Monsanto on trial for crimes against humanity by government mob
Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 4 months ago to Business
While I would applaud a fair trial and restitution if guilty, my life experience leads me to believe that this is more llkely extortion by the world government mob that will not benefit anyone harmed by Monsanto. The 'world court' will fine Monsanto millions and those damaged will never see a penny.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
That said, and in reference to your very educational post on glyphosate, I try to reduce my family's exposure to the stuff. Can't avoid it, as it's everywhere.
I thought that it was just pure defiance. -- j
.
What Do We Really Know About Roundup Weed Killer? April 2015 National Geographic
By Elizabeth Grossman, National Geographic
PUBLISHED Thu Apr 23 10:35:32 EDT 2015
The world’s most widely-used herbicide has been getting a lot of attention lately.
Last month, an international agency declared glyphosate, the primary ingredient in the popular product Roundup, a “probable human carcinogen.” The weed killer also has made recent headlines for its widespread use on genetically modified seeds and research that links it to antibiotics resistance and hormone disruption. Several national governments are planning to restrict its use, and some school districts are talking about banning it.
So what do we know about glyphosate? Five key questions and answers:
How Is Glyphosate Used?
Introduced commercially by Monsanto in 1974, glyphosate kills weeds by blocking proteins essential to plant growth. It is now used in more than 160 countries, with more than 1.4 billion pounds applied per year.
Glyphosate, often sold under the brand name Roundup, is probably in your garage or shed because it’s ranked as the second most widely used U.S. lawn and garden weed killer. These products have been promoted as easy-to-use and effective on poison ivy, kudzu, dandelions, and other weeds.
But the primary use is by agriculture. Nearly all the corn, soy, and cotton now grown in the United States is treated with glyphosate.
Its use skyrocketed after seeds were genetically engineered to tolerate the chemical. Because these seeds produce plants that are not killed by glyphosate, farmers can apply the weed killer to entire fields without worrying about destroying crops. Between 1987 and 2012, annual U.S. farm use grew from less than 11 million pounds to nearly 300 million pounds.
“By far the vast use is on [genetically engineered] crops – corn, soy and cotton – that took off in the early to mid-nineties,” says Robert Gilliom, chief of surface water assessment for the US Geological Survey’s National Water Quality Assessment Program.
In addition, some five million acres in California were treated with glyphosate in 2012 to grow almonds, peaches, onions, cantaloupe, cherries, sweet corn, citrus, grapes, and other edible crops.
Picture of Roundup weed killer for sale at Home Depot
Glyphosate, marketed by Monsanto as Roundup, is the second most popular weed killer for residential yards and gardens.
Photograph by J. Blue, Bloomberg/Getty
What Happens to Glyphosate in the Environment?
Despite its widespread use, USGS hydrologist Paul Capel said there is “a dearth of information” on what happens to it once it is used.
Related Content
Monarch Butterfly's Reign Threatened by Milkweed Decline
Glyphosate is not included in the U.S. government’s testing of food for pesticide residues or the monitoring of chemicals in human blood and tissues. As a result, there is no information on how much people are exposed to from using it in their yards, living near farms or eating foods from treated fields.
A recent USGS study sampled waterways in 38 states and found glyphosate in the majority of rivers, streams, ditches, and wastewater treatment plant outfalls tested. Not much was found in groundwater because it binds tightly to soil.
Glyphosate also was found in about 70 percent of rainfall samples. It “attaches pretty firmly to soil particles” that are swept off farm fields then stay in “the atmosphere for a relatively long time until they dissolve off into water,” Capel says.
What About Exposure Through Food?
Before genetically engineered crops, glyphosate residues in food were considered unlikely, says Charles Benbrook, research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources. But since about 2005, pre-harvest use of glyphosate “results in very high residues,” he says. Traces were found in 90 percent of 300 soybean samples.
continued at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/20...
"Hard information is sparse there are a lot of could , probably, maybe, might sort of qualifications. Unlike with DDT which was pulled without replacement and caused the deaths of millions there seems to have been no 'rush to judgement ' however if one read the label and followed directions...which people won't do......etc etc etc...ad nauseum
Normally trial in another sovereign jurisdiction requires an extradition treaty. The UN has no soveriegn status it is not a country nor does the World Court.
However any crime committed in foreign country by a US Citizen is subject to the laws of that country. The State Department is not noted for being of much help.
US jurisdiction in these matters stops three miles offshore and on the border with Mexico and Canada.
Monsanto representatives, factories, dealers etc in foreign countries are subject to the laws of those countries some having laws that recognize World Court Jurisdiction.
Rachel Carson remains unindicted.
But, if you commit a crime in a foreign country you will be apprehended and stand trial in their court. I'm not saying I agree with any of this. I'm just trying to answer your question.
multiplier which he had to fix. -- j
.
In the first paragraph lists toxic chemicals they're accused of introducing. The few of them I happen be knowledgeable about are actually not toxic. Maybe none of them are.
They will have to "answer for their reign of terror" and "atrocious acts".
It almost seems like a parody. First Monsanto makes some controversial products, but there's no scientific evidence of harm. Popular opinion is against them, regardless of the science, so gov't harasses them. Then a rightwing news outlet reports on it, but they cannot help but write like crazed idiots, regardless of the topic. I can't tell if the author is truly critical of Monsanto, doing a parody of Monsanto's critics, doing a general parody of the hyperbolic tone of rightwing blogs.
How many divisions does the World Court have?
If I had a penny...
...To see the farm is to leave it....
(I avoid fluoride except when unavoidable.)
Load more comments...