Theory: Monsanto rekindled glyphosate conspiracy theories online and promoted "label it" campaign in California to draw attention away from regulatory issues with glyphosate successor, dicamba
40 2017-12-27 by jackthebutholeripper
Glyphosate resistant weeds have been a known issue for years now that has grown at a much more rapid rate than expected and has Monsanto clamoring to push it's replacement, Dicamba through the regulatory process and into the commercial market.
Reports detailing the concerns of weed scientists at the university of Arkansas, Mizzou, and elsewhere were gaining traction around the end of october, and if you look around some of the more popular alt "news" and conspiracy spots, the unprecedented resurgence of a soon to be irrelevant glyphosphate conspiracy appears to coincide. I think monsanto was behind it.
The EPA's approval of dicamba has been restricted as a result of the controversy regarding volatility (how far it spreads after you spray it,) i thought i read something about it causing rashes too. iirc, the brand name was nemastrike.
It almost slipped through the cracks though. Monsanto and one other company were on a warpath to discredit every person and study refuting it's findings.
Volatility seems like a pretty simple things to measure. If this formulation of dicamba doesnt end up making it through or gets revoked completely in the long run, I'm sure a perfectly logical explanation of the way Monsanto was able to fudge the numbers enough to get through the EPA in the first place will be provided.
20 comments
1 of_mendez 2017-12-27
Monsanto, the its like they are try'n to kill us
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
MAYBE WE ARE THE WEEDS
1 of_mendez 2017-12-27
!!!
1 mydirtyfun 2017-12-27
mind blown.
but if we are the weeds, where will the profit come from after we shrivel up and die?
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
GLYPHOSATE RESISTANT SHEEPLE
1 mastigia 2017-12-27
How much is it going to get your kids genes modded to be able to eat GMO food? Are we going to have to license the ability to digest wheat? How far can this go?
1 liverpoolwin 2017-12-27
Now that Bayer have Monsanto the profit will come from the cancers and other diseases which their pesticides cause, similar to what vaccines are used for.
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
Bayer's neonicotinoids actually killing all the bees. Monsanto killin the weeds.
Chinachem bought syngenta the same year bayer bought Monsanto isn't that nuts?
1 liverpoolwin 2017-12-27
When one looks at the ingredients of vaccines, it is clear the elite do see us as the weeds
1 momosalemur 2017-12-27
Monsanto is one of those organizations where nothing will stop them achieving their end goal. I wouldn't be surprised if they had employed a number of hitmen.
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
Obama put their old CEO at the head of the fda for a while. Michael r taylor
1 NeedlesinTomatoes 2017-12-27
Michael R Taylor was never the head of the FDA nor was he the CEO of Monsanto.
Are you lying deliberately or could you not be bothered to look up his wikipedia?
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
Good Lord princess Vice President for Public Policy at monsanto then Senior Advisor to the FDA Commissioner, then Deputy Commissioner for Foods at the Fda
The conflict of interest is just as prominent
1 NeedlesinTomatoes 2017-12-27
So were you deliberately lying to make it seem worse or did you just decide not to research your claim before you made it.
Furthermore, if ypu would have researched him even the tiniest bit, you would have found information like this:
So if he recused himself from Monsanto related matters and "never sought to influence the thrust or content" of the agencies policies on Monsanto, is it really a conflict of interest?
1 HelperBot_ 2017-12-27
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Taylor
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 133389
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
Yeah because that was in 1999. So what? he got backed into a corner and recused himself and thats supposed to make up for the decade he spent going through the revolving door before Obama appointed him? Why are you white Knighting for Michael R Taylor? An ex-Monsanto lobbyist should never have been appointed to an authoritative position within the FDA, I dont give a fuck what he recused himself of in 1999.
1 NeedlesinTomatoes 2017-12-27
It shows he was willing to recuse himself from "prominent" conflicts of interest, an act you accused him of.
How do you know he was backed into a corner?
What exactly did he do wrong in the decade before Obama appointed him?
Why are you lying about him and considering him guilty until proven innocent?
That is your opinion. Obama had a different opinion. You don't know Michael Taylor, you don't know his motives or his expertise. You don't know the reasons why he was appointed to the position that he was.
Let's face it, you just view Monsanto as a big evil boogeyman and therefore conclude Michael R Taylor is guilty of secretly working to benefit Monsanto with no evidence to support it.
1 Aye_or_Nay 2017-12-27
It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.
1 Junkeregge 2017-12-27
How's dicamba the successor? It's ten years older than glyhposate and only works against dicotyledons, whereas glyphosate is also effective against monocotyledons.
1 jackthebutholeripper 2017-12-27
Idk read the article they made a new formulation that's supposed to replace glyphosate