Home | Download | Discussion | Help | Site Map | New Posts | Sign in
Replies: 44 (Who?), Viewed: 19621 times.
Page 2 of 2
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#26 Old 6th May 2018 at 6:23 AM Last edited by Rafael! : 7th May 2018 at 3:04 AM.
March Against Monsanto /Bayer Meeting in May!



On 19.05.2018 the MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO / BAYER 2018 takes place. In Hamburg (Germany) and hundreds of other cities around the world protest against agricultural giants and genetic engineering representatives such as Monsanto / Bayer. Together we strongly oppose the use of glyphosate and the destructive industries of Monsanto & Co.

MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO also stands for worldwide solidarity. In North and South America, Asia, Australia, Africa and Europe, millions of people hit the streets on May 19, 2018 to make a difference. So stay free this day and join us!

When: Saturday, 19.05.2018 14:00 h Where: Hachmannplatz, Hamburg Central Station

From Central Station we walk across the city, make a stopover with speeches at Jungfernstieg and end at the Green Hunter. There will be at 4:00 pm the final rally with further expert speeches, information booths and a nice musical finale.

We are still looking for clubs and volunteers who want to support the MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO / BAYER with a speech or an information stand or are interested in participating in the organization of the demo.

For further planning, questions or suggestions send us an e-mail to [email protected].

The MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO is a worldwide protest march against Monsanto & Co. launched in 2013. The protest is directed against all environmental sins and human rights violations committed against Monsanto / Bayer and similar agricultural and chemical giants (eg BASF, Syngenta, DuPont, Dow, ChemChina): rainforest deforestation, land grabbing, the displacement of indigenous peoples, the buying up of smallholder farms, mergers of mega-corporations, food monopolies, patents on seeds, genetically modified seeds and genetically modified food, broad spectrum herbicides such as glyphosate, water and water Air pollution and not least against the bee and species extinction .
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#27 Old 24th May 2018 at 11:18 PM
Some news!


Landmark lawsuit claims Monsanto hid cancer danger of weedkiller for decades.
In June, a California groundskeeper will make history by taking company to trial on claims it suppressed harm of Roundup

Carey Gillam

Monsanto has been accused of hiding the dangers of its popular Roundup products for decades, a claim the company denies.
Monsanto has been accused of hiding the dangers of its popular Roundup products for decades, a claim the company denies. Photograph: Benoit Tessier/Reuters
At the age of 46, DeWayne Johnson is not ready to die. But with cancer spread through most of his body, doctors say he probably has just months to live. Now Johnson, a husband and father of three in California, hopes to survive long enough to make Monsanto take the blame for his fate.

On 18 June, Johnson will become the first person to take to trial on allegations that it has spent decades hiding the cancer-causing dangers of its popular Roundup herbicide products – and his case has just received a major boost.

Last week Judge Curtis Karnow issued an order clearing the way for jurors to consider not just scientific evidence related to what caused Johnson’s cancer, but allegations that Monsanto suppressed evidence of the risks of its weed killing products. Karnow ruled that the trial will proceed and a jury would be allowed to consider possible punitive damages.

“The internal correspondence noted by Johnson could support a jury finding that Monsanto has long been aware of the risk that its glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic … but has continuously sought to influence the scientific literature to prevent its internal concerns from reaching the public sphere and to bolster its defenses in products liability actions,” Karnow wrote. “Thus there are triable issues of material fact.”

Johnson’s case, filed in San Francisco county superior court in California, is at the forefront of a legal fight against Monsanto. Some 4,000 plaintiffs have sued Monsanto alleging exposure to Roundup caused them, or their loved ones, to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Another case is scheduled for trial in October, in Monsanto’s home town of St Louis, Missouri.

The lawsuits challenge Monsanto’s position that its herbicides are proven safe and assert that the company has known about the dangers and hidden them from regulators and the public. The litigants cite an assortment of research studies indicating that the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicides, a chemical called glyphosate, can lead to NHL and other ailments. They also cite research showing glyphosate formulations in its commercial-end products are more toxic than glyphosate alone. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen in 2015.

Monsanto does not want the truth about Roundup and cancer to become public
Michael Miller, attorney

Monsanto “championed falsified data and attacked legitimate studies” that revealed dangers of its herbicides, and led a “prolonged campaign of misinformation” to convince government agencies, farmers and consumers that Roundup was safe, according to Johnson’s lawsuit.

“We look forward to exposing how Monsanto hid the risk of cancer and polluted the science,” said Michael Miller, Johnson’s attorney. “Monsanto does not want the truth about Roundup and cancer to become public.”

Monsanto has fiercely denied the allegations, saying its products are not the cause of cancer. The IARC finding was wrong, according to Monsanto, as are studies finding glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup to be potentially carcinogenic. Monsanto points to findings by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulatory authorities as backing its defense.

“Glyphosate-based herbicides are supported by one of the most extensive worldwide human health and environmental effects databases ever compiled for a pesticide product,” Monsanto states on its website. “Comprehensive toxicological and environmental fate studies conducted over the last 40 years have time and again demonstrated the strong safety profile of this widely used herbicide.”

A company spokeswoman did not respond to a request for additional comment.

How the Johnson lawsuit plays out could be a bellwether for how other plaintiffs proceed. If Johnson prevails, there could be many more years of costly litigation and hefty damage claims. If Monsanto successfully turns back the challenge, it could derail other cases and lift pressure on the firm.

Weedkiller found in granola and crackers, internal FDA emails show.

According to the court record, Johnson had a job as a groundskeeper for the Benicia unified school district where he applied numerous treatments of Monsanto’s herbicides to school properties from 2012 until at least late 2015. He was healthy and active before he got the cancer diagnosis in August 2014. In a January deposition, Johnson’s treating physician testified that more than 80% of his body was covered by lesions, and that he probably had but a few months to live. Johnson has improved since starting a new drug treatment in November but remains too weak sometimes to even speak or get out of bed, his attorneys and doctors state in court filings.

