Monsanto’s Controversial Past

Monsanto Company is an American multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is a leading producer of genetically engineered seeds and of the herbicide glyphosate, a chemical substance used to destroy or inhibit the growth of plants, which it markets under the Roundup brand.

The information provided in this article is not generally known by the public. People are far more concerned with Monsanto’s recent business practices but it is also important to understand its equally dark past. The aim of this article is to illustrate that Monsanto is in no way new to controversy and in fact seems to have deliberately chosen to develop and produce products which cause irreparable damage to the environment and life; be human or animal.

The people's perception of Monsanto

Since the company’s foundation in 1901 it has been controversial. Today the world associates Monsanto with biotechnology but over the years it has produced artificial sweeteners, insecticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pesticides and bovine somatotropin (rBST).

This article attempts to provide straight forward information on Monsanto’s controversial past.

The company's first product was the artificial sweetener saccharin, which it sold to the Coca-Cola Company. Saccharin has effectively no food energy and is devoid of any food value. Studies on laboratory rats during the early 1970’s linked saccharin with the development of bladder cancer in rodents and as a consequence, all food containing saccharin was labeled with a warning.

However, in 2000, the warning labels were removed because scientists learned that rodents, unlike humans, have a unique combination of high pH, high calcium phosphate and high protein levels in their urine which caused saccharin to damage their bladders. Doctors still caution pregnant women against excessive consumption of products containing artificial sweeteners since such foods could be replacing nutrient-dense, energy-yielding foods. Without the labels the advice is difficult to follow.

Monsanto began manufacturing the insecticide DDT, a chemical used against insects, in 1944. DDT was used in the second half of World War II by the U.S. to control malaria and typhus among civilians and troops. After the war, DDT was made available for use as an agricultural insecticide, and its production and use greatly increased.

In 1962, the book ‘Silent Spring’ by American biologist Rachel Carson was published. The book catalogued the environmental impacts of spraying DDT and questioned the logic of releasing large amounts of chemicals into the environment without fully understanding their effects on ecology or human health. Due to the book’s success and resulting public outcry DTT was banned in the U.S. in 1972. DDT was subsequently banned for agricultural use worldwide under the Stockholm Convention in 2004.

DDT in use 1948

DDT has been linked to diabetes, asthma, early pregnancy loss, premature birth and low birth weight. One study suggests that children exposed while in the womb have a greater chance of development problems. Occupational exposure in agriculture and malaria control has also been linked to neurological problems such as Parkinson’s disease.

In 1935 the company acquired Swann Chemical Company; a PCB producer. PCBs were widely used as dielectric and coolant fluids in transformers, capacitors, and electric motors. The toxicity of PCBs had been known since before its first commercial production through research done by producing companies themselves in the 1930’s; however, these conclusions were dismissed as negligible.

Much like DDT, contact with PCBs is known to cause major health problems including liver cancer. Again babies exposed while in the womb are at risk of changing sex or developing into neither male nor female, a condition termed intersex. Before the United States Congress banned domestic production in 1979, Monsanto produced 99% of all PCBs used by U.S. industry.

Monsanto’s most notorious past product must be the herbicide widely known as Agent Orange. During the 1960’s and 1970’s Monsanto was one of the most important producers of Agent Orange for the U.S. Armed Forces during the Vietnam War (1961-1971). Vietnamese authorities estimate 400,000 people were killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects as a result of the use of the chemical. The Red Cross of Vietnam estimates that up to 1 million people are disabled or have health problems due to Agent Orange.

United States Air Force records show that at least 6,542 spraying missions took place during the war. Nearly 20,000,000 U.S. gallons (76,000,000 liters) of material containing the chemical herbicide mixed with jet fuel was sprayed in Vietnam, eastern Laos and parts of Cambodia.

In 1994 Monsanto began to produce yet another controversial product; a recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) branded Posilac. The administration of rBST increases the milk yield in lactating cows. From 2000 to 2005 the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) survey of dairy producers found that about 17% of producers used rBST.

Milk from rBST-treated cows is not chemically identical to traditional milk; milk from rBST-treated cows contains slightly elevated levels of certain hormones. Cows treated with rBST have a substantially higher rate of mastitis, the inflammation of breast tissue, and more often require antibiotics.

