The Best Years in Life
Articles by natural health author Paul Fassa
|Home Article Directory Healthy Recipes Natural Remedies The TBYIL Supplement & Health Catalog Beating/Avoiding Cancer Pets/Animals Humor Diets/Weight Loss Natural Living Anti-Aging/Longevity Inspiration Contact Us|
Enforcing Glyphosate's Carcinogenic Label May Crack Monsanto's PR Insulation
by Paul Fassa
(The Best Years in Life) Now that the dust has settled, it appears that even mighty Monsanto won't be able to overturn the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recommended classification 2A of probable carcinogenicity for glyphosate, the active ingredient in the world's most popular weedkiller, Monsanto's Roundup.
Monsanto had attempted to blur the distinction between 2A and 2B (possibly carcinogenic) by maintaining glyphosate was “possibly” carcinogenic, which they said is no big deal since there are many other items in daily use that are possibly carcinogenic. But that was a complete lie. It's 2A folks, and that means probably, not possibly. Look up the dictionary definition difference.
As a matter of fact, lead IARC researcher Aaron Blair told Harper's Alexander Cockburn the only debate within the committee was whether glyphosate should be considered category 1, known human carcinogenic, or considered 2A. Only two imperfect state epidemiological studies, Iowa and North Carolina, kept glyphosate from being deemed category 1.
California May Be Wiser With Glyphosate Carcinogenicity than Vaccine Choice
California's Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) is as strict as it gets at warning about carcinogenic toxins with prominent labels on foods or chemicals in the USA. Although even that's not enough, at least it's better than most states, because it's enforceable by law.
The lead agency for enforcing Proposition 65, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), has announced plans to list Tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, and glyphosate as known to the state to cause cancer for purposes of Proposition 65 enforcement.
President of California's nonprofit Environmental Law Foundation, James Wheaton, has been a plaintiff in Proposition lawsuits for 18 years. He told the LA Times that carcinogenic warnings themselves don't mean much to most since they involve obvious items like paint thinners and home use insecticides. But more pay attention when food items are affected.
Well, glyphosate affects food. And they don't have to be GMO crop foods. Some major non-GMO grain producers have been using glyphosate to desiccate (dry) grains, wheat and oats mostly, to expedite earlier than normal harvesting. So hello to the your carcinogens in your food Mr. and Mrs. America.
Prop. 65's carcinogenic listing could hinder Monsanto and their biotech cohorts who now also use glyphosate based herbicides since Monsanto's glyphosate patent expired. The products are not banned. Choices remain. But tort (lawsuit) litigation can be pursued against violators of Prop. 65 for plaintiffs who are damaged by the products that are on its list.
Herbicide liability precedence was established by the Supreme Court's 2005 decision on Dow's appeal with the Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC case: “The mere fact that a product was regulated and the mere fact that the product complied with that regulation did not protect the manufacturer from a common law tort action. Compliance with regulations was considered a minimum requirement of manufacturers.”
Now even if a product is registered for use by one our corrupt federal agencies, it's okay for individuals to sue manufacturers of those products. Prior to this decision, defending poison makers had cause to throw lawsuits out of court with the logic that a federal agency registered it for use as directed.
And with California's Prop. 65, it's even worse for the poison makers. James Wheaton also explained how under federal law, “The chemical is innocent until proven guilty, and no action occurs. But under Prop. 65 the presumption of guilt is flipped.” Simply put, the chemical company has to prove the levels used are absolutely safe.
And from France there is more good news. A French court of appeals recently upheld the 2012 decision against Monsanto with grain farmer Paul Francois's compensation for neurological disorders from its pre-Roundup herbicide Lasso, which had used a different active ingredient from glyphosate.
And viva la France, French Ecology Minister Segolene Royal announced a ban on over-the-counter sales of the Monsanto weedkiller Roundup after the IARC category 2A probable carcinogenic announcement.
Sources for this article
Paul Fassa started looking into natural health to overcome his unhealthy lifestyle. Then he developed more interest as he researched his articles for Natural News and Align Life.