Trump's cabinet pick for EPA and Agriculture: Making Monsanto Great Again

Author Topic: Trump's cabinet pick for EPA and Agriculture: Making Monsanto Great Again  (Read 264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,900
Are you concerned at all about the safety of water supplies as the fracking gets ramped up now?
Are you concerned that it is now 'ok' to dump coal dust into streams and rivers?
Do you think that deregulation across the board on environmental safety is a good thing?
Do you remember when they had to 'shut down' Beijing for a few weeks before the Olympics, because the air quality sucked, and they had to let it clear so the athletes could breathe?
Do you think that deregulation is a great idea?

You know who does?

Monsanto. They LOVE deregulation.

Monsanto clears USDA regulatory hurdle for new GMO corn
And that was back in 2015... imagine how much easier it will be, now that we have a deregulator-in-chief...

Oh... looky here...

Smoking Gun on EPA's Secret Collaboration With Monsanto
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/01/31/epa-monsanto-collaboration.aspx
January 31, 2017

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is once again facing scrutiny over its dealings with Monsanto, the maker of Roundup herbicide.

In 2015, glyphosate, Roundup's active ingredient, was determined to be a "probable carcinogen" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is the research arm of the World Health Organization (WHO).

The EPA, rather than taking immediate steps to protect Americans from this probable cancer-causing agent, decided to reassess its position on the chemical and, after doing so, released a paper in October 2015 stating that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.1

In April 2016, the EPA posted the report online, briefly, before pulling it and claiming it was not yet final, and had been posted by mistake.

The paper was signed by Jess Rowland (among other EPA officials), who at the time was the EPA's deputy division director of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and chair of the Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC).

This is notable because Monsanto is currently embroiled in a number of lawsuits, including litigation from more than 50 people who claim exposure to Roundup caused them to develop non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL).

Monsanto has used the EPA's supposedly-not-final report in court hearings to suggest glyphosate is safe, and now the plaintiffs' attorneys are asking for documents detailing Monsanto's interactions with Rowland to be released.

EPA, Monsanto Refuse to Lift Seal on Controversial Documents

In a review published in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, a team of scientists thoroughly reviewed the research behind the IARC's glyphosate/cancer ruling, noting an association between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was found based on available human evidence.2

Associations between the chemical and rare kidney tumors, genotoxicity and oxidative stress and even DNA damage in the blood of exposed humans were also revealed.

But industry is working hard to ensure that any science and other evidence not on their side is overlooked, including allegations that Monsanto has long known glyphosate causes cancer and spent decades covering it up.

(continued)

==================================

So Monsanto has to deal with the EPA, and the USDA as well...
What's in store with Trump's cabinet picks?

Trump's new Secretary of Agriculture: Meet Sonny Perdue...


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/us/politics/sonny-perdue-agriculture-secretary.html?_r=0

"... Environmental activists condemned Mr. Trump’s choice, saying that Mr. Perdue had received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal farm subsidies that help chemical companies and large agriculture conglomerates at the expense of small farmers and the environment.

“It’s certainly hard to imagine that a former fertilizer salesman will tackle the unregulated farm pollution that poisons our drinking water, turns Lake Erie green, and fouls the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs at EWG, an environmental research group.

If confirmed, Mr. Perdue would oversee an agency with a $150 billion budget. The Agriculture Department is in charge of farm policy and food safety, and it funds food stamps, other nutrition programs and the Forest Service.

=============================

Sounds like Monsanto (and ConAgra) must be happy with Sonny. He's going to deliver all those approvals.
What about the EPA?

=============================

Pruitt confirmation sets stage for Trump EPA assault
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/14/financial-backers-of-epa-pick-scott-pruitt-have-faced-hundreds-of-pollution-actions/ault
February 14 2017



AT LEAST 15 COMPANIES with financial ties to Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump’s nominee to run the Environmental Protection Agency, have faced hundreds of EPA enforcement actions, which are the basic tool the agency uses to enforce environmental rules and laws.

Among the Pruitt donors with enforcement cases against them in recent years are Continental Resources, an oil company that contributed to Liberty 2.0, a pro-Pruitt Super PAC; Murray Energy, which was a co-party in eight of 14 lawsuits Pruitt filed against the EPA and contributed to his political campaigns; and Devon Energy, which raised money for the Republican Attorneys General Association when Pruitt led it and whose lawyers penned a letter that Pruitt sent to the EPA. Peabody Energy, whose executive Fred Palmer contributed to Pruitt’s 2014 re-election campaign for Oklahoma attorney general, is the parent company of 12 separate coal companies that have faced EPA enforcement actions. In addition to the energy companies, the agricultural company Monsanto, which contributed to Pruitt’s 2010 and 2014 election campaign, has been named in 96 formal administrative cases, according to EPA records. It’s impossible to tally a complete list of the enforcement cases filed against Pruitt donors because some donations, such as those to the most recent pro-Pruitt PAC, Protecting America Now, can be made secretly.

