By Rex Weyler
Monsanto, perhaps the world’s most reviled environmental villain, has finally been busted for for selling its poisonous products around the world.
Juries in three U.S. lawsuits in the last year have ruled that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide caused or significantly contributed to the onset of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a life-threatening immune system cancer. Over US$2-billion has been awarded in damages to four victims, and over 13,000 other lawsuits are now pending.
A year ago, well aware of the imminent medical liabilities, the German chemical and drug giant, Bayer AG, bought the troubled Monsanto. Since the purchase, as Monsanto’s liabilities mounted, Bayer’s stock price has plummeted, losing over 40% of its value.
Bayer’s own dubious history includes an affiliation with IG Farben in producing Zyklon B gas for Hitler’s execution camps and conducting deadly medical experiments on prisoners. Typically, after the glyphosate trials, Bayer doubled down on denial. “Glyphosate-based herbicides do not cause cancer,” claimed spokesman Dan Childs, insisting that “Monsanto’s conduct has been appropriate.” Bayer may soon have to eat those words.
The three landmark court cases, and subsequent investigations, that brought down Monsanto, and may ultimately bring down Bayer, have resulted in accusations by victims, scientists, and media that, to promote the sale of glyphosate, Monsanto suppressed evidence, manipulated lab results, bullied and harassed scientists, and undermined international regulators. Internal documents obtained by the courts now suggest that Monsanto marketed Roundup as “safe,” knowing full well that it was a likely carcinogen.
In 1950, Swiss chemist Henry Martin first synthesized glyphosate, a chemical analogue of the natural amino acid, glycine. Glyphosate acts as a non-selective herbicide, killing most plants and some micro-organisms by disrupting a chemical pathway that produces essential amino acids. Since mammals do not contain this particular chemical pathway, Monsanto, without waiting for definitive test results, originally claimed the chemical “is safer than table salt.” They began marketing the herbicide as “Roundup” in 1974.
In the 1990s, Monsanto labs found a bacteria strain that could survive in glyphosate, cloned the relevant enzyme gene sequence into soybeans and introduced the first glyphosate-resistant plants that allowed farmers to poison weeds without killing the cash crop. The technique has since been applied to maize, canola, alfalfa, sugar beets, and cotton. By 2015, in the US, 94% of soybeans and 89% of corn and cotton were genetically modified to be glyphosate-tolerant.
However, the “safer than salt,” slogan soon began to collapse. As documented by journalist Carey Gillam, scientists linked repeated or high doses administered to rats during pregnancy to stunted growth and bone defects in fetuses. Children are particularly vulnerable, as their bodies and organs are actively growing.
Skin lesions, headaches, and respiratory symptoms first began to appear among farmers. A 2001 US National Cancer Institute study among male farmers showed “a statistically significant 50% increased risk” of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after exposure to organophosphate pesticides, such as Roundup.
In 2010, in New South Wales, Australia, doctors diagnosed farmer Tralee Snape, who had spread Roundup on her fields with her husband Ron, with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Australian doctors, including Tralee’s oncologist, called the disease “farmer’s cancer,” because of the many cases appearing among farmers. “The bloody bastards who made this product should have warned us,” Ron Snape says now, “so we could make an informed decision.”
In 2012, after a death from a large dose in Thailand, doctors discovered that the mixture of glyphosate with other compounds in Roundup eroded mucous membrane tissues, gastrointestinal linings, and respiratory tracts, leading to pulmonary congestion and edema in the victim’s lungs.
A 2014 meta-analysis published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health reported that “B cell lymphoma was positively associated with … the organophosphorus herbicide glyphosate.”
In February, this year, a meta-analysis by Louping Zhang and colleagues at the University of Washington, found “a compelling link between exposures to GBHs (glyphosate-based herbicides) and increased risk for NHL (non-Hodgkins lymphoma).”
