Connect with us

Corruption

EPA Contradicts Its Own Research to Say Monsanto’s Glyphosate is Safe

Avatar

Published

on

EPA Monsanto Glyphosate Safe
Like this article? Get the latest from The Mind Unleashed in your inbox. Sign up right here.

The controversy surrounding the chemical glyphosate continues as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the weed killer is not a carcinogen—a claim which contradicts recent rulings by U.S. juries and research by the World Health Organization. 

Last week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated that glyphosate, the chemical contained in Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer, does not pose a risk to public health and is not a carcinogen when used in accordance with the label. Roundup is currently the most widely used herbicide in the world, being sprayed by farmers, on home lawns, school grounds, and golf courses across the world.

This is the second time since 2017 that the EPA has concluded that glyphosate does not cause cancer. However, the EPA’s statements conflicts with two recent rulings by juries as well as the World Health Organization’s cancer arm which in 2015 classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, a former lobbyist who represented the coal industry, stated that the EPA would create “new management measures that will help farmers use glyphosate in the most effective and efficient way possible, including pollinator protections.

Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, the former Governor of Georgia with a history of ethics complaints, is also supporting the EPA’s decision, saying glyphosate is needed to feed 10 billion people by 2050. “USDA applauds EPA’s proposed registration decision as it is science-based and consistent with the findings of other regulatory authorities that glyphosate does not pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans,” Perdue stated.

Bayer AG, who owns Monsanto Co, said they “firmly believe the science” supports the claim that glyphosate does not lead to cancer. Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity, told Reuters that American consumers “cannot trust the EPA assessment of glyphosate’s safety.”

Despite the EPA’s statements, two U.S. juries have recently ruled in favor of individuals who developed cancer after using glyphosate. A California man was awarded $289 million in August 2018 after a state court jury found the weed killer caused his cancer. That award was later reduced to $78 million and is being appealed by Bayer. In March, a U.S. jury awarded $80 million to another California man who claimed his use of Roundup caused his cancer. Recently, The Mind Unleashed reported that the third roundup-cancer lawsuit exposed even more details of the cozy relationship between the EPA and Monsanto.

The EPA’s new report conflicts with a March 2015 report from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that found that glyphosate “probably” contributes to non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans and classified it as a ‘Group 2A’ carcinogen. “There was sufficient evidence in animals, limited evidence in humans and strong supporting evidence showing DNA mutations and damaged chromosomes,” Aaron Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute and lead author of the study, told Reuters at the time.

The IARC report was published in The Lancet Oncology and detailed evaluations of organophosphate pesticides and herbicides. The report concluded that there was “limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.” The evidence for this conclusion was pulled from studies of exposure to the chemical in the US, Canada, and Sweden published since 2001. The researchers found “convincing evidence that glyphosate can also cause cancer in laboratory animals.

The 2015 IARC report points out that the EPA had originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans in 1985. The IARC Working Group evaluated the original EPA findings and more recent reports before concluding “there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.

In addition, In These Times magazine released an in-depth report titled How Monsanto Captured the EPA (And Twisted Science) To Keep Glyphosate on the Market. The investigation thoroughly outlines the history of regulation of glyphosate— the key ingredient in Roundup—and how Monsanto has been able to influence and subvert regulatory agencies in order to make it the most widely used pesticide in the world. “Our two-year investigation found incontrovertible evidence that Monsanto has exerted deep influence over EPA decisions since glyphosate first came on the market—via Roundup—more than 40 years ago,” the report states.

The detailed investigation reveals that nearly every time a Monsanto chemical received negative attention from scientists and researchers, the biotech company would hire its own researchers and firms or pressure government employees until they came to Monsanto’s preferred conclusion. Both the testing and the approval of glyphosate seem to fit the pattern.