Monsanto’s lawyers plan to introduce evidence that other factors caused Johnson’s cancer, to challenge the validity of the science Johnson’s claims rely on, and to present their own experts and research supporting safety. The company has an EPA draft risk assessment of glyphosate on its side, which concludes that glyphosate is not likely carcinogenic.

Carey Gillam is a journalist and author, and a public interest researcher for US Right to Know, a not-for-profit food industry research group.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#28 Old 7th Jun 2018 at 5:51 PM

Roundup Gave Me Cancer
In All Health Watch, Big Pharma, Cancer, Featured Article by INH Research June 5, 2018

Spraying Pesticides
In 2014, DeWayne Johnson was healthy and enjoying his job as a school groundskeeper in Benicia, California.

But then the father of three noticed lesions creeping over his skin. Soon 80% of his body was covered.

His doctor diagnosed him with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Now, at age 46, his physicians say he has just months to live.

But Johnson has one thing he wants to do before he dies: Take down the chemical company Monsanto.

He and his doctors blame his cancer on Johnson’s long-term use of Monsanto’s weed killer, Roundup. He is suing Monsanto, alleging they hid the cancer-causing dangers of their product for decades.

Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is a cancer of the white blood cells. It usually doesn’t strike people until they are over 65.

Johnson’s job required him to mix and spray hundreds of gallons of Monsanto’s herbicides onto school properties. He underwent chemotherapy. But it has not stopped his cancer from spreading.

Late last year, he was told he was going to die. That’s when he decided to press forward with his lawsuit.

The company has quashed dozens of similar legal claims for years. It has deep pockets to hire an army of lawyers.

But this case may be different.

Johnson is the first person the courts have allowed to introduce evidence that Monsanto knew that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, caused cancer.

Michael Miller, Johnson’s attorney, charged “Monsanto does not want the truth about Roundup and cancer to become public.”

A trial judge agreed. The judge ruled that Johnson’s evidence could prove “that Monsanto has long been aware of the risk that its glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic.”

The judge added that a jury might find “material fact” that the company “continuously sought to influence the scientific literature to prevent its internal concerns from reaching the public sphere.”

EPA Increases the Amount of Roundup in Food
For years, Monsanto has insisted that Roundup is safe. But for over a decade studies in Canada and Europe have linked Roundup to cancer in humans.

Despite this, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has done nothing to protect the public.

Recommended For You: Fighting the Fires Inside
In fact, from 2000 to 2015, the EPA actually increased the amount of Roundup allowed in food. One study found that 93% of Americans now have glyphosate in their urine.

But don’t expect Monsanto to admit that Roundup is dangerous. It is the company’s best-selling herbicide and has made them billions of dollars.

The US Department of Agriculture reports that Roundup is used on 89% of corn and 93% of soybeans.

Minimize Your Exposure to Weed Killer
More than 300 million pounds of glyphosate are dumped on American plants every year. But there are ways to minimize your exposure:

Don’t eat processed foods. More glyphosate is found in packaged foods than on fresh or frozen foods. That’s because many packaged foods contain some form of corn or soybeans.
Never eat non-organic versions of these foods. Tests show the following foods often contain high levels of glyphosate:

Dried peas
Sweet potatoes

Wash vegetables thoroughly. The best way to clean your fruits and vegetables of the herbicide is to soak them in water for about 10 minutes. Then rinse under running water while rubbing the outside of the produce with your hands. Buy organic. Chemical products like Roundup are not allowed on organic crops or in feed used to produce organic meats, egg, and dairy. Use Roundup alternatives. If you need a weed killer for your yard, don’t use glyphosate-based products. Use a natural herbicide instead. We recommend Dr. Earth. Editor’s note: This doctor’s natural cancer treatment cured 85% of his patients. Then authorities found him dead in a river. Those responsible for his death will stop at NOTHING to keep this cancer-killing treatment buried. But you can access it today…if you know how.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#29 Old 13th Jun 2018 at 5:14 PM
Visit : https://www.wemove.eu/our-campaigns Join the movement of 938376 Europeans.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#30 Old 26th Jun 2018 at 10:02 PM
Terminally Ill Groundskeeper To Testify Against Monsanto in First-Ever Roundup Cancer Trial


By Nick Meyer On June 25, 2018

The Monsanto Company is busy on all fronts lately as its merger with Bayer continues to move toward the action stage.

It’s something the company most likely expected, but here’s what they didn’t expect: a massive wave of Roundup lawsuits against them from everyone including farmers to groundskeepers and others who have been exposed to their notorious cancer-linked weedkiller.

The most high-profile case of the thousands suing involves Dewayne Johnson, a groundskeeper who used the chemical over two years and blames his cancer diagnosis on its active ingredient glyphosate, which was declared a “probable human carcinogen” in 2015 by the World Health Organization’s IARC.

Now, his testimony is set to become a key piece of evidence as the fate of the former ‘Most Evil Company in the World’ is decided in court.

Terminally Ill Man to Testify Against Monsanto

Thousands worldwide have accused the company’s weedkiller for leading to their cancer diagnoses, and now Johnson may be set to become the most high profile of them all.
At age 46, Johnson says he can show scientific evidence that Roundup caused his cancer and that Monsanto allegedly knew about the link, and will sue the company for punitive damages.

According to a CBS News legal analyst, Monsanto may have the upper hand in this case because of the large amount of studies they have at their disposal to counteract recent ones showing that the weedkiller is “safe.” But critics point out the 2015 IARC declaration which was a decision made by a team of international experts on cancer, as well as other studies such one that showed Monsanto knew glyphosate caused cancer to mammals as early as 1981.