I’m not an idiot
In 2016, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that glyphosate had “low toxicity for humans.” However, critics have claimed that Monsanto exercised undue influence on that study, which is now under review. Former EPA advisorsrecently found people heavily exposed to Roundup are 41% more likely than unexposed individuals to develop non-Hodgkins lymphoma. The World Health Organization classifies glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” while the state of California says it is “known to cause cancer.”
In March 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the scientific data regarding glyphosate. IARC avoided unpublished industry-funded studies, whereas the EPA had allowed Monsanto to submit their own unpublished research. Based on epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in-vitro studies, IARC classified glyphosate in category 2A, as “probably carcinogenic in humans.”
With international studies stacking up and regulators warning potential victims, Monsanto went on a public relations offensive. Company lobbyists called the IARC report biased and demanded a retraction. They claimed IARC “purposefully disregarded dozens of scientific studies,” namely the unpublished industry-funded studies. In 2012, Monsanto founded and led the “Glyphosate Task Force,” a consortium of companies promoting glyphosate in Europe. After the IARC decisions, this industry group attacked the IARC for scientific “deficiencies.”
Internal Monsanto documents revealed that an editorial in Forbes magazine, by an academic challenging the report, had been ghostwritten by Monsanto. The academic had not revealed Monsanto’s involvement. In response, Forbes removed the editorial.
In 2016, after California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced plans to list glyphosate as a known carcinogen, Monsanto launched a SLAPP lawsuit against OEHHA and its director, Lauren Zeise. Monsanto lost the suit after spending a year harassing the regulator.
In 2017, journalist Carey Gillam published “Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science.” Gillam used Monsanto’s own internal documents to show that the company smeared the reputations of scientists who published research that challenged their statements, threatened regulators to approve the chemical, skipped compliance tests, and used the media to manipulate public perception.
Oncologist, Dr. Brian Durie, Chairman of the International Myeloma Foundation, in support of Gillam, noted that Monsanto was guilty of “ruthless greed and fraud which have led to the poisoning of our planet.”
According to David Schubert, Head of the Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, “Monsanto and other agricultural chemical companies lied about their products, covered up the damaging data, and corrupted government officials in order to sell their toxic products around the world.”
Among their favorite catchphrases, Monsanto claimed that glyphosate was “safe enough to drink.” Publicist Patrick Moore, who describes Monsanto as “a seed company that offers crop protection,” often repeated this slogan but eventually got caught in the deceit. In March 2015, Moore appeared on French cable news station Canal+ and announced, “glyphosate is not causing cancer. You can drink a whole quart of it, and it won’t hurt you.” The Canal+ journalist replied, “Would you like to drink some? I have some.”
“I’d be happy to,” said Moore, then appeared dazed and confused. “Not really,” he stumbled, “I’m not stupid.”
“So,” replied the journalist, “you know it’s dangerous.” Moore backtracked again, claiming, “It’s not dangerous to humans.” However, when the journalist again offered him a glass of glyphosate, the bewildered lobbyist fled the interview, declaring, “No, I’m not an idiot.”
In the case of Edwin Hardeman, 70, who acquired non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after long exposure to glyphosate, a US federal court found that Monsanto had defectively designed Roundup, acted negligently, failed to warn customers of the cancer risk, and had engaged in deliberate, underhanded efforts to influence scientists and regulators concerning the safety of glyphosate. Judge Vince Chhabria rebuked the company, saying “There is strong evidence from which a jury could conclude that Monsanto does not particularly care whether its product is in fact giving people cancer, focusing instead on manipulating public opinion and undermining anyone who raises genuine and legitimate concerns about the issue.”
The risk of pesticides in food does not stop with glyphosate. A 2019 review study by the US Environmental Working Group (EWG) — based on a 2018 US Department of Agriculture (DOA) report — documented pesticide residues in 70% of produce sold in US even after washing. The DOA found 225 different pesticides in common fruits and vegetables that had been peeled and washed. The twelve most contaminated products were strawberries, spinach, kale, nectarines, apples, grapes, peaches, cherries, pears, tomatoes, celery, and potatoes. The most frequently detected pesticide was Dacthal, DCPA, classified by the US Environmental Protection Agency as a possible human carcinogen, and prohibited in Europe since 2009.
A French study among 69,000 citizens, published last year, found that people who most frequently ate organic food had 25% fewer cancers than those who did not eat organic food. A Canadian study found glyphosate in 98% of Canadian honey samples. The EWG, DOA, and the French and Canadian researchers all warn that to avoid pesticides and genetically modified foods, citizens would benefit by eating organic produce.
According to David Wallace-Wells, “Since 1950, much of the good stuff in the plants we grow – protein, calcium, iron, vitamin C, just to name four – has decline by around one third. Everything is becoming more like junk food. Even the protein content of bee pollen has dropped by a third.”
The so-called “green revolution” in agriculture has helped produce an increased quantity of food, but the cost has been a sharp decline in nutrition and a dangerous increase in poisons and cancer rates. Only a few generations ago, what we now call “organic farming,” was just called “farming.”
Pesticide-based farming — led by companies such as Monsanto, dating back to the days of DDT use and Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” warning — has left behind a trail of unintended consequences.
References and Links
“Monsanto must pay couple $2bn in largest verdict yet over cancer claims, Guardian, 13 May, 2019. “Roundup : Bayer condamné à payer 2 milliards de dollars à un couple américain, 13 May, 2019, Le Monde.
Bayer’s involvement with IG Farben, Zyklon gas, and Nazi concentration camps: United Nations War Crimes Commission, “IG Farben and Krupp trials”; New York Times, “Feared Symbol of Nazi Era Seeks Bankruptcy, by Mark Landlernov, 2003; Nurenberg Tribunal, “The IG Farben Case,” p. 1282; Peoplesworld.org, “Bayer-Monsanto merger can’t erase Nazi chemists’ past,” September 22, 2016, by Victor Grossman.
Monsanto accused of manipulating laboratory results: “Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed Documents,” Danny Hakim, New York Times, March 14, 2017; and “industry manipulated academic research or misstate findings, The New York Times, 2018. “Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science,” by Carey Gillam, Island Press, 2017. “Monsanto Manipulates Science to Make Roundup Appear Safe,” Food and Water Watch, April, 2017. “ laboratories hired by Monsanto to conduct Roundup studies committed fraud Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman, attorneys, firm website. The secret tactics Monsanto used to protect Roundup,” ABC Australia, 2018. International Monsanto tribunal http://www.monsanto-tribunal.org/.
Monsanto accused of bullying scientists: “Monsanto papers: la guerre du géant des pesticides contre la science, Le Monde, Stéphane Horel, Stéphane Foucart, June 2017; and an English version: “Monsanto Papers: An investigation on the worldwide war the Monsanto corporation has started in order to save glyphosate,” Environmental Health News, Nov. 2017. “Bully Monsanto attacks scientists who link Glyphosate and cancer,” The Hill, Carey Gillam, 2016. Monsanto “‘bullied scientists” and hid weedkiller cancer risk, lawyer tells court: Guardian.
International Monsanto Tribunal, 2016-2017, Den Haag, Netherlands. Five judges ruled that Monsanto (Bayer) activities have a negative impact on basic human rights.
“Exposure to Glyphosate-Based Herbicides and Risk for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Meta-Analysis and Supporting Evidence, Luoping Zhang, Iemaan Rana, Rachel M.Shaffer, et al., University of Washington, Reviews in Mutation Research, 19 February 2019.
“Pathological and toxicological findings in glyphosate-surfactant herbicide fatality: a case report,” Sribanditmongkol P., et. al., The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, NCBI, 2012.
Glyphosate General Fact Sheet, Henderson, A. M.; et al. National Pesticide Information Center, Oregon State University, NPIC, 2010.
“Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and occupational exposure to agricultural pesticide chemical groups and active ingredients: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Schinasi L, Leon M. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2014.
