Hoe evil is Monsanto eigenlijk? #6

quote:

Op dinsdag 9 juni 2015 13:44 schreef NightFlight het volgende:
Te kleine sample-groepen nemen en te korte termijnen gebruiken valt onder manipuleren om zo het resultaat gunstiger te laten lijken omdat op die manier ongunstige resultaten minder voorkomen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 9 juni 2015 14:53 schreef NightFlight het volgende:
"In the unprocessed soy study the inclusion level of the GM soy was too low and would probably ensure that any possible undesirable GM effects did not occur."

quote:

Op dinsdag 9 juni 2015 13:44 schreef NightFlight het volgende:
Te kleine sample-groepen nemen en te korte termijnen gebruiken valt onder manipuleren om zo het resultaat gunstiger te laten lijken omdat op die manier ongunstige resultaten minder voorkomen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 9 juni 2015 14:53 schreef NightFlight het volgende:
"In the unprocessed soy study the inclusion level of the GM soy was too low and would probably ensure that any possible undesirable GM effects did not occur."

quote:

Op maandag 8 juni 2015 22:23 schreef .SP. het volgende:
aanrader, hoop dat het in NL gekeken kan worden....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ipla(...)ood-cultivating-fear

quote:

Op dinsdag 9 juni 2015 16:03 schreef NightFlight het volgende:
Inderdaad. Geen goede onderzoeksmethode om gunstige effekten te bereiken.

quote:

Dat is expres gedaan om zo gunstige resultaten te behalen. Zeer bedenkelijk dus.

quote:

ST. LOUIS — Monsanto Corporation, the agribusiness giant best known for its pesticides and genetically-modified crops, also manufactured white phosphorous for the U.S. government over at least the past 20 years. Used in incendiary military weapons, the United States sold white phosphorous-based weapons to Israel, which used those weapons to commit brutal war crimes against Palestinians living in Gaza in 2009.

White phosphorous is created from phosphorous through industrial processes — it is not a naturally occurring substance. Exposure can cause severe and often fatal burns, or other complications such as organ failure, with even survivors suffering from long-term health effects.

In addition to its use in weapons, white phosphorous is also used to create phosphoric acid, a key ingredient in some fertilizers, which likely explains why Monsanto would manufacture the substance.

At one point, Monsanto was the only U.S.-based firm manufacturing the substance. This, of course, caught the military’s attention.

According to heavily redacted government documents revealed by the blog Current Events Inquiry, the U.S. government saw Monsanto as a key supplier, fearing that global politics might interfere with the ability to import the substance from China or India, where most white phosphorous is manufactured due to flimsy environmental protections and oversight. The documents, originally posted on the U.S. Federal Business Opportunities website, state that because of this key role, Monsanto could require special government protections “in the event of a national emergency.”

Further evidence of Monsanto’s role in manufacturing white phosphorous can be found in a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report from 1997, “Toxicological Profile For White Phosphorous,” which lists Monsanto facilities that store hundreds of thousands of pounds of the toxic chemical. The document also outlines some of the dangerous effects of white phosphorous: in addition to fatal or serious burns, exposure can result in chronic health problems, damage to the immune system, birth defects, and neurological damage.

Monsanto sold white phosphorous to the U.S. military’s Pine Bluff Arsenal, where it is stored in underwater tanks and manufactured into munitions. Then, the U.S. military sold white phosphorous to Israel, where it was used in war crimes during Israel’s “Cast Lead” offensive, which killed thousands of civilians from Dec. 27, 2008 to Jan. 18, 2009.

Antiwar.com’s Jason Ditz explains:

“The use of white phosphorus is not in and of itself a war crime, and is generally considered acceptable as a means of obscuring troop movements or illuminating areas. Its use in civilian areas however, even if not directed at the civilian population, is banned under the Geneva Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.”

