Is the EPA aiding Monsanto in covering up the cancer-causing effects of Roundup?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Monsanto-coverup(NaturalHealth365) Monsanto and the Environmental Protection Agency have apparently joined forces to try to prevent a former EPA official from being deposed during an upcoming legal battle.

And the stakes are high – attorneys representing a group of cancer patients are accusing Jess Rowland, a former deputy at the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) Office of Pesticide Programs, of breaking ethics rules and collaborating with ‘the most hated corporation in the world‘ to institute a massive cover-up. (keep reading for the ugly details)

EPA official may be in hot water

Over 50 lawsuits have been filed accusing Monsanto of failing to warn of the risk that glyphosate in their weed killer Roundup could cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

While working at the EPA, Rowland chaired a Cancer Assessment Review Committee – which found “insufficient evidence” to conclude that glyphosate causes cancer, and determined that glyphosate was “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”

The report was leaked to the press last May – to the obvious delight of Monsanto, which pushed to publicize it in order to prevent additional actions against glyphosate.  Within days of the CARC report being leaked, Rowland left the EPA. (Gee, I wonder why?)

Attorneys for the plaintiffs now maintain that Rowland worked hand-in-hand with the biotech giant to disguise the chemical’s cancer-causing potential.

The EPA has already shot down requests to depose Rowland

It appears that a federal judge may allow Rowland to be deposed on his cozy relationship with Monsanto – and on his alleged attempts to suppress information.  Lawyers for the plaintiffs maintain that Rowland had an improper and “highly suspicious” relationship with Monsanto, one which “strained and even broke” ethics rules and regulations.

Saying it “would not be in the interests of the agency” to allow attorneys to question Rowland, the EPA denied a request to have him deposed. However, a US District Judge seems to leaning towards allowing it, characterizing the deposition as “appropriate.”

Monsanto is trying to prevent public disclosure of secret documents

While anxious to publicize the leaked CARC report, Monsanto is clearly not so thrilled with having to reveal internal documents – and is scrambling to keep documents that show collusion between Rowland and Monsanto out of the public eye.

The corporation was compelled to turn over internal documents in the course of discovery, but has argued that roughly 85 percent of them should be kept confidential – as they would “unfairly prejudice” the public and cause “reputational harm.”

Pointing out that the EPA is a taxpayer-funded public agency, attorneys for the plaintiffs insist that its interactions with Monsanto should be subject to public scrutiny. They maintain that the documents show that Rowland’s primary goal was to “serve the interests of Monsanto,” and argue that “decisions affecting the public health should not be based on secret conversations between Monsanto and EPA officials.”

Emotional letter from colleague makes shocking plea

And the attorneys for the plaintiffs have one more piece of ammunition – in fact, it may very well be a “smoking gun.”

In a March 2, 2013 letter to Rowland, a former EPA scientist begged him to reclassify glyphosate from a “possible” carcinogen to a “probable” carcinogen – which, incidentally, is the way the World Health Organization categorizes it. In the letter, toxicologist Marion Copley implored Rowland: “… for once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your conniving games with the science” (to favor the industry).

Copley went on to accuse Rowland of pressuring staff members to change reports involving glyphosate, and of helping Monsanto to suppress them.

Monsanto remains unapologetic

Of course, Monsanto, which insists glyphosate has a “long and well-established history of safe use,” predictably continues to deliver its boilerplate response: “There is no evidence that glyphosate is the cause (of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma).”  Yet, many health experts warn that glyphosate has been linked with a host of ills, including kidney damage, liver damage, birth defects and cancer.

Meanwhile, the EPA has until March 28 to file its written arguments opposing the Rowland deposition.

The clock is ticking.

References:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-27/monsanto-cancer-suits-turn-to-alleged-whitewash-by-epa-official

Gain INSTANT Access:


  • » Vaccine World Summit
  • » 7-Day Juice Cleanse
  • » FREE Newsletter
 

Keep Reading:

  • Jimmy Yost

    Is the EPA aiding Monsanto in covering up the cancer-causing effects of Roundup? The question is so stupid that it doesn’t deserve an answer.

  • Sue

    If it is so safe may I recommend the board, upper management, and FDA consume 1/8 cup each. We can all stand back and watch. Monsanto’s dream has long been the purveyor of all seed. Their greed is epic and will grow if their merger with Bayer and Syngenta is allowed by the FTC.