“Agricultural use of organophosphate pesticides and the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma among male farmers (United States),” Waddell B.L., et al., Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, US National Cancer Institute, Cancer Causes Control, 2001.
Monsanto Emails Raise Issue of Influencing Research on Roundup Weed Killer,” New York Times, 2017.
IARC Monograph on Glyphosate, WHO, 2015.
“Common weed killer glyphosate increases cancer risk by 41%,” Emily Dixon, CNN, February 15, 2019
“Roundup substantial factor in man’s cancer, jury finds in key verdict,” The Guardian, March 19, 2019.
“Bayer must pay another $80mn in Monsanto Roundup cancer trial,” Reuters / Wolfgang Rattay, RT News, 28 March, 2019,
“Widely used herbicide linked to cancer” Cressey D (March 25, 2015). Nature, 2015. ” malathion, diazinon and glyphosate — were rated as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
“Differences in the carcinogenic evaluation of glyphosate between the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA),” Portier CJ, Armstrong B.K., et al. (94 medical research scientists), Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2016.
“Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate,” Kathryn Z. Guyton. et al., The Lancet, Oncology, 2015.
“Weed Killer, Long Cleared, Is Doubted,” Andrew Pollack, New York Times, 27 March 2015.
“Association Between Pesticide Residue Intake from Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Women Undergoing Infertility Treatment With Assistance Reproductive Technology,” Y-H Chiu, et al.,. JAMA Internal Medicine, 2018.
“Monsanto Lobbyist Runs Away When Asked To Drink ‘Harmless’ Pesticide,” Pat Moore caught lying, flees Canal+ interview, The Young Turks, March 2015.
The secret tactics Monsanto used to protect Roundup,” ABC Australia, 2018
“Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science,” by Carey Gillam, Island Press, 2017.
“Of Mice, Monsanto And A Mysterious Tumor, June 8, 2017, Carey Gillam Huffington Post,
“Weed killer residues found in 98 percent of Canadian honey samples,” Carey Gillam, Environmental Health News, March, 2019
“Association of Frequency of Organic Food Consumption with Cancer Risk,” Baudry et al., JAMA, Internal Medicine, 2018.
“Estimating Pesticide Exposure from Dietary Intake and Organic Food Choices: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA),” C.L. Curl et al., Environmental Health Perspectives, 2015.
“Organic Diet Intervention Significantly Reduces Urinary Pesticide Levels in U.S. Children and Adults, C. Hyland et al., Environmental Research, 2019.
California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Pesticide Residues on Fresh Produce, CDPA, 2015.
“Determination of glyphosate, AMPA, and glufosinate in honey by online solid-phase extraction-liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry,” Thomas S. Thompson, et al., Agri-Food Laboratories, Alberta, Canada, Journal of Food Additives & Contaminants, v. 36, 19 Feb. 2019.
Quotes from D. Wallace-Wells, from “The Uninhabitable Earth.” Goodreads
“Declining Fruit and Vegetable Nutrient Composition: What Is the Evidence?,” American Society for Horticultural Science, Donald R. Davis, 2009.
This blog has been republished with the following edits and notes from the author:
In this piece, I am not setting out to prove that Monsanto’s glyphosate product Roundup is dangerous, although I believe the evidence supports that conclusion. I am reporting on court decisions that have ruled Monsanto liability for injury due to their products; and I am reporting on allegations of their undue influence on, and manipulation of, the scientific and regulatory process.
- Links: Added direct links throughout.
added direct link to: Juries in
two (now three) U.S. lawsuits in the last year have ruled that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide caused or significantly contributed to the onset of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a life-threatening immune system cancer.added International Monsanto tribunal to the end references
- EPA: Clarify EPA vs IARC decisions, credibility of EPA decision and Monsanto’s manipulation of science, balance in the narrative.
Here is a summary of some of the evidence of Monsanto’s manipulation of the science, certain studies, the EPA decision, and other regulatory decisions. Given these numerous references to Monsanto’s manipulation, the legal team is satisfied with the claims made in this article.:
== New York Times:
2018 review by The New York Times
industry manipulates academic research or misstate findings.
example: Monsanto-financed paperon glyphosate
Monsanto picked scientists and shaped the project.
Monsanto Influencing Researchon Roundup … NY Times
“Monsanto .. Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety”: New York Times, March 14, 2017
re: files unsealed by Judge Vince Chhabria:
raising questions about .. research practicesof Monsanto
Monsanto had ghostwritten researchattributed to academics
academic research it underwrites is compromised
== Carey Gillam: “Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science,”
Island Press, 2017.
David Schubert, Salk Institute (citing Gillam): “Monsanto lied.. covered up damaging data
Marion Nestle, New York University, (citing Gillam):
“Monsanto-paid scientists … influenced EPA
make Roundup appear benignin the face ofevidence that glyphosate is carcinogenic ..
manipulation of science
Excerpt at Google Scholar
the company arranged for Marvin Kuschner to .. persuade the agency
that the observed tutors are not related to glyphosate
Levinskas … efforts … to downplay damaging findings
Monsanto refused to repeat studies as requested
EPA’s toxicology branch expressed doubts about the validity of Monsanto’s data
The 1983 study that showed kidney tumors in mice .. a Monsanto trade secret.
only scientists with financial ties to Monsanto affirmed … a tumor in the control group
research Monsanto provided to the EPA raised red flags .. because fraud had been discovered
deceptions by Monsanto’s hired labs
Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories (IBT) the FDA discovered deception
convicted of trying to defraud the government by covering up inaccurate research data.
false datawere submitted if test results indicated a product’s adverse or fatal effects.
One of those convicted was a Monsanto insider Paul L. Wright.
Wright, for Monsanto attempted to get test results on PCBs altered..
Craven Laboratories, used by Monsanto to test glyphosate … Fraud uncovered in 1990
falsified pesticide residue testing data .. including Roundup
Cate Jenkins, 1990, EPA scientist .. suspected Monsanto’s studies on dioxins were fraudulent
claimed “misrepresentations and falsifications” in Monsanto’s studies
accused the company of covering up dioxin contamination problems
Mother Jones magazine, Marcia Williams, former EPA Pesticide Review
safety data for pesticides during glyphosate introduction were unsound
Carey Gillam, “Of Mice, Monsanto And A Mysterious Tumor,” June 8, 2017, Huffington Post,
Monsanto .. convince regulators to accept scientific interpretations that support their products.
company provided additional datato try to convince the EPA to discount the tumors.
900 cases pending with similar claims – that Monsanto manipulated the science
“Regulatory Collusion, Scientific Mischief, Carey Gillam, Huntington Post, Aug 01, 2017 ..
Monsanto suppressed information
“Monsanto Manipulates Scienceto Make Roundup Appear Safe,”
Monsanto’s strategy for twisting the sciencesurrounding Roundup.
“new evidence of Monsanto’s manipulationof science”
documents reveal a coordinated strategy to manipulatethe debate about safety of glyphosate
Monsanto commissioned scientists to write favorable reviews of studies
Monsanto commissioned panelto counter the WHO’s classification
== Donna R. Farmer, Ph.D., Toxicology Programs, Monsanto; US Right to Know
“you cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen … we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement. … we advise using the phrase …. ‘no unreasonable adverse effects to people, wildlife, and the environment are expected.”
This misrepresent lab test results by adding “unreasonable.”
==Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman, attorneys, firm website
“Monsanto has known Roundup … is carcinogenic for several decades, but buried the risks … “
EPA determined that laboratories hired by Monsanto .. committed fraud.
attorney Brent Wisner: Monsanto stopping studies that look badfor them
== GM-Free Cymru, Wales, UK, gmfreecymru.org : fraud in Roundup / Glyphosate testing
Craven Laboratories, for Monsanto, falsified test result
falsifying notebook entries
manipulating scientific equipmentto produce false reports.
