174

GM Crops: Experts Debunk Claims of Success Research reveals those pushing Bt Cotton in India have conflicts of interest

Colin Todhunter

On 6 July 2020, an article extolling the benefits of genetically modified (GM) crops appeared on the BloombergQuint website based on an interview with Dr Ramesh Chand, a member of the key Indian Government think tank Niti Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India) . On 17 July, another piece that placed a positive spin on GM crops and gene-editing technology (Feeding 10 Billion People will Require Genetically Modified Food) appeared on the same site.

According to Prof Andrew Paul Gutierrez, Dr Hans R Herren and Dr Peter E Kenmore, internationally renowned agricultural researchers, the pieces reported “sweeping unsupported claims” about the benefits of and need for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and related technologies in agriculture in India.

The three academics felt that “a responsible and factual response” was required and have written a letter – containing what could be described as the definitive analysis of Bt cotton in India – to Dr Ramesh Chand, Dr Rajiv Kumar (Niti Aayog Vice Chancellor) and Dr Amitabh Kant (Niti Aayog CEO).

Chand is reported as saying that there is no credible study to show any adverse impact of growing Bt cotton in the last 18 years in the country (India’s only officially approved GM crop). This is simply not the case. Moreover, Gutierrez et al argue that all of the credible evidence shows any meagre increases in cotton yield after the introduction of Bt cotton in 2002 were largely due to increases in fertiliser use.

Before proceeding, it is pertinent to address the claim that ‘feeding 10 billion people will require genetically modified food’. If we take the case of India and its 1.3 billion-plus population, it has achieved self-sufficiency in food grains and has ensured that, in theory at least, there is enough food available to feed its entire population. It is the world’s largest producer of milk, pulses and millets and the second-largest producer of rice, wheat, sugarcane, groundnuts, vegetables and fruit.

However, food security for many Indians remains a distant dream. Hunger and malnutrition remain prevalent. But that is not because farmers don’t produce enough food. These problems result from other factors, including inadequate food distribution, social and economic policies, inequality and poverty. It is a case of ‘scarcity’ amid abundance (reflecting the situation globally). India even continues to export food while millions remain hungry. Productivity is not the issue.

And while proponents say GM will boost productivity and help secure cultivators a better income, this too ignores crucial political and economic contexts; with bumper harvests, Indian farmers still find themselves in financial distress. India’s farmers are not experiencing hardship due to low productivity. They are reeling from the effects of neoliberal policies and years of neglect. It’s for good reason that the calorie and essential nutrient intake of the rural poor has drastically fallen.

Yet the pro-GMO lobby has wasted no time in wrenching these issues from their political contexts to use the notions of ‘helping farmers’ and ‘feeding the world’ as lynchpins of its promotional strategy.

Valid concerns

The Chand interview occurred at a book release event for a new volume titled ‘Socio Economic Impact Assessment of GM crops: Global Implications Based on Case Studies from India’ edited by Sachin Chaturvedi and Krishna Ravi Srinivas of the Delhi-based Research and Information System (RIS) for developing countries – a policy research think tank in the Ministry of External Affairs.

Gutierrez et al state that what Niti Aayog and RIS representatives say and write are existentially important because of their deep links to Indian policy makers: their views can have a large impact on the future development of policy in the area of genetic engineering and related technologies such as genomic editing, which will affect the long-term health, livelihood and welfare of Indian farmers and the nation.

Chand posits that opposition and uncertainty to GM technology lingers because it has created fear in the minds of people. He appears to imply this is one reason why the Indian government did not embrace the technology and that media reporting has relied more on activists than on scientists.

GMO biotech lobbyists have often stated that science has been sidelined by activists who have swayed the policy agenda.

In the journal Current Science (September 2019), Dr Deepak Pental responded to a previous paper in the same journal by eminent scientists P C Kesavan and M S Swaminathan, whose piece cited good evidence that questioned the efficacy of and the need for GMO agriculture in India.

Pental argued that the two authors had aligned themselves with environmentalists and ideologues who have “mindlessly” attacked the use of GM technology and that aspects of their analysis are a reflection of their “ideological proclivities”.

However, in India it was a unique four-month scientific enquiry, not activism, that led to the rejection of the commercialisation of Bt Brinjal in 2010. And if we look at Europe, robust regulatory mechanisms are in place for GMOs as it is agreed they are not substantially equivalent to their non-GM counterparts.

Numerous studies have highlighted the flawed premise of ‘substantial equivalence’. Furthermore, from the outset of the GMO project, the sidelining of serious concerns about the technology has occurred and, despite industry claims to the contrary, there is no scientific consensus on the health impacts of GM crops.

Both the Cartagena Protocol and Codex share a precautionary approach to GM crops and foods in that they agree that GM differs from conventional breeding and that safety assessments should be required before GMOs are used in food or released into the environment.

These concerns cannot be brushed aside as being non-science based. Such accusations are political posturing, part of a strategy to slant the policy agenda and divert attention away from evidence that leads to the questioning of the safety, environmental impacts and record of GM crops.

False narrative of Bt cotton

Gutierrez et al also comment on the Chaturvedi–Srinivas book in their letter and note that, in contrast to pro-GMO statements about the book reported in the press, most of the chapters contain some points that temper or criticise this over-simplified enthusiasm.

In reviewing the book, the three researchers note the general policy position, that Bt cotton benefits smaller and poorly connected farmers, is not always supported by the case study data presented. Moreover, Bt cotton yields were not necessarily higher (than non-Bt cotton) for all farmers and even when economic gains occurred, it was not demonstrated that those gains came from Bt traits: higher fertiliser levels usually increased yields.

Bt cotton is also not scale neutral: it has mainly benefited larger farmers and high Bt cotton seed prices are a big concern for many farmers as are monopolistic pricing practices.

Gutierrez and his colleagues conclude that the RIS volume cited gains in yield and reductions in insecticide use in Bt cotton that are inaccurate.

They add:

…a failed picture emerges of an unsustainable eco-social Bt cotton system based on a dystopic relationship between those who control and sell the inputs, and the vast majority of farmers… Nowhere in the volume is there mention of potential viable non-GMO alternatives.”

The three researchers note that at least 25-30 peer reviewed papers have been published recently in India from almost all the agricultural universities dealing with cotton, validating the short-season high-density (SS-HD) concepts using non-Bt varieties. In all the studies, SS-HD plantings invariably got the highest yields, clearly pointing to the inappropriateness of the current long-season low-density hybrid system. Yet, none of these studies were cited in the Chaturvedi–Srinivas RIS volume.

Gutierrez et al note that hybrid cottons unique to India were introduced in the mid-1970s purportedly to increase yield and quality, but the hybrid seed is considerably more expensive, the plants require more fertiliser and stable water and the hybrid technology serves as a value capture mechanism requiring annual purchases of seed.

They argue that Indian farmers are planting inappropriate long-season hybrid cotton varieties at inappropriate low planting densities due to high seed costs, which contributes to low yield stagnation.

They also provide an overview of how, in long-season hybrid cotton, insecticide use caused ecological disruption, inducing outbreaks of secondary insect pests:

Farmers were spending money on insecticides to lose money from (insecticide) induced pests… While the Bt technology initially solved the bollworm problems, outbreaks of secondary pests not controlled by the Bt toxins began to occur, again increasing insecticide use in Bt cotton that by 2013 surpassed pre-2002 levels. This caused ecological disruption and induced outbreaks of still newer secondary pests… and increased levels of resistance to insecticides. By 2013, Indian farmers were solidly on both the insecticide and biotechnology treadmills.”

The three researchers conclude that Bt cotton did not increase yields but did contribute to increased cost of production in the face of stagnant yields, leading to economic distress.

They argue that hybrid Bt cotton in India is a failure or at best very suboptimal for farmer welfare and say that HD-SS non-GMO pure line rainfed cotton varieties have been developed in India that could double yield and triple net income. The potential exists for development of even higher yielding HD-SS non-hybrid non-GMO varieties in India, which would allow seed saving by Indian farmers.

However, they assert that this approach has been sidelined: we now see hybrid Bt cotton falsely being used as an example of success and as a template for rolling out GMOs, gene editing and other technologies across Indian agriculture.

On 12 August 2013, an article in The Hindu (‘Nip this in the bud’) noted that the Ministry of Agriculture, the Indian Council of Agriculture Research and the Ministry of Science and Technology were deeply compromised due to their strong and active ties with the GMO biotech industry.

Indeed, Monsanto had been granted access to agri-research public institutions, which had placed that company in a position to seriously influence policy. By 2014, 95 per cent of cotton grown in India was GM and non-GM seeds had almost disappeared from the market.

The push is now on to see a similar value-capture scenario take root with genetically engineered food crops based on a myth of Bt cotton success, which has in recent years been promoted by a number of government officials in India.

Science and reason (and farmers and the public) are in danger of being sacrificed for the “ideological proclivities” of key figures and bodies directly linked to national policy making.