Learning about the past aids us when trying to learn about the present. This is universally true and applies to present Monsanto practices. Can Monsanto change? Looking back at its history raises serious doubts.

Originally posted on The Pianosa Chronicle

Syrian Civil War: The use of chemical weapons in Syria

The 21-August chemical attack was not the first of its kind carried out since the beginning of the Syrian civil war which has been on-going since March, 2011. From a little online research I have found six other alleged uses of chemical weapons since December, 2012. The U.N. has also commented on the attacks and accused the Syrian opposition of using chemical weapons.

The first alleged use of chemical weapons was reported on 23-December, 2012. Six or seven people were allegedly killed, depending on which report you read, in Homs by a “poisonous gas” used by the Assad regime. The coverage included the report of side effects such as nausea, relaxed muscles, blurred vision, and breathing difficulties.

According to Dr. Abu al Fida, who treated about 30 of the approximately 100 people who were affected by the mysterious gas:

"It's still an apparent misuse, but the chemical was found to not be Sarin or the banned "Agent 15," despite showing clinical similarities to both.”

As a consequence of the attack, on 15-January a U.S. Department communication from the U.S. consul general in Istanbul said there was compelling evidence that the Syrian military had used a chemical weapon known as Agent 15. Agent 15 is similar to 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ, a powerful hallucinogen. While Syria is well-known to have a massive supply of chemical weapons, international observers haven’t ordinarily included BZ on the list.

Over the years, there have been rumors of BZ being used on a battlefield — including one that Iraqi insurgents dosed themselves with the drug to pump up their aggressiveness. If the 15-January communication is accurate, it would be the first confirmed case of BZ employed as a weapon.

A day later, 16-January, Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the U.S. National Security Council, said that the alleged incident of chemical weapons use was not consistent with information that the White House has about Syria’s chemical weapons program.

On 19-March two more alleged uses of chemical weapons were reported in Syria’s two main cities of Aleppo and Damascus The attacks reportedly killed between 25 and 31 people and injured dozens more. The Assad regime claimed that Syrian opposition forces were responsible for the attacks and on 20-March requested the United Nations conduct an investigation.

Four days later on 24-March Syrian opposition activists reported that Syrian forces had used chemical weapons from multiple rocket launchers at the town of Adra, northeast of Damascus, reporting to have killed 2 people and wounding 23. Doctors described that the weapons used were phosphorus bombs that harm the nervous system and induce imbalance and loss of consciousness.

On 13-April the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said that the Syrian army dropped two gas bombs on rebel-controlled Aleppo, killing 2 people and wounding 12. Opponents of the Syrian government accused the army of using chemical weapons.

Another attack allegedly took place on 29-April. A helicopter dropped canisters containing chemical weapons on the town of Saraqeb; 8 people claimed symptoms such as nausea and breathing problems, and one of them later died.

The world looks to the United Nations to verify the use of chemical weapons and on 5-May, 2012 it did.

Carla Del Ponte member of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic

"According to the testimonies we have gathered, the rebels have used chemical weapons, making use of sarin gas," del Ponte, a former war crimes prosecutor and member of the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, said in an interview with Swiss radio on 5-May.

"We still have to deepen our investigation, verify and confirm (the findings) through new witness testimony, but according to what we have established so far, it is at the moment opponents of the regime who are using sarin gas," she added.

Ms. del Ponte, a former Swiss prosecutor and attorney general, told Swiss TV: “Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals. According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated.”

In response Rebel Free Syrian Army spokesman Louay Almokdad denied that rebels had used chemical weapons.

“In any case, we don’t have the mechanism to launch these kinds of weapons, which would need missiles that can carry chemical warheads, and we in the FSA do not possess these kind of capabilities,” Mr. Almokdad told CNN.

“More importantly, we do not aspire to have (chemical weapons) because we view our battle with the regime as a battle for the establishment of a free democratic state. … We want to build a free democratic state that recognizes and abides by all international accords and agreements — and chemical and biological warfare is something forbidden legally and internationally.”

As mentioned in my last article “Syrian Civil War: 21-August Chemical Attack” evidence exists that the Syrian opposition do have chemical weapons. If the U.S is waiting for a U.N analysis, one exists from back in May suspecting the opposition of using chemical weapons.