Monsanto’s own studies are often slanted in favor of their best-selling weedkiller, critics say, because they are either undertaken by industry or conducted in Monsanto-affilated laboratories, among other concerns.

Trial Scheduled to Begin Today

According to this report from the Daily Mail, Johnson’s trial was set to begin today. He was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer that starts in the white blood cells of the body, in August 2014, and it has spread giving him only months to live according to doctors.

The article noted that Johnson has the right to an expedited trial because of California state law which allows for it in the case of patients who are dying.

Things have taken a serious turn for the worse for the 46-year-old man: he is unable to speak or move on some days, and 80 percent of his body is covered in lesions because of his chronic exposure to the chemical, he says.

Johnson worked his job at a school district in Benicia, California, where the exposure occurred. His doctors say there is “substantial medical doubt” as to whether he will survive longer than six months.

Monsanto in response has remained firm in denying the charges that its weedkiller is carcinogenic, the article stated.

According to the company, which was recently bought for over $60 billion by Bayer of Germany, non-Hodgkin’s lympoma, which Johnson has, can “take many years to form, and the fact that his first exposure was in 2012 and his diagnosis was in 2014 “precludes any possible casual connection here,” the article says.

Still, there are thousands of lawsuits against Monsanto for all different forms of cancer that seem to disagree with this notion. And there is a precedent for serious harm from pesticides worldwide: over 200,000 people die each year from acute exposure according to the United Nations.

At any rate, this is one trial that is sure to have supporters of organic and non-GMO food on the edge of their seats; and Monsanto’s new parent company Bayer as well.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#31 Old 30th Jun 2018 at 6:28 PM
What i post now, is not Bayer related. But it´s a blow in the face, for many people in Europe. Anyone heard about the trade agreement, between the European Union and Japan called JEFTA? JEFTA wants our water: if the trade agreement between Europe and Japan comes, our tap water threatens to become mere commodity. The danger: higher prices, lower quality. The EU Council is expected to vote on JEFTA in just a few days. The SPD (party) must enforce, that Germany in the vote contains - so that nobody does business with our tap water!

Here is a link, you can sign the petition show them you´re against it:


Important details i translate:

What is JEFTA?

JEFTA is the planned trade agreement between the EU and Japan. When it comes into force, a huge economic area is created, which covers 30 percent of global gross domestic product. JEFTA would be the EU's largest trade agreement so far.

What are the consequences of JEFTA?

The agreement not only facilitates the exchange of goods and services between countries. Many of the planned regulations can strongly influence our everyday lives. Above all, we are threatened with massive privatization with JEFTA.

What can Jefta do with my water supply?

JEFTA's basic approach is liberalization at any price. The agreement defines some areas that are protected from privatization. Only water is not there. This opens the German water industry for corporations. It would be enormously difficult with JEFTA to protect existing water resources and ensure water quality.

What does the privatization of water mean?

London, Lisbon, Berlin - three deterrent examples that show the dire consequences of privatizing the water supply. Lines were no longer modernized, the water quality was worse and prices rose rapidly - in Berlin within a few years after privatization by 35 percent, in Portugal even by almost 400 percent. Berlin has ended its 2013 privatization trip. The country had to buy back its shares in the water companies for about 1.2 billion euros. The profits from the massive price increases, on the other hand, hit the investors themselves.

What needs to change in JEFTA?

The water supply must be explicitly excluded from liberalization and privatization. In addition, JEFTA must respect the EU's precautionary principle: damage to our health and our environment must be taken into account from the outset - not just when it's too late. Other trade agreements include special articles on water. Here it is clarified: Water is not a commodity and must therefore be exempt from the agreement. We also want such a clause for JEFTA.

Who decides on the trade agreement?

JEFTA is due to be signed by representatives of both sides at the EU-Japan Summit on 11 July 2018. Before that, the Council of the European Union must approve the agreement, specifically: the economic ministers of the Member States. An agreement with such far-reaching consequences must necessarily be discussed publicly - so far, it was mainly negotiated in secret. Our demand: Everyone should be able to participate in the discussion, and also renegotiations must be possible. But JEFTA is a so-called EU-only agreement: Officially, even the parliaments of the Member States have no opportunity to demand changes. But they can put political pressure on their governments. That's exactly what we want to support with our express appeal.

How did JEFTA come about?

JEFTA has been negotiated for five years. Nevertheless, almost nothing is known about the exact content - the official documents are kept secret by the European Commission. Everything we know comes from leaks. As a result, we did not have a chance to hold a public, transparent discussion on the consequences. NGOs such as Lobby Control have also revealed that corporate lobbyists have heavily influenced the negotiations.
#32 Old 30th Jun 2018 at 7:39 PM
Damn I don't really care anymore what the EU does, because they ruined themselves already and keep doing it. No matter what the citizens say, EU does the opposite. Let them take my money or anything, but not my clean and tasty Ostfriesian water, it's the best qaulity in all of Germany

Reality's an illusion, the universe is a hologram, buy gold! Byeeee
Need help building? We'll help.
Lab Assistant
#33 Old 2nd Jul 2018 at 1:43 AM
Why Japan has to come here to EU to get water? montains mont fuji is snowed .. oceanwater can be de-salted... or is another issue they cant ged rid off like radiation?
plus Water tapped on bad plastic is also bad for hormone system...
On 2000-2008 crack I thought all politicals all arround world, related to banks, seems to went to the same guru-medium and said "this is the end, get all profit, no matter what-" All like fools trying to do deeds on people who sleep on streets ... and the fools keep up and doing scams to all people. How we can stop that? We are more informed than never before and cant do a bit to stop scams.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#34 Old 2nd Jul 2018 at 5:16 AM
Originally Posted by Johnny_Bravo
Damn I don't really care anymore what the EU does, because they ruined themselves already and keep doing it. No matter what the citizens say, EU does the opposite. Let them take my money or anything, but not my clean and tasty Ostfriesian water, it's the best qaulity in all of Germany

Well it´s always worth, to fight for our rights. Especially if everything looks hopeless.

