As a layman trying to sift through the previous comment; Is he implying that because copper is safe and good, that copper sulfate is safe and good?

From Wiki:

Copper sulfate is an irritant.[34] The usual routes by which humans can receive toxic exposure to copper sulfate are through eye or skin contact, as well as by inhaling powders and dusts.[35] Skin contact may result in itching or eczema.[36] Eye contact with copper sulfate can cause conjunctivitis, inflammation of the eyelid lining, ulceration, and clouding of the cornea.[37]

Upon oral exposure, copper sulfate is only moderately toxic.[35] According to studies, the lowest dose of copper sulfate that had a toxic impact on humans is 11 mg/kg.[38] Because of its irritating effect on the gastrointestinal tract, vomiting is automatically triggered in case of the ingestion of copper sulfate. However, if copper sulfate is retained in the stomach, the symptoms can be severe. After 1–12 grams of copper sulfate are swallowed, such poisoning signs may occur as a metallic taste in the mouth, burning pain in the chest, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, discontinued urination, which leads to yellowing of the skin. In cases of copper sulfate poisoning, injury to the brain, stomach, liver, or kidneys may also occur.[37]

So moderately toxic, but not exactly the "safe and good" compound he was making it out to be. So the next question is, how much weight is there to the studies he links? When comparing the two, which is actually worse for human health?