Volatility

May 4, 2016

The EPA Parrots Monsanto

<

The EPA posted online, then took back down, its laundered regurgitation of the Monsanto marketing department’s decree against the fact that glyphosate causes cancer. In reality glyphosate causes cancer as confirmed by all the science, this confirmation summed up by the WHO’s IARC in 2015. We now have the EPA’s own parroting of the EU’s earlier rubberstamp of industry lies. The fact is that the WHO’s cancer agency consulted all the science and nothing but the science, while the EPA, the German BfR, and the EU’s EFSA have literally zero science on their side and throw out all the legitimate science. They “assess” nothing but Monsanto’s marketing materials. In fact, among several other EPA documents posted and then taken down at the same time were summaries of three 2015 EPA consultations with Monsanto and a Monsanto slide show for EPA officials.
.
Why did EPA post the thing now and then immediately retract it as “not yet final” when every page says “FINAL”? No doubt it was timed to influence the upcoming European vote on the relicensing of glyphosate. But why not post it and leave it up? This seems to indicate a lack of confidence at EPA, or maybe a lack of consensus on how to carry out pro-Monsanto strategy and tactics. Whatever’s going on with these idiots, they seem clumsy. If the idea is to bolster the EFSA’s political credibility with European state ministers by giving the EU’s agency EPA backup, how is this goal attained if the EPA immediately undercuts its own credibility by immediately retracting its own “final” report? According to the EPA’s own account they were incompetent and confused, as they claim they “inadvertently” posted all these documents, including stamping “FINAL” on every page of a report which they now claim is “not yet final”. All that’s been proven here is that the EPA can’t keep its own story straight for even a few hours, and that it lacks confidence in its own ability to sustain its contradiction of the fact that glyphosate causes cancer. It can get hard sometimes, committing crimes against humanity by systematically lying about these crimes.
.
.
Advertisements

5 Comments

  1. In Western Oregon, the industrial timber industry will often mix Glyphosate into witches brew combinations. Sometimes these unstudied mixtures will consist of up to five or, reportedly, even six different herbicides and all of their ancillary chemicals. These will then be uploaded into tanks attached to helicopters, which spray them far and wide across the many large and newly clear cut portions of the Coast Range and Cascades watersheds. These toxic brews can include atrazene, 2,4-D and other proven endocrine interrupters. The Oregon Health Authority publicly admits that synergistic results with unknown cumulative impacts will occur from combining these substances, as if the well known toxic effects from Glyphosate alone were not threat enough. In Oregon, there currently exist no buffer regulations protecting homes or schools.

    Comment by Joseph Patrick Quinn — May 4, 2016 @ 11:52 am

    • I’ve heard the horror stories coming out of Oregon, especially on account of forestry use of glyphosate, 2,4-D and others. I know some people there involved in the county-level movement to restrict and ban various pesticides and GMOs. I also read and wrote about Vallianatos’s account of the birth defect outbreaks from dioxin accumulation in the environment.

      https://attempter.wordpress.com/2016/01/10/the-epa-fights-for-24-d-and-dioxin/

      Comment by Russ — May 4, 2016 @ 1:05 pm

      • Umpqua Watersheds, the volunteer environmental advocacy group I work with in Douglas and Coos County, OR. co-sponsored a presentation by the organization Beyond Toxics, at the library headquarters, in Roseburg, last year. Attracted quite a crowd, many big timber reps. there, who grew increasingly apoplectic and left, if one can judge from their letters to the editor, feeling that their industry had been most unfairly branded. If the shoe fits, of course….

        I have read the Vallianatos book. Not an uplifting read. Although always willing to be surprised, I see no good evidence that improved regulations regarding use of aerially applied herbicides are on the horizon. They maintain otherwise, but to us it is obvious that the timber industry still has a good hold on government in Oregon, at the state and especially at the county level. Ever charging ahead under the pernicious banner of “sustained yield,” that industry continues to ignore the far reaching environmental effects of decades of over-harvest. That this clear cut, herbicide, mono-culture fiber farm “forest” management model is sustained but not sustainable is proven, to my mind, by its continued reliance on heavy chemical inputs.

        Comment by Joseph Patrick Quinn — May 4, 2016 @ 1:24 pm

      • I read Poison Spring as well. No, not at all uplifting, and I agree that there’s nothing to hope for from the EPA or any such organization. The book’s inconsistent about that; at times he seems aware that corporations and regulators form one combined assault, but he also keeps coming back to the call to “take back” the EPA. Back to what? He himself says it was originally inoculated with corporate culture by cadres brought over from the USDA.

        He spoke with some people from the Benton County Community Rights Coalition, and one of them told me that face to face he agreed the EPA will never call a halt to campaigns like the ones you’re describing, and that some other way of stopping them will be needed.

        Is Coos one of the places trying to ban aerial bombardment at the county level? I saw something about that but forget which county it was. I’ll check out Umpqua Watersheds, sounds like a good group. Obviously anything dependent on the Poisoner campaign is unsustainable. The poisons require massive corporate welfare every step of the way, which already proves they’re totally unviable. And then every poison rapidly fails in the field and needs to be escalated, supplemented, and eventually replaced. By planned-obsolescence design, of course.

        Comment by Russ — May 4, 2016 @ 2:39 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: