Saskatchewan Farmer Tells of the Dangers of Bio-Tech Manipulation

Everything You Never Wanted to Know About
Monsanto's Modus Operandi (M.O.)
Monsanto Roundup
(Glyphosate)
Homepage

If You Think Monsanto's Roundup is a Safer Pesticide, Please read the articles and papers on this page !
Because all herbicides are pesticides, Roundup is a pesticide as defined by the EPA.

If you're still not convinced that Roundup is a highly toxic and persistent pesticide, read on, while at the same time remembering the other contributions that Monsanto has made to society such as:

Saccharin, Astroturf, agent orange, dioxin, sulphuric acid, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), plastics and synthetic fabrics, research on uranium for the Manhattan Project that led to the construction of nuclear bombs, styrene monomer, an endless line of pesticides and herbicides (Roundup), rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone that makes cows ill), genetically engineered crops (corn, potatoes, tomatoes, soy beans, cotton), and it's most significant product to date; Lies, Factual Distortions and Omissions. Here's one of the distortions that Monsanto had on its website a while back. "Sustainability - the idea that the resources and people of this world are finite. That for any business decision we make, we must consider the effect it will have on us and our children. That the products we make must not use up all of a natural resource, or even worse, contaminate what is left behind."
___________________
Read more about Monsanto's M.O. at link -
http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Monsanto-Roundup-Glyphosate.htm

Multiple scientific studies across the globe prove Monsanto's Roundup is dangerous.
_____________
Multiple Studies Show that Monsanto's Roundup is Toxic
GM WATCH Daily, March 20, 2007
Straight to the Source

1. Roundup is toxic - Glenn Ashton
2. Multiple studies show Roundup toxicity - Mark Wells
--- ---
1.Roundup is toxic Cape Times, March 16 2007 http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3733319

Hans Lombard, media spinner for genetically modified crops and agricultural chemicals, provides several fine examples of the nonsense he claims others speak, in his letter "Herbicide safe for soil" (March 14).

He insists no information exists to indicate that the active ingredients of Roundup, the most widely used herbicide on earth, are either persistent in the soil or dangerous. He asks for peer-reviewed science to disprove him:

The Danish government banned the use of Roundup as it was found to have polluted groundwater, backed up by data in the Journal of Environmental Quality (issue 34, 2005). Monsanto, manufacturers of Roundup, attempted to dispel such fears. However it has been demonstrated that the components of Roundup are indeed persistent in ponds and water, having a half-life of nearly three months. The ingredients are also toxic to frogs, fish and other aquatic life, as many other peer-reviewed studies show.

The California Pesticide Illness Surveillance Programme found Roundup ranked as the highest cause of pesticide-induced illness or injury to people in California in 1997. It is not only the active ingredient, glyphosate, that is dangerous but also so-called "inert ingredients".

A letter in Nature ["letters" in Nature are peer reviewed scientific papers - ed] stated that POEA, one such chemical, constituting 15% of Roundup, was responsible for nine deaths in Japan. Lombard has much in common with the tobacco lobby in days of yore, with their tired insistence there was nothing wrong with their products.

His apparently solid facts are as full of holes as a mad cow's brain.

Glenn Ashton Noordhoek"
--- ---

Photo: the image in its original context on the page: www.homegrownevolution.com/2006/11/roundup.html

"Dangers of Genetically Engineered Foods

(Footnotes refer to pages in the book Seeds of Deception by Jeffrey M. Smith.)

The following presents some of the dangers of genetically engineered foods and reasons why avoiding them is an important step to safeguard our health. The footnotes refer to page references in the book Seeds of Deception; there you can find meticulously documented evidence that leaves no doubt that GM food should never have been approved.

For a more in-depth look at 65 health risks of GM foods, excerpted from Jeffrey Smith's comprehensive new book Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, click here.

