Monsanto voor beginners

Alles over gezondheid, voeding, lichaamsbeweging het menselijke lichaam en nog veel meer. Wil je gezond leven dan staat hier veel handige informatie.
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

ma 23 mar 2015, 22:19

Biotech's Dirty Little Secret

First a little background. Since the early 1980s, Monsanto has endlessly hyped genetically engineered (GE) crops they claim could reduce hunger, reduce pesticide use, and survive droughts. In reality, no such "miracle" crops exist. No significantly greater yielding crops, no more effective drought resistance crops. And as for the claim of less pesticide use, behind this myth lies the "dirty little secret" of agricultural biotechnology. Namely, that GE crops actually add hundreds of millions of pounds of pesticides to our fields and crops, and create greater agrochemical residues on our food. Why? Because around 85 percent of all genetically engineered crops in the United States and around the world have been engineered to withstand massive doses of herbicides, mostly Monsanto's Roundup. Usually, if toxic weed-killing chemicals such as Roundup come into contact with a crop they will destroy it as well as the weeds around it. But Monsanto scientists genetically engineered a cassette of bacterial and viral DNA into plants that allowed them to tolerate these herbicides. So the weeds are killed, but the crops remain.

In the United States, more than 50 percent of all our cropland is devoted to GE corn, soy and cotton. They are commodity crops that feed cars, animals in industrial meat production and are used for additives like high fructose corn syrup. Almost none directly feeds people. So rather than feeding the hungry, this technology is about chemical companies selling more chemicals, a lot more chemicals. So as noted, each year 115 million more pounds of Roundup are spread on our farmlands because of these altered crops.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-ki ... 04606.html
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: Toxopeus
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15924
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

vr 24 apr 2015, 13:09

Genetisch wietje
vrijdag 24 april 2015
www.stelling.nl/kleintje/actueel/ILTI1429856797.html


Goed dat Ollie Opstelten pleite is. Die was om de een of andere reden mordicus tegen het opsteken van een wietsigaar. En daarmee had ie als getectileerde USSA-follower binnen redelijke termijn toch problemen gekregen. Want gisteren bereikte ons de droeve tijding dat de gengrutters van Monsanto nu ook hebben geëxperimenteerd met marihuana en hun eerste oogst al hebben binnengehaald. En dat doen die grutters niet zomaar, want hun activiteiten kosten poen en dat moet worden terugverdiend. Liefst met grove winst. Blijkbaar leeft bij hullie de verwachting dat in Washington binnen redelijke termijn voor het hele land het licht op groen gaat.

Volgens Ollie kon dat niet vanwege internationale verdragen, maar in de staten Oregon en Colorado en het district Columbia hadden ze daar vrolijk schijt aan. En in Uruguay hebben ze zich misschien te barsten gelachen om Ollie's gedreutel. Binnenkort dus in de shop naast White Widow, Power Plant, Northern Light, Superskunk, Top44, K2, Bubbelicious, Orange Bud, Hollands Hoop, B52, Snow White, Ice, Silver Haze en Amnesia Haze een Monsanto Monster. En wie weet zelfs voor de beginners een Ollie Special. Far out, man. Far out.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: blackbox, Permuter 0., Toxopeus, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

zo 19 jul 2015, 14:39

House Backs Monsanto and BANS GMO Labeling

On Tuesday, US food companies and Monsanto sealed a critical victory as the House Agricultural Committee approved a measure that bans the mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods and prevents cities and counties from banning GMO crops within their jurisdictions. Several counties in California and Oregon already have bans in place, and this threatens those restrictions. The measure also paves the way toward preventing food companies from even telling you that their food is GMO free.

Afbeelding

While dozens of countries around the world ban GE crops and have ousted Monsanto after citizens protested, petitioned, and took to the streets, the United States seems to want to do everything it can to keep its citizens in the dark about what they are actually eating. Americans clearly want labeling that presents them with accurate and consistent information about what is in their food. As it stands right now, each state has a different method of GMO labeling and some have none at all. Farmers and food manufacturers cannot keep up with 50 different standards. Maine has already passed a law requiring labeling GMO products, and those labels would be prohibited if this bill is upheld in the Senate.




http://www.activistpost.com/2015/07/hou ... s-gmo.html
illuminati of my own reality
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

do 01 okt 2015, 14:17

Thx to Ninster...