Throughout the 1970s, EPA staff repeatedly raised red flags about the inadequacy of testing data that Monsanto was submitting in support of glyphosate’s original registration,” the report states. In These Times also examined EPA memos that say “detail incomplete or otherwise unacceptable toxicology screening tests.” The pressure to approve glyphosate can be traced back to 1983 when the EPA was examining toxicity data supplied by Monsanto. As part of the registration and approval process, Monsanto submitted a two-year mouse feeding study. In These Times writes:

“The mouse study was conducted for Monsanto by a commercial lab called Bio/Dynamics, but the results of the research were neither peer-reviewed nor made publicly available.”

By March 1986, the EPA had reversed their designation of glyphosate as carcinogenic and they have reiterated their support for the use of glyphosate several times over the last 30 years. At the same time, Americans have grown skeptical of Monsanto’s business practices and the safety of their products. For those willing to take the time to dig deep into the history of Monsanto, EPA corruption, and the science behind the use of glyphosate, the safety of this chemical may still be up for debate.


Derrick Broze / Minds.com / Used with Permission

Corruption

Trump “Pretty Likely” to Land in Jail For Many Alleged Crimes, Legal Analyst Says

Elias Marat

Published

on

Like this article? Get the latest from The Mind Unleashed in your inbox. Sign up right here.

Legal experts continue to say that it remains likely that former President Donald Trump could land in jail if convicted on one of the many legal challenges he faces.

Throughout his life, Trump has been involved in a number of lawsuits – both as the subject and instigator of them – but he is currently facing no less than 29 lawsuits and is also the subject of several criminal lawsuits, including one which saw his tax returns opened up to lawyers.

Trump is being investigated for potential bank, tax and insurance fraud by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office for what Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr.’s office calls “possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump Organization,” reports the New York Times.

The former head of state denies any malfeasance and has said that he is “proud” of his tax returns.

However, legal analyst Jay Michaelson told Daily Beast’s The New Abnormal that Trump is “pretty likely” to face jail time if found guilty.

“Trump’s lawyers will always come up with something, but there should be no reason why the grand jury won’t get these financial records tomorrow,” Michaelson said.

“Will he go to jail for, like, the rest of his life? Probably no,” he continued. “Is it possible that this would lead to criminal charges that would carry jail time? I would say that’s pretty likely, and we could have a grand jury indictment fairly soon.”

Last month, the Supreme Court rejected the Trump legal team’s appeal to keep his tax returns closed from prosecutors. The move opens the door to the returns being shown to a grand jury in New York.

Following the ruling, Trump denounced the move as a result of him being a victim of “’the greatest political witch hunt in the history of our country.”

“In the meantime, murders and violent crime are up in New York City by record numbers, and nothing is done about it,” he added. “Our elected officials don’t care. All they focus on is the persecution of President Donald J. Trump.”

“I will fight on, just as I have, for the last five years (even before I was successfully elected), despite all of the election crimes that were committed against me. We will win!”

Continue Reading

Corruption

Minneapolis Police Lieutenant Calls Chauvin’s Use of Force On George Floyd “Totally Unnecessary”

Elias Marat

Published

on

Like this article? Get the latest from The Mind Unleashed in your inbox. Sign up right here.

The head of the Minneapolis Police Department’s homicide division flatly denounced former officer Derek Chauvin’s use of force against George Floyd as “totally unnecessary.”

Lt. Richard Zimmerman testified on Friday about his over three decades of police training and the lethal dangers of the techniques used on Floyd on May 25, 2020.

Chauvin, a white former Minneapolis police officer, is currently facing trial for his role in the killing of Floyd, 46, a Black man, by pressing his knee into Floyd’s neck for over nine minutes as he lay handcuffed on the ground.

“Once you handcuff a person you need to get them out of the prone position as quickly as possible, because it restricts their breathing,” Zimmerman said, adding that being handcuffed “stretches the muscles back through your chest and it makes it more difficult to breathe.”

“That would be the top tier, the deadly force,” he said, noting that escalating to such a degree goes against use-of-force training at MPD. “Because if your knee is on someone’s neck, that can kill them.”