The letter mentioned in this article can be read in full on the GMWatch.org website. It contains a more in-depth analysis of Bt cotton in India than presented here, including numerous graphics and references to key studies.

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

4.5 8 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
174 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paul Vonharnish
Paul Vonharnish
Aug 18, 2020 2:31 PM

Definition: “Expert”: A formerly pertinent individual…

sam2
sam2
Aug 17, 2020 11:36 PM

https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/19502-experts-debunk-false-claims-that-gm-bt-cotton-in-india-has-been-a-grand-success
Taking issue with all of these claims are Andrew Paul Gutierrez, senior emeritus professor at the College of Natural Resources at the University of California at Berkeley and CEO of the Center for the Analysis of Sustainable Agricultural Systems; Hans R. Herren, winner of the World Food Prize and president of the Millennium Institute, Washington DC; and Peter E. Kenmore, MacArthur Fellow (“Genius Award”) for his work on integrated pest management in green revolution rice, former head of FAO/Plant Protection, and former FAO Ambassador to India. These authors have written a fully referenced open letter to Dr Chand and other members of Niti Aayog rebutting their claims. They have given GMWatch permission to publish the letter in full below.

The letter is long and detailed, so here’s a summary of its contents:

GM Bt cotton not responsible for meager increases in yield

John
John
Aug 16, 2020 12:05 PM

It should not be an issue in any event. Firstly science is not about consensus. It should again be a about freedom of choice. The farmer should have the choice of cultivating GMO crops as well as non-GMO crops. The only requirement should be that they must declare this when taking the product to market or selling the product, it should be labelled as GMO. Then the consumer can make the choice too.

sam2
sam2
Aug 17, 2020 11:30 PM
Reply to  John

what about if the GM product has been found to damage the gut when ingested?
SHould it be allowed to be produced when thre are other ways to increase yields?

John
John
Aug 18, 2020 5:48 AM
Reply to  sam2

Evidence please.

sam2
sam2
Aug 18, 2020 8:18 AM
Reply to  John

https://www.gmwatch.org/en/gm-reality/13882-gm-soy-linked-to-health-damage-in-pigs-a-danish-dossier
For whatever reason, dead and deformed piglets are a problem in all pig farming situations where GM soy is used in the diet. Mr Pedersen is convinced that this is connected to the residues of glyphosate that are allowed in feed within the EU – 20 ppm in corn and soybean.

sam2
sam2
Aug 18, 2020 8:24 AM
Reply to  John

https://nofanj.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/60-corn-stomach-paper-Clear-English-summary.pdf
We previously published a feeding study comparing the health of pigs fed a GM diet to pigs fed a comparablenon-GM diet. The GM diet contained GM corn(maize) with three common genetic modifications.Our study found an increase in severe stomach inflammation in the pigs on the GM diet,which was more thantwice as high forfemale pigs and four times as high formale pigs1.

John
John
Aug 19, 2020 9:54 AM
Reply to  sam2

When I saw OECD is had to start laughing. Another tentacle of the very famous UN. Please pull the other one. Its like peer review done by the other tentacle IPCC.

dion matthews
dion matthews
Aug 15, 2020 2:39 PM

Check out the epicyte gene…just imagine if that new telecommunication standard really did affect the blood brain barrier….just imagine if the jag in the arm really did enable drugs to cross the blood brain barrier…corn starch/sugar is in everything…contraceptive corn one size fits all

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:30 PM

The point or goal of GM food crops is increased profits for big Agriculture not better quality food .

John
John
Aug 19, 2020 10:06 AM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

Who told you that Greenpeace? Suggest you read the article on Golden Rice.Kere is the link- https://quillette.com/2019/12/01/gm-crops-like-golden-rice-will-save-the-lives-of-hundreds-of-thousands-of-children/

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 19, 2020 1:36 PM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

Greenpeace became a corporate entity after Obomber snowed them at Copenhagen 20 years ago?

Paul
Paul
Aug 14, 2020 9:43 PM

One of the sub plots of the virus scam is the attack on the food chain and the attack on farmers.
So much meat and dairy has been wasted as the hospitality industry has been shut down.
They are trying to put them out of business.

Under Agenda 2030 the plan is for the world to be more reliant on genetically modified food.
Now we all know that people can’t get nutrients from GM food but there’s no need to worry of course as vaccines will be undoubtedly required to give us our regular boosts of nutrients.

Is it a coincidence that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations is heavily invested in GM food.
I remember reading an article recently too about GM burgers growing in popularity in the USA and alas Gates is funding them too.

If you haven’t worked it out yet they want to change our DNA with this ‘Covid19’ vaccine and then their will be a roll out for vaccines for every other health need and what ever else they want to poison our bodies with.

That’s why it’s so important that we stop Operation Vaccine in its tracks now by everybody refusing to take it.

And Gates needs to be locked up and the key thrown away.

Fixing
Fixing
Aug 14, 2020 10:19 PM
Reply to  Paul

People have not stopped eating food, the producers will be producing just as much but the state are acting to make small shop and farms go bust, to help the large corporations and Amazon, the company store.

This has been a trend in the US and UK for decades, why do you think every high street in the US and UK look identical. They are fighting the same corporate monopoly battles, But good try at fairy tale distractions.

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:36 PM
Reply to  Fixing

What you can buy to eat is definitely on the ebb as aisles are widening and product selections are becoming narrower in the multinational big box food stores.

John
John
Aug 16, 2020 12:09 PM
Reply to  Paul

GM Burger? Are you not perhaps confusing Vegan with GM? i.e.Meat substitutes like soybean patties or laboratory grown meat?

Charlotte Russe
Charlotte Russe
Aug 14, 2020 9:29 PM

Monsanto is the agricultural equivalent of the Gates and Melinda “vaccine foundation.” Two psychopathic organizations which employ favorable media-relations to profit-off marginal populations thus being emblematic of worldwide neoliberal exploitation which deliberately generates “scarcity’ amid abundance.”  

Antonym
Antonym
Aug 15, 2020 7:39 AM

How much is Vandana Shiva charging for a live show these days? 50K, 100K?

Charlotte Russe
Charlotte Russe
Aug 15, 2020 12:32 PM
Reply to  Antonym

If you’re truly interested contact her agent.😈

John
John
Aug 18, 2020 6:11 AM

Anti-GMO is a cult that was started by Greenpeace designed at extorting money from Bayer..

Charlotte Ruse
Charlotte Ruse
Aug 18, 2020 11:09 AM
Reply to  John

It’s hard to have empathy for Bayer. That’s the nature of US politics–the political duopoly secure funds by extorting various industries…..

Jogging
Jogging
Aug 14, 2020 9:26 PM

aptive
Aug 14, 2020 9:21 PM
Awaiting for approval
Reply to Martin Usher

The US state have just started to fleece Monsanto because it is now German owned and they want to fleece Bayer and get control of it. One of Germany’s most successful companies. It is a Trojan horse operation, like so many US take overs.

Why do you think the Alt-right, acting as an extension of the US deep state are now championing attacks on Monsanto & GMO’s, which was traditionally the preserve of the left? It is a looting exercise bigger than BP, RBS and VW.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 14, 2020 11:14 PM
Reply to  Jogging

Jogging:
Telling the truth about GMOs is– like all truthtelling– life-supporting. It’s wicked to denigrate truth-telling because of the nationality of the liar exposed.

Igor
Igor
Aug 15, 2020 12:05 AM
Reply to  Jogging

History lesson. After WW2, as a result of the Nuremberg War Crime Trials, the German chemical conglomerate IG FARBEN was broken into pieces. Bayer was one of the pieces.

Time passed and Bayer began reassembling the former IG FARBEN firms under the Bayer name. No one cared. One might think that the people, to whom the number six million matters, would care.

Bayer added Monsanto’s chemicals into the new IG FARBEN portfolio.

Bayer holds 38 patents on strains of (GM?) cannabis seeds. Cannabis will be legal at the Federal level in the USA, when Bayer is ready to profit. Small growers will be put out of business, when Federal regulations will require growers to have their cannabis strains approved through an expensive procedure. Easy for a multi billion dollar corporation, difficult for a million dollar business.

The same families who were the majority owners of IG FARBEN stock pre Nuremberg, probably are the current majority owners of Bayer. They only broke up the conglomerate, they did not change the ownership.

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Aug 14, 2020 8:22 PM

As ever the problem lies not with the actual mechanics of gene manipulation but the way the modern corporate business and political environment contorts it to product results that inimical to both society and the planet we live on. Humans have been manipulating genes for thousands of years by selective and cross breeding plants and animals (and quite often themselves) but thanks to the limits of this methodologies the negative side effects have usually been confined to marriage scandals among the upper classes and haven’t threatened the wellbeing of the planet and its population. Now we have these powerful direct manipulation tools which allow corporations to wreak havoc on large populations in the never ending search for higher profits (promoting monoculture and using legal tools to enforce exclusive use of their products) we face a direct threat to our well being.

