Re:Mexico's Decision to Ban Glyphosate Has Rocked the Agribu...
by hilbert42 on Monday March 29, 2021 @01:00PM
(#26624792)
The debate over Glyphosate and genetically engineered crops is no longer a rational one in that scientific evidence has not driven the agenda for many years and the fact that the matter has become highly political and very polarized. (Note, here I'm deliberately not siding one way or other with the arguments as I'm insufficiently knowledgeable about the science to do so.)
A large part of the reason was the widespread reaction to Monsanto's nasty aggressive marketing of Glyphosate and its maniacal and obsessive pursuit of any farmer who it considered violated its GM patents by having so much as a single GM plant on his/her property without a Monsanto license—even if the farmer was unaware that his farm had been inadvertently contaminated from nearby GM farms. Had Monsanto cooled its outrageous behaviour and let the science speak from the very outset then its PR would have been much better and we may even be closer to knowing for certain whether Glyphosate is truly safe or not.
Other reasons include Monsanto's political lobbying to reduce or avoid additional scrutiny from regulators and the fact that it appears to have been less than fully open with the truth about Glyphosate.
Like many multinationals that think normal rules don't apply to them, Monsanto played dirty and ran roughshod over everyone who seemingly got in its way. Now, fortunately, it's getting its comeuppance—or should I say its new owner Bayer is.
Mind you, Monsanto and Bayer make good bedfellows. Bayer too has had a long lineage of unethical marketing that goes back to 1895 in that it forced dangerous and unsafe product on the public: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin(see the History section).
A large part of the reason was the widespread reaction to Monsanto's nasty aggressive marketing of Glyphosate and its maniacal and obsessive pursuit of any farmer who it considered violated its GM patents by having so much as a single GM plant on his/her property without a Monsanto license—even if the farmer was unaware that his farm had been inadvertently contaminated from nearby GM farms. Had Monsanto cooled its outrageous behaviour and let the science speak from the very outset then its PR would have been much better and we may even be closer to knowing for certain whether Glyphosate is truly safe or not.
Other reasons include Monsanto's political lobbying to reduce or avoid additional scrutiny from regulators and the fact that it appears to have been less than fully open with the truth about Glyphosate.
Like many multinationals that think normal rules don't apply to them, Monsanto played dirty and ran roughshod over everyone who seemingly got in its way. Now, fortunately, it's getting its comeuppance—or should I say its new owner Bayer is.
Mind you, Monsanto and Bayer make good bedfellows. Bayer too has had a long lineage of unethical marketing that goes back to 1895 in that it forced dangerous and unsafe product on the public: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin (see the History section).