article.

"Rotenone, Paraquat, and Parkinson’s Disease" - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3114824/

"In 110 PD cases and 358 controls, PD was associated with use of a group of pesticides that inhibit mitochondrial complex I [odds ratio (OR) = 1.7; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.0–2.8] including rotenone (OR = 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3–4.7) and with use of a group of pesticides that cause oxidative stress (OR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2–3.6), including paraquat (OR = 2.5; 95% CI, 1.4–4.7)."

"Agricultural paraquat dichloride use and Parkinson's disease in California's Central Valley" - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38309714/#full-view-affiliat...

"Ambient paraquat exposure assessed at both residence and workplace was associated with PD, based on several different exposure measures. The PD patients both lived and worked near agricultural facilities applying greater amounts of the herbicide than community controls. For workplace proximity to commercial applications since 1974, working near paraquat applications every year in the window [odds ratio (OR) = 2.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.46, 3.19] and a higher average intensity of exposure [per 10 pounds (4.54 kilograms), OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.31, 3.38] were both associated with an increased odds of PD. Similar associations were observed for residential proximity (duration: OR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.30, 2.83; average intensity: OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 0.99, 3.04). Risk estimates were comparable for men and women, and the strongest odds were observed for those diagnosed at ≤60 years of age."

"Department of Pesticide Regulation Releases Preliminary Findings from Review of Environmental and Human Health Studies Related to the Use of the Pesticide Paraquat" - https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/2024/12/30/department-of-pesticide-r...

"DPR’s preliminary scientific evaluation found that the current registered uses of paraquat in California may adversely affect non-target organisms, including birds, mammals and aquatic organisms, with the most significant risks to birds. Additional mitigation measures, beyond current restrictions on paraquat use currently in effect, may not feasibly reduce these environmental impacts to acceptable levels.

Consistent with United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) 2019 review, DPR’s review of existing human health studies does not indicate a causal association between paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease."

MPSFounder 12/15/2025||
Under Trump, so many regulations have been setback. It will only get worse. I think the answer has to be on the community level, pushing back against industrial use that has not been rigorously tested. However, many believe that job creation is more important than the right of individuals (innocents) to a life free of health issues.
sixothree 12/15/2025||
I honestly think there's a technology / robotics solution to the pesticide, and especially herbicide, problems. I'm in completely the wrong space to see it happen, but I'm still hopeful someone smart can do it.
jtbayly 12/15/2025||
Am I the only one that thinks it's weird to call a weed killer a pesticide?
JumpCrisscross 12/15/2025|
Herbicides are a pesticide [1]. (Alongside insecticides, fungicides and fumigants, among others.)

[1] https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-01/documents/pe...

lordswork 12/15/2025||
Technically, yes, but it's a similar relationship of humans being animals. If you say animals, the audience will assume you're not talking about humans.
connicpu 12/15/2025|||
Scientific terminology should be precise, not based on colloquial usages
rcMgD2BwE72F 12/15/2025|||
Did you mean "beast" or "creature"?
juujian 12/15/2025||
Meanwhile, RFK is too busy talking vaccines and beef tallow...
forgetfreeman 12/15/2025||
I know I'm going to regret this but...beef tallow? What?
bombcar 12/15/2025||
Fries used to be fried in beef tallow oil basically everywhere. Most fast-food chains went to vegetable oils for various reasons (vegan, subsidized, cheaper, supposedly healthier, etc). Many perceive a noticeable taste difference.
JumpCrisscross 12/15/2025|||
> Most fast-food chains went to vegetable oils

This is the legitimate end of the spectrum. The science that drove tallow out of kitchens and homes was incomplete, particularly when it was replaced with trans fats.

Where it goes off the rails is when nutters conclude that because tallow was wronged in one context, it is wronged in all of them, which leads to folks rubbing tallow on their faces [1]. (It's probably harmless. I've used it as a foot cream because I got samples at my farmers' market.)

[1] https://www.prevention.com/beauty/skin-care/a63833046/beef-t...

amanaplanacanal 12/15/2025||||
One of the big benefits for corporations is that rancidity in vegetable oils isn't as noticeable by smell, so they can keep using them after they've gone off. Just to add to how much cheaper they are.
m000 12/15/2025||||
Have there been any blind tastings for that? I mean, if people swear by beef tallow's taste, they should be able to also prove it experimentally.

This would also set a level field between beef tallow and other oils. I would expect that a lot have changed in the fast food industry supply chain since the "good old days". Frying oil is only one of the factors that may have affected the taste of fries. Not to mention that everything tastes better when one is young.

phantasmish 12/15/2025|||
The difference wasn’t subtle, and they cooked differently after the switch, too. Plenty of folks had the experience of noticing that they’d had a run of bad batches of fries before finding out the recipe had change (so now all batches were bad) and effectively did do a blind taste test.
forgetfreeman 12/15/2025||||
I assure you if you'd been alive and consuming fast food french fries before and after the change you wouldn't think a blind test was required. The difference between whatever the hell McDonalds was using before the switch and after was jarring.
kevin_thibedeau 12/15/2025|||
It was very noticeable when McDonald's switched over. They were the first domino to fall.
forgetfreeman 12/15/2025||||
That I did know. I lived through the change and "noticeable taste difference" is a massive understatement. What fresh indignity has been injected into the media cycle that makes this in any way relevant?
SoftTalker 12/15/2025|||
"for various reasons" ... not really, the main reason was "supposedly healthier." There was pressure from healthy food advocates, mostly based on pop science claims. In the 1980s the "fat and dietary cholesterol is bad" trend started. That's when restaurants switched away from beef tallow, so they could advertise "fried in vegetable oil" as if that was healthier. They also introduced salads, oat bran muffins, changed from milk to yogurt ice cream, and other things that customers generally didn't want but could be claimed to be "healthy."