Its not the GM that’s the problem. Its the entire agribusiness setup.

aptive
aptive
Aug 14, 2020 9:21 PM
Reply to  Martin Usher

The US state have just started to fleece Monsanto because it is now German owned and they want to fleece Bayer and get control of it. One of Germany’s most successful companies. It is a Trojan horse operation, like so many US take overs.

Why do you think the Alt-right, acting as an extension of the US deep state are now championing attacks on Monsanto & GMO’s, which was traditionally the preserve of the left? It is a looting exercise bigger than BP, RBS and VW.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 14, 2020 11:18 PM
Reply to  Martin Usher

Martin– please don’t use the same term, GM, to refer to 2 vastly different processes. The means and the end products could not be more different. Please preserve the language distinction which enables us to separate the two.

richard
richard
Aug 16, 2020 3:47 PM
Reply to  Martin Usher

“cross breeding plants and animals”
what we don’t want is cross breeding plants with animals etc.
I mean, of course, by manipulating genes inside a laboratory.

John
John
Aug 18, 2020 5:53 AM
Reply to  richard

What a load of crock. Cross breeding a plant with animals. Get real.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:10 PM

Thank you. Until now it seems like the only cited person standing up to IGFarbenMonsantoBayer has been Vandana Shiva. Curious why that is. Glad to see well stated facts to counter the propagandists with people from other sources.

sam2
sam2
Aug 17, 2020 11:32 PM
Reply to  zdb

there’s GM watch too
https://www.gmwatch.org/en/

Max
Max
Aug 14, 2020 7:36 PM

If it’s not enough with all those Indian farmers who committed suicide due to GM effects on their crops and financial situation, then I don’t what is.

Eric Bjerregaard
Eric Bjerregaard
Aug 14, 2020 8:05 PM
Reply to  Max

That is an oft repeated error/lie spread by vandana shiva. The farmers have been
Buying the seeds over and over. Not something they would do if their neighbors are killing themselves because of the seeds.

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 17, 2020 11:52 AM

Alternatives to what the politcal masters decree are illegal. It is the same for other crops. A search will show whether farmer suicides are propaganda, and how bad it has been. But you know that.

sam2
sam2
Aug 17, 2020 11:38 PM

Indian cotton farmers defy Monsanto with native seedsBy Sally Ho
Green Queen, Nov 11, 2019
https://www.greenqueen.com.hk/indian-cotton-farmers-say-no-to-monsanto-switch-back-to-native-seeds-2/
[links to sources at this URL]
Agrochemical multinational corporation Monsanto is responsible for huge socioeconomic damage within the Indian farming community ever since they launched illegal operations of field trials decades ago to make inroads into the market. After years of pressuring farmers to adopt a strain of Bt cotton – which unleashed devastating consequences – these farmers, backed by the Indian government, are fighting against the corporation by returning to using native cotton seeds.

Eric Bjerregaard
Eric Bjerregaard
Aug 18, 2020 3:17 AM
Reply to  sam2

Incorrect. The farmers want GE seeds. In fact they buy them voluntarily in massive quantities. Farmers seeing higher yields and using less pesticides are not socioeconomic damage. In fact farmers are now illegally planting GE brinjal to protest against the violation of their freedom of choice regarding seeds choices. https://issues.org/keith/ and https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190225100726.htm and https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2018/01/witnessing-indias-gmo-cotton-revolution/ and https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2020/06/03/after-illegal-seed-planting-in-2019-indian-farmers-again-demand-access-to-gmo-herbicide-tolerant-cotton/

sam2
sam2
Aug 18, 2020 8:49 PM

its about education. Monsanto sells the idea with promises to the farmers. Many believe and so want the product and get into debt to be able to buy it.
Huge amounts of pesticides are necessary for it to flourish. Thats how the GM seeds are developed. Monsanto also produce the pesticide, roundup or glyphosate.
Its all about control of the world’s seed supply. What benefit is it to have a few varieties only of any plant except to the monopolist.

Eric Bjerregaard
Eric Bjerregaard
Aug 19, 2020 3:30 PM
Reply to  sam2

Nonsense, there are thousands of seed companies. GE crops require fewer pesticides, not mor. Your use of the phrase “huge amounts” reveals how little you know about the topic.many companies produce glyphosate. Because it is safe and the patent expired about 20 years ago. There are thousands of varieties of seeds available. BTW some of the patents on GE crops have already expired.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:14 PM
Reply to  Max

They counter that argument with criticisms of farmer ineptitude. Same arguments Gates Foundation uses with Heiffer Intl. If not for the guiding powerful colonial hand of Gates and UN ngos how would these peasants survive? Or have survived for generations until now? Same arguments were used in Ireland in the 1840’s to 1870’s – as if generations of Irish farmers were stupid enough to monocrop a junk version of potato and starve to death. Not at all like the shipping records at Liverpool show that Ireland was genocided while a rich harvest was siphoned out at the point of Brit Army bayonets and shipped to London while the absentee landlords put all their Irish farmers into poorhouses to starve and die of TB and get buried in hidden (until now) mass graves.

Jim(jacKie)
Jim(jacKie)
Aug 14, 2020 7:35 PM

The US corporate subscription frauds: The GMO fraud of one-off infertile seeds, so you must buy afresh every year what you should get for free after the first purchase.
The Aids model, where people are tied into ‘treatments for the rest of their lives, even though a cure is easily available.

The Window OS fraud where you are tied into fake paid updates every year, for almost zero improvement in function. Win98 was even better then Win10.

The flu vaccine, where you need every season a new vaccine to fight flu and the flu conveniently changes on cue every year. And I suspect makes the old die a few years earlier.

The Covid Vaccine looks like an advance form of the flu fraud.

If you are tied into a company there is no competition. The US doesn’t succeed in competition, with better educated, better invested better funded countries and companies, they can’t compete, they often fail.

So they try to tie you into a contract with a US corporate monopoly or duopoly, and price gouge when the monopoly is total, that is their ideal model.

The state takes care of the competition with psyops against them, think of Blackberry, Samsung, Nokia, Tiktok and many US shakedowns of overseas companies that are happening today.

The US is a Corporate Neo-fascist state model, run with the full cooperation of the state, media, military, spook agencies, finance sector, big Pharma and political, It is run like a total war against it’s own people and the rest of the world.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:15 PM
Reply to  Jim(jacKie)

Well said. Now how do we step aside being vaccinated out of existence?

Jim(jacKie)
Jim(jacKie)
Aug 14, 2020 9:11 PM
Reply to  zdb

Sell dollars!

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 9:40 PM
Reply to  Jim(jacKie)

and buy what? and how does that help?

jekeOhna
jekeOhna
Aug 14, 2020 11:12 PM
Reply to  zdb

Euro’s

LKing
LKing
Aug 14, 2020 11:53 PM
Reply to  Jim(jacKie)

Hi, I agree about the subscription frauds. I’m interested in your opinion about AIDS as I haven’t heard this before. Can you elaborate on what is the cure?

jkb
jkb
Aug 16, 2020 3:47 PM
Reply to  LKing

There were few articles I read about this. They all agreed that changing the lifestyle and diet healed the disease. Sorry can’t give you any link, but it’s not hard to find them.

Eric Bjerregaard
Eric Bjerregaard
Aug 19, 2020 3:33 PM
Reply to  Jim(jacKie)

There have never been any infertile seeds released to the market.

Voz a0bd
Voz a0bd
Aug 14, 2020 7:20 PM

This is very OLD news! A few know this for many years now…

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:16 PM
Reply to  Voz a0bd

How to make it more known?

Voz 0db
Voz 0db
Aug 16, 2020 3:39 PM
Reply to  zdb

The large majority of the Uman Herd does not care… So it’s pointless to waste resources on that.

Maxwell
Maxwell
Aug 14, 2020 6:52 PM

That we’re still having this discussion in 2020 about the toxic fraud that is GM agribusiness tells you all you need to know about what a dangerous Ponzi scheme it is.

If GMO’s delivered even half of what the Biotech PR machine has been touting for two decades the entire globe would be well fed. But of course that’s not the intent. And of course would you really need a multi-billion dollar PR machine if it was such the miracle?

Further evidence as to how all governmental entities have zero concern for the public’s health and well-being.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:17 PM
Reply to  Maxwell

You do know that they are gmo-ing tomatoes and other veggies to have a vaccine that can be eaten right? After all someone has to save the world from the dread cv1984.

Guy
Guy
Aug 15, 2020 12:23 AM
Reply to  zdb

All the more reason to start saving seeds from Heirloom sources . Been doing it for years and growing good vegetables , just like my parents used to . Once you have a good source you can save the seeds from same .Never too late to start.

zdb
zdb
Aug 15, 2020 6:25 AM
Reply to  Guy

yup. seed sales are wild this year. think the seed banks Gates and the oligarchs own in Iceland and elsewhere are thinking these ways too? after all, the executive cafeteria at Monsanto is all organic.

