lol the dems didn't put obama in place... a ton of us did given we were sick of the alternative and the past admins(regimes) which all ended up being a thorn on the same stem anyhow. most did the same this go around too but you didn't get the person you wanted.
besides all that jazz, keep dismissing the demoKKKrats history. i know how yall like to bring up history unless it impedes yalls agenda/narrative.
I don't know that "Monsanto=GMO's" is a universal association. Each of those things can cause a kneejerk reaction even with people who don't even have a basic awareness of what they are. I would speculate the poll would show different results if it asked about Monsanto specifically, instead of GMO's.
This is, of course, anecdotal. I just haven't seen Monsanto opposition in conservative media the way I've seen it in liberal media.
lib s are more vocal about GMOs since the hippy/greenpeace contingent is there but conservatives dislike them too. I would guess from the distrust of science and the "back in my day food was all natural" type of derpiness
It's ignorance of the science too. "Genetically Modified" just has a connotation where I can understand how people, given no other information, might go in with a negative view.
In his defense youre a deep, complex guy and its hard to pin you down
5000 more cases filed against totally evil Monsanto
Still one of the safest chemicals I've ever sprayed. Too bad it doesn't work very food anymore. Trying to ban Roundup is like getting to get rid of horses and carriages in 2018.
^that will never get old
... because most people are ing uninformed, disengaged, and they know they are powerless to stop BigCorp even if they engaged.
BigChem pushes, designs GMO, and BigCHem is the overwhelming main pusher, because GMO crops are designed specifically to withstand poisoning by BigChem.
iow, poisoning the planet for profit, for unendingly amassing Capital for Capitalists.
Bayer's buyout of Monsanto has been an epic self-immolation, largely because of Roundup litigation
Federal Judge Nixes Proposed Monsanto Glysophate Settlement, Deepening Black Hole for BayerBayer bought Monsanto, despite its known glysophate litigation risks, as a poison pill, to make Bayer too big, and by loading up the company with a lot of debt to finance an “all cash” offer to avoid shareholder approval, too leveraged to be an attractive target to even larger companies on the prowl.
The poison pill part worked out even better than any of the Bayer executives could possibly have anticipated. Bayer has been widely deemed to be the worst deal of all time, with the $63 billion purchase price effectively going poof in the reduction of Bayer’s stock price as consumer lawsuits started piling up. Bayer’s board and management were castigated in an unheard-of successful vote of no confidence by Bayer’s German investors. The gross misconduct of Bayer’s management and board has also produced a novel and potentially deadly lawsuit, which we described in Devastating Lawsuit Targets Bank of America, Credit Suisse, and Bayer Board Members and Executives Over Disastrous Monsanto Acquisition.
Even more bizarrely, Bayer hasn’t changed its strategy for selling Roundup one bit. It has not only not taken it off the market or attempted to reformulate it, but it hasn’t even toughened up the warnings on its labels, apparently believing that doing so would be an admission of guilt. So Monsanto is continuing to rack up even more liability via its refusal to change course.
Her latest post, on how the second Roundup case to go to appeal, described how a three judge panel in the 9th Circuit upheld a lower-court decision in Hardeman v. Monsanto, which awarded $25 million to plaintiff Edwin Hardeman. He’d argued that his non-Hodgkins lymphoma was the result of exposure to Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, whose active ingredient is glysophate. A jury had awarded Hardeman nearly $5.3 million in compensatory damages and $75 million in punitive damages, which the court cut to $20 million.
Not only was the loss another blow to Monsanto, but two elements of the ruling were particularly damaging to the chemical company’s prospects. One was rejecting Monsanto’s argument that the WHO finding that glysophate was a probable carcinogen to be presented as evidence since the FDA had made no such determination. Second was to reject Monsanto’s argument that its labeling met applicable Federal standards (the case had been argued using more stringent California rules). affirmation of the reasonableness of the punitive damages.
Pleased to see BigChem screw itself, still doesn't pay for the decades of damage to people and environment.
otoh, their partner in the poisonous BigChem gang, 3M, continues unsued, so far.
Now that the (Biden) EPA is targeting 3M's PFOA/PFAS (targeting NEVER was going to happen from Trash's EPA kakistocrats), 100s of cities are finding that forever-poison in their water.
Guess who gets to pay for removing it? yep, 3M's "external costs" dumped on water consumers.
====
Tests Find More Than 200 Chemicals in Newborn Umbilical Cord Blood
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-exposure-bpa/
Similac is another problem. I think that stuff is poison and causes cancer and suppresses brain development.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote