Tag Archives: Roundup

If ‘Children Of The Vine’ Sounds Like a Horror Flick, That’s Because It Is, Filmaker Says, by Julie Comber, Ph.D.

Do the wine drinkers who cherish Napa Valley wines know that the grapes are sprayed with Roundup? From Julie Comber, Ph.D, at childrenshealthdefense.org:

When Brian Lilla moved from Oakland, California, to Napa Valley he made an unfortunate discovery: Napa Valley was beautiful, but it also was highly toxic.

Why? Because of the widespread use of Roundup weedkiller on the region’s vineyards.

Lilla’s discovery led him to make “Children Of The Vine,” an investigative documentary on Roundup and the pesticide’s impact on public health.

The film weaves together facts about Roundup, and its key active ingredient — glyphosate — with stories about people who developed cancer after using Roundup, scientists, lawyers and journalists working to end the use of Roundup, and farmers who do and those who don’t use the weedkiller.

Lilla is the documentary’s director, producer, publicist, writer and researcher.

The film’s title, “Children Of The Vine,” is a nod to the ’70s horror film, “Children of the Corn,” based on a short story by Stephen King.

“My wife says that ‘Children Of The Vine’ sounds like a horror film,” Lilla said. “I always tell her it is.”

Continue reading→

‘Monsanto’s History Is One Full of Vast Lies’, by Nils Klawitter

Nils Klawitter at Spiegel Online, spiegel.de, interviews Brent Wisner, the lawyer who won the recent $289 million verdict against Monsanto.

On Aug. 10, lawyer Brent Wisner, 34, scored a landmark verdict on behalf of his client, cancer patient Dewayne Johnson. A court in San Francisco ruled that Monsanto was guilty of concealing the potential health risks associated with its weed killer glyphosate, which is sold in the United States under the brand name Round Up. The jury ordered the company to pay $289 million in damages to the plaintiff, who had used Round Up at his job as a janitor for a school district. The court said Monsanto should have labeled the product’s possible dangers for consumers. Monsanto, which was recently acquired by German pharmaceuticals giant Bayer, has denied any link between the product and the disease.

Wisner spoke to DER SPIEGEL about the case in an interview.


DER SPIEGEL: Your law firm is widely considered to be on the side of consumers. You have targeted pharmaceutical companies and intractable airlines. When did you start taking a closer look at Monsanto?

Wisner: It’s kind of in my blood. Even my father was a bit skeptical of pesticides. He networked with farmers and became an activist against the whole chemical thing. Then, two-and-a-half years ago, I received a call from Teri McCall. She was the widow of a farmer who had died of cancer and who had worked for over 30 years with Monsanto products. That was the impetus for our investigation. This summer, Dewayne Johnson approached us as well.

DER SPIEGEL: The dangers of Monsanto products have been under discussion for decades. Why did a court only decide to address the issue now?

Wisner: There are several reasons. The most important was probably the classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is part of the World Health Organization. In early 2015, they evaluated glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.” Monsanto’s CEO responded by calling it “junk science.” Before that, nobody had collected so much data and looked so deeply at the issue. That was a wake-up call.

Attorney Brent Wisner: "Monsanto executives don't care about their reputations at all."

AFP

Attorney Brent Wisner: “Monsanto executives don’t care about their reputations at all.”

DER SPIEGEL: How much does Monsanto have to do with the fact that a verdict was reached only now?

Wisner: A lot! Monsanto has an internal program called “Let Nothing Go.” The aim of this program is to attack scientists who are critical of Monsanto products. They go after people directly and discredit them. They also pay others to do so.

To continue reading: ‘Monsanto’s History Is One Full of Vast Lies’

New Court Documents Shine a Spotlight on the Shady Business Practices of Monsanto, by Michael Krieger

Evidently scientific “evidence and analysis” is for sale at the right price. Apparently Monsanto paid that price. From Michael Krieger at libertyblitzkrieg.com:

I’ve spent much of my time over the past several years focused on trying to understand the world around me. The most consequential thing I’ve discovered over that time is that an enormous portion of the U.S. economy is little more than a rent-seeking racket. It’s everywhere you look. Throughout every industry, at “think tanks,” and within government, there’s some elaborate scam happening that hurts the many while a handful of parasites win. This is destroying the social and economic fabric of our civilization. It’s basically become a rampant disease, and the recent release of court documents related to Monsanto further highlights the point.

This is precisely why nobody trusts institutions or “experts” any more. People aren’t being anti-science so much as they rationally no longer trust fraudsters acting like they’re doing work to inform the public. It’s not my fault for not trusting them, it’s their fault for being shady.

Here’s some of what The New York Times reported regarding the Monsanto docs:

Documents released Tuesday in a lawsuit against Monsanto raised new questions about the company’s efforts to influence the news media and scientific research and revealed internal debate over the safety of its highest-profile product, the weed killer Roundup.

The active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, is the most common weed killer in the world and is used by farmers on row crops and by home gardeners. While Roundup’s relative safety has been upheld by most regulators, a case in federal court in San Francisco continues to raise questions about the company’s practices and the product itself.

The documents underscore the lengths to which the agrochemical company goes to protect its image. Documents show that Henry I. Miller, an academic and a vocal proponent of genetically modified crops, asked Monsanto to draft an article for him that largely mirrored one that appeared under his name on Forbes’s website in 2015. Mr. Miller could not be reached for comment.

To continue reading: New Court Documents Shine a Spotlight on the Shady Business Practices of Monsanto

Monsanto Colluded With EPA, Was Unable To Prove Roundup Does Not Cause Cancer, Unsealed Court Docs Reveal, by Tyler Durden

Guess what happens when government regulates business? Business spends a lot of money and goes to extraordinary lengths to game the system in its favor. After over 100 years of the regulatory state, that should surprise no one, but to those who need a demonstration, here’s a good one. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

If we had a dime for every kooky, left-wing theory we’ve heard alleging some vast corporate conspiracy to exploit the treasures of the earth, destroy the environment and poison people with unknown carcinogens all while buying off politicians to cover their tracks, we would be rich. The problem, of course, is that sometimes the kooky conspiracy theories prove to be completely accurate.

Lets take the case of the $60 billion ag-chemicals powerhouse, Monsanto, and their controversial herbicide, Roundup as an example. For those who aren’t familiar, Roundup Ready is Monsanto’s blockbuster weedkiller, credited with transforming U.S. agriculture, with a majority of farm production now using genetically modified seeds resistant to the chemical.

For years the company has assured farmers that their weed killing product was absolutely safe to use. As proof, Monsanto touted the approval of the chemical by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

That said, newly unsealed court documents released earlier today seemingly reveal a startling effort on the part of both Monsanto and the EPA to work in concert to kill and/or discredit independent, albeit inconvenient, cancer research conducted by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)….more on this later.

But, before we get into the competing studies, here is a brief look at the ‘extensive’ work that Monsanto and the EPA did prior to originally declaring Roundup safe for use (hint: not much). As the excerpt below reveals, the EPA effectively declared Roundup safe for use without even conducting tests on the actual formulation, but instead relying on industry research on just one of the product’s active ingredients.

“EPA’s minimal standards do not require human health data submissions related to the formulated product – here, Roundup. Instead, EPA regulations require only studies and data that relate to the active ingredient, which in the case of Roundup is glyphosate. As a result, the body of scientific literature EPA has reviewed is not only primarily provided by the industry, but it also only considers one part of the chemical ingredients that make up Roundup.”

To continue reading: Monsanto Colluded With EPA, Was Unable To Prove Roundup Does Not Cause Cancer, Unsealed Court Docs Reveal