Eric Bjerregaard
Eric Bjerregaard
Aug 16, 2020 2:26 PM
Reply to  zdb

Nonsense, that lie about the cafeteria has never been proven.

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 17, 2020 12:05 PM
Reply to  Guy

You need
.. local cooperation/expertise, and liason with other areas, to widen the collection
.. collective ownership to thwart a sell-off.
Some national collections ended up in private hands. Ice around the Svalbaard (Norway) repository is already melting. Another case of the dangers of globalisation/centralisation/gigantism.

Maxwell
Maxwell
Aug 15, 2020 12:26 AM
Reply to  zdb
zdb
zdb
Aug 15, 2020 6:23 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

Thank you. Did you use Google/GSK to search that?

Jesper
Jesper
Aug 14, 2020 4:38 PM

You can modify and cross breed naturally etcetera but the second you put something in a lab and change the genetics you’re messing around with gods bollocks!

Objective
Objective
Aug 14, 2020 5:05 PM
Reply to  Jesper

You think this is bad, i don’t think this experiment will end well either!

https://www.rt.com/news/497893-control-locust-swarm-chemical-pheromone/

Jesper
Jesper
Aug 14, 2020 6:09 PM
Reply to  Objective

“…either by corralling them into specific areas before killing them off en masse or by bioengineering more passive, less genocidal solutions.” Suddenly I wasn’t sure they’re just talking about locusts…

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:18 PM
Reply to  Jesper

So you are already begging for the vaccine that will modify you dna, right?

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:43 PM
Reply to  Jesper

GM foods are simply a form of evolution on steroids purposed for profit nothing else. .

Marfanoi
Marfanoi
Aug 14, 2020 4:09 PM

Spain bans smoking in public.They coming for your joint man.Paz y Amor.

Voz a0bd
Voz a0bd
Aug 14, 2020 7:22 PM
Reply to  Marfanoi

That will be FUN to watch…
Modern Slaves, specially those that VOTE, really deserve everything that is still coming for them.

S Cooper
S Cooper
Aug 14, 2020 3:12 PM

Nothing but Pseudo Science “New Age” Techno Babble Newspeak with a Smiley Face; hawking the same old dishonest and disingenuous repackaged political snake oil of blood soaked tyrants, oppressors, slave masters and thieving oligarchical mobster psychopaths.

As to feeding 10 billion people that too is a lie. After ‘Doc‘ Billy Eugenics Euthanasia Death Shot culls the herd of useless eater untermenschen, the population of humanity is estimated to be no more than 500 million.
comment image

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 2:24 PM

Feeding 10 billion people will prove impossible just as feeding 8 billion has become . since most of the people can no longer produce or afford to buy their food whether it be genetically modified or not.

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 2:54 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

There will never be 10 billion people if we cannot feed them, the problem of feeding them will never arise.

Marfanoi
Marfanoi
Aug 14, 2020 5:01 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

Hello tiffin are you friends with the old flute ?

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 5:47 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

A strong possibility but not on topic?

Flute
Flute
Aug 14, 2020 3:04 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

There will not be 10 billion people if we cannot feed them, the problem will never arise.

Marfanoi
Marfanoi
Aug 14, 2020 5:02 PM
Reply to  Flute

Hello flute are you friends with the old tiffin ?

Marfanoi
Marfanoi
Aug 14, 2020 5:05 PM
Reply to  Marfanoi

Did you copy each others homework at school ? Thats lovely.

Jacko
Jacko
Aug 14, 2020 10:05 PM
Reply to  Marfanoi

No they are both the sane person, the censorship here is so complete, I need to change my account almost every post to get even the most mundane of comments published.

Voz a0bd
Voz a0bd
Aug 14, 2020 7:24 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

The OPERATION COVID, and the next one, OPERATION GREAT RESET are being used by the SRF & Billionaires to MAKE SURE that the Herd of Morons is reduced… So don’t worry, no 8 billion much less 10B!

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:20 PM
Reply to  Voz a0bd

Have you heard of or read Ray Kurzweil’s “Singularity”. The Covid panic-demic may be one aspect or indication that is in fact occurring. Our current elites all claim to be advised by software or computer predictions of some sort?

Voz 0db
Voz 0db
Aug 16, 2020 3:38 PM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

Well… We are in 2020 and there is no computer in sight capable of simulating the [h]uman brain! It’s not easy to make a machine so stupid!

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 16, 2020 6:11 PM
Reply to  Voz 0db

On what evidence do you make that unlikely assumption ? The reliance on stupidity as the root cause of humanity’s problems is like Douglas Adams , in his Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, claim that 42 is the meaning of everything . A bit funny but tending to be over used? I’m inclined to believe that humans are algorithms within intersecting loops aka animated meat based computer programs of a sort. The purpose of which will remain forever unknown?

Voz 0db
Voz 0db
Aug 16, 2020 6:28 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

I saw a video of that dude – Ray K.- from more than a decade ago where he said that by 2020 we would have pc’s simulating the [h]uman brain!

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 16, 2020 8:08 PM
Reply to  Voz 0db

Mr Kurzweil another billionaire who helped invent the computer age circa 1980 and turn it into a monopoly, he also greatly fears death. His goal was to turn humans , who could afford it, into cyborgs . In fact human brains are now and perhaps always have simulated computers and no one seems to have noticed? Language being very buggy computer code from its outset ? We are told by the high priests of technology that “computer projections” assure us the covid is deadly and a pandemic, when reality is quite different.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:18 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

We struggle to feed people b/c what’s produced by big ag has only half the nutritional value it should have – so we have to produce twice as much.

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:13 PM
Reply to  Blubber

You clearly don’t understand the basis of the problem here . Unlimited growth in food production to feed an unlimited increase in humans in perpetuity is delusional .

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 15, 2020 7:13 AM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

I state that food production would be enough at current levels if what we produce contained the nutrition it should contain ( which it doesn’t because of the way big ag grow it). Where did I say keep growing more and more to feed an endless population increase? Coupled with the fact that approx a third of what’s produced is never eaten.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 15, 2020 1:36 PM
Reply to  Blubber

You make an excellent point in stating that 40% of our food is discarded in the US and Canada , the upper classes of course being the main culprits . However food production for profit aka factory farming is not and has never been sustainable , since the industrial revolution began and human population began to ramp up which it continues to do , increasing by 80 million /year

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 17, 2020 12:20 PM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

Ditto for unlimited production, pollution, automation, etc. all underlaid by usury.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 17, 2020 2:01 PM
Reply to  mgeo

Determining what is causal and what are simply effects being my point here . Treating an effect as a cause is not the answer .

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 18, 2020 6:46 AM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

Sure, anything to distract from the blood-sucking.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:21 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

It’s not a production problem. It’s distribution, storage and corruption that need to be dealt with. Joel Salatin, Greg Judy, Justin Rhodes and a list of farmers worldwide working with diverse regenerative farming proved this out years ago and are proving it further now.

Jum McDonagh
Jum McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 11:08 PM
Reply to  zdb

You are parroting the basic neoliberal theology that unlimited growth is possible through technology. Regenerative farming to feed constantly growing numbers of starving humans is delusional.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 11:57 PM
Reply to  Jum McDonagh

definitely not neoliberal. far from it. factory farming ruins the soil and produces toxic poor nutrition. neoliberal policies are what Monsanto and Bayer and big chem/ag/pharma/petro companies are all about. This is the opposite. This is small, local, decentralized, integrated, resilient farming. And more profitable. This returns carbon (and other nutrients) to the soil.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 15, 2020 12:47 AM
Reply to  zdb

Once again you don’t see the big picture, or are a tout for a niche farmer such as the one pictured ? All farming eventually depletes soils . For farming even to appear self sustaining populations must be low and held static. Idealist servicing profiteers make a wonderful living from false optimism. Renewable energy is another fairly tale the scions of the wealthy have imbibed and now market as well.

zdb
zdb
Aug 15, 2020 6:08 AM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

You don’t understand or don’t want to understand how this system works.

Livestock properly managed, rebuild the soil. They are replicating what native Americans did by being nomadic with the buffalo herds. That also rebuilt soils. Migrating herds are why soils and the ensuing prairie plant life flourish.

This has been proven in habitat after habitat in the last 30 years. Over grazing did not cause the deserts of the world. Lack of livestock and their natural tilling, planting and fertilizing of the land caused it. Holding a herd in once place is inherently over grazing and destroying soils.

These regenerative farmers are replicating migrating herds by moving their herds daily. Some move them a couple times a day. They never let their pastures come near over grazing. They never plow. And within years they yield many times per acre what conventional farmers were getting.

Greg Judy’s even proving out that his farms are also hunters’ paradises. Besides producing more meat per acre from his cattle and sheep, he’s drawn in wild herbivores from all over. And they are all flourishing and in turn causing the pastures to flourish more.