He Holds the Patent that Could Destroy Monsanto and Change the World


If there’s anything you read – or share – let this be it. The content of this article has potential to radically shift the world in a variety of positive ways.

And as Monsanto would love for this article to not go viral, all we can ask is that you share, share, share the information being presented so that it can reach as many people as possible.

In 2006, a patent was granted to a man named Paul Stamets. Though Paul is the world’s leading mycologist, his patent has received very little attention and exposure. Why is that? Stated by executives in the pesticide industry, this patent represents “the most disruptive technology we have ever witnessed.” And when the executives say disruptive, they are referring to it being disruptive to the chemical pesticides industry.

What has Paul discovered? The mycologist has figured out how to use mother nature’s own creations to keep insects from destroying crops. It’s what is being called SMART pesticides. These pesticides provide safe & nearly permanent solution for controlling over 200,000 species of insects – and all thanks to the ‘magic’ of mushrooms.

Paul does this by taking entomopathogenic Fungi (fungi that destroys insects) and morphs it so it does not produce spores. In turn, this actually attracts the insects who then eat and turn into fungi from the inside out!

This patent has potential to revolutionize the way humans grow crops – if it can be allowed to reach mass exposure.

Een voorbeeld:
Afbeelding

http://organicsoiltechnology.com/fungus ... fungi.html




http://prn.fm/he-holds-the-patent-that- ... the-world/
illuminati of my own reality
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: ThaViking, Toxopeus
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
ninti
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 933
Lid geworden op: di 11 jan 2011, 23:28

do 01 okt 2015, 15:58

6 Ways mushrooms can save the world. Paul Stamet's TED Talk

De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: blackbox
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

vr 02 okt 2015, 00:41

PLOP


The TPP, Monsanto, Rockefeller, Trilateral Commission, Brzezinski

All hands on deck for global, economic, corporate dictatorship

by Jon Rappoport

May 27, 2015

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

There are dots to connect here. They’re real, and they’re spectacular.

Let me begin with a brief exchange from a 1978 interview, conducted by reporter Jeremiah Novak. He was speaking with two American members of the Trilateral Commission (TC), a group founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller and his intellectual flunkey, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral Commission] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

RICHARD COOPER [Trilateral Commission member]: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KARL KAISER [Trilateral Commission member]: It just hasn’t become an issue.

Source: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.

This through-the-looking-glass moment summed up the casual arrogance of Trilateral members: of course US government policy was in the hands of Trilateralists; what else would you expect?

US government policy most certainly covers the area of international trade—and Cooper and Kaiser were foreshadowing blockbuster trade treaties to come: e.g., NAFTA, GATT (which established the World Trade Organization), CAFTA, and now, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is being negotiated in secret among 12 nations responsible for a major amount of world trade and world GDP.

Here are two key Trilateral quotes that reflect this global outlook—by which I mean a world dominated by mega-corporations:
“The nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.” — Zbigniew Brzezinski, 1969.
Brzezinski was Obama’s foreign policy mentor after Obama won the Presidency in 2008.

Any doubt on the question of Trilateral Commission goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, the founder of the TC, in his Memoirs (2003):
“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
“Integrated global political and economic structure” means: domination of populations via giant corporations.
Here is the payoff. The current US Trade Representative (appointed by Obama in 2013), who is responsible for negotiating the TPP with 11 other nations, is Michael Froman, a former member of the Trilateral Commission. Don’t let the word “former” fool you. TC members resign when they take positions in the Executive Branch of government. And when they serve in vital positions, such as US Trade Representative, they aren’t there by accident. They’re TC operatives with a specific agenda.

The TPP IS a major item on the Trilateral to-do list. Make no mistake about it.




MORE:
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015 ... rzezinski/
illuminati of my own reality
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, Toxopeus, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

do 08 okt 2015, 17:28

Mooi zo....oprotten van deze planeet!


5 Reasons Monsanto Is Crashing And Burning


It’s hard to believe that the once almighty Monsanto is on its knees. But their dirty deeds seem to have finally caught up with them. Monsanto shares have already dropped 27 percent this year and they just posted fourth quarter losses wider than estimates.They also announced cost-saving measures to counter their plunge; deep cuts to their workforce and exiting the sugarcane business

by Eric Blair, Activist Post:

Bloomberg reports:

Monsanto Co. said it will eliminate 2,600 jobs as part of a cost-savings plan, joining a growing list of major corporations struggling to contain the damage from the decline in world commodities prices.

