Roundup Revelations: Monsanto-EPA Collusion Exposed
March 18, 2017
It’s been a bad week for Monsanto. Money machine hinge pin, Roundup, must be labeled a possible carcinogen in California. Judge Kristi Culber Kapetan handed down the final ruling in Monsanto’s lawsuit against the state in Fresno County Superior Court on Friday, March 10th. Monsanto lost. Glyphosate is now firmly on the Proposition 65 list. All products in the state containing the controversial chemical must now bear the warning label.
Naturally, the company and their legal team tried the profit plea. Their attorney telling the judge that this warning label would hurt Monsanto by driving customers away gained no sympathy. They insisted this treatment of their glyphosate product is uncalled for, and out of line.
“Monsanto and its lawyers argued that the state is out of step with other regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the European Food Safety Authority, in listing glyphosate as causing cancer.” — Fresno Bee
Meanwhile, in a different court a federal judge revealed documents Monsanto fought to keep secret just this Tuesday. Not only are some EPA scientists suspicious of the actual safety of glyphosate and Roundup – agency officials have been protecting it against further scrutiny by other federal agencies.
Wonder no more why the EPA can’t accomplish finishing their most recent “assessment” of glyphosate. And likely the basis for increases of allowable levels of the chemical in food crops?
Questions about EPA-Monsanto collusion raised in cancer lawsuits
That’s the headline of Carey Gillam’s mid-February post at Huffington News. And as stated in opening that article… here’s where things really start to get interesting.
A top-ranking EPA official and agency scientist for 30 years, Jess Rowland, is in collusion with Monsanto. A letter from a past agency scientist (now deceased) in the federal court’s possession as supporting evidence reveals fascinating information. He went so far as to intimidate other EPA scientists. So, here’s an echo of previous insinuations of whistle-blowing past EPA employees. Monsanto’s inside man prevented anything from getting in the way of glyphosate, Roundup, and Roundup Ready seed gaining approval. One email conversation has Rowland poised to stop the Department of Health and Human Services from investigating the weed killer’s safety. Whether he succeeded or not isn’t clear. However, the HHS investigation never took place.
These are just part of the revelations made in San Francisco’s federal court as part of a non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma class action filing. On Tuesday, presiding federal Judge Vince Chhabria unsealed documents that included internal Monsanto emails and those moving between the company and EPA regulators. Now that top secret internal documents are public knowledge, the story is reverberating through world media.
So… it’s not a conspiracy theory anymore. Of course, the Big M, in traditional form, is working hard at explaining away the implications. However, the records point to Monsanto ghostwriting their own research and paying academic scientists to edit and sign the documents to get them into peer reviewed journals.
““A less expensive/more palatable approach” is to rely on experts only for some areas of contention, while “we ghost-write the Exposure Tox & Genetox sections,” Heydens wrote to a colleague.
The names of outside scientists could be listed on the publication, “but we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” according to the email, which goes on to say that’s how Monsanto handled the 2000 study.” — Bloomberg
And more recently, Jess Rowland at the EPA gave Monsanto insider tips months before the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s probable carcinogen rating of glyphosate was formally announced. When that news spewed out of the media fan, Monsanto hit the ground running with all their ducks neatly in a row.
I’ll leave you to discover the rest of the details from source articles. One thing you might not want to overlook is on top of the link stack below. The highly interesting Document 141, an alleged Plaintiff’s Reply In Support of Motion To Compel Deposition of Jess Rowland filed with San Francisco’s US District Court last month. While it’s not available on the court’s web page for the cancer case (last link), it is available through Carey Gillam, Research Director at US Right To Know. More documents available on the USRTK website link.
A motion to halt further depositions was filed and denied. So, it’s looking like Rowland will have to be deposed after all. The next date on the docket for activity on the case is May 11th. This won’t be over swiftly.
Featured image courtesy of Mike Mozart.
Latest posts by Agent Green (see all)
- The State of Indoor Farming - January 24, 2018
- E. coli, Romaine, Food Safety, and Hydroponic Produce - January 22, 2018
- Front Burner Food Policy News - December 20, 2017