For more information, see also these articles:

Jeffrey Smith's Testimony to the EPA - June 2007
Genetically Modified Foods Are Inherently Unsafe
Genetically Engineered Foods Pose Higher Risk for Children
Case Study on Industry Research: Soy Study by Monsanto
Inhaled GM Maize Pollen May Cause Disease
GM Food Promoter Transfers to Rat Cells
GM Vaccines Recombine into Unpredictable Hybrid Viruses in Human and Animal Cells
A Deadly Epidemic and the Attempt to Hide its Link to Genetic Engineering
55.6% Mortality in Rats Whose Mothers Were Fed GM Soy
Terje Traavik, PhD, responds to criticism about his studies
Article update linking health problems in the Philippines with Bt corn
The biotech industry claims that the FDA has thoroughly evaluated GM foods and found them safe. This is untrue. Internal FDA documents made public from a lawsuit, reveal that agency scientists warned that GM foods might create toxins, allergies, nutritional problems, and new diseases that might be difficult to identify.131-140 Although they urged their superiors to require long-term tests on each GM variety prior to approval, the political appointees at the agency, including a former attorney for Monsanto, ignored the scientists. Official policy claims that the foods are no different130 and do NOT require safety testing. A manufacturer can introduce a GM food without even informing the government or consumers.146 A January 2001 report from an expert panel of the Royal Society of Canada said it was "scientifically unjustifiable"136 to presume that GM foods are safe. Likewise, a 2002 report by the UK's Royal Society said that genetic modification "could lead to unpredicted harmful changes in the nutritional state of foods," and recommended that potential health effects of GM foods be rigorously researched before being fed to pregnant or breast-feeding women, elderly people, those suffering from chronic disease, and babies."

"The neem tree - a case history of biopiracy

By Vandana Shiva

A classic case of biopiracy by transnational corporations is that of the neem tree in India. Vandana Shiva provides the background to this attempt to appropriate an invaluable biological resource of the South.

DURING 1994, Indian farmers staged one mass demonstration after another against the proposed GATT Uruguay Round agreement. In March about 200,000 gathered in Delhi demanding, among other things, that the draft treaty - known colloquailly as 'the Dunkel draft' after chief negotiator, Arthur Dunkel - should be translated into all Indian languages. On 2 October, about half a million converged upon Bangalore to voice their fears about the impending legislation, aware of the threat that GATT poses to their livelihoods, by allowing multinational organisations to enter Third World markets at their expense.

In particular, many of them began to question the Dunkel Draft's call for an international harmonisation of property rights legislation. In their demonstrations, protesters carried twigs or branches of neem, a tree found throughout the drier areas of India.

Several extracts of neem have recently been patented by US companies, and many farmers are incensed at what they regard as intellectual piracy. The village neem tree has become a symbol of Indian indigenous knowledge, and of resistance against companies, which would expropriate this knowledge for their own profit."

Go to link to read more on the Neem Tree and W.W.Grace Company.
___________________

Photo of Neem Tree on street in New Delhi, India - RAVEENDRAN/AFP/Getty Images

The thinking we see from self-described "scientists" in these threads is full of the false logic that corporations and their high-paid lobbyists use to confuse consumers and Americans about the real dangers of what they are doing.

A favorite tactic is picking out a side-thread of the conversation and creating absurd hypotheticals while intoning American values like free enterprise and being fairly compensated for your inventions.

The imaginary farmer who improves his crop and deserves to be able to patent his innovation is a typical example. In reality, most of these patents are not granted to individuals, but to multi-national corporations like Monsanto whose crimes worldwide of taking indigenous plants, altering them slightly in the lab, then patenting their "invention" and legally controlling the plant and its properties are well documented, as are the rare cases where people have prevailed over corporate takeover of indigenous plants like with Neem Tree in India . Research this case of bio-piracy that was challenged by communities in India - http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=...

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/745028.stm

Unfortunate how discussions on these crucial issues get hijacked too often by people who jump on every post and comments that question the actions of multinational corporations that imperil our environment, food supply and the health of billions worldwide.

Anyone who discounts Rachel Carson's SILENT SPRING is not credible as a scientist, or as an informed citizen. To blame Carson for the upsurge in malaria in Africa discounts the countless other reasons that have nothing to do with not using the poison DDT. There are other ways to control mosquitoes that do not cause as much environmental harm. Notice that the "support" for this false claim does not mention any testing that monitors how the health of the communities and their ecosystem is impacted by the spraying of DDT in the people's homes.

Rachel Carson's warnings about the dire impact of DDT has been well proven since she wrote the groundbreaking SILENT SPRING. The world would be in much better shape if governments and scientists had heeded her warning that whatever we introduce into the environment has consequences. Pretty basic common sense, but multinational corporations spent billions debunking it an successfully replaced common sense with scientific double-speak.

Monsanto's war with farmers.
Very comprehensive report.

They did the same thing regarding PCBs, Agent Orange, and Dioxin as they are now doing regarding GMOs. Despicable.