The St. Louis-based agricultural giant announced the reductions — the equivalent of 12 percent of its workforce — as it reported a loss of 19 cents a share in the fiscal fourth quarter and warned profit would remain weak through 2016.

Monsanto enjoys a near monopoly on corn and soybean in North America. They appear to have it all; they own the farmers, the industry, the politicians, and the regulators. And, yet, they’re crashing and burning.

Bloomberg cites slumping commodity prices for Monsanto’s decline. “Like DuPont Co. and Glencore Plc, Monsanto, the world’s largest seed maker, is taking steps to combat the effects of a commodity slump…”

However, here are 5 real reasons Monsanto is tanking:

1. Consumer activism: The market doesn’t want herbicide-soaked genetically modified food anymore. As people are becoming more health conscious, they prefer to eat organic food. It’s really that simple.

2. Lawsuits with farmers: Monsanto spends untold resources suing family farms for copyright infringement. Farmers are forbidden from saving patented seeds year to year. Additionally when Monsanto’s GMO crops pollute neighboring farms, Monsanto sues those farms too. Not a great business model when your primary customers are farmers. An organic farmer in Australia is hoping to reverse this revolting practice.

3. Funding anti-labeling campaigns in multiple states is draining Monsanto of millions of dollars. This seems to be the majority of their “marketing” budget. They spent at least $8M in 2012, over $9M in 2013 in Washington State alone, and combined for $8M to defeat just a county initiative in Maui County Hawaii this past year.

4. Flagship product causes cancer: A recent World Health Organization report concluded that the active chemical used in Monsanto’s flagship product “Glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans.” This unsettling realization hasn’t even begun to sink in yet. Although some cancer-stricken farm workers are suing the big “M” over their illness with many more likely to do the same.

5. National bans: An increasing number of countries are banning either GMOs or certain pesticides, or both. At least 15 European Union members move to ban GMO crops. Meanwhile some small nations like Bermuda and Colombia have banned glyphosate.

To summarize, when people no longer want a product, market share and regulatory control mean nothing. This a long-term problem for Monsanto that can’t be fixed with cost-savings measures. That is why they’re doomed.



http://theinternationalreporter.org/201 ... d-burning/
illuminati of my own reality
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, combi, Toxopeus, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
ninti
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 933
Lid geworden op: di 11 jan 2011, 23:28

do 15 okt 2015, 15:28

Bedankt BB dat je het artikel hier hebt geplaatst. Ik gooi af en toe die links in de shout en dan ben ik te lui om ze bij desbetreffende topic te plaatsen ;)

En ik had het bovenstaande artikel nodig om door te sturen naar iemand dus was fijn als het dan terug te vinden is. (die van de TPP ook, dus super!)
:)
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, blackbox
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
combi
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 15924
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 21:27

do 24 mar 2016, 12:41

Scientist who linked GMOs and glyphosate to rat tumors wins SECOND court case against criminal biotech shills who forged signatures to discredit his research
by: Amy Goodrich

Monday, March 21, 2016


(NaturalNews) The Parisian High Court has ruled that French Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini, a scientist known for his controversial research linking GM feed with cancerous tumor growth in rats, was right when he concluded that GMOs are unsafe for human consumption.

meer en bron: http://www.naturalnews.com/053378_Seral ... tists.html
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, BL@DE, Toxopeus, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

ma 28 mar 2016, 15:12

Monsanto-Lobbyist: Glyphosat ist trinkbar! Rastet aus als er es trinken soll!

De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
ninti
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 933
Lid geworden op: di 11 jan 2011, 23:28

vr 22 apr 2016, 13:24

European commission plans to relicense 'carcinogenic' weedkiller

Leaked proposal on glyphosate seen by the Guardian has few substantive changes from the one that was blocked last month:

The European commission is planning to relicense a controversial weedkiller that the World Health Organisation believes probably causes cancer in people, despite opposition from several countries and the European parliament.

In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer – WHO’s cancer agency – said that glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide made by agriculture company Monsanto and used widely with GM crops around the world, was classified as probably carcinogenic to humans.

