Jump to content
Advertise With Us! Or Sign Up To Remove Ads!
Hello, readers! Please consider adding conspiracyoutpost.com to your adblock whitelist. Our ads support the development and upkeep of the site.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ukshep

Breaking | Monsanto Emails Show Collusion With EPA

Recommended Posts

 Ukshep    17,093

Investigative Journalist Jeffery Jaxen breaks down the Monsanto papers, a wikileaks-style data dump showing collusion with EPA officials to hide the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.

Dang those internal emails... is what they must be saying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 dazedb42    282

The problem is the only study which states glyphosate  causes tumors is easily discredited. The rats used in the study are breed because they form tumors readily. They should be used for cancer cure research not for showing if something causes cancer as they nearly all develop tumors.

Quote

Monsanto was the 2015 decision of the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to give glyphosate a Group 2A designation of being “probably carcinogenic to humans.” The second blow came in June 2017 when California state’s health officials added glyphosate to the list of chemicals that can cause cancer under California’s Proposition 65. 

Herein lies the problem, as there is no mechanism for round-up to cause cancer, it's basically a salt, the WHO couldn't come out and say it causes cancer only PROBABLY and yet by the time it got Cali it DID cause cancer.

 This is classic scare campaigns and disinfo on the part of activists.

I know most here can't see past the Monsanto is Bad propaganda but I might get through to one of you who can look past emotion and deal with facts.

Cue the shill remarks. *Yawns*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 COBO Member    2,816

Sure no fan of Monsanto for more reasons than glysophate. But in any case, their "collusion" with the EPA just sounds like business as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 apache54    4,163

there are independant studies that have shown that glysophate  is very nasty stuff ,  it is not JUST salt!!  i would suggest people do their homework and actually look at what it does and HOW it works,

The MAIN issue is there has been collusion in the fed government by way of lobbists to allow many bad things to be given the OK, and the public suffers from it!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 dazedb42    282
Just now, apache54 said:

there are independant studies that have shown that glysophate  is very nasty stuff ,  it is not JUST salt!!  i would suggest people do their homework and actually look at what it does and HOW it works,

The MAIN issue is there has been collusion in the fed government by way of lobbists to allow many bad things to be given the OK, and the public suffers from it!!

 

I have and I also work in the environmental movement. There is no definitive proof, only scare campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 apache54    4,163
3 minutes ago, dazedb42 said:

I have and I also work in the environmental movement. There is no definitive proof, only scare campaigns.

well I will have to see if I still have some of the info on the studies i saw, and it says different, also I have a friend who works fro Monsanto and has for a long time and they do so as a informant to the outside with info. on what is bad! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 dazedb42    282
3 minutes ago, apache54 said:

well I will have to see if I still have some of the info on the studies i saw, and it says different, also I have a friend who works fro Monsanto and has for a long time and they do so as a informant to the outside with info. on what is bad! 

There might be a problem with a surfactant in it but only if they change the law. The glysophate itself is harmless is what  I've read. The only study is flawed due to the genetics of the rats to start off with. They were pretty much guaranteed to develop tumors. The state of easy litigation is the US makes filing lawsuits easy, I dunno, there sholuld be a massive amount of people who would of developed problems in the last 40 years if it really' was a problem but that ain't happening. A lot of environmental movement is extreme left and they'll publish all sorts of bogus material for the cause.

I could be wrong. There might be some credible evidence come out in the next week or years  and I'll have to change my position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 apache54    4,163
1 minute ago, dazedb42 said:

There might be a problem with a surfactant in it but only if they change the law. The glysophate itself is harmless is what  I've read. The only study is flawed due to the genetics of the rats to start off with. They were pretty much guaranteed to develop tumors. The state of easy litigation is the US makes filing lawsuits easy, I dunno, there sholuld be a massive amount of people who would of developed problems in the last 40 years if it really' was a problem but that ain't happening. A lot of environmental movement is extreme left and they'll publish all sorts of bogus material for the cause.

I could be wrong. There might be some credible evidence come out in the next week or years  and I'll have to change my position.

I completely understand the left movement and see how they are performing the brainwashing, i met and talked to some college kids that were hired to be activists about this type of thing, they were being paid anywhere from 12 to 15 dollars a hour depending on what their part was. LOTS of college kids need money and this is a BIG ploy to brainwash them, you should have heard what they were being told and the purported facts to back it up. the leftist scum has no boundaries to obtain what they want!

If i find the report i am looking for, i will show it to you, I keep most things on thumb drives for obvious reasons and don't keep very good records on where it is! LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Curenado    827

NM is 60% gmo. You can tell the difference easily. Indiscriminate eaters turn into a beach ball. The french burned monsanto down in thier country I believe? Smart people. One kernel of maybe-good is used to accomplish barrels of what is label as hazardous waste in some countries. Smart people. 

The other thing is....it doesn't have to be carcinogenic to eradicate species? It is suspected of effects that cancer might make a good distraction for? 

Lastly, with the brew of things out there, chemically and biologically, the possibilities of concomitant, substance altering and bio triggering are vast. To chase one thing means to consider it with a hundred others most prominent in the regional sample. Both sides arguments are a bit over simplified to upend the balance.

But I just watched a small pool of mosquito eating tadpoles die in minutes, when water ran off that gmo corn into thier puddle. Hard to get past simple things like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 dazedb42    282
1 minute ago, apache54 said:

I completely understand the left movement and see how they are performing the brainwashing, i met and talked to some college kids that were hired to be activists about this type of thing, they were being paid anywhere from 12 to 15 dollars a hour depending on what their part was. LOTS of college kids need money and this is a BIG ploy to brainwash them, you should have heard what they were being told and the purported facts to back it up. the leftist scum has no boundaries to obtain what they want!

If i find the report i am looking for, i will show it to you, I keep most things on thumb drives for obvious reasons and don't keep very good records on where it is! LOL 

Cheers. Young kids are passionate, it takes a few years normally for the ideological glasses to fall off. They're easy targets for the left. Tell them they are saving the planet and send them off. I see the left as pandering to people by giving them a sense of entitlement and assures them of moral superiority if they agree. Blatant emotional manipulation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jump To Top
×