I dispute that your "facts" proved anything.
Consequently, your "conclusions" are not significant.
If you prefer to believe they are significant, great. Drink more glycophosphate.
They were not my facts. They are facts from the article you posted. The test was done by placing bacteria on slides and putting Roundup on them. No animals were tested. Sugar can kill bacteria.
Which of these facts do you dispute? My conclusion was that the article is agitprop. My conclusion is an opinion which you are free to dispute. Maybe you have a different conclusion based not the facts as presented in that article.
But then again, you have serious questions about unknown consequences.