In these same processes most farmers like Judy and Salatin and Rhodes rotate other livestock through the pasture to speed the process by tilling and feeding on the bugs. First cows, then chickens, then sheep, then…………….

It’s not a niche market. I know of three farmers within an hour drive doing this successfully. Their products are better. Their yields are greater and their overheads are reduced. And they are converting other farmers fast.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 15, 2020 1:41 PM
Reply to  zdb

In fact the vast majority of the worlds herd animals have been killed and eaten until mainly bio-engineered for profit sheep and cows remain. Global soils are being depleted as desertification continues across the continents.

zdb
zdb
Aug 16, 2020 7:32 AM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

blame factory farming as advanced by Rockefeller Fdtn since 1900’s – not regenerative farming as proven by nomadic tribes for centuries and now by regenerative farmers in US and UK for the last 40 years.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 15, 2020 7:17 AM
Reply to  zdb

It’s not an either or situation.
Many things can be true at once.
Produce regeneratively on smaller scales.
Distribute locally first and export only excess.
Stop waiting a third of what is grown

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 15, 2020 1:43 PM
Reply to  Blubber

Even if waste was controlled it is a short term solution as human populations continue to grow

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 15, 2020 4:33 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

so you nudge people into having less kids. You don’t secretly sterilise whole populations, insects and seeds.

John Pretty
John Pretty
Aug 14, 2020 2:02 PM

I suspect that a great deal of ignorance is driving this debate.

I think the article is poorly written in places as it fails to distinguish between GM crops and GM organisms (GMOs), which seem to me to be very different beasts.

As for GMOs, they seems like a bad idea, but under what sort of circumstance would they be necessary? GMOs seem to me to be a very different matter from GM crops.

I have no opinion either way about GM crops – in principle. Much of what we eat is manipulated by man anyway. Bananas for example.

The debate on GM crops seems to have been hijacked by our old enemy the MSM, who scared the public shitless with nonsense about “frankenstein food”. (Compare and contrast the covid scaremongering. It’s very similar.)

In principle people ought to be happy about GM crops as (in principle) it would mean the end of herbicides and insecticides. Maybe the chem giants themselves are opposed to GM for that reason?

The central problem with GM is not that the food is dangerous in any way, but the potential it has for upsetting ecosystems. If insects can no longer feed then that could spell trouble as while humans don’t usually eat insects, insects are often consumed by things we do eat and insects pollinate plants.

I think this concern about GM crops is valid.

It would be preferable for farmers to farm entirely “organically”, but is that practical in a world with so many people?

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 2:11 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

”I have no opinion either way about GM crops – in principle. Much of what we eat is manipulated by man anyway. Bananas for example.”

There is a big difference between selective breeding, which we could call traditional genetic engineering, and the splicing together of genes from other creatures into plants, that is intuitively disturbing for good reason, mainly becuase we haven’t got a clue what we are doing and what the long terms effects might be.

Guy
Guy
Aug 15, 2020 12:31 AM
Reply to  Tiffin

“selective breeding, which we could call traditional genetic engineering”
Please do not muddy the waters .There is no such thing as traditional genetic
engineering .The process of improving plant variety is called hybridization , which probably means what you are saying in essence , but many would not know the difference.
Cheers.

ColinT
ColinT
Aug 14, 2020 4:01 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

I suspect a great deal of ignorance is behind your comment. For you to state that the article is poorly written (in places) indicates a lazy interpretation of what was said. The article – and indeed the letter it reports on – is clearly discussing GMOs in agriculture, which translates as GM crops. It is not talking about the application of GMOs in areas beyond agriculture. You say, “I have no opinion either way about GM crops” but then go on to offer some ill-informed opinions. You parrot tired industry rhetoric about humans having always manipulated crops, imply that we need GM for feeding “a world with so many people” and talk of fearmongering about GM food. It is as though you did not even read the article (or the letter). Because if you had read it, you would have seen that all three points are dealt with. As to your claim about the end of agrochemicals, you really need to read the letter which provides evidence to counter this claim.

Objective
Objective
Aug 14, 2020 5:08 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

You should research the difference between cultivars & genetic modification it may help you form an opinion, its never wise to comment on something you have no knowledge of.

gordon
gordon
Aug 14, 2020 7:18 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

i’m so pretty
ohh so pretty
so pretty
so pretty
and gay

go drink super size bucket of round up ready boy
and you tube the link

i wanna see you slurping down that satanick vitamin juice you punk : )

Voz a0bd
Voz a0bd
Aug 14, 2020 7:25 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

Keep eating bananas…

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:21 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

In a world with so many people you absolutely can do organic. More hands to produce more organic nutritious food meaning less food needs to be consumed.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:26 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

GMO’s have led to increase herbicide and pesticide use – not less. And their production is falling. Joel Salatin, Greg Judy, Justin Rhodes and a growing list of organic regenerative farmers is turning around land damaged by the land rapers at Bayer/Monsanto-IGFarben and getting 12 times the production with higher quality and better land in the process. Good luck.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 14, 2020 11:39 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

John Pretty, here’s a pretty good video talk by F Wm Engdahl , author of “Seeds of Destruction.”
Regards.

Guy
Guy
Aug 15, 2020 12:35 AM
Reply to  Penelope

Read the book many years ago and would highly recommend it to anyone who would want to learn more on the subject.
Thanks for posting it ,I was thinking of doing so also .
Cheers.

sam2
sam2
Aug 17, 2020 11:41 PM
Reply to  John Pretty

https://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/17764-uncovered-monsanto-campaign-to-get-seralini-study-retracted
The study, led by Prof GE Séralini, showed that very low doses of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide had toxic effects on rats over a long-term period, including serious liver and kidney damage. Additional observations of increased tumour rates in treated rats would need to be confirmed in a larger-scale carcinogenicity study.

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 1:40 PM

When I first heard about Bayer intending to buy Monsanto a while back, I wrote a few comments in the Guardian business section, stating that as soon as the deal was done the US ‘justice’ system will open the flood gates to legal claims against Monsanto and demand massive compensation, in the billions.

After the deal was done, my prediction came true and I found myself watching repeated adverts on YouTube calling any American who had used Monsanto’s Roundup and also had cancer to call in and join a class action against Monsanto.

This is the same drumming up of ‘victims’ we saw in the BP oil spill. When calls went out to all businesses in the Mexican gulf area to immediately make a claim. All claims were immediately approved by American judges of course regardless of validity.

The campaign against Monsanto culminated (since overturned) in an award of $2 billion to one cancer sufferer, whose illness was attributed to Monsanto’s Roundup, in a jury trial, where the threshold of proof is extremely low.

Bayer offers almost a bottomless pit of money for the US to extort and they will ultimately attempt to get control of the company, like they succeeded in doing with BP.

The US justice system extracted $65 billion from BP, deposed the British head and put an America CEO in charge. For the failure of a US subcontractor, Halliburton.
They have also extorted 30 billion from VW for the ‘emissions scandal’, which I have no doubt the US regulators passed as acceptable for years, and in the banking sector extracted 27 billion from RBS for crimes facilitated by the US banking system and will no doubt extract similar amounts from Bayer.

The US is a criminal enterprise that uses a conspiracy of Corporate, Judicial and CIA to extort trillions from overseas companies. There have now been so many examples it is an obvious pattern but yet you’ll see not a word in the press.

As Putin once said to Macron; ‘I don’t know why you pay the fines’, referring to BNP’s multi billion dollar fine to the US ‘justice’ system. Of course there is no reason to pay money to a ‘protection racket’ but if you don’t, then there will be consequences, which the victim must be prepared to stomach. They may burn down your precious national monuments, murder people in a concert call it terrorism, or slap a 20% tariff on all your exports. Mafia, psychopaths are outside the law and outside any notion of conscience.
In my view, whoever arranged the take over of Monsanto in Bayer, needs to be arrested for treason against Germany. Monsanto has been a poison challis for years and only an idiot or a threatened man would take on all that liability, and they haven’t even started compensation for GMO’s.

So how do you know who is backed by the US deep state? This article is actually adding to the campaign to extort vast amounts of European wealth by the USA, so thanks for helping to make us all (in Europe) that little bit poorer and helping the US, a criminal state, loot our most successful Corporations.

Monsanto is a monster because US regulators let them be. It is so easy to jump on the bandwagon of anti-Corporate campaigning but ultimately Corporations will do what states let them do, so our energy should always be directed at the regulators, not the Corporations.

The result of Bayer’s purchase of Monsanto will be higher price drugs, less tax revenues, less sponsorship of the arts and less research by Bayer in Europe, as its hard won profits flow to the US probably to fund similar operations.