The amount of sugar added to prepared food took a big jump around this time, as it replaced fat to make the food taste good. Around this time is when obesity started to become a bigger problem.

NotGMan 12/15/2025||
Why can't all of these things be problematic? Why the binary thinking?
mring33621 12/15/2025||
Huh.

Poisons are poison!

And they sprayed this shit all over themselves and people nearby.

malfist 12/15/2025||
[flagged]
twirlip 12/15/2025||
If you actually read the article, it indicated epidemiological studies showing that people living or working near farmland where paraquat is used have a higher incidence of Parkinson's.

Additionally, the article cites a leading neuroscientist in Parkinson's research who says that pesticides are one of the "biggest threats" linked to Parkinson's

Lastly, I personally discount your sort of arguments because it is the same kind we've witnessed the tobacco industry, the sugar industry, and the gasoline industry use regarding the science showing harmful effects of their products.

lm28469 12/15/2025||
Scientists hate him! Discover how this HNer invalidated all studies with one single weird trick.
phendrenad2 12/15/2025||
Are the migrant workers getting Parkinson's, or only the white males who can pull the heartstrings of MAGA folks?
mathgradthrow 12/15/2025|
1 in 400 US citizens is diagnosed with parkinsons, if by "thousands", this headline means 5000, then 1 in 2000 US farmers has Parkinson's. Stop it.
tredre3 12/15/2025||
Skepticism is healthy. You've found that the numbers don't make sense at face value. The problem is that you stopped there, you haven't even made any attempt at reconciling them with the original claim.

What if the US number of 1 in 400 figure is that high precisely because it includes people exposed to pesticide? In other words, maybe the number would be 1 in 500 if it weren't for Paraquat? You'd have to look at concentration maps or at the very least check what's the diagnosis rates in other countries before you can truly dismiss the claim, imho.

mathgradthrow 12/18/2025||
>The problem is that you stopped there, you haven't even made any attempt at reconciling them with the original claim.

What are you talking about? I've done all the diligence that is due. If you want to convince me, you have to actually present your evidence. When you do present evidence, I'm free to assume that the evidence you've presented is your best evidence.

The article starts with a story about an 83 year old farmer with Parkinsons. I'm not going to continue reading after that point. An 83 year old with Parkinsons is not an anomaly, his existence is not evidence of anything. I'm not required to look beyond this point, and I'm absolutely free to comment about that. This is reasonable skepticism. I am not claiming evidence of absence, I'm claiming absence of evidence.

But fine, if you want to look for evidence of absence, then as you say, We need look no further than a random country where paraquat is banned. Paraquat is banned in germany, and there are 80 million people in germany, go google how many of them have Parkinson's disease.

If you are trying to convince me of an effect so small that you cannot even come up with one anomalous Parkinson's case to write a story about, then I don't care.

zamadatix 12/15/2025|||
The article already talks to the numbers they mean and what scale they believe it to be:

> More than 6,400 lawsuits against Syngenta and Chevron that allege a link between paraquat and Parkinson’s are pending in the U.S. District Court of Southern Illinois. Another 1,300 cases have been brought in Pennsylvania, 450 in California and more are scattered throughout state courts.

> “I do think it’s important to be clear that number is probably not even close to representative of how many people have been impacted by this,” said Christian Simmons, a legal expert for Drugwatch.

mathgradthrow 12/15/2025||
There are hundreds of pictures of the Loch Ness monster.
zamadatix 12/15/2025|||
I'm not saying you have to believe it, just that rhetorically asking if it's more than 5,000 in the US is redundant when the article already says there are more than that many individual cases about it in a single district court.
mathgradthrow 12/15/2025||
I drastically underestimated the number of farmers, who skew older. This is very unlikely to be anything.
zamadatix 12/15/2025||
Is that just stating a hunch or do you have new data outside the 2 narratives presented in the article driving that?
sentrysapper 12/15/2025|||
My grandfather was a crop duster pilot in the 60s-70s. He died of Parkinson's almost 4 years ago today. He is the only one in my family to succumb to this disease. For a brief moment I was relieved to know there was some explanation for his suffering.

Then I read the HN comments. It is beyond infuriating to read a well researched paper with 1300 open cases legal with overwhelming evidence only to be met with "zero chance this is real."

mathgradthrow 12/18/2025||
I don't think you would know a well researched paper if it bit you. Legal cases are only evidence that there is money to be made in litigation.
lm28469 12/15/2025|||
If only we had tools like science and statistics... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00139...
slashdev 12/15/2025|||
The article mentions epidemiological studies showing that people living or working near farmland where paraquat is used have a higher incidence of Parkinson's.

Don't be so quick to dismiss it, there could be a link.

tastyfreeze 12/15/2025||
Paraquat was used in horrendous amounts mid century. It may be a dose dependant outcome.