It also said there was “limited evidence” that glyphosate was carcinogenic in humans for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. At the time Monsanto said it could not understand the decision and that the scientific data did not support the conclusion.

The finding has triggered an EU row over the use of glyphosate, with Italy, France, Sweden and the Netherlands opposing its relicensing in March. More than 1.4 million people have signed a petition calling for the chemical to be banned.

But a leaked proposal from the European commission, seen by the Guardian, has few substantive changes from the one that was blocked last month. It would cut the authorisation period for glyphosate from 15 to 10 years, and mandate consideration of an immediate ban if a European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) study next year finds it hazardous.

The Green party called it a betrayal of the precautionary principle which obliges regulatory caution if there is scientific doubt. Bart Staes, the Green party’s environment and food safety spokesman, said: “It is scandalous that the commission is seeking to bulldoze through an EU approval for glyphosate to be used with no restrictions, despite the very serious concerns about the impact of this toxic substance on public health and the environment. Banning glyphosate would be the responsible course of action”

European agricultural industry groups said that they too were concerned that a precedent could be set by any decision to reduce the new approval period. Graeme Taylor of the European Crop Protection Agency told the Guardian: “Clearly we are disappointed that political pressure has resulted in the scientific process for substance authorisation being undermined. If the substance is considered to have met all the criteria for re-approval then it should re-approved for a period of 15 years.”

A spokesman for the Glyphosate Task Force, an industry body linked to Monsanto, said: “We would be surprised if the Commission has indeed included such terms in the draft implementing act for glyphosate. The Commission has granted 15 years in all previous cases of the renewal of active substances. We see no reason why glyphosate should be treated differently”.

Glyphosate is an ingredient in Monsanto’s bestselling Roundup brand as well as in herbicides manufactured by Syngenta and Dow. The chemical is typically mass-sprayed on crops that have been genetically engineered for immunity, and some farmers say it has triggered an explosion of resistant weeds in the US since its introduction in 1974.

The weedkiller’s popularity ballooned 20 years ago when the US Environmental Protection Agency loosened its safety rules, allowing 50 times more residues to be sprayed on corn. Since then glyphosate’s use in the US has increased 15-fold.

WHO’s cancer arm has deemed it “probably carcinogenic to humans”, although the European Food Safety Authority disagrees. An opinion from the ECHA panel could resolve a dispute over lab methodologies and industry influence between the two scientific bodies. But the study will take 18 months and has not yet begun. An ECHA spokesman would only say that “currently, ECHA has no opinion on changing the classification of glyphosate”.

Although the commission is bound to follow ECHA’s guidance, some countries made an explicit reference to this – and a cut in the authorisation period – conditions for their support.

A diplomat from one of the dissenting states told the Guardian: “We understand from our contacts with the commission that it is willing to meet our conditions. I am not sure if those are already met in this paper but in the end, that is what we expect the commission to do.”

Last week, the European parliament voted to oppose the approval of glyphosate where alternative methods exist, and in pre-harvest agricultural use, in public parks and in playgrounds. Dozens of MEPs volunteered to give urine samples for glyphosate testing shortly before the last parliamentary vote.

Glyphosate is so widely used that it is found in British breads, German beers and in urine samples across Europe, at levels that can be five to 20 times above the safe limit for drinking water.
*zucht*...
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, Toxopeus
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
Toxopeus
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 4210
Lid geworden op: ma 15 nov 2010, 19:53

zo 22 mei 2016, 01:39

Mogelijk bod Bayer op Monsanto kan oplopen tot 56 miljard
Gepubliceerd: 21 mei 2016 12:09

Een mogelijk bod van het Duitse chemieconcern Bayer op de Amerikaanse producent van landbouwchemicaliën Monsanto kan oplopen tot een waarde van 63 miljard dollar (56,1 miljard euro).

Dit meldt Bloomberg op basis van schattingen van analisten. De bedrijven zelf hebben zich er nog niet over uitgelaten.

Marktvolgers denken dat Bayer ongeveer 120 tot 150 dollar per aandeel voor Monsanto moet gaan betalen. Dit betekent in het minst gunstigste geval voor Bayer dat het bedrijf 66 procent meer betaalt dan waar de aandelen nu voor worden verhandeld.