The $27 billion handed over by RBS, a government own bank, was the equivalent of 8 years of austerity. So if you want to know why the British suffered so long under austerity ask them where our money went.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:31 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

You are arguing that Round Up is not carcinogenic?
Those cases against Monsanto were not overturned. Bayer offered a $10B settlement package against the next tranch of lawsuits that required gag orders and restraints on all ensuing lawsuits. They are trying to buy out all further suits. Your downplaying tens of billions if not hundreds of billions in suits.

And you are making it sound like the DeepWaterHorizon / BP oil spill was a nothing burger with no damaged parties? Wow. Nice long troll.

Jake(GOOD)
Jake(GOOD)
Aug 14, 2020 9:56 PM
Reply to  zdb

”And you are making it sound like the DeepWaterHorizon / BP oil spill was a nothing burger with no damaged parties? Wow. Nice long troll.”

You little US troll, in defense of Halliburton.

zdb
zdb
Aug 15, 2020 6:21 AM
Reply to  Jake(GOOD)

Ha. you mean Dick Cheney. Or Liz now. Please you think someone posting here on OG is going to be pro-Halliburton? The ideas you put forward of corporate warfare are worthy. I am not arguing that. These ideas explain better some of the blatantly stupid actions like paying DeepWater to destroy the worlds biggest drilling platform to get the insurance fraud funds just as they replace the Horizon with an even bigger rig. Of course Halliburton is a monster. Of course they and the CIA are capable and probably attacking other countries’ corporate entities. That VW fine was a joke – exactly matching Germany’s annual GDP. What I am arguing with you here is the BP and Bayer are no innocent babes in the wood. They are just as much monsters and have 5 eyes working for them as well. Any defense of any of these monsters feels like trolling.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 8:38 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

The lawsuits against Monsanto started long before Bayer got in. You are correct about the poison chalice that is Monsanto. You are insanely treating Bayer or BP or anyone as an innocent. Bayer if you remember marketed HIV tainted blood to EU and Africa after it was caught in the US. Bayer is the same monster that Monsanto is. They bought Monsanto knowing it was a monster for reasons you may not be aware of. They bought in the process keys to US Ag kingdom. Monsanto’s cornered seed markets, software farmers are now dependent on, gps data systems that track ag production down to square foot increments, and on. Bayer is making out like the monopolistic monster it is in ways we cannot see yet and will continue Monsanto’s monstrous history. They already have a chemical practically identical to glyphosate in the works to replace it when the captured FDA and EPA finally outlaw glyphosate.

Jogging
Jogging
Aug 14, 2020 9:47 PM
Reply to  zdb

No substatial reward was offered against round-up before Bayer and the mass mobilization had NOT started before Bayer took over. The flood gates were opened as I said, when Monsanto because German owned, the legal actions were suppressed and not very successful prior.

Glyphosate is not totally outlawed in the US yet although since Bayer it is gaining steam.

Jake(GOOD)
Jake(GOOD)
Aug 14, 2020 9:53 PM
Reply to  zdb

No substantial reward (2billions) was offered against round-up before Bayer and the mass mobilization had NOT started before Bayer took over. The flood gates were opened as I said, when Monsanto because German owned, the legal actions were suppressed and not very successful prior.

Glyphosate is not totally outlawed in the US yet although since Bayer it is gaining steam ion many states.

I believe they were conned into buying Monsanto, it was a CIA operations and I will be proven right, I have seen too many of these scams, they all look the same.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 11:45 PM
Reply to  Jake(GOOD)

You are saying that Bayer did not know what they were getting into? Are you next going to tell me that all those times Monsanto representatives told us that Roundup is no more toxic than table salt, they really did not know better? Bayer got fooled into buying one of the most powerful companies on the planet? Do you have any idea how many Monsanto lawyers now work in the federal US govt after appointments by Bush and Obama? Do you know how much power over US agriculture, Bayer gained by picking up Monsanto? It’s a valuable purchase at ten times the price in lawsuits. You are correct in noting that getting outside the US jurisdiction is useful. Bayer knew exactly and knows exactly what they’re doing. CV1984 is one of many tactics they are using to more than compensate for any damage done to their company. There’s a reason why IG Farbensanto survived Nuremberg and is now poisoning humanity on a much more massive scale.

zdb
zdb
Aug 14, 2020 11:50 PM
Reply to  Jake(GOOD)

The EPA will continue to declare glyphosate safe indefinitely. To say otherwise requires them to admit failure. Not just a mistake. Utter complete failure and corruption completely owned by Monsanto and the entire petro-chem-pharma industry. They will keep saying Roundup is safe for years after glyphosate is replaced with something probably as toxic but not prevalent enough to have killed enough people. They will do as the ADA and FDA in the US have done on mercury amalgalm fillings in teeth. They will slowly let dentists work their way out of metal fillings all the while claiming that they were and are safe. Same as they did with thimerosal in a couple of vaccines. They said they were taking it out as a favor to some upset customers. Then years later they put it back in quietly when suits die down. This is not a Bayer vs Monsanto problem.

Moneycircus
Moneycircus
Aug 14, 2020 1:07 PM

TL;DR – Yes, this is the short version of the Journey from Capitalism to a Eugenic Technocracy.

Globalism was a cover for Technocracy, a shift from political control to corporate control. The lever was to gain political control of the U.S., the object was China as a rock to break the economic system (piloting Technocracy so it could be mirrored on to the U.S.)

Zbigniew Brzezinsk co-founded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller and used this to inject the plan into the UN and the U.S. political system.

Things moved very fast: 1972 Nixon visits China, 1973 Trilateral Commission founded and calls for a New International Economic Order, 1974 UN passes resolution to create a New International Economic Order, 1979 Chairman Deng Xiaoping visits U.S., 1980 U.S. grants China full trade access.

This was presented under the guise of liberalizing trade and thus free enterprise. This is clearly not the case because China is not capitalist, nor committed in any way to free enterprise. What the globalists were creating was a Technocratic China. But how could you be against Globalism! It was the perfect Trojan horse.

Technocracy as a movement peaked in the 1930s but was damaged by its close association with Corporatism and Fascism and was later hidden under rocks of various names: UNESCO, WWF, WEF, Climate Change, Carbon Trading, Green Energy, Sustainable Development — yet all these “burning issues” share the implication that power should be stripped from politicians and that policy should be set by scientist technocrats.

Beneath all of them is Eugenics, barely hidden: the implication that scientist technocrats would allocate living space/life according to one’s burden on the community – or one’s carbon footprint.

All is revealed

Only now, with the World Economic Forum’s unveiling of The Great Reset is it more or less acknowledged that politicians have no role in the new world order. The mechanisms are computational algorithms, outputs determined by inputs.

Equity not equality

The woke useful idiots subverted equality of opportunity into equity of outcome. They helped demolish free markets (Gillette is a case study in “get woke, go broke”).

What the woke don’t realize is that in a Technocracy equity simply means, “Computer sez”. It has nothing to do with empowering victims or settling historical grievances.

The woke have been had. They are leading the charge into a eugenic, technocratic present in which welfare will cease to exist for anyone whom the algorithm determines to be a “useless eater.”

Spiro Skouras: The Global Elite & The Coronavirus Coup D’état With Patrick Wood https://youtu.be/HKdsL57SUZo?t=1568

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 1:49 PM
Reply to  Moneycircus


If anyone is engaged in a Eugenics program, then they are not very good at it, and are not doing very well. So stop with the Scifi, the real world is far more interesting and far simpler.

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Aug 14, 2020 2:44 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

Your real world is indeed simple but unfortunately not too interesting.

Flute
Flute
Aug 14, 2020 3:03 PM
Reply to  Nixon Scraypes

You guys are selling fairy stories, but I wouldn’t let you near the children.

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Aug 14, 2020 3:13 PM
Reply to  Flute

Last time I looked there was only one of me and when I consulted the ledger your account was owing.

Paul Vonharnish
Paul Vonharnish
Aug 14, 2020 4:00 PM
Reply to  Moneycircus

Hello Moneycircus: I’ve voted you up in many of your posts, as it was obvious you’ve done extensive research on many topics.

Most civilians have no clue regarding the overthrow of nations by technocratic interests, so they continue to play into media influenced political and demographic designations. The fabricated social labels are not even valid points of debate…

“Equity not equality” is something technocratic minions openly discuss with governmental agencies, who ultimately approve of human and environmental carnage for profit. Modern governmental policy is highly controlled by technocratic elites, and consumer demand for techno-idiocy and dangerous toys will continue to fund mankind’s ultimate suicide.

I’ve read Patrick Wood’s work at Technocracy News & Trends > https://www.technocracy.news
His research is well documented and analysis is spot on.

Moneycircus
Moneycircus
Aug 14, 2020 5:04 PM

Hi Paul,

I’m sure we’re in some kind of a cycle and we’ll just have to see it through. When I came across Kondratiev I came to my own conclusion that far from the Internet unleashing a new Age, we are at the end of a cycle: that of data over wires. I’m probably isolated in my opinion that we don’t actually have a new technology on the horizon. Robotics and AI is still data over wires, which started with the telegraph. Currently it’s producing an economic race to the bottom… ecommerce pares margins ever thinner… robotics is profitable only for the makers of robots. Those who implement them will be likewise in a race to the bottom, profitwise.