Roundup residue studies among the tests in question.
== NB Media Co-op citing Journal of Public Health Policy:
Monsanto manipulated glyphosate approval process, by Dallas McQuarrie on August 13, 2018
Monsanto attempted to manipulate scientific evidencefor its own business interests.
== The secret tactics Monsanto used to protect Roundup,” ABC Australia, 2018
Carry Gillam: “scientific literature has beencorrupted” Monsanto Papers, ..
“the company has worked tohide the risksof its products”
Laboratory was doctoring the numbers, cooking the books .. fraudulent studies ..
an aggressive campaign of deception and dirty tricks. “
EPA declared the studies invalid, flawed science
Craven labs (for Monsanto) caught falsifying test resultsfor … Roundup.
“Bullying” scientists: Perhaps the most compelling evidence is reviewed in the Le Monde article from 2017. There appears to be evidence that Monsanto “targeted” studies they did not like, attempted to “destroy” the UN cancer agency (IARC), “vilified” and attempted to “discredit” the agency and individual scientists, “intimidated,” sought to “install anxiety,” “bullied,” sought “maliciously” to “cut off funding,” “smeared” reputations, “undermined” scientists, agencies and their studies, and engaged in “arm-twisting,” and “strong-arming,” scientists.
“Monsanto papers: la guerre du géant des pesticides contre la science,”
Le Monde, Stéphane Horel, Stéphane Foucart, June 2017.
English version: Monsanto Papers: An investigation on the worldwide war the Monsanto
has started in order to save glyphosate, Environmental Health News, Nov. 2017.
“Monsanto corporation has undertaken an effort to destroy the United Nations’ cancer agency,”
Christopher Wild, IARC Scientist:
“we are the target of an orchestrated campaign of an unseen scale and duration.”
“unprecedented brutality.” Monsanto vilified IARC’s work as “junk science.”
Pathologist Consolato Maria Sergi, University of Alberta in Canada, wrote, November 4, 2016, concerning a letter Monsanto sent to individual scientists who worked for IARC: “I found your letter intimidating and noxious .. I find your approach reprehensive and lacking in common courtesy even by today’s standards. … I consider your letter pernicious because it maliciouslyseeks to instill some anxiety and apprehension in an independent group of experts.”
“Bully Monsanto attacks scientists who link Glyphosate and cancer,” The Hill, C. Gillam, 2016
Monsanto via “CropLife America” are driving efforts to cut off U.S. funding for IARC
Monsanto labeled IARC findings as “junk science,”
claims IARC members are part of an “unelected, undemocratic, foreign body.”
Monsanto tactics overwhelming for IARC scientists.. not accustomed to assaults on their character.
IARC statement .. saying some scientists felt “intimidated” by the industry actions ..
Australian epidemiologist Lin Fritschi: attacks on the team’s credibility are unwarranted.
Monsanto documents reveal: a public relations effort to discredit the IARC report
Monsanto’s public relations plan to “orchestrate outcry” Guardian
OEHHA harassment suit: 2015, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced plans to list glyphosate as a carcinogen, Monsanto sued OEHHA and its director, Lauren Zeise, lost the case, but created threat, work load, and costs to OEHHA.
Edwin Hardeman case before Chabria:
undermining anyone who raises genuine and legitimate concerns about the issue.”
DeWayne Johnsoncase: “Monsanto has specifically gone out of its way to bully… and to fight independent researchers,” said the attorney Brent Wisner
Monsanto ‘bullied scientists‘ and hid weedkiller cancer risk, lawyer tells court: Guardian
Monsanto … resorted to bullying independent researchers (citing lawyers) Mercola Health
Carey Gillam, Whitewash, 2017. scientists reputations have been smeared for publishing research that contradicted business interests.
Publisher writes: Readers learn about the arm-twisting of regulators
blackballing critics and strong-arming regulators.