Originally Posted by Valdesca
Why Japan has to come here to EU to get water? montains mont fuji is snowed .. oceanwater can be de-salted... or is another issue they cant ged rid off like radiation?
plus Water tapped on bad plastic is also bad for hormone system...
On 2000-2008 crack I thought all politicals all arround world, related to banks, seems to went to the same guru-medium and said "this is the end, get all profit, no matter what-" All like fools trying to do deeds on people who sleep on streets ... and the fools keep up and doing scams to all people. How we can stop that? We are more informed than never before and cant do a bit to stop scams.

Water means big business. Once you control it, you´re rich in notime. JEFTA is a nasty business deal like TTIP and TPP:
"We" stopped this madness once. Let´s try this again! Big companies, banks etc. get filthy rich. I only wished, the financial system couldn´t control our planet THAT much gasp! Always the same, since thousands of years. Some guys grab all the money, and the rest suffers. We didn´t learn much! I second that, many people are well informed nowdays. The internet is a very powerful tool. We argue in the internet about injustices, share informations get angry. And that`s it.......? We know in several cases, who´s the "bad boy". And instead of hey, let´s do something about it....silence or surrender? We can do a lot, in a peaceful way. Thousands demonstrate fight for their rights. Very good uh, why not millions? I shared this simple example several times: You don´t like Bayer, Nestle, don´t buy their products. Imagine millions do the same worldwide, for several month. The money they loose.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#35 Old 13th Jul 2018 at 11:30 AM
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#36 Old 17th Jul 2018 at 6:46 PM
About the topic again: JEFTA the EU's largest trade agreement. Corporations want our water.

I translate:

BAD NEWS! The EU and Japan signed the JEFTA trade agreement today (17.7.2018) in Tokyo. In other words, corporations can seize our water in the future. But the EU Parliament still has to agree to the agreement before it enters into force. And that is our chance to prevent JEFTA. The trade agreement threatens genetic engineering and hormone meat - all negotiated completely intransparent. And it threatens our water: JEFTA considers water as a commodity and brings it to the open market. Even with CETA, the agreement with Canada, water was explicitly excluded. JEFTA clears the way for privatization by large corporations. The result: worse quality, much higher prices.

We want, no, we have to prevent that. And we have a chance: in December, the European Parliament has yet to decide on JEFTA. The EU parliamentarians know: Next year's European elections. Media and millions of voters are now looking very carefully. If we succeed in starting a broad protest movement against JEFTA, we can stop selling off the water.

Field Researcher
Original Poster
#37 Old 3rd Aug 2018 at 9:08 AM
Monsanto’s “Cancer-Causing” Herbicide Glyphosate “Destroyed My Life,” Dying Man Says as Landmark Trial Continues.


Dewayne Johnson, the former groundskeeper who once spent his days spraying Monsanto’s controversial weedkiller glyphosate on the school grounds where he worked, has many regrets about his time on the job, first and foremost the fact that he has been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. “I’ve been going through a lot of pain,” said Johnson, a father of three according to a new article in The Guardian. “It really takes everything out of you … I’m not getting any better.” Aside from his own cancer diagnosis and suffering, he always wishes he never would have sprayed the potentially harmful chemical all over the grounds that he worked, especially where children are present. According to the IARC of the World Health Organization, the chemical is capable of causing cancer, an assertion they made in spring 2015. But Monsanto, as is par for the course, is once again denying the link, as part of a case that has already sent shockwaves through the worlds of groundskeeping and agriculture. Johnson’s Lawyers: Monsanto has “Fought Science” and Bullied Scientists. Also mentioned in the article was Johnson’s lawyers’ opposition to the alleged safety declarations that have been made by government organizations on Monsanto’s chemicals. While the EPA has approved glyphosate and Roundup, the latter of which is a more potent chemical cocktail with the former as its main ingredient, the jury is still out to say the least on the safety of these chemicals, especially in light of a recent scandal of alleged collusion with an EPA official to “kill” further safety studies according to Monsanto. Johnson’s lawyers argued in court that the company has “fought science” over the years and worked to “bully” researchers who have raised concerns about the health risks of glyphosate and Roundup. In Johnson’s case, he stated that being exposed to the chemicals at work was “kind of unavoidable” due to drift, even though he wore extensive protective gear while spraying according to The Guardian‘s article. “You were getting it on your face everyday,” he said. He added that he had perfect skin before working the groundskeeping job, saying that the weedkiller residue “got on everything” during his time at work. Now, he may only have months to live according to doctors. Monsanto Denies Glyphosate Caused Johnson’s Cancer With thousands of similar claims against Monsanto pending in court, it goes without saying that Johnson and his peers’ lawsuits represent one of the biggest existential threats to both the reputation and business of Monsanto (now owned by Bayer) in the coming months and years. Monsanto had the following to say in response to The Guardian: “We have empathy for anyone suffering from cancer, but the scientific evidence clearly shows that glyphosate was not the cause.” But as shown by Johnson’s lawyers, Monsanto internal emails have reportedly revealed their “repeated efforts” to ignore expert warnings while “ghostwriting” positive papers and seeking to control the narrative about the science of these chemicals. In Johnson’s case, the evidence is on display for all to see. Something caused his health to rapidly deteriorate and he strongly believes it was the chemicals he sprayed. When it comes to Monsanto and what activists have deemed “tobacco” science in regards to their chemical concoctions, things are far more hazy. In the coming days and weeks, we will learn more as the court attempts to sort it all out and get to the bottom of what really caused Johnson’s cancer. Stay tuned, because his and other cancer cases aren’t going away anytime soon.