Maybe that’s why the profit-chasing economy has given way to demands for control: after all, by controlling the population you can squeeze some profit from the people, even in barren economic soil.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:35 PM

All these smug administrators / ‘paper’ pushers now ‘working’ from home ( on their bikes blocking the roads) are in for a shock when their company decides if employees don’t need to work at the office then they could get labor at a fraction of the cost by outsourcing to India, Eadtern you role etc.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 6:19 PM
Reply to  Moneycircus

Though I disagree with your view that Eugenics as science is a negative .The rest of your post seems accurate to me.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 15, 2020 1:07 AM
Reply to  Moneycircus

Exactly, TLDR. Patrick Wood has written books, including one with Anthony Sutton, exposing these inhuman plans. Books “Trilaterals Over Washington” and “Technocracy Rising: the Trojan Horse of Global Transformation”

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/09/patrick-wood-technocracy.aspx?cid_source=dnl VIDEO interview. Also a transcript.

There is also a longer, Coast to Coast interview which begins with the history/origins of technocracy https://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/wood-patrick-96792/

gordon
gordon
Aug 14, 2020 1:07 PM

capital ism
zio nism
commun ism
fasc ism
all
satan ism

all the ism’s in
lockstep

the talmud says
all goyim are beasts

that is why the self chosen
have ritual
slaughter

gmo same old same old
companies and families

interlocked

read the book murder by injection
eustace mullins

read the book
the dream and lie of louis pasteur
rb pearson

culling the herd

nothing new under the sun

Eyes Open
Eyes Open
Aug 14, 2020 12:00 PM

GMO food crops usually contain higher levels of lectins, which increase gut inflammation. Someone may not feel anything or ten years, then suddenly develop an autoimmune disease.

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 12:23 PM
Reply to  Eyes Open

I don’t know the evidence for the first claim, but lectins sure do make people ill.

Emily Ellen
Emily Ellen
Aug 14, 2020 11:55 AM

Thanks to sanctions, Russia has gone into agriculture in an ever bigger way and is now a successful exporter,
And Russia has banned GMO.
Lucky Russians having decent food to eat.
And don’t forget the Gates Covid vaccine is designed to change your! DNA.
GMO YOU.
If you want the jab I would go Russian too.
Theirs is from the lab which created the anti Ebola vaccine.
And know what.
They gave it to Africa for FREE.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/disease/vaccines-that-change-your-dna-gates-italian-experiment/
https://thedailycoin.org/2020/05/17/bill-gates-explains-that-the-covid-vaccine-will-use-experimental-technology-and-permanently-alter-your-dna/

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 1:52 PM
Reply to  Emily Ellen

The Russian Covid vaccine is as fake as the virus. Neither are what they are claimed to be.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 2:34 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

The Russian vaccine works on this specific mild form of coronavirus . 99.7 % of the global population will develop herd immunity and mild symptoms after exposure. This virus which will have mutated by the time the looming second wave is declared by social engineers and profiteers in the coming fall and winter . A global reset attempt is indeed in progress truth be damned.

Flute
Flute
Aug 14, 2020 3:01 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

So there is a mild form is there ? You seem so sure……. This will be a mild form of the common cold virus which we have spent the best part of a century trying to find a vaccine for, and failed. Yet the Russians got busy and in a few weeks hoopla!. ….BS.

Objective
Objective
Aug 14, 2020 3:38 PM
Reply to  Flute

You know why the russians skipt testing their vaccine, the vaccine was the placebo.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 14, 2020 4:48 PM
Reply to  Flute

All the data sans political cant and hype seems indicates that covid is just another mild flu . Vaccines that do work have been produced for decades and are sold every flu season ? That the Russians have found one to treat this years strain is not remarkable.

Jim(jacKie)
Jim(jacKie)
Aug 14, 2020 7:05 PM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

That is a point worthy of consideration, which would mean they are calling the Wests bluff on the whole Covid story.

Because we are told it is not a flu virus, we are told it is from the Covid family, like the common cold.

But I think you may have a good point there.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:38 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

Or they stumbled on the recipe for the vaccine which was patented in West before the outbreak allegedly.

ame
ame
Aug 14, 2020 10:15 AM

I disagree with 95% quote
the organic or old way of life market is fucking huge
so huge they brought in the dooms days world is going to die, war of carbon last year Extinction Rebellion ritual took place and now sustainability development goals which every British council now has on their websites agenda (2020 like like exactly event 201 event 20 agenda 20) just a coincidence

The fact the governments all governments highly subsidies GM crops which they can then use more poisons GM crops are sprayed more as they are more resistance lovely jubbly with agro chemical ching ching£$ all about feeding the world what though death

And organic which uses hardly none the grower buyer has to pay for certification and the customer pays more

that how deluded the world government is but do politicians look like earthy people!
I recall dolly the sheep and GM when it first came out and there was uproar
the world would be feed we was told by bio tek

bullshit

Dolly the sheep the other sheep did not except her and it died early as in for sheeps and died of quite a lot of complications

can’t fool nature

and the first human test tube she grow up and could not have children

good luck eating that crap

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 10:34 AM
Reply to  ame

A genome – even a microscopic worm’s genome, let alone a human one – is unbelievably complicated. It was bad enough when scientists thought that each of the thousands of genes did one thing all the time. Then they discovered epigenetics: some genes control the expression of other genes. All genes (almost) express proteins, some of which affect genes, some of which control other genes…

That’s why Dolly was never quite well and died early. She was quite a good imitation of a healthy sheep, but so many little details weren’t quite as they should be.

In all these matters of science, technology and (mainly) money, one must always start by asking “cui bono?” (“who profits?”) – even if some people accuse anyone who uses that expression of being “a Russian troll”. 😎

An honest, unbiased scientist who thoroughly understood genetics and epigenetics would advise proceeding with EXTREME caution.

However there are very few such scientists, as they almost all depend on corporations and/or government to pay their salaries, let alone their very big experimental costs. And “he who pays the piper calls the tune”.

Not to mention that some of the best and most groundbreaking scientists are keen to make huge fortunes of their own by setting up companies to exploit the discoveries they have made with taxpayers’ money.

So (more Latin, I’m afraid) “caveat emptor”. (“Buyer beware!”)

ame
ame
Aug 14, 2020 10:47 AM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

forget the HEMP market that is now huge
cheers Tom good intel you wrote

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 1:54 PM
Reply to  ame

Hemp is still banned in many states in the USA, I believe, although in Europe it is widely available.

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 1:54 PM
Reply to  ame

hemp and cannabis isn’t afflicted by pests to the same extent cotton is. It’s also generally easier to grow with far less fertlizer requirements. Du Pont family were key in prohibition in the US and inturn the rest of the world. The =irony is, that there is a good argument that the British Empire would never have been without hemp being used for the Royal Navy. Liz the 1st I think it was even mandated taxes can/should be paid in hemp.

Tiffin
Tiffin
Aug 14, 2020 2:05 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

I consume the cold pressed form regularly for it’s healthy fats. I believe it also has many other, as yet unproven, beneficial health impacts.

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 2:09 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

Rick Simpson Oil is where the real magic is at……

Victor G.
Victor G.
Aug 14, 2020 8:47 PM
Reply to  Tiffin

Try lighting up a blunt. You’ll love it …

aspnaz
aspnaz
Aug 14, 2020 6:02 AM

Isn’t it interesting how really big business has turned its back on capitalism and has taken up authoritarianism. The government acts as their captured audience to sell vaccines, GMO food, Fentanyl drugs, prison services, etc etc … I am sure the list is almost endless. They are after the big money, so government is the only client worth chasing.

Gates did similar with Windows, forcing everybody who bought a new computer to also buy a new copy of Windows – I wonder how much he had to pay in bribe money to get that deal through. Looks like big pharma learned a lot from Gates.

Just look at the FANG lot, how did they get to be super-monopolies without paying a fair price to the politicians: now they are boring old companies that seem unable to bring out anything new, unless it is yet another Apple watch … give me strength or another 1000 USD phone that is worse than the Chinese competitors.

Apple’s lack of innovation is startling, I wonder how long before they go the way of GM and start begging the fed for bailouts to keep their corruption ridden, decaying businesses alive. I know they are trying to skim off the decent businesses that have to use them to compete, but that cannot last forever.

What happened to good old fashioned competition and innovation? Instead we have megalomaniacs sucking on the government teat and bribing weak minded politicians while the standard of living stands still because innovation has effectively stopped.

Ergo
Ergo
Aug 14, 2020 8:59 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

“to also buy a new copy of windows”

Something that has bugged (excuse the pun) me for years.

