Monsanto vs. World Health Organization

[soul food]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/2 ... to-Action#

Monsanto’s “Discredit Bureau” Really Does Exist [UPDATE]

by occupystephanie

euters is reporting that Monsanto is demanding a sit-down with members of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). This international scientific body is being called on the carpet for reporting that Monsanto’s most widely sold herbicide, which is inextricably linked to the majority of their genetically engineered products, is probably carcinogenic to humans.
In a DO-YOU-KNOW-WHO-WE-ARE moment, Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs Philip Miller said the following in interview:

"We question the quality of the assessment. The WHO has something to explain." [emphasis mine]
Evidence for the carcinogenicity of Glyphosate comes from a peer-reviewed study published in March of 2015 in the respected journal The Lancet Oncology.

[rickfm]

If the term "Evil Corporation" ever truly applied anywhere, it would be to Monsanto.

What a monster.

[zumacraig]

Oh, but wait, if I'm to believe the posters in other threads here 'we are free to eat what we want'. Right, it's just unhealthy choices that are causing the obesity crisis. The food industry, it's power, lawyers, money, threat, neuromarketing, addicting products…they're not at fault. The food industry is just responding to consumer need (THAT THEY CREATED!)

[rickfm]

The industrial food complex preys upon blissfully ignorant humans happily stuck in the pleasure trap of artificially rich food.

I can't help but think of the movie The Matrix where there are "billions of people just living out their lives... oblivious." And Dr. McDougall and others are like Morpheus saying, "I'm trying to free your mind." And that is something that only happens one mind at a time.

Reminds me of a quote I once read, "Citizens are deceived enmase but enlightened one at a time."

It takes an act of the will to break away from the decades of social and cultural conditioning we have all been subject to by the advertising and marketing campaigns of the food industry. Do any of you think you could count the number of times you've heard that cartoon tiger proclaim "They're GRRREAT!" when pitching that empty calorie crap called Frosted Flakes? Sorry Tony, no they're not... they are GARRRBAGE! And yet, millions of parents share that crap with their children every day, all the while being motivated to do so by images on TV of caring parents lovingly engaged in their kid's lives by sitting down with them for a nice big bowl of what is little more than candy soaking in the bodily fluids of a cow.

Corporations carry the burden of deception and manipulation, but only because foolish humans don't care about being manipulated and deceived.

[bbq]

Speaking of The Matrix, maybe it's a good idea to watch Century of the Self as mentioned below:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sacramento-street-psychiatry/201308/review-century-the-self-bbc-documentary
https://vimeo.com/111346364
https://vimeo.com/112485187
https://vimeo.com/112533840
https://vimeo.com/112755045

Adding The Trap just for good measure, pretty much anything by Adam Curtis should be a must-see for everyone on Earth:

http://youtu.be/gZt2HhFXB3M
http://youtu.be/WbRApO3k_Jo
http://youtu.be/LFjCJFsbS0U

Waking up is relatively easy, accepting the truth and getting over the cognitive dissonance would be another story.

Heck, it's painful enough to realize what money really means once we've seen The Money Fix:

http://youtu.be/jR7GCRonqBE

[brec]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/27/1373484/-Monsanto-s-Discredit-Bureau-Swings-into-Action#
Monsanto’s “Discredit Bureau” Really Does Exist [UPDATE]
by occupystephanie

... Evidence for the carcinogenicity of Glyphosate comes from a peer-reviewed study published in March of 2015 in the respected journal The Lancet Oncology.

There is no such "peer-reviewed study" nor any new evidence published in the March 2015 Lancet Oncology. There is a news item (listed as such in the issue's table of contents) which consists of a republication of the IARC (a branch of WHO) report that made news generally by classifying glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans". That classification was based on "limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of glyphosate", citing several studies published from 2001 to 2009.

Here is one instance of another view of the IARC classification (and IARC itself) from the American Council on Science and Health:
http://acsh.org/2015/03/iarcs-ruling-on ... e-science/

[Crider]

Here is one instance of another view of the IARC classification (and IARC itself) from the American Council on Science and Health:
http://acsh.org/2015/03/iarcs-ruling-on ... e-science/

American Council on Science and Health is a corporate PR front group.

"Former ACSH director, the late Elizabeth Whelan, explained that the concept of ACSH emerged following being commissioned by Pfizer [emphasis mine] to produce a background paper on the 'Delaney Clause' in the 1958 Food Additive Amendment, which restricted the use of cancer causing chemicals in foods. Subsequently, Whelan wrote Panic in the Pantry, a "book on the history of food scares", which was published in 1976."

"The Washington Post identified ACSH as "an industry-friendly group whose board member Betsy McCaughey helped set off the "death panels" frenzy in the 2009 health care reform debate."

"ACSH and Whelan were fixtures on the anti-environmental scene long before the Alar issue emerged, downplaying risks from DDT, dioxin, asbestos, and a host of other polluting chemicals, but Whelan's prominent role in the Alar counter-publicity campaign helped make ACSH a common source for journalists seeking commentary on public health issues."

"In December, 1980 ACSH co-founder Stare wrote to tobacco giant Philip Morris seeking financial support. "We are a voice of scientific reason in a sea of pseudo science, exaggeration and misnformation. We believe it would be to your benefit to help ACSH," he wrote. Stare explained that the "basic" ACSH corporate benefactor membership was $3,000 "but we hope you will contribute $10,000 or more." "

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Am ... and_Health

[zumacraig]

Couldn't agree more with all the posts in this thread. Thanks also for the links to the documentaries. Will need to check those out. We've got to speak out about this stuff even here where folks are still not seeing the big picture.
Craig

[dynodan62]

Even Dr. Oz cimbed onto the bandwagon today, extracting a denial statement from Monsanto.
I can see it now: after 40 years of future intensive scientific study conclusively proving that millions of cancer deaths were directly attributable to our RoundUp-poisoned food supply, the board members of Monsanto will be standing in front of congress vehemently denying one at a time that Glyphosate is dangerous!