“Monsanto zal niet goedkoop zijn en is misschien niet de beste optie voor aandeelhouders van Bayer”, aldus een analist in Londen tegenover het persbureau.

Als Bayer succesvol is, gaat het om de grootste overname ooit door een Duits bedrijf.

Bron: http://www.nu.nl/economie/4265354/mogel ... ljard.html
In de erfenis der eeuwen ligt veel wijsheid opgetast. Ook hier geldt: dwaas is hij die zijn eigen geschiedenis versmaadt.
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: baphomet, blackbox
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
baphomet
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 23142
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:08

wo 25 mei 2016, 06:32

Monsanto-Bayer mega-deal a nightmare for America?

(CNN)Bayer's announcement that it intends to buy Monsanto, the world's largest seed producer, shocked farmers and consumers alike. The deal could have a profound -- and negative -- effect.

Seed prices could rise for farmers, consumers could see more genetically engineered foods on supermarket shelves, and our global agricultural system could end up depending on just a few companies to meet a high percentage of the world's agricultural needs.
In short, the $62 billion deal would further concentrate power in an already highly consolidated global seed and chemical industry.

It's time for anti-trust regulators, who have been allowing mergers and acquisitions such as this for decades, to look closely at how allowing this merger could hurt farmers and the environment.
Bayer-Monsanto is the latest in a series of high-profile mega-mergers proposed in the agricultural industry. Dow Chemical's planned merger with DuPont, and ChemChina's acquisition of Syngenta are both under review by regulators. A merger between St. Louis-based Monsanto and Germany's Bayer could further increase prices and limit options for farmers.
Even before these mergers were announced, the industry had been trimmed down to just six companies -- Syngenta, Bayer, BASF, Dow, Monsanto and DuPont -- that control 60% of commercial seed and more than 75% of agrochemical markets. If all of the mergers were approved, those top six dominant companies would shrink to four, with most power concentrated in just three.

Bayer's and Monsanto's catalogs of seeds and chemicals complement one another. Monsanto held a 26% market share of all seeds sold in 2011 to Bayer's 3%. By contrast, Bayer dominates in agrochemicals, selling 17% of the world total, compared with Monsanto's 7%. A joint Bayer-Monsanto would rival Syngenta to be the world's largest agrochemical company, with annual revenue of more than $67 billion.
Monsanto has been widely criticized for its aggressive tactics to expand its reach in the farming sector. The company has bought up dozens of its competitors to become the largest supplier of genetically engineered seeds.
But as its market share has grown, seed prices have risen dramatically. The Organic Center, a nonprofit research center that studies the environmental effects of organic food and farming, estimates that genetically engineered seed costs about twice as much as conventional seed, and that the cost of them has risen more than 140% since 2001.

The Department of Justice spent three years on an antitrust investigation of the company's practices but quietly closed the case in 2012 due to "marketplace developments," according to a department spokeswoman.
As Monsanto has become dominant, it has become increasingly difficult for farmers to avoid becoming reliant on the company. Monsanto has used a variety of strategies to ensure farmers must return to the company each year to buy new seeds, a costly upfront expense in an industry historically reliant on saving seeds.

At one time, Monsanto achieved this by using sterile "terminator seeds," which don't produce viable seeds for replanting season to season. Today, Monsanto has been known to take legal action against farmers who attempt to save and replant the company's seeds.
Other Monsanto seeds are genetically modified to work in tandem with Monsanto pesticides and herbicides. Farmers who plant these seeds must also invest in Monsanto's chemical products, furthering their reliance on the company. If the Bayer acquisition is approved, these farmers may soon be financially dependent on a German chemical and pharmaceutical company most famous for its production of aspirin.

Monsanto's dominance has also contributed to diminishing biodiversity in large-scale agricultural production. Today, Monsanto seed traits can be found in 80% of corn and more than 90% of soybeans grown in the United States. Planting vast acres of these identical crops alongside ample application of pesticides and other chemicals can deplete the soil's structure and resilience, leading to runoff of pesticides and fertilizers into waterways.
Monsanto has already achieved even greater control of the seed marketplace through licensing agreements with competitors. DuPont agreed in 2013 to pay Monsanto $1.75 billion over 10 years for rights to its genetically modified, pesticide-resistant soybeans. Today, Monsanto's exerts nearly total control over genetic traits for pesticide-resistant soybeans.