Victory! European Court Rules that Gene Edited Crops Must Be Regulated as GMOs


The Monsanto and Bayer train is about to officially roll into town in the coming months, but a huge part of their plan hinges on deception rather than actually giving the people what they want: healthy, organic, nutritious and above all real food. In Europe, Monsanto has been relegated mostly to the sidelines after a wave of GMO bans by EU member states that took place in recent years. And now things have gotten even worse for the GMO agenda in Europe as it has been announced that the industry’s latest lab creations, CRISPR gene edited foods, will officially be regulated the same as GMOs, which could keep them mostly out of Europe for the foreseeable future. CRISPR Gene Edited Crops To Be Treated As GMOs According to this report from the website Futurism.com, the new gene edited crops will be regulated the same as GMOs after all. There had been some question as to this potential outcome but Europe’s highest court ruled on Wednesday that the new gene-edited crops will face the same regulation and thus, likely, the same stiff opposition and likely bans from lawmakers, citizens and companies. “It is an important judgment, and it’s a very rigid judgment. It means for all the new inventions such as CRISPR–Cas9 food, you would need to go through the lengthy approval process of the European Union,” said Kai Purnhagen, a Dutch legal scholar. Many grassroots environmental organizations have welcomed the decision including Greenpeace. “Releasing these new GMOs into the environment without proper safety measures is illegal and irresponsible, particularly given that gene editing can lead to unintended side effects,” Franziska Achterberg, Greenpeace EU’s food policy director, said in a press statement. “The European commission and European governments must now ensure that all new GMOs are fully tested and labelled, and that any field trials are brought under GMO rules.” For more info, see the full article here. Problems Arise in the U.S. with CRISPR GMOs Meanwhile here in the states, the GMO CRISPR experiment will be foisted upon the public as expected, despite a lack of any long-term independent safety testing. Monsanto recently signed a new $125 million dollar deal to produce more GMOs using CRISPR gene-editing technology, including strawberries and other favorite crops potentially down the line (read more here). In April of this year, pro-GMO Secretary of Ag. Sonny Perdue signed off on a ruling that made it so that CRISPR GMOs would have even less regulation than traditional GMOs, which is already considered to be lax in the United States by world standards. It’s all because of Monsanto’s longstanding cozy ties with the government, as well as the country’s obsession with unlabeled genetically modified junk food. For now, be careful of what you buy, and be sure to support local organic farmers whenever possible while spreading the word. The importance of your support cannot be understated. Also, be sure to avoid the following CRISPR gene-edited foods whenever possible: arctic apples, GMO potatoes (three varieties, looking for anything non-organic from the Simplot company), and potentially in the coming months, mushrooms.

Monsanto, Bayer Plan to Dump New GMOs on Unsuspecting U.S. Customers After Latest EU Ban.


Monsanto and Bayer have been busy in all corners of the globe attempting to spread their genetically modified seeds and pesticides, but one place where they haven’t had much luck is in Europe, where opposition remains firm. The latest ruling that the newest type of GMOs must be regulated as such means that bans are likely, which of course means that the two companies are searching for a new market in which to dump their latest GMO creations. All of which of course means that the next target market is the United States, where Monsanto and Bayer plan to unleash their latest lab-spliced food on unsuspecting human guinea pigs yet again. CRISPR GMO Experiment to Be Dumped Into American Food Supply Unfortunately for hapless Americans who don’t have access to GMO labels, a storm is brewing: the latest type of GMO will be dumped on unsuspecting Americans under the guise of “substantial equivalence,” the false doctrine crafted by Monsanto-allied lawmakers stating that GMOs and regular crops are the same. In this case, the new GMOs will be created using “gene editing,” a process that allows scientists to play God with our food in the laboratory. So far, apples, potatoes and even GMO mushrooms have all been created using this technology and are being unleashed into the food supply even though haven’t been tested for long term safety. But Americans will be forced to eat them without even knowing it thanks to a lack of GMO labeling. According to an article from Euronews.com, BASF and Bayer (the new owner of Monsanto), plan to pursue opportunities for the new GMO crops elsewhere after the ruling. Avoid the New GMO Experiment At All Costs The new GMO experiment is still in its infant stages, but Monsanto recently signed a new $125 million deal to flood the market with these “long-lasting” GMOs. Which of course means that our favorite foods could be created by scientists in a laboratory with virtually no oversight, instead of being made the old fashioned way through seed saving and careful planting and breeding. A recent study found that the CRISPR GMO technique, Monsanto and Bayer’s preferred new method for bringing GMOs to the market, may cause “unexpected genetic damage” and even cancer in some cases, according to its applications in the medical field. But despite this the government says we don’t need long-term, independent safety testing for this process when it is used in our food. It’s the same reason that over 70% of the grocery store food supply is now tainted with GMOs, while they are banned in approximately 20 countries in Europe and widely rejected throughout much of the world. Meanwhile, our farmers’ fields are being doused in Roundup, the herbicide that has brought thousands of cancer lawsuits against the Monsanto company, including one from a man who only has months to live and was a former groundskeeper who sprayed the stuff every day. In any other sane world or culture where people value the integrity of their food, this would sound patently insane. But here in America, it’s just another day and another dollar for Monsanto and Bayer. Avoid these new “longer-lasting” GMOs at all costs if you don’t want to be a part of the experiment. Without labeling, it’s easier said than done, but buying organic is the best place to start.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#38 Old 4th Sep 2018 at 11:17 AM
BREAKING NEWS: Monsanto Found GUILTY in Roundup Cancer Trial, Multi-Million Verdict Awarded to Dying Man.


After years of denying its flagship product Roundup causes cancer, the Monsanto Company has officially been found guilty in federal court, after a San Francisco jury ruled in favor of a school groundskeeper dying from the disease.

Dewayne Johnson, who has long served as a pest control manager in a San Francisco Bay Area school district, was diagnosed with lymphoma in 2014 at age 42.

