Monsanto conspires with “industry partners”
In the five-page document, Monsanto lists four tiers of “industry partners” to be used in their “preparedness and engagement plan” for the IARC’s carcinogen rating for glyphosate. The plan, of course, was put in place nearly a month before the IARC publicly released their finding that glyphosate probably causes cancer — which raises substantial suspicions that the biotech giant knew what IARC was going to find.
As Sustainable Pulse reports, Monsanto’s plan to denounce the IARC’s conclusion came from all sides. Step 2 in Monsanto’s diabolical plan to deceive the world includes the four tiers of industry partners.
Tier 1 industry partners included agrichemical industry-funded lobbyists and public relations groups:
- Biotechnology Innovation Organization is a trade association for the biotech, GMO and pesticide industries.
- CropLife International / European Crop Protection Association are trade groups for the pesticide industry. European Crop Protection Association is a member association of CropLife International.
- GMO Answers is a “crisis management public relations tool” run by Ketchum public relations firm and paid for by Monsanto and their biotech brethren, Bayer, BASF, Dow, DuPont and Syngenta.
Tier 2 partners are “front groups.” Though these sources are often listed as “independent,” the sad truth is that behind closed doors, they work with the industry on public relations and lobbying efforts:
- Genetic Literacy Project — Evidence has shown GLP founder Jon Entine works closely with Big Ag and Monsanto.
- Academics (AgBioChatter) — This is actually a “private email listserver used by the agrichemical industry and its allies to coordinate messaging and lobbying activities.”
- Sense About Science — Often cited as “independent experts” by the MSM, it seems they’re in Monsanto’s back pocket.
- Biofortified — A nonprofit that reportedly works with Big Ag on lobbying campaigns and PR issues.
- Academics Review — USRTK has revealed that this is a front group set up by Monsanto to attack Big Ag’s detractors while keeping the appearance of being “independent.”
Tier 3 included partners from the food industry. As Sustainable Pulse explains, these groups were used to “Alert food companies via Stakeholder Engagement team (IFIC, GMA, CFI) for ‘inoculation strategy’ to provide early education on glyphosate residue levels, describe science-based studies versus agenda-driven hypotheses” of the independent cancer panel.”
Groups in the third tier were used to brainwash stakeholders and keep them in favor of glyphosate. In a truly Orwellian effort, Monsanto insinuated that the IARC’s find was “agenda-driven,” while their own approved studies were “science-based.”
Tier 3 includes:
- Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) — A top trade group for the junk food industry.
- International Food Information Council (IFIC) — Funded by the food industry, this group reportedly heads up “a coalition of 130 associations that coordinate messaging about GMOs and pesticides.”
- The Center for Food Integrity (CFI) — Another group funded by Big Food, charged with “earning consumer trust” by promoting industry-approved messaging about GMOS, pesticides, antibiotic-laden meat and more.
Tier 4 of the plan may be the most covert of them all; even Monsanto didn’t include the names of who belonged to the fourth and final tier in their internal documents. Instead, Tier 4 simply reads, “Inoculate key grower associations.”
Monsanto’s extensive plan to con the world
This is not just a company trying to protect its interests by disputing the claim that glyphosate causes cancer. This is a massive, well orchestrated attempt to promote disinformation. And these four tiers are only part of the plan; Monsanto has a multi-faceted approach to combating truth with lies, paid-off shills and a host of other tricks.
Step 3 of the “master plan” is to “Address New Allegations,” which dictates that Monsanto “Respond quickly and publically to new pseudoscience cancer studies,” and that they “Identify/ request third-party experts to blog, op/ed, tweet and/or link, repost, retweet, etc.”
In other words, Monsanto’s third step was to get third-party people to produce pro-glyphosate, anti-IARC content for the media.
And then, there’s Step 4, named, “Orchestrate Outcry with IARC Decision.” Monsanto wanted Sense About Science and CropLife International to lead industry press releases and discussions as part of their charge to “conduct robust media/social media outreach on process and outcome.” Another bullet point describes their objective to “Push opinion leader letter to key daily newspaper on day of IARC ruling with assistance of Potomac Group.”
Step 4 essentially outlines Monsanto’s plan to control media coverage of the IARC finding and sway the messaging in their favor.
And then there’s Step 5: Engage Regulatory Agencies
Step 5’s only bullet point states that the objective is to encourage “Grower associations/ growers write regulators with an appeal that they remain focused on the science, not the politically charged decision by IARC.”
