As European officials on Wednesday weigh whether or not to re-approve the use of Monsanto's glyphosate, a storm has erupted after the World Health Organization (WHO) seemingly flipped in its assessment of the dangers posed by the chemical.
I am glad that I had the foresight to genetically engineer all of my children to be "Round-Up Ready" so that my family will not have to worry about this problem.
mercy. so now hey are a global power? they can buy FAO and WHO? as well as the always on sale U.S. congress? now its getting too scary
Pointing to the discrepancy between the various reports on the toxicity of glyphosate, The Intercept's Sharon Lerner noted Tuesday that what distinguished the WHO's March 2015 study, which concluded with a cancer warning, is that it used research "on both glyphosate alone as well as the complete formations of Roundup and other herbicides," which included the impact of supposedly "inert" ingredients.
Though it is true that glyphosate is more potent when combined with other ingredients, what primarily distinguished the WHO's March 2014 study, which concluded with a cancer warning, was that it based its decision on publicly available scientific studies, not on the abstracted findings of industry-funded studies, whose methodology and data is withheld from public scrutiny due to supposedly containing trade secrets. If a company won't publicly reveal the methods and the data, any conclusions based on such methods and data should be disallowed from consideration.
There is another give away here, the WHO/FAO ok only clears Glyphosate as not being cancer causing in the food chain--it doesn't clear it of causing cancer to farmers who use it and their neighbors who breath it in or get it in their water supply in far higher doses than appears in food products.
This why systems of governance must be radically changed.
Corporate power must be significantly reduced.
A vote for the status quo is a vote for corruption.
Take back the center!
How did we get to this point where the chemical agriculture industry controls both our food system and those who regulate it? Let us count the ways:
The US Dept. of Agriculture and EPA are riddled with employees from the chemical agriculture revolving door job pool.
Chemical agriculture companies fund university research departments and researchers across the U.S. and the world. Their funding often remains undisclosed, and very few watchdog groups monitor the links between funding and research.
Awards like the World Food Prize are funded by the chemical agriculture industry and awarded to people who have spent their lives feeding from the chemical agriculture trough. Their annual Borlaug Dialogue is a veritable rogues gallery of food criminals, both industry and individuals.
Attorney negotiators for the TTIP and TPP are paid for by the chemical agriculture industry.
Formerly respected journals like National Geographic now accept advertising from the chemical agriculture industry, greatly affecting the content of their articles.
There is another revolving door on the implementation side connecting 3 rooms: the chemical agriculture industry, 'humanitarian' organizations like the Gates & Syngenta Foundations, and government agencies like USAID and DfID.
Organizations like Conservation International are little more than green washing tools for corporations, one of the chief among them being the chemical agriculture industry.
When we see headlines about the EU about to approve further saturation of our food with poisons for the next 9 years (!) it tells us the system is working. No, working isn't the right word. It's a well-oiled death machine slouching toward Dystopia.
For further reading, Colin Todhunter, who's become in my opinion the foremost journalist on food quality and food justice issues, published this yesterday:
And, let's not forget the farmworkers, whose average life expectancy is 50 years.