Yet Israel had flaunted international law once again, using white phosphorous rounds over some of Gaza’s most “densely populated areas,” according to a March 2009 report from Human Rights Watch, despite acknowledging that white phosphorous can cause horrific burns and fatal health complications:

“A medical report prepared during the recent hostilities by the Israeli ministry of health said that white phosphorus ‘can cause serious injury and death when it comes into contact with the skin, is inhaled or is swallowed.’ Burns on less than 10 percent of the body can be fatal because of damage to the liver, kidneys, and heart, the ministry report says. Infection is common and the body’s absorption of the chemical can cause serious damage to internal organs, as well as death.

If the IDF intended to use white phosphorus as a smokescreen for its forces, it had a readily available non-lethal alternative to white phosphorus – smoke shells produced by an Israeli company, Human Rights Watch concluded.”

The same documents revealed by Current Events Inquiry show that Israel is taking a more direct role in the manufacture of white phosphorous today, now supplying it to the U.S. government via ICL Performance Products, a subsidiary of Israel Chemicals Ltd., which in turn can be traced back to the Ofer brothers, the country’s wealthiest family.

As for Monsanto, this is not the only time the corporation’s products have been linked to war crimes or cancer. The company was recently sued for manufacturing PCBs, a lingering environmental carcinogen, and glyphosate, a key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup pesticide, may contribute to cancer. And the U.S. government used 20 million gallons of Monsanto’s “Agent Orange” defoliant during the Vietnam War, the effects of which continue to linger even today.

quote:

Op woensdag 17 juni 2015 17:52 schreef budvar het volgende:
Monsanto was toch tegenwoordig een heel normaal bedrijf dat alleen zaadjes modificeert?

quote:

Triest dat het niet verbazingwekkend is

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 juni 2015 10:12 schreef SicSicSics het volgende:

[..]

Monsanto was een heel divers bedrijf. Onder andere met een flinke chemische tak. Deze tak hebben ze (onlangs?) afgestoten om zich alleen maar op agro(chemie) te richten.

Ze produceren geen PCB's, witte fosfor e.d. meer.

Tevens is het maken van witte fosfor iets anders dan het uiteindelijk tegen burgerdoelen inzetten, niet?

Of zijn alle bedrijven die wapens, onderdelen voor wapens of überhaupt voor defensie produceren heel triest?

[..]

Triest dat men een naam ziet en gelijk conclusies trekt, de mening klaar heeft en weigert verder te kijken naar enige nuancering.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 juni 2015 10:38 schreef budvar het volgende:
Misschien zijn het wettelijk gezien 2 verschillende bedrijven maar ze delen het zelfde hoofdkantoor, topmannen en werknemers dus ookal zijn het 2 verschillende bedrijven ze blijven met elkaar verbonden en ik ga en kan daar geen onderscheid in maken.

quote:

En ja de hele wapenindustrie is in-en-intriest, of ze nou simpele 5.56mm ammunitie maken of clusterbommen en tanks het blijft triest.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 juni 2015 11:29 schreef jogy het volgende:
Dit gaat volgens mij over de 'oude' Monsanto

Zie ook: http://www.icl-pp.com/en-us/Company/Pages/History.aspx

Dus de agro Monsanto maakt geen witte fosfor voor de overheid blijkbaar.

quote:

Op vrijdag 19 juni 2015 12:17 schreef jogy het volgende:
Mja wie weet. Het is in ieder geval maar goed dat verplicht tussen aanhalingstekens staat

quote:

ICL: 'We zouden wel willen maar het geeft erg slechte PR'
Overheid: 'We zeggen wel dat je het moet doen en geen keuze hebt'
ICL: 'Cool, thanks!'

(Of niet natuurlijk )

quote:

Op vrijdag 26 juni 2015 11:53 schreef .SP. het volgende:
Grappig idee, jammer dat het in het veld niet werkt:


En dat antwoord van de anti-GMO dame Liz, wat een domme doos.

quote:

A basic understanding of evolution tells us that GM offers, at best, a sticking-plaster approach to complex and evolving problems

Liz O'Neill, director of GM Freeze
http://www.express.co.uk/(...)l-beat-eco-saboteurs

March Against Monsanto London 2015 GM Freeze Liz O'Neill 1 of 2 Failed GM Technology