Note how throughout the document, Monsanto refers to the IARC’s finds as “politically charged,” “agenda driven” and the like. The IARC is part of the World Health Organization; it’s a team of international experts and belongs to one of the most respected health agencies on the planet. Who is “agenda driven” here, when Monsanto has literally crafted a multi-pronged approach to obscure the IARC’s findings? Check out Monsanto.news to stay current on their latest scams.
Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Trials
(HealthImpactNews) In August 2018, jurors in state court in San Francisco ordered Monsanto to pay $289 million in damages to school groundskeeper Dewayne “Lee” Johnson, who is dying of non-Hodgkin lymphoma the jury found was caused by his exposure to Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicides. The judge in that case lowered the total verdict to $78 million and the verdict is now on appeal.
In March 2019, a unanimous jury in federal court in San Francisco ordered Monsanto to pay roughly $80 million in damages for failing to warn plaintiff Edwin Hardeman of the cancer risks of Roundup herbicide.
In August 2019, after listening to 17 days of trial testimony, jurors said Monsanto must pay $1 billion to Alberta Pilliod, who was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma brain cancer in 2015, and another $1 billion to her husband Alva Pilliod, who was diagnosed in 2011 with non-Hodgkin lymphoma that spread from his bones to his pelvis and spine. The couple, who are both in their 70s, started using Roundup in the 1970s and continued using the herbicide until only a few years ago. The jury also awarded the couple a total of $55 million in damages for past and future medical bills and other losses.
More than 13,000 plaintiffs have filed similar lawsuits against Monsanto, alleging the company’s herbicides cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma and the company has hidden the risks.
Evidence laid out in the three trials included numerous scientific studies that showed what plaintiffs’ attorneys said was proof Monsanto’s herbicides can cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma. As well, the attorneys presented jurors with many internal Monsanto communications obtained through court-ordered discovery that show Monsanto has intentionally manipulated the public record to hide the cancer risks.
Among the many revelations that have emerged from the trials:
- Monsanto never conducted epidemiology studies for Roundup and its other formulations made with the active ingredient glyphosate to evaluate the cancer risks for users.
- Monsanto was aware that the surfactants in Roundup were much more toxic than glyphosate alone.
- Monsanto spent millions of dollars on covert public relations campaigns to finance ghostwritten studies and articles aimed at discrediting independent scientists whose work found dangers with Monsanto’s herbicides.
- When the US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry sought to evaluate glyphosate toxicity in 2015, Monsanto engaged the assistance of EPA officials to delay that review.
- Monsanto enjoyed a close relationship with certain officials within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who have repeatedly backed Monsanto’s assertions about the safety of its glyphosate products.
- The company internally had worker safety recommendations that called for wearing a full range of protective gear when applying glyphosate herbicides, but did not warn the public to do the same.
Pilliod attorney Brent Wisner suggested to jurors in his closing arguments that they consider punitive damages in the range of $1 billion to send a message to Monsanto and Bayer about the need to change the company’s practices. In spite of several jury trials now determining that glyphosate in RoundUp causes cancer, it continues to be sold in the U.S.
Source: Mercola.com
External articles & Videos on Monsanto:
- VIDEO: The World According to Monsanto documentary
- VIDEO: Monsanto: The Company that Owns the World’s Food Supply
- Why Are We Being Fed By A Poison Expert?
History Pages Involving Monsanto
Mexico Bans Genetically Engineered Corn
USDA admits Monsanto GMO Experiments Polluted Entire Wheat Industry
First Long-term GMO Study by Dr. Seralini Reveals GMO’s Very Toxic to Mammals
French GMO Grain Farmer Wins Court Battle with Monsanto for Chemical Poisoning
The USDA Green Lights GMO Sugar Beets that Had Been Barred by a Federal Judge Fearing “impending Nationwide Sugar Shortage”
Monsanto Begins a Massive Disinformation Campaign to Discredit Opponents of GMO’s
Operation Cast Lead (Gaza War/Massacre) begins: Israels 22-day Slaughter of Palestinians
Jury Rules Journalist Jane Akre was Wrongfully Fired by Fox News for Refusal to Broadcast “a False, Distorted or Slanted Story” about Monsanto rBGH
Under Scrutiny, the FDA Approves the Growth Hormone rBGH based on Monsanto’s Self-Administered, Unpublished, 90 Day Study on 30 Rats