But now doctors say he only has months to live after his exposure to Roundup, the chemical weedkilling cocktail with active ingredient glyphosate deemed a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2015.

After a four-week deliberation, the jury returned the landmark verdict: Monsanto has acted “with malice or oppression” toward Johnson, a verdict that was unanimously reached against the chemical and GMO giant.

Nearly $290 Million Awarded in Monsanto Cancer Case

Johnson, who goes by the nickname “Lee” and is a father of three, will now be awarded a total of nearly $290 million from the company — $2.3 million in economic losses, $37 million for pain and emotional distress, and $250 million in punitive damages.

He suffers from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma due to the his exposure to Roundup and another Monsanto product, Ranger Pro, during his years on the job according to the lawsuit as noted in this report from NBC News.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#39 Old 20th Sep 2018 at 4:21 PM

Bayer's Monsanto asks U.S. court to toss $289 million glyphosate verdict.

Tina Bellon

(Reuters) - Bayer AG unit Monsanto on Tuesday asked a California judge to throw out a $289 million jury verdict awarded to a man who alleged the company’s glyphosate-based weed-killers, including Roundup, gave him cancer.

The company said in motions filed in San Francisco’s Superior Court of California that the jury’s decision was insufficiently supported by the evidence presented at trial by school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson.

Johnson’s case, filed in 2016, was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system, that he alleged was caused by years of exposure to Roundup and Ranger Pro, another Monsanto herbicide that contains glyphosate.

Monsanto asked Superior Court Judge Suzanne Bolanos, who oversaw the trial, to set aside the verdict or, in the alternative, reduce the award or grant a new trial. A hearing on the motions is set for Oct. 10.

The company, which denies the allegations, has previously said it would appeal the verdict if necessary.

Johnson’s case was the first to go to trial over allegations that glyphosate causes cancer. Monsanto is facing some 8,000 similar lawsuits across the United States.

Shares in Bayer, which bought Monsanto this year for $63 billion, slid following the Aug. 10 jury decision and the stock was still trading some 20 percent below its pre-verdict value of 73.30 euros ($85.45) on Tuesday.

“The jury’s decision is wholly at odds with over 40 years of real-world use, an extensive body of scientific data and analysis ... which support the conclusion that glyphosate-based herbicides are safe for use and do not cause cancer in humans,” Bayer said in a statement on Tuesday.

Bayer said Johnson failed to prove glyphosate caused his cancer and the scientific evidence he presented at trial “fell well below the causation standard required under California law.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in September 2017 concluded a decades-long assessment of glyphosate risks and found the chemical is not a likely carcinogen to humans. However, the cancer unit of the World Health Organization in 2015 classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

The jury found Monsanto failed to warn Johnson and other consumers of the cancer risks posed by its weed-killers. It awarded $39 million in compensatory and $250 million in punitive damages.

The company in its motion for a new trial also said statements by lawyers for Johnson inflamed and inappropriately influenced the jurors. Some legal experts have said Monsanto faces long odds on appeal on those grounds.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#40 Old 25th Oct 2018 at 3:30 AM
Default Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Company | California State Court
10/22/2018 update: Judge Bolanos denied Monsanto’s motion for JNOV (Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict) in Dewayne Johnson vs. Monsanto.

Official Jury Verdict Form
Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Company is the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. The lawsuit alleges exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer and its active ingredient, glyphosate, caused Northern California resident Dewayne “Lee” Johnson to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

10/22/2018 update: Judge Bolanos denied Monsanto’s motion for JNOV (Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict) in Dewayne Johnson vs. Monsanto.

Order Denying Monsanto’s Motion
Statement on behalf of Baum Hedlund & The Miller Firm:
Although we believe a reduction in punitive damages was unwarranted and we are weighing the options, we are pleased the Court did not disturb the verdict. The evidence presented to this jury was, quite frankly, overwhelming. And, as we saw in recent days, this jury was intelligent, diligent, and followed the letter of the law. We are happy the jury’s voice was acknowledged by the Court, even if slightly muted. We are still reviewing whether we will accept the proposed remittitur or retry the punitive damages. That said, today is a triumph for our legal system. We care deeply for Lee and his family, and we are excited to share this important win with them and all those who supported this case.

10/12/2018 update: Plaintiff and Defense filed the proposed orders today regarding the motion for JNOV (Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict) in Dewayne Johnson vs. Monsanto.

Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson Proposed Order on JNOV
Defendant Monsanto Proposed Order Granting JNOV
10/2/18 update: Attorneys for Mr. Johnson filed two opposition briefs on October 2, 2018 in response to motions previously filed by Monsanto; one opposing Monsanto’s motion for a new trial and the other opposing Monsanto’s motion to reverse or amend the landmark verdict. According to the plaintiff’s briefs, Monsanto “received a fair trial in this case and an independent assessment by a remarkable jury who unanimously found ample evidence that Plaintiff proved all elements of his case…It is time to end this litigation and respect the jury’s judgment.”

Lee Johnson worked as a groundskeeper for the Benicia Unified School District in the San Francisco Bay Area. Between 2012 and 2015, part of Mr. Johnson’s job was to apply Monsanto herbicides to school properties.

In 2014, Lee began to experience severe skin irritation, which he reported to health care providers. He also contacted Monsanto, asking if his skin irritation could have been caused by his use of Roundup. Internal Monsanto emails later obtained by Lee’s attorneys show that his queries concerning Roundup were discussed among company employees. However, Monsanto never responded to Mr. Johnson, so he continued to use Roundup.

