Monsanto Has Known that Roundup is Carcinogenic for Decades

Amazingly, Monsanto has a task force that intends to do damage control on the WHO report that glyphosate is a “probable carcinogenic”. They’re even sending their arm twisting agents to confront and challenge the WHO about the study from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a coalition of 17 experts from 11 countries who recently met in Lyons, France.

The “probable carcinogenicity” category requires sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity where a causal relationship has been established between the agent and an increased incidence of malignant neoplasms in animals and/or humans, according to the USA Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA).

But wait, according to investigations acquired by GM-Free Cymru in Wales, a small territory of 3 million inhabitants that’s part of Great Britain, Monsanto has known of this and kept it secret from health agencies throughout the world since 1981 and possibly before.

At the time, Monsanto Chief of Product Safety, Robert W. Street, managed to shuffle and tweak their own 90 day studies sufficiently to confuse EPA regulators enough for them to give Monsanto a free pass on field use with glyphosate. Today, the EPA has agreed to raise glyphosate residue limits on non-organic plant foods.

Inconclusive is not usually cause for rejecting a study after peer reviewed and accepted. Here’s the smoking gun for that rejection. Soon after this tsunami of outrage from GMO related scientists that got favorable press, along came former Monsanto scientist Richard E. Goodman to the newly created post of associate editor for biotechnology at FCT via the owner/publisher of the FCT journal Elsevier.

Seralini’s study had four other homes with their doors open for the FCT rejected study. But the research team decided to go with one that was open to public scrutiny, Environmental Sciences Europe as “Republished study: long-term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize”, and it can be viewed here.

Then there was the earlier less publicized Seralini study that broke down Roundup’s toxic brew to discover it’s worse than just glyphosate, “Ethoxylated adjuvants of glyphosate based herbicides are active principles of human cell toxicity.” Evidently Seralini copied the original that was retracted and posted it onto his own site.

Conclusion: GMOs and the herbicides and pesticides are worse than even many anti-GMO activists know. And how Monsanto and others of their ilk are able to coerce academic institutions, politicians, and the media to cover their misdeeds and even paint a rosy picture for this industry is a horror show beyond most imaginations.

Lobbyist Claims Monsanto’s Roundup Is Safe To Drink, Freaks Out When Offered A Glass

I’ll echo Dr. Anthony Samsel’s words: “Nations must stand together against Monsanto and other chemical companies who continue to destroy the biosphere. We are all part of that biosphere and we are all connected. What affects one affects us all.”

Perhaps then, the EPA was not so confused, but dazzled by the study shuffle and other “influences” from Monsanto.

Dr Brian John of GM-Free Cymru says: “The evidence shows that by 1981 both Monsanto and the EPA were aware of malignant tumours and pre-cancerous conditions in the test animals which were fed small doses of glyphosate in the secret feeding experiments.”

Dr. John continued, “Although concerns were expressed at the time by EPA committees, these concerns were later suppressed under the weight of conflicting evidence brought forward by Monsanto, some of it involving the inappropriate use of historical control data of dubious quality. None of these studies is available for independent examination. That is a scandal in itself. There has been a protracted and cynical cover-up in this matter.”

Research scientist Dr. Anthony Samsel adds: “Monsanto’s Trade Secret studies of glyphosate show significant incidence of cell tumors of the testes and tumorigenic growth in multiple organs and tissues. (…) Glyphosate has an inverse dose response relationship, and it appears that its effects are highly pH dependent. Both Monsanto and the EPA knew of the deleterious effects of this chemical in 1980 at the conclusion of their multiple long-term assessments, but the EPA hid the results of their findings as “trade secrets.”

Trade secret laws permit corporations to sue anyone who obtains or discloses exclusive proprietary formulas and are used to refuse ingredient disclosures of their products to regulatory agencies. So what good are the EPA and FDA?

Glyphosate is Only the Active Ingredient of Roundup. What Else is in Roundup?

Monsanto uses those convenient laws to keep health agencies and independent researchers from testing Roundup, which contains glyphosate and several other ingredients that have been isolated by Professor Gilles-Eric Serallini and his colleagues to demonstrate that the adjuvants used in Roundup create an even more toxic synergy than the glyphosate.

It seems Serellini et al were able to discern the secret ingredients to perform toxicological analysis on them and as a whole. And don’t forget, that earlier study Serrellini and his team did for two years to exceed Monsanto’s typical 90 day study. The rats used, which were the same breed used in Monsanto’s study, came up with large tumors after being treated to small amounts of Roundup within EPA allowances as well as GMO corn.

Of course the study was vilified publicly as part of Monsanto’s damage control department that goes viciously after scientists who register disagreements from Monsanto’s “science”. The Serellini studies were removed from the peer reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT).

This happened after two major events. First there was an orchestrated surge of “scientific criticisms” from scientists with or formerly with GMO industry connections. Some even with GMO patents. Serellini’s and the University of Caen’s conflicts of interest were admittedly never an issue, nor was their an issue of fraud or inaccurate data. The publisher simply said the study was “inconclusive”.