Featured Post

The Silence Breakers #MeToo Update

So this is the newest age of enlightenment. We have finally come to the conclusion that using a position of power to coerce, assault, ha...

Monday, September 7, 2015

Monsanto’s Roundup “known to cause cancer”

The EPA’s office of environmental health hazard assessment in California wants to label four chemicals, including the most popular herbicide and key ingredient of Monsanto’s Roundup, glyphosate, as “known to cause cancer,” following the most recent WHO cancer research division’s report.

The “notice of intent” envisions placing Glyphosate within 30 days to the list of chemicals that are known to cause cancer, classification of which falls under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, or the Proposition 65. Under the Act any chemicals that threatens human life require a businesses to provide a "clear and reasonable" warning label before exposing individuals to a chemical on the list.
In March the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as being “probably” carcinogenic to humans forcing the agrochemical giant Monsanto to furiously reject the conclusions.
Glyphosate, which was invented by Monsanto back in 1974, is a broad-spectrum herbicide used to kill weeds, especially annual broadleaf weeds and grasses known to compete with commercial crops.
Monsanto’s Roundup Herbicide Linked to Brain Cancer in Children http://t.co/gIyHHCqEoDpic.twitter.com/DGIPcJu7Qm — Before It's News (@beforeitsnews) September 6, 2015
In the US the herbicide has been considered safe since 2013, when Monsanto received approval from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for increased tolerance levels for glyphosate. In its original assessment the US watchdog said glyphosate could be “used without unreasonable risks to people or the environment.”
But a study released last week by an international group of scientists revealed that the long-term intake of Monsanto’s herbicide, even in very small amounts, lower than hat which is permissible in US water, may lead to kidney and liver damage.
In a recent report by the Center for Food Safety, the heavy proliferation of Roundup was also linked to a drastic 90-percent drop in the population of monarch butterflies in the US.
The news of California's EPA decision was welcomed by environmental activists.
“California’s taking an important step toward protecting people and wildlife from this toxic pesticide,” said Dr. Nathan Donley, a staff scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity“More than 250 million pounds of glyphosate are used each year in the United States, and the science is clear that it’s a threat to public health and countless wildlife species. It’s long past time to start reining in the out-of-control use of glyphosate in the United States.”
In addition to glyphosate, tetrachlorvinphos, parathion and malathion, were listed along Monsanto's product as having carcinogenic effects. The public now have an opportunity to comment or dispute the new proposed classification through October 5.

California EPA mulls labeling Monsanto’s Roundup as being ‘known to cause cancer’ 6 Sep, 2015

L'erbicida Roundup è cancerogeno MARCH 21, 2015


MONSANTO CAUSES CANCER APRIL 23, 2015



People demonstrate against the US biotechnology giant Monsanto and its genetically modified crops and pesticides, in Asuncion, on May 25, 2015 two days after thousands of people hit the streets in cities across the world to protest against the company. © AFP 2015/ NORBERTO DUARTE

A fresh article by The New York Times, based on verifiable sources, demonstrates a simple truth: both pro- and anti-GM researchers have been systematically paid by food companies for providing information support and lobbying for their respective genetically modified and organic foods.
Using scientists for PR-backup was regarded more effective than even TV ads featuring farmer mothers, according to emails sent by world’s largest seed company Monsanto employees, The Times reveal.
“Doesn’t poll as well as credible third party scientist,” Lisa Drake, Monsanto lobbyist, wrote. “I know hard to believe, but I have seen the poll results myself, and that is why the campaigns work the way they do.”

That’s why Monsanto was paying biotechnology scientists-cum-lobbyists vast sums of money for travelling around the States with speeches, creating their own websites to support the use of herbicides and convey the message GMOs are no harm to humanity.
One of the most prominent GMO supporters, a Florida University professor Dr. Kevin Folta, received an undisclosed amount in special grants, the Times reported.
Sometimes, the company even provided the professor was also provided by the company with ready answers to potential questions from the audiences he was addressing to.
“This is a great 3rd-party approach to developing the advocacy that we’re looking to develop,” Michael Lohuis, the director of crop biometrics at Monsanto, wrote in an email while considering giving Dr. Folta an unrestricted grant last year.

The online voting results from last night's GMO debate between Dr. Charles Benbrook & Monsanto's Exec VP, Robb Fraley pic.twitter.com/aj4yf1swzI — Robyn O'Brien (@foodawakenings) December 4, 2014
On the other side of the frontline, organic industry executives were eager to recruit independent researchers to their party and also supported them with grants. This is the case of Professor Dr. Charles Benbrook of Washington State University, who repeatedly received financial backing, according to emails obtained by The Times.
“They want to influence the public,” Dr. Benbrook was quoted as saying by The Times, referring to both parties of the GMO war. “They could conduct those studies on their own and put this information on their website. But nobody would believe them. There is a friggin’ war going on around this stuff. And everyone is looking to gain as much leverage as they can.”

The game is worth playing as both competitive groups of food companies have got their wins in food battles in the Senate and around different states. Who wins the grand war depends on who captures more hearts and minds with the help of recruited scientists.

GMO Wars: Both Sides Paid US Scientists for Studies Supporting Their Claims 07.09.2015

Infowar on Genetically Modified Crops SEPTEMBER 1, 2015







Ti piace?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...