In August of 2014, Lee was diagnosed with epidermotropic T-cell lymphoma. After his diagnosis, his job still required him to apply and be in close contact with Monsanto glyphosate-based herbicides. Despite enduring chemotherapy treatments throughout 2015, Mr. Johnson’s cancer progressed. In September 2017, a biopsy revealed mycosis fungoides (non-Hodgkin lymphoma with large cell transformation).
Mr. Johnson filed a Roundup cancer lawsuit against Monsanto in 2016. He is represented by the Miller Firm and Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman. In the documents below, you will find trial transcripts and exhibits (posted after 48-hour delay) and other court documents from Dewayne Johnson v. Monsanto Company. For access to all public documents in this case, you can view the docket via the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco. If you are looking for the court documents from the federal Monsanto Roundup litigation (MDL), please visit the Monsanto Court Papers page. If you are looking for unsealed Monsanto emails, communications, studies and other memoranda, please visit the Monsanto Papers page.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#41 Old 13th Nov 2018 at 8:54 PM

Bayer Hit by More Lawsuits Over Safety of Roundup Weedkiller
Lawsuits from 9,300 plaintiffs were pending at the end of October, up from 8,700 in August

Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller atomizers are displayed for sale at a garden shop.
By Ruth Bender
Nov. 13, 2018 3:37 a.m. ET
BERLIN— Bayer AG BAYRY -3.11% disclosed another jump in the number of lawsuits alleging the German company’s recently acquired weedkillers cause cancer, elevating an issue that has wiped billions off Bayer’s market valuation.

Lawsuits from 9,300 plaintiffs were pending at the end of October compared with 8,700 at the end of August, Bayer said Tuesday. Plaintiffs claim that Roundup weedkillers, which Bayer acquired in its takeover of Monsanto Co., made them ill and that Monsanto knew or should have known of the risks but failed to warn adequately.

Bayer rejects the allegations, arguing there are hundreds of scientific studies and regulatory authorities that affirm glyphosate, the compound contained in the weedkillers, is safe to use.

“We continue to believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in all of these lawsuits,” Chief Executive Werner Baumann said in a press release for the company’s third-quarter results.

The latest increase in the number of cases highlights the challenge for Bayer to assuage investor concerns that its acquisition of Monsanto this year had burdened the pharmaceutical and chemicals company with a problem that could take years to resolve and could weigh on its share price for some time.

The trouble for Bayer flared on Aug. 10, when a San Francisco jury held Monsanto liable for a former groundskeeper’s terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma and ordered a heavy fine on the U.S. company. At the time, Bayer had limited latitude to defend itself as it didn’t yet officially control Monsanto, pending asset sales required by antitrust authorities to close the $63 billion acquisition of the U.S. agricultural giant.

Bayer has been fighting back vigorously since, but markets remain skeptical. Since the verdict, Bayer has lost some €30 billion ($33.7 billion) in market capitalization as investors fear the issue could overshadow the integration process.

What's NewsA digest of the day's most important news to watch, delivered to your inbox. LEARN MORE
In late October, the San Francisco judge reduced the August jury award to $78.5 million from $289 million but maintained the jury’s verdict that Monsanto acted with malice, sending Bayer shares down again. Investors had taken heart earlier in October when the same judge issued a tentative order for a new trial that could have allowed Bayer to argue the case afresh.

Bayer is now appealing the verdict with the California Court of Appeal, saying it is a single judgment that isn’t binding for other cases. Bayer has been arguing that attorneys for the plaintiff Dewayne Johnson relied on flimsy scientific evidence to prove a link to his cancer and that they had swayed the jurors with overly emotional and speculative arguments.

Judge Reduces Jury Award Against Bayer’s Roundup to $78.5 Million (Oct. 23, 2018)
Bayer Steps Up Legal Fight Over Weed Killer Blamed for Cancer (Sept. 19, 2018)
Bayer Says More Americans Are Alleging Monsanto Weedkillers Cause Cancer (Sept. 5, 2018)
Monsanto Hit by $289 Million Verdict in Cancer Case (Aug 10, 2018)
Health Agency Says Widely Used Herbicide Likely Carcinogenic (March 20, 2015)
Meanwhile, plaintiffs’ lawyers have aired ads seeking new Roundup plaintiffs, particularly since the San Francisco verdict came out. So far this year, some 24,000 such TV ads have run at an estimated cost of $5.7 million, according to Kantar Media CMAG data analyzed by litigation-risk forecaster X Ante.

The wave of Roundup lawsuits started after the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a unit of the World Health Organization, in 2015 classified glyphosate as likely having the potential to cause cancer. The decision came despite Monsanto and other agricultural groups having pointed to other studies that showed no link between cancer and the chemical.

While the number of lawsuits continues to rise—and Bayer said it expects more to come—the integration of Monsanto helped boost the German company’s third-quarter sales by 23% to €9.91 billion.

Net profit fell 26% to €2.89 billion from €3.88 billion in the year-earlier period, when Bayer booked a large gain from selling a stake in plastics-and-chemicals business Covestro AG. Earnings before interest taxes depreciation and amortization before special items was flat at €2.2 billion.

Bayer confirmed its full-year outlook. However, it warned that its outlook for its animal and consumer health divisions was looking increasingly ambitious.

Bayer continued to deleverage in the third quarter. Net debt decreased 18% to €36.52 billion at the end of September helped by asset sales Bayer had to make to obtain regulatory approval for the Monsanto purchase.

Bayer shares opened up 1% after the company’s third-quarter report.

Write to Ruth Bender at [email protected]
#42 Old 20th Nov 2018 at 6:51 PM
Originally Posted by Rafael!
Well it´s always worth, to fight for our rights. Especially if everything looks hopeless.

To this I can only say that if the citizens fight with success, they come back a few years later with the slightly changed, but fundamentally same plan under a new name. Current example would be Article 13. A few years ago they had ACTA which was basically the same..

Reality's an illusion, the universe is a hologram, buy gold! Byeeee
Need help building? We'll help.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#43 Old 19th Dec 2018 at 5:05 PM
Originally Posted by Johnny_Bravo
To this I can only say that if the citizens fight with success, they come back a few years later with the slightly changed, but fundamentally same plan under a new name. Current example would be Article 13. A few years ago they had ACTA which was basically the same..