=============================

So Monsanto must be throwing parties celebrating the likely approval of Glyphosate.
I predict that Glyphosate will pass safety testing, (the EPA is like the CDC... working for the corporations at the expense of the health of US citizens)
Roundup will be out there even more ... in grass seed, on lawns across the country.. we'll have a spike in Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, but that's ok - that's money for pharma... it's a win-win for corporations.
And  the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, 
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren,  ye have done it unto me.

Matthew 25:40

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,900
Re: Monsatan On Trial For Roundup Cancer
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2017, 02:16:01 PM »
Monsatan On Trial For Roundup Cancer
https://www.corbettreport.com/monsatan-on-trial-for-roundup-cancer/
Corbett • 03/11/2017

“For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”

These words, penned in 2013 by former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientist Marion Copley, have an urgency seldom found in the dry correspondence that is typically passed between scientists. But this was no ordinary memo; it was an appeal, a desperate plea for action. And it was written on her death bed.



The letter is addressed to Jess Rowland, at that time the head of the EPA’s Cancer Assessment Review Committee (CARC). It begins by noting 14 separate effects of glyphosate (a herbicide marketed by Monsanto under the name “Roundup”) known to the EPA. As Copley explains in the letter, “any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously.” She argues that the CARC should change its assessment of glyphosate from a “possible cause of cancer” to the more definitive “probable human carcinogen.” And she excoriates Rowland himself, noting that his “trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated” and that as a result CARC science is 10 years behind the literature. She charges Rowland and his colleague, Anna Lowit, with intimidating staff and changing reports to favor industry interests. And she ends with these haunting words:

“I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in HED [the Health Effects Division] to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.”

She may have done her duty, but she did not get her wish. Just nine months later she was dead, and the EPA still listed glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen.

Just nine months later she was dead, and the EPA still listed glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen.

Copley’s letter is just one of the many dramatic pieces of evidence submitted as part of a new filing in a class action lawsuit against Monsanto that is currently before the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleges that Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer (now officially the most-used agricultural chemical of all time!) is responsible for the non-Hodgkin lymphoma of thousands of people across the country.

Independent scientists, natural health activists and even government agencies have been warning of glyphosate’s dangerous effects on human health for years, but, as Corbett Reporteers will remember, the herbicide came under special scrutiny in 2015, when the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) officially declared it a “probable human carcinogen,” the same status Dr. Copley was arguing for in her 2013 letter to the EPA. Since then, dozens of lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto blaming the company’s Roundup weed killer for their cancer. In October 2016, the cases were consolidated into a single trial, “IN RE: ROUNDUP PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION” (MDL No. 2742, Case No. 16-md-02741-VC).

The latest remarkable twist in this sordid courtroom drama is that Jess Rowland, the recipient of Dr. Copley’s terminal letter, will likely be compelled to testify in the case after having been subpoenaed by the plaintiffs. Last year a CARC report declaring glyphosate “Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans” was mysteriously leaked and then retracted, but not before it was used by Monsanto to “refute” the WHO’s assessment. The report bore Rowland’s signature, and he retired from the agency just days after the “inadvertent” leak. (Ed. - FAKE Science!!!)

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, presiding over the case, did not mince words, declaring Rowland’s actions and his likely collusion with Monsanto to be “highly suspicious” and adding, “When you consider the relevance of the EPA’s reports, and you consider their relevance to this litigation, it seems appropriate to take Jess Rowland’s deposition.”

So as things sit, it is very likely that the former head of the EPA’s cancer review board will be sitting on a very hot seat in a California court room answering some uncomfortable questions about his relationship with Monsanto. The case may not only open the door for thousands of cancer victims in the US to achieve some restitution from the company they believe responsible for their condition, but may also blow the lid off of the EPA’s supposed impartiality when it comes to such assessments.

And as rewarding as these developments are in themselves, they in turn pay further dividends. Readers of this column will remember how Bayer AG is preparing to swallow Monsanto in an effort to further consolidate the already centralized agrochemical industry. But as Bloomberg notes, reporting on the pending testimony from Rowland:

Quote
The dramatic turn in the litigation comes less than a week after Bayer AG signaled that it may face delays in its deal to buy St. Louis-based Monsanto, the world’s largest seed company, for about $66 billion. Some investors have doubted the takeover will be approved due to regulatory concerns.

So BayerSanto may not happen after all, and there remains the possibility that the corporate heads of Monsanto may one day face justice for their crimes. It’s hard to imagine “good news” and “Monsanto” appearing in the same news story, but this may be a rare example.
And  the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, 
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren,  ye have done it unto me.

Matthew 25:40