There are indications that Monsanto will try to resist the Bayer deal. Though Monsanto's market value is about 35% below its peak in 2014, its recent attempt to buy Syngenta suggests it may fancy itself an acquirer rather than the target of an acquisition. And as recently as March, Monsanto had been exploring deals with the Germany company BASF, the third-largest agrochemical company in the world.
The recent involvement of the Department of Agriculture in reviewing the ChemChina-Syngenta deal suggests a growing awareness that consolidation in this sector poses dangers to the environment, to agriculture and the economy.
But without dramatic action from regulators, when the dust settles from this flurry of deal making, the seed and agrochemical sectors will be consolidated as never before. And farmers, consumers and the environment will pay the price.
Source: ->> http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/23/opini ... r-douglas/
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: blackbox, ninti
Omhoog
Gebruikersavatar
blackbox
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 6239
Lid geworden op: za 21 aug 2010, 16:09

za 04 jun 2016, 10:57

We all have a massive glyphosate problem


on our hands, even if you have eaten 100% organic food all your life. The pesticide chemical glyphosate, Monsanto’s gift to mankind, is totally out of control – not just in the US, but also in Europe, Australia and many other nations that use it.

Afbeelding

Glyphosate is almost constantly in the news, as study after study reveal just how widespread, toxic and carcinogenic it is. It’s the most used pesticide in the world. Meanwhile, the US, EU, UN and others all argue over how this lethal chemical killer should be classified and labeled – despite the fact it’s showing up in people’s urine, breast milk and blood (yes – even those avoiding GMOs), and despite the fact that it has been found to be, in the words of an MIT scientist, “the most destructive chemical in our environment”.

Although glyphosate used to be the patented chemical solely belonging to Monsanto and used in its RoundUp formula, it is now used by other Big Biotech corporate multinationals such as Dow in their Durango pesticide formula. Now, with the NWO corporatocracy trying to push through the TTIP in secret, backroom deals are being made (such as Big Pharma company Bayer trying to buy out Big Biotech company Monsanto) that could spread glyphosate even further. When is the world going to wake up and acknowledge the uncontrolled glyphosate problem we face?



http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom ... arcinogen/
illuminati of my own reality
Gebruikersavatar
ninti
Administrator
Administrator
Berichten: 933
Lid geworden op: di 11 jan 2011, 23:28

do 13 okt 2016, 10:14

GM seed firm Monsanto dismisses 'moral trial' as a staged stunt

US agri-business declines to attend peoples’ tribunal at which toxicologists and scientists will argue its activities have harmed human health and environment
International judges will take evidence from 30 witnesses and “victims” of US agri-business Monsanto in an attempt by hundreds of grassroots groups to hold the company accountable for what they allege are human rights violations, crimes against humanity, and “ecocide”, or widespread environmental damage.

High-profile witnesses, including former UN special rapporteur on the right to food Olivier De Schutter, will give evidence alongside Argentine doctors, Mexican beekeepers and toxicologists and scientists from 15 countries. The five judges will deliver what is expected to be a lengthy advisory legal opinion.

The three-day peoples’ tribunal, which will be held in The Hague this weekend, will adopt the format of the UN’s international court of justice but will have no standing in law.

Organisers have described the hearing as a “moral trial” and “a test of international law”.

“It aims to assess the allegations of harm made against Monsanto as well as the human health and environmental damages caused by the company throughout its history,” said a spokeswoman in London.

“Monsanto promotes an agro-industrial model that contributes at least one-third of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions; it is also largely responsible for the depletion of soil and water resources, species extinction and declining biodiversity, and the displacement of millions of small farmers worldwide. This is a model that threatens peoples’ food sovereignty by patenting seeds and privatising life”, said the spokeswoman.

“The tribunal will give a legal opinion on the environmental and health damage alleged to have been caused by the multinational. It will also give people all over the world a well-documented legal file to be used in future lawsuits against Monsanto and similar chemical companies.”

In an open letter, signed by three Monsanto directors, the company said it would not attend the tribunal because it was “staged and supported by” organic food organisations.
More: https://www.theguardian.com/global-deve ... oral-trial
De volgende gebruiker(s) zeggen bedankt: blackbox, combi
Omhoog
Plaats reactie

Terug naar “Gezondheid / Voeding”