From personal intuitive hunches Gates invented and planted the computer virus which caused users to provide anti viral software, then invented serial upgrades of operating systems requiring more and more A/V software…on and on creating a pattern of repetition thus drawing in a fortune from users.

Users had to upgrade endlessly their Microsoft products.

Did we have to constantly upgrade our violins or our bookshelves?

Hard to draw analogies, but that’s the drift.

Dr NG Maroudas
Dr NG Maroudas
Aug 14, 2020 9:57 AM
Reply to  Ergo

@Ergo: “Users had to upgrade endlessly their Microsoft products.”

Dead right. That’s why I switched to Linux: upgrades come for free, as in free beer, and I have not needed to buy anti-virus “protection” since I quit using MicroSoft products.

Bill Gates’s human anti-virus “protection” (NanoSoft?) sound suspiciously like his computer anti-virus “protection” (MicroSoft) — only much bigger and even more expensive.

Victor G.
Victor G.
Aug 14, 2020 8:50 PM
Reply to  Dr NG Maroudas

One way or another, his mission is to stick it to you.

Moneycircus
Moneycircus
Aug 14, 2020 9:01 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

“Competition is a sin,” Rockefeller once said, and he had certainly done his part to stamp that sin out. — Smithsonian Magazine.

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 10:46 AM
Reply to  Moneycircus

Rockefeller was a huge hypocritical religious bigot. He must have known how much harm he was doing, but he could always twist the facts to make himself look holy. And then he took on saintly airs by giving away a small fraction of the wealth he had swindled from others.

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 12:54 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

That sounds like how the government operate.

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 1:31 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

Bullseye!

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 1:31 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

And the Gates Foundation.

Objective
Objective
Aug 14, 2020 3:42 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

He sounds like a liberal.

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 3:44 PM
Reply to  Objective

Sounds like Jams o’Donnel now spewing anger and screaming everyone is stupid but him/socialists on the board. He should slurp back more chamomile tea and less of corbyns capatalist slave worked coffee.

Objective
Objective
Aug 14, 2020 4:41 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

You know what they say, don’t feed the troll.

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 10:42 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

An honest economist (if you can find one) will tell you that the theory of free enterprise capitalism, as told in economics textbooks, is and always has been a fairy tale. There is no such thing as a free and open market in which firms compete fairly, and anyone can always start a new company.

For a start, without firm government control and regulation you don’t have a free market at all. The big players will use their muscle to intimidate and drive out competitors.

But if the market is free only to the extent that government makes it free, that’s bad too – because soon the rich and powerful get control of the government, which then regulates according to their wishes.

Last but not least, our hypothetical honest economist would tell you that no real capitalist has any time for fair competition. They all aim at a monopoly, as soon as possible. And in our very imperfect system, many of them get a monopoly (or something close enough for their purposes). Microsoft does not have a monopoly of PC software – not quite – but it does have well over 90% of the market, which suits it well enough.

Why is it hard to find an honest economist? Same reason it’s hard to find an honest scientist: they almost all work for the would-be monopolists, or for the government that is controlled by the would-be monopolists. So they teach that we have a free, fair and open market (although we don’t).

Ælfræd
Ælfræd
Aug 14, 2020 1:52 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

You won’t find an honest economist because it’s a social science, not a real science. Even science is no longer science for the most part.

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes
Aug 14, 2020 2:58 PM
Reply to  Ælfræd

Exemption~ Professor Richard Werner~forensic proof that banks create credit from nothing. He’s one of the few.

Objective
Objective
Aug 15, 2020 7:49 AM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

There is no such thing as a free and open market

Firstly let me say i’m neither a capitalist or an economist, but I disagree with that theory, whilst its true economics is not governed by the laws of nature (its entirely man made) & therefore it can be & is to often manipulated by powerful conspirators to advance their own interests.

Its not true that a free market is impossible, sure monopolies exist & the purpose of competition as in nature is to dominate all others, but as with ecological evolution, monopolies fail & fall, become extinct, when the environment or a competitor evolves an edge the old couldn’t successfully adapt to, through stale ideas or simple complacency. The younger more hungry for success have greater drive to eventually topple its rivals.

Perhaps the problem is we see things through a prism of our own lifespans, but life continues after we are long gone in the memories of new species (players) & (younger individuals). Its certainly true we most likely have never witnessed a true free market, where wealth hasn’t bought lobbyists to corrupt democratic politicians.

Maybe the answer is we should eradicate alien species & vermin like economists & politicians & create a new environment where the largest minority doesn’t unnaturally rule the majoirty?

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 10:43 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

“Apple’s lack of innovation is startling…”

It’s essentially due to their lack of Steve Jobs. They have been coasting on his ideas ever since he died.

aspnaz
aspnaz
Aug 14, 2020 10:52 AM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

Also the change in management. It his amazing how companies change when the entrepreneur leaves and the professional CEO takes over to manage the slow decline of the company. The professional CEO only knows how to kiss ass and stab people in the back and fiddle finances, not the best skills when trying to move a company forward.

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 11:28 AM
Reply to  aspnaz

I should know, aspnaz! I was fortunate enough to work for Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) from 1974 until 1993, when I was made redundant along with the rest of the software marketing team. As far as we could make out, the board had realised that software was the only division that was making profits, and decided to get rid of it in favour of hardware which barely broke even.

My colleagues and I were made redundant the year after Ken Olsen, the founder, was forced to resign. He had been in charge for 35 years, and was assessed by Fortune magazine as the greatest US entrepreneur ever – above Henry Ford, Thomas Edison and Thomas Watson of IBM.

As soon as Mr Olsen left, DEC went into a flat spin and didn’t last out the decade. In 1988, some of the idiots in charge had been talking about when DEC would overhaul IBM!

aspnaz
aspnaz
Aug 14, 2020 12:05 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

After 19 years! You were going to be a lifer. My first experience in mini computing was on a Dec PDP-11 at Rolls Royce Aerospace at Filton, Bristol, using the PDP-11 to control real-time blade scanners looking for cracks in turbin eblades, using various sensors. That was back in the early 80’s when I didn’t know how lucky I was!

Tom Welsh
Tom Welsh
Aug 14, 2020 12:21 PM
Reply to  aspnaz

Being a lifer at the DEC I joined in 1974 would have been quite pleasant. But by the 1980s the company was gradually rotting. As the engineers used to say, “Success breeds failure”. To begin with, DEC salesmen were titled “sales engineers” and did not receive commission. They spent their days sincerely advising customers on the best equipment to buy, and how to use it. One colleague of mine who began as a salesman said that his hardest job was apologizing to customers that they couldn’t get all the kit they wanted immediately, due to limited production capacity. (Rather like Rolls Royce cars).

In about 1988 I was asked by the salesman for the RAF account to join him as his software adviser. I said I would be delighted, as I really enjoyed talki9ng to the RAF people and they seemed to appreciate my direct style. It all looked good until I had my personnel interview. The personnel guy said he knew within 5 minutes that I was wrong for the post, as I was obviously more interested in machines than in people.

I was unable to get him to understand that that was exactly why I was right for the job – everyone in the RAF was like that too.

We were infested by such touchy-feely nonsense, and hordes of mediocre employees (mainly managers, who hired more like themselves). When Ken Olsen himself was thrown out, I didn’t really want to stay.

aspnaz
aspnaz
Aug 14, 2020 3:38 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

That is the worst, when you see the people you respect – maybe even admire – being thrown out, then you know it is time to go.

Having said that, no company lives forever and the same is true for teams:I am a projects guy and I have been in great teams in the past, I still keep in touch with most people in the teams (will until I die), but the project always comes to an end and the team – mostly international – go back to their own countries. Enjoy it while you can then you have to move on. I just hope that will be possibel in the future.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:47 PM
Reply to  Tom Welsh

Hence Jonny ives leaving too – no Jobs

Flute
Flute
Aug 14, 2020 3:23 PM
Reply to  aspnaz

It is the job of business to maximize profit, and it is the job of government to regulate business on our behalf.

It is the failure of democracies to represent and regulate on behalf of the population that has cased the problems in the USA.

In Europe the EU still serves better the interests of the population and bans most GMO’s and comes down heavily on artificial additives and bad processed food production and bad animal husbandry.

Trump continues to deregulate the US food industry.

Blubber
Blubber
Aug 14, 2020 8:45 PM
Reply to  aspnaz

Don’t buy their stuff.

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 17, 2020 12:57 PM
Reply to  aspnaz

There was no “turning its back on capitalism”. Tyrants and plutocrats need each other. It was called fascism. Now, it is called oligarchy.

Antonym
Antonym
Aug 14, 2020 4:34 AM

Research reveals those blocking Bt Cotton in India have conflicts of interest
Is a better sub headline. Opposing MNCs abroad through NGOs makes a living for some: stopping to block usually has big pay offs under the table, while gullible Westerners donate for the rest of the time – tax reductions at home.

India needs to be stopped, the rest of the world can go ahead, fair is fair.