Article originally posted on The Pianosa Chronicle

Sources:

The Telegraph Article “UN accuses Syrian rebels of chemical weapons use”

The Washington Times Article “Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad’s regime: U.N. official”

Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/IICISyria/Pages/AboutCoI.aspx

Syrian Civil War: 21-August Chemical Attack

On 21-August Syrian activists reported that Assad forces struck Jobar, Zamalka, ‘Ain Tirma, and Hazzah in the Eastern Ghouta region with chemical weapons. As a result on 30-August the US government released a four-page document, link provided, outlining their conclusions about the August 21 attack, blaming Assad and stating that 1,429 people had been killed including 426 children.

Their assessment was based on human, signals, and geospatial intelligence as well as a significant body of open-source reporting.

“We assess with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack against opposition elements in the Damascus suburbs on August 21. We assess that the scenario in which the opposition executed the attack on August 21 is highly unlikely. The body of information used to make this assessment includes intelligence pertaining to the regime’s preparations for this attack and its means of delivery, multiple streams of intelligence about the attack itself and its effect, our post-attack observations, and the differences between the capabilities of the regime and the opposition.”

“The Syrian regime has the types of munitions that we assess were used to carry out the attack on August 21, and has the ability to strike simultaneously in multiple locations. We have seen no indication that the opposition has carried out a large-scale, coordinated rocket and artillery attack like the one that occurred on August 21.”

To summarize, the US government blames the Syrian government, in part, because they believe the opposition does not have the means to carry out such an attack.

With little effort claims that the opposition does indeed have the capabilities to carry out chemical weapons attacks can be found online.

Syrian Rebels On The Streets Of Aleppo

An article published by Mint Press News, on 31-August, written by Dale Gavlak and Yahya Ababneh, claims that Syrian rebels have been given chemical weapons by the Saudis and reports that Syrians on the ground in Gouta and Damascus report chemical weapons were used by the rebels.

According to the article, numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, reveal that many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via Saudi intelligence and were responsible for carrying out the 21-August gas attack.

A female rebel fighter reportedly complained, “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them, we didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

A well-known rebel leader in Ghouta reportedly said “Jabhat al-Nusra militants do not cooperate with other rebels, except with fighting on the ground. They do not share secret information. They merely used some ordinary rebels to carry and operate this material. We were very curious about these arms.”

Rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing chemical weapons to Jabhat al-Nusra; an al-Qaida linked rebel group.

In a recent article for Business Insider, reporter Geoffrey Ingersoll highlighted Saudi Prince Bandar’s role in the two-and-a-half year Syrian civil war. Many observers believe Bandar, with his close ties to Washington, has been at the very heart of the push for war by the U.S. against Assad. Ingersoll refers to an article in the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph newspaper about secret Russian-Saudi talks alleging that Bandar offered Russian President Vladimir Putin cheap oil in exchange for dumping Assad.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan: Saudi Intelligence Chief

“Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord,” Ingersoll wrote.

“I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” Bandar allegedly told the Russians.

Prince Bandar is reported to have urged the U.S. to arm and train rebels out of a planned military base in Jordan. Rebels interviewed said Prince Bandar is referred to as “al-Habib” or ‘the lover’ by al-Qaida militants fighting in Syria.

To conclude this article I would like to talk about motives for the 21-August chemical attack. Who wins from the attack? Answer: the Syrian opposition. Since 21-August the U.S, the U.K, France and others have been calling for military intervention. The Syrian rebels are not winning the civil war but now have some new and powerful international friends.

Over the next few days more articles will be posted on other aspects of the Syrian civil war and more on what the mainstream media is not reporting.

Websites:

U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/30/government-assessment-syrian-government-s-use-chemical-weapons-august-21

Mint Press News Article “Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack”

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

Business Insider Article “The Saudis Offered Mafia-Style ‘Protection’ Against Terrorist Attacks At Sochi Olympics”

http://www.businessinsider.com/saudis-russia-sochi-olympics-terrorism-syria-2013-8

Article originally posted on The Pianosa Chronicle

http://thepianosachronicle.wordpress.com