  • Barry Butler

    Check out my Song and Video “THE MIGHTY SEED”.
    https://www. youtube. com/watch?v=a4l6PxR8Z-I

  • Murray Thompson

    All private use of all pesticides (including DEET in insect repellents) must be totally banned. National re-educational programs focusing on a more enlightened ORGANIC form/variety of IPM must be made available freely. Broad access to information on tested and proven alternative and organic pesticide substitutes/products must be made available to everyone via physical Council/County mail deliveries, TV ads, emails, etc. Private citizens, at the very least, must be able to also locally pick up sample organic pesticide products to personally test.

    All commercial ‘public health’ pesticide applications must comply utterly with the Precautionary Principle (and thus be completely re-drawn), thus reducing the classic appeal to, and physical application of, toxic and orthodox pesticide applications to an extreme minimum.

    Pesticide use impacting the food chain must be reduced to near zero.

    Via this comprehensive PUBLIC HEALTH and (quite literally) EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT imperative, all glyphosate based herbicides would automatically be banned in totality.

    Fines must be extreme, with these proceeds helping to fund re-education. Profits from past pesticide sales, and funds from industrial and private assets that can be legally linked to prior knowledge of toxicity (like the tobacco industry’s prior knowledge of tobacco toxicity) can help fund this approach. Prior knowledge must exact severe penalties, with genocide being considered as an appropriate label for such long-winded and wilfull crimes.

    Ultimately, dramatic improvements in public health will save money that can be built into a long-term version of the above scheme.

  • Sci-reader

    Glyphosate is not an acute toxin, but a chronic toxin. It was patented as an antibiotic, applied to the soil kills beneficial bacteria preventing essential mineral uptake by crops. It also is a metal chelator, bonding with manganese and iron, preventing use by the body during digestion of food, while delivering those minerals in a way to be neurotoxins. Glyphosate as an antibiotic in the human gut kills beneficial bacteria, causing leaky gut syndrome and auto-immune diseases. Glyphosate is a synthetic analog of the essential amino acid glycine and replaces glycine in cell protein syntheses which causes mis-folding of the proteins, eventually causing cancers and organ failures. All this happens over time, maybe 10, 20, and 30 years of consumption of small quantities. Monsanto’s original studies in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s showed these effects after 24-26 months in lab rats, but hid the data with the complicity of the EPA in a callous disregard for human health. Monsanto noticed that the detrimental effects do not show up until 4 to 7 months so all of their studies are now done for only 3 months, corresponding to 7 – 9 human years consumption, which do not show the problems or show very little problems, which are usually dismissed as not biologically meaningful with no followup to detrimental findings. This company and ther complicit EPA should be charged with criminal endangerment and sentenced to jail.

  • Murray Thompson

    All private use of all pesticides (including DEET in insect repellents, and home/garden usage) must be totally banned. National re-educational programs focusing on a more enlightened ORGANIC form/variety of IPM must be made available freely. Broad access to information on tested and proven alternative and organic pesticide substitutes/products must be made available to everyone via physical Council/County mail deliveries, TV ads, emails, etc. Private citizens, at the very least, must be able to also locally pick up sample organic pesticide products from distribution points to personally test.

    All commercial ‘public health’ pesticide applications must comply utterly with the Precautionary Principle (and thus be completely re-drawn to focus on sources of problematic pest issues rather than just the notion of the technical ‘fix’ of symptoms only), thus reducing to an extreme minimum the potential of the lazy, classic appeal to, and physical application of, toxic and orthodox pesticide applications.

    Pesticide use impacting the food chain must be reduced to zero within 3 months.

    Via this comprehensive PUBLIC HEALTH and (quite literally) EXTINCTION LEVEL EVENT imperative, all glyphosate and neonicotinoid based herbicides would automatically be banned immediately, and in totality.

    Fines for continued breaches must be extreme, with these proceeds helping to fund re-education during the mandated swift migration to an organic approach. Further, profits from past pesticide sales, and funds cleanly generated from industrial and private assets that can be legitimately linked to prior knowledge of toxicity (like the tobacco industry’s prior knowledge of tobacco toxicity) can help fund this approach. Prior knowledge must exact severe penalties, with genocide being considered as an appropriate label for such long-winded and wilfull crimes.

    Ultimately, dramatic improvements in public health will save money that can be built into a very long-term version of the above scheme.