[brec]

Here is one instance of another view of the IARC classification (and IARC itself) from the American Council on Science and Health:
http://acsh.org/2015/03/iarcs-ruling-on ... e-science/

American Council on Science and Health is a corporate PR front group.
...
"In December, 1980 ACSH co-founder Stare wrote to tobacco giant Philip Morris seeking financial support. "We are a voice of scientific reason in a sea of pseudo science, exaggeration and misnformation. We believe it would be to your benefit to help ACSH," he wrote. Stare explained that the "basic" ACSH corporate benefactor membership was $3,000 "but we hope you will contribute $10,000 or more." "

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Am ... and_Health

And immediately following the quoted paragraph at the sourcewatch.org link:

Whelan & ACSH opposition to tobacco

Despite Stare's 1980 solicitation of funds from PM, Whelan was an early advocate against the tobacco industry. In December 1981 she wrote to Henry Waxman explaining that while they opposed government labeling restrictions on food additives such as saccharin and nitrites - "because there is no adequate data to support the hypothesis that these substances pose a risk to human health" - cigarettes was another matter altogether.

"In the case of cigarette smoking, however, the evidence is overwhelming. I believe it is the correct role of government to provide educational information on the health risks to consumers, and let the consumers make their own decisions," she wrote.[22]

When a new cigarette brand called "Satin" appeared with the slogan "Spoil yourself with Satin," the ACHS commended this in a newsletter as the first truthful cigarette ad because "our dictionary defines 'spoil' as 'to damage seriously; to ruin; to impair the quality or effect of.' What better way to describe a product which harms the lungs, heart and other organs, stains the teeth and fingers, promotes wrinkles, fouls the breath, and leaves an unpleasant odor on hair and clothing. Certainly the more than 300,000 Americans who died last year of smoking related diseases were 'spoiled' by cigarettes."[23]

In 1982 and 1986, ACSH conducted a survey of magazines to determine how well they covered the hazards of smoking and to explore the role that cigarette advertising might play in editorial policy. The studies clearly showed that the best coverage of smoking and health was presented in magazines that did not accept cigarette advertising.[23]

Regardless of ACSH vis-a-vis cigarettes: I didn't do any reasearch on ACSH as an organization before linking to their article on IARC/glyphosate. On review of that article, it's mostly a recitation of facts and quotes that don't depend on ACSH's credibility. The balance, as on the nature of IARC, is clearly opinion.

[rickfm]

Speaking of The Matrix, maybe it's a good idea to watch Century of the Self as mentioned below:

Interesting. I watched the first half of the first part and will definitely watch the rest, being the documentary nut that I am.

I've long been aware of the fact that we no longer think of ourselves as citizens, but rather "consumers." And I knew that at one point in time the unholy alliance of psychology and marketing was formed. I just didn't realize it went all the way back to the 1920s.

I've pretty much got into the habit of examining advertisements by asking myself the question when I see ads, "How are they trying to make me feel bad for not having the useless thing they want me to spend my money on?"

I think this commercial is one of the best examples of the kind of outright brainwashing that takes place in our society by the food industry.

Yeah, way to go mom. Just think how cool you'll be when you give your kids that poisonous, obesity and childhood diabetes inducing, empty calorie crap... they'll rise and you'll shine. Oh, but it's ok because they're "baked with real fruit."

[soul food]

danodan62 I had to laugh as I imagined the future being like a flashback to the tobacco executives statement before congress that nicotine is not addictive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQUNk5meJHs

The Seven Dwarves: I believe that nicotine is not addictive

bbq, yes, anything by Adam Curtis is interesting.

soul food

[zumacraig]

Speaking of The Matrix, maybe it's a good idea to watch Century of the Self as mentioned below:

Interesting. I watched the first half of the first part and will definitely watch the rest, being the documentary nut that I am.

I've long been aware of the fact that we no longer think of ourselves as citizens, but rather "consumers." And I knew that at one point in time the unholy alliance of psychology and marketing was formed. I just didn't realize it went all the way back to the 1920s.

I've pretty much got into the habit of examining advertisements by asking myself the question when I see ads, "How are they trying to make me feel bad for not having the useless thing they want me to spend my money on?"

I think this commercial is one of the best examples of the kind of outright brainwashing that takes place in our society by the food industry.

Yeah, way to go mom. Just think how cool you'll be when you give your kids that poisonous, obesity and childhood diabetes inducing, empty calorie crap... they'll rise and you'll shine. Oh, but it's ok because they're "baked with real fruit."

Yep, advertising always makes me feel depressed and I believe has incrementally lowered my self esteem over the years. I just moved and had to purchase some stuff for the house. Man, was that a nightmare feeling like I had to get the right furniture, in the right place and have the right sites, sounds and smells in my house. It is literally sickening. I'ver read a bit on neurmarketing which takes the psychological aspect of advertising to a whole other level. Marketers know how to actually manipulate our brain chemistry to get us to feel a certain way and buy something.

[brec]

Roundup and Risk Assessment at The New Yorker

[dynodan62]

I love that writer's 'bathtub drownings/auto crash deaths' example of why toxic/not-proven-safe chemicals should be allowed into the food supply. In a way, it's like people who would rather shower or walk shouldn't have that choice, because GMO products can't legally be labeled as such and thus easily avoided.