Monday, August 07, 2017
Friday, August 04, 2017
The New York Times (Warning: article may be paywalled; alternate source):
Documents released Tuesday in a lawsuit against Monsanto raised new questions about the company's efforts to influence the news media and scientific research and revealed internal debate over the safety of its highest-profile product, the weed killer Roundup.
The active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, is the most common weed killer in the world and is used by farmers on row crops and by home gardeners.
While Roundup's relative safety has been upheld by most regulators, a case in federal court in San Francisco continues to raise questions about the company's practices and the product itself.
The documents underscore the lengths to which the agrochemical company goes to protect its image.
Documents show that Henry I. Miller, an academic and a vocal proponent of genetically modified crops, asked Monsanto to draft an article for him that largely mirrored one that appeared under his name on Forbes's website in 2015.
Mr. Miller could not be reached for comment.
A similar issue appeared in academic research. An academic involved in writing research funded by
appeared to express discomfort with the process, writing in a 2015 email to a Monsanto executive, "I can't be part of deceptive authorship on a presentation or publication."
He also said of the way the company was trying to present the authorship: "We call that ghost writing and it is unethical."
Mr. Miller's 2015 article on Forbes's website was an attack on the findings of the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a branch of the World Health Organization that had labeled glyphosate a probable carcinogen, a finding disputed by other regulatory bodies.
In the email traffic, Monsanto asked Mr. Miller if he would be interested in writing an article on the topic, and he said, "I would be if I could start from a high-quality draft."
The article appeared under Mr. Miller's name, and with the assertion that "opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own."
The magazine did not mention any involvement by Monsanto in preparing the article.
The Complete History of Monsanto, “The World’s Most Evil Corporation”http://www.anh-usa.org/hold-monsanto-accountable/
When it comes to global warming, Fido and Fluffy are part of the problem, a new study by UCLA indicates.
Pet ownership in the United States creates about 64 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, UCLA researchers found.
That's the equivalent of driving 13.6 million cars for a year. The problem lies with the meat-filled diets of kitties and pooches, according to the study by UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin.
Dogs and cats are responsible for 25 to 30 percent of the impacts of meat production in the United
And what goes in, must come out. In terms of waste, Okin noted, feeding pets also leads to about 5.1 million tons of feces every year, roughly equivalent to the total trash production of Massachusetts. The study has been published in the journal PLOS One.