2 Comments

  1. blank Undecider says:

    Since the WHO is part of the problem, they’ll just make some arbitrary statement. Then Monsanto will continue doing as Monsanto does.

  2. blank Hugh Pizzi says:

    It does seem rather odd that the WHO are biting the hand that feeds. Similar apparent changes in position have happened with Big Ag, Big Pharma and friends before and usually there’s some profit motive. One example is Du Pont changing its position on CFCs and the ozone layer right after they patented potential replacements for CFCs. Instead of cheap generic compounds being available as refrigerants and propellants, the world ended up paying Du Pont a fortune for proprietary replacements. It looked as though Du Pont had seen the light, but instead had seen the chance to get a UN-backed treaty guaranteeing their profits for years to come. Something similar happens with drugs on a regular basis: Hide the side-effects, deaths and injuries until just before the patent expires; see the light and agree to a settlement that is a small fraction of the profits from the drug; withdraw the drug and so prevent it from ever going generic as it is now officially dangerous; release a proprietary, expensive replacement and corner the market again. I have no idea if a new, patented, super-herbicide complete with resistant GM crops is in the wings, but it wouldn’t surprise me. Getting cheap glyphosate and 2,4-D banned shortly before its release would play straight into Big Ag’s hands.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *