Home | About | Donate

Citing Big Ag Research, EU Set to Approve Toxic Weedkiller


#1

Citing Big Ag Research, EU Set to Approve Toxic Weedkiller

Lauren McCauley, staff writer

European regulators—under the influence of industry-backed research—are on the cusp of re-approving the use of the Roundup chemical glysophate, reporting Wednesday revealed, despite the fact that the World Health Organization recently deemed the widely-used herbicide a probable carcinogen.


#2

The evil monsanto will destroy all!


#3

Just another example of global corporate empire calling the shots. Sickening, really.


#4

What I do not understand his how a chemist or research scientist can work for such a company. As a scientist myself, it has always been an unspoken tenet to "do no harm". It is noble to want to feed people but mixed with capitalism and all of its baggage, harm is done to water supplies, heirloom crops, soil integrity, wildlife, etc. I hope I don't go bald scratching my head...


#5

Don't feel bad. Anyone or anything can be bought. Our golden calf society has elevated faux science to stratospheric levels. I used to think bankers and politicians were the worst pimps and prostitutes in society. Sadly many science professionals have chosen their path.


#6

Strikes me that this is another very good example of why any member state of the EU would want to make a speedy exist from the EU.


#7

It is totally irresponsible for government agencies to use industry-produced "research" for the purposes of making any regulatory decisions. Companies seeking approval for some whiz-bang product should pay the government to conduct the necessary safety testing, just as I pay the local government taxes to provide policing for my house.

I study how people get fooled about research, and although education is my real specialty, there are easily a dozen ways you can rig studies to reach a "no harm" conclusion even when a product is very harmful: small sample size, poor statistical power, crude assessments (visual inspection of organs rather than bio-chemical or microscopic analyses), using old rats, short duration of the study, using the wrong independent variable (I believe that people don't put straight glyphosate on crops, they put round-up or enlist duo on crops, and the complete weed killers have additional nasty chemicals inside), etc., etc. Most remarkable perhaps was a study in which the test animals organs changed color, but the industry-paid scientists did no follow-up testing and reached a "no-harm" conclusion.

Given evidence that round-up and enlist duo appear to contain probable carcinogens and endocrine disruptors, it's a wee bit worrisome that other endocrine disruptors such as BPA have shown harmful effects on animals in animal experiments when the concentrations were as staggeringly low as the low parts per trillion. The individual molecules can turn cell receptors on and off, just like natural hormones do. If a single drop of water had a concentration of five parts per billion of on the nasty chemicals in round-up, it would have somewhere in the ballpark of 600 million molecules of that chemical, and each molecule can turn cell receptors on and off--in ways nature never intended.


#9

Glysophate is the second leading cause of death in El Salvador among men. Agricultural workers exposed to glysophate are coming down with an otherwise rare, usually fatal kidney disease.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24876-monsantos-herbicide-linked-to-fatal-kidney-disease-epidemic-will-ckdu-topple-monsanto#


#10

"The glyphosate-heavy metal complex reaches the kidney tubules, where the high acidity allows the metal to break free of the glyphosate. The cadmium or arsenic then damages the kidney tubules and other parts of the kidneys, ultimately resulting in kidney failure and, most often, death." What more does one need to know...thank you PaulK for the link. I will be sharing it.


#12

It is quiet simple - it is the pay scale.

You can languish in research outfits that are trying to make it. That would be 60k+ straight out of college. But if you are vying for Monsanto, who probably funded your graduate school chair, and have the right strain of Phd mutation, you are likely to get 90k at Monsanto. If in a few years, you show complete lack of morality and concern for the planet, you could make twice that, easily.

Our system of Money is what needs to be changed.

Then some moral introspection might follow


#14

The EU government is wholly corporate owned.