When asked if such force was necessary, Zimmerman responded that it was “totally unnecessary” given that any potential threat from Floyd had been subdued.

“First of all, pulling him down to the ground facedown and putting your knee on the neck for that amount of time is just uncalled for,” Zimmerman said. “I saw no reason why the officers felt they were in danger, if that’s what they felt. And that’s what they would have to feel to use that type of force.”

Continuing, Zimmerman noted that handcuffing a person quickly alters the permissible use of force that can be used in a situation.

“Once a person is cuffed, the threat level goes down all the way to, they’re cuffed, how can they really hurt you?” he said. “That person is handcuffed, and the threat level is just not there.”

At that stage, the use of force quickly declines, he added.

“If they become less combative, you may just have them sit down on the curb,” Zimmerman said. “The idea is to calm the person down and if they are not a threat to you at that point, you try to, you know, to help them so that they’re not as upset as they may have been in the beginning.”

Derek Chauvin has faced at least eighteen complaints during his 19-year career with the Minneapolis police, including six times in which prosecutors claim the former officer used force against arrestees.

However, these incidents – like George Floyd’s own criminal record – won’t be introduced to jurors in the Chauvin trial so that the defendant isn’t punished for prior misconduct, and is instead evaluated on the charges he faces for the death of Floyd: third- and second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

Continue Reading

Corruption

Jeffrey Epstein Threatened to Feed Young Woman to Alligators After Raping Her, New Lawsuit Claims

Elias Marat

Published

on

Like this article? Get the latest from The Mind Unleashed in your inbox. Sign up right here.

The disgraced pedophile Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but he is facing a fresh allegation that he raped a 26-year-old real estate broker and threatened to feed her to alligators, all with the help of British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, according to the brutal details of a new lawsuit.

In the federal complaint filed last week, the woman – identified only as Jane Doe – claims that Epstein sexually abused her at his Palm Beach estate in 2008 with the “assistance” of Maxwell, who is currently facing a range of charges for the sexual exploitation of minors, sex trafficking and perjury.

According to Jane Doe, a married woman and devout Muslim of Turkish descent, following the rape Epstein and Maxwell drove the woman to pick up her 8-year-old son before stopping the car “at a large body of water that was infested with alligators.”

“Epstein then ushered the Plaintiff to the body of water and told her in explicit detail that, as had happened to other girls in the past, she would end up in this body of water and be devoured by the alligators, should she ever reveal what Epstein had done to her,” the suit filed in South Florida Federal Court reads.

The federal filing, reported first by the Miami Herald, also notes that she was “repeatedly raped” by Maxwell and Epstein, even in the presence of her young son, and that Epstein forced her to have sex with other men, including one man identified as a local judge.

Doe also alleges that she was forced to “unwanted and unnecessary vaginal surgery” to give the false impression that she was a virgin, and that the “violent and illegal procedure” was botched and left Doe “permanently sexually dysfunctional.”

According to Doe, she met Epstein and Maxwell at a barbecue hosted by her boss in late 2006 or early 2007 before being hired to find a property for Epstein.

It was at that point, she claims, that she was recruited and groomed by Maxwell to be abused by the multimillionaire pedophile.

In the following months, Epstein and Maxwell sex trafficked her while threatening her with rape, deportation, arrest for prostitution, and having her son seized from her.

“While making these threats, Epstein emphasized his personal connections to many powerful actors within the legal system and elsewhere whom he asserted would not hesitate to act on his behalf,” the suit noted.

Epstein also told Doe, who looked young for her age, to tell clients that she was 17. Additionally, she claims that she was coerced by the pair into helping them sex traffic other young women, including some believed to be underage.

The details of the case are especially gut-wrenching, even by the standards of the Epstein case.

Epstein, 66, was found hanged in a lone cell in the special housing unit (SHU) of a federal Manhattan prison in Manhattan on Aug. 10, 2019, while facing a potential prison sentence of up to 45 years on charges of pedophilia and sex trafficking. A city medical examiner ruled the death a suicide.

Continue Reading

Trending