Sure they come back with new nasty ideas. If we stop the fight for our rights we´re lost.
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#44 Old 29th Dec 2018 at 10:36 PM
Soo here are some news: It looks like coal will be banned. At least in Germany. Plus i heard a rumour, that Glyphosate will be banned in Europe by law! I ain´t got any solid proof so far. Either way protest is wonderful!
Field Researcher
Original Poster
#45 Old 15th Jan 2019 at 3:16 PM

The Sobering Details Behind the Latest Seed Monopoly Chart

When Philip Howard of Michigan State University published the first iteration of his now well-known seed industry consolidation chart in 2008, it starkly illustrated the extent of acquisitions and mergers of the previous decade: Six corporations dominated the majority of the brand-name seed market, and they were starting to enter into new alliances with competitors that threatened to further weaken competition.

Howard’s newly updated seed chart is similar but even starker. It shows how weak antitrust law enforcement and oversight by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has allowed a handful of firms to amass enormous market, economic, and political power over our global seed supply. The newest findings show that the Big 6 (Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Dow, Bayer, and BASF) have consolidated into a Big 4 dominated by Bayer and Corteva (a new firm created as a result of the Dow–DuPont merger), and rounded out with ChemChina and BASF. These four firms control more than 60 percent of global proprietary seed sales.

Howard began his annual tracking of seed industry ownership changes in 1998, a year that served as a turning point for industry consolidation. Two years after genetically engineered (GE) varieties were introduced in 1996, by 1998 the large agribusiness companies had accelerated their consolidation by buying up smaller firms to accumulate more intellectual property (IP) rights. By 2008, Monsanto’s patented genetics alone were planted on 80 percent of U.S. corn acres, 86 percent of cotton acres, and 92 percent of soybean acres. Today, these percentages are even higher.

Economists say that an industry has lost its competitive character when the concentration ratio of the top four firms is 40 percent or higher. The seed industry continues to exceed this benchmark not only across the entire global supply, but across crop types as well. For example, even before the Big 4 merged, three firms (Monsanto, Syngenta, and Vilmorin) controlled 60 percent of the global vegetable seed market.

The most notable mega-mergers in Howard’s updated chart include:

• Dow and DuPont: This $130 billion merger resulted in the two chemical companies dividing into three companies, including a new agriculture firm called Corteva.
• ChemChina and Syngenta: This $43 billion merger allowed China to add its second company ranking in the top 10 of global seed sales (along with Longping High-Tech).
• Bayer and Monsanto: This $63 billion deal was the second-biggest merger announced in 2016; Bayer has since dropped Monsanto’s 117-year-old name.
“For farmers, the options continue to be reduced,” says Howard. “Although Bayer sold a number of seed divisions to BASF to pave the way for its acquisition of Monsanto, the share of the market controlled by the largest firms has only increased.” What’s more, he added that although those firms made promises of job growth and greater innovation if the merger was approved, Bayer last month announced it would cut 12,000 jobs, or about 10 percent of its global workforce.

History shows us that seed industry consolidation leads to less choice and higher prices for farmers. These companies also aggressively protect their IP rights, which means less innovation and more restrictions on how seed is used and exchanged, including for seed saving and research purposes. These restrictions affect conventional and organic agriculture alike by making a large pool of plant genetics inaccessible to public researchers, farmers, and independent breeders, which in turn limits the diversity of seed in our landscapes and marketplace and weakens our food security.

A number of studies suggest increased market domination removes companies’ incentive to innovate. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s own data confirms this trend, finding that fewer players mean less innovation. As the seed industry became more concentrated, private research “dropped or slowed” and those companies that survived consolidation are “sponsoring less research relative to the size of their individual markets than when more companies were involved.”

While the three mergers mentioned above received the most media attention and public resistance, Howard’s latest report found that 2018 brought 56 additional acquisitions and joint ventures involving other top seed companies, including Limagrain’s Vilmorin-Mikado subsidiary in France and Longping High-Tech in China, which acquired Dow’s maize division in Brazil. Both ChemChina and Longping High-Tech are planning more acquisitions of seed companies in China.

“There is a strong need to make these hidden ownership ties more visible to both farmers and eaters,” Howard explains, “so that we can avoid supporting firms that threaten the resilience of our food systems.”

Seed represents profound potential for improving our food and agricultural systems. Plants can be bred to thrive without pesticides and to naturally resist disease, and to be adaptable to changing climates and environmental conditions; they can also be bred to improve the quality of our food. But to realize all of this potential, we must create structural changes to how seed is managed and shared.

The DOJ has abdicated its responsibility to investigate and prosecute violations of antitrust laws, meaning that it is up to the public to demand action and resist companies that put the sustainability and security of our food and farming future at risk. We must also demand and support more investment in public plant breeding programs that are truly responsive to the needs of regional and resilient farming systems that support the health of both people and the planet.

As the industry continues to consolidate at a scale previously thought unimaginable, and policymakers begin to grapple with solutions, there is a growing community of seed stewards who are making an immediate difference today. Seed leaders including Ellen Bartholomew, Edmund Frost, Walter Goldstein, Ken Greene, Sarah Kleeger and Andrew Still, Frank Morton, Judy Owsowitz, Laura Parker, Theresa and Dan Podoll, Clifton Slade, Don Tipping, Rowen White, and many others are actively increasing the security of our seed and food supply.

By supporting more democratic seed systems—whether it’s buying from a seed company that aligns with your values, visiting your local seed library exchange, or growing and saving your own seed—we can take back control of our seed supply while actively conserving, improving, and generating more diversity on farms and in our backyards. This is the kind of diversity that, when considered collectively, is globally important.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top