- Bayer, Nazis, and Zyklon gas: added references for Bayer’s Zyklon gas affiliation.
I added the United Nations War Crimes Commission, link.
- Clarify court vs. scientific evidence: This paragraph is a summary of what is to come, wherein I do distinguish the court decisions from the science. Here, however, I am simply summarizing what is about to be detailed. I’ve changed “revealed” to — “have resulted in accusations by victims, scientists, and media that” — which simply reports the accusations.
- rat studies: I reference Carey Gillam, from her book, “Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science,” and her article “Of Mice, Monsanto And A Mysterious Tumor, June 8, 2017, Huffington Post, to which I’ve linked, and I’ve cited her and this article as the reference. Gillam goes thoroughly into the history of this study, and writes a book on it. For the purpose of this article, I cite her research, “according to” Gillam. The bit about ” Children are particularly vulnerable,” is a generalized statement that appears in some studies and reviews, and is generally true regarding any toxic poisoning.
- change glyphosate to organo-phosphate pesticides, re: 2001 US National Cancer Institute study.
- Clarify Thailand incident, large dose: I point out that the Thailand exposure was a “large dose,” and that the significant revelation from this case is that the mixture of glyphosate with other compounds led to the health impact. I cite the relevant study in the American Journal of Forensic Medical Pathology so that any interested reader may dig deeper.
- Address review studies: I point out that the International Journal of Environmental Research and Mutation Research papers are both meta-studies, reviews of a collection of studies, and I quote them directly.
- Glyphosate Task Force: I’ve added the 2012-2015 timeline and identified this as a consortium of companies.
- Source original DOA report, re: EWG report: I clarify that EWG study is a review study, and add the DOA report link.
- Qualify language regarding EWG, DOA, French and Canadian researchers regarding the value of organic food.
added DOA report link
Regarding the Canadian honey stuty, I cited the original study, and add it to the references at the end. “Determination of glyphosate, AMPA, and glufosinate in honey by online solid-phase extraction-liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry,” Thomas S. Thompson, et al., Agri-Food Laboratories, Alberta, Canada, Journal of Food Additives & Contaminants, v. 36, 19 Feb. 2019.
Regarding the French study, I am only reporting the association they report: organic food eaters had fewer cancers. Their qualifying language does not need to be quoted, since most such studies rigorously qualify results.
I added a reference re: declining nutrition. The increase of environmental toxins and cancer rates since 1950 (the beginning of the so-called “Green Revolution”) is generally well known and probably does not need a reference. The decline in nutrients is also well known, and supported in many studies. In any case, I’ve cited: “Declining Fruit and Vegetable Nutrient Composition: What Is the Evidence?” American Society for Horticultural Science, Donald R. Davis, 2009.
This study references three kinds of evidence in the US & UK:
1) early studies of fertilization found inverse relationships between crop yield and mineral concentrations—the widely cited “dilution effect”;
2) three studies of historical food composition data found apparent median declines of 5% to 40% or more in some minerals in groups of vegetables and perhaps fruits
3) recent side-by-side plantings of low- and high-yield cultivars of broccoli and grains found consistently negative correlations between yield and concentrations of minerals and protein, a newly recognized genetic dilution effect. ..
this topic has been widely treated in popular media, such as:
“A Decline in the Nutritional Value of Crops,” New York Times:
Worldwatch Institute: “Farmers today can grow two to three times as much grain, fruit, and vegetables on a plot of land as they could 50 years ago, but the nutritional quality of many crops has declined,” based on a report co-authored by Worldwatch Institute food researcher Brian Halweil. “Less nutrition per calorie consumed affects consumers in much in the same way as monetary inflation; that is, we have more food, but it’s worth less in terms of nutritional value.”
- reference for David Wallace-Wells, quote re: decline of protein, calcium, iron, vitamin C in food. Quotes from D. Wallace-Wells, from “The Uninhabitable Earth.”Goodreads