Bayer/Monsanto

uztrac

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
fakenham-norfolk
Looking at a financial update a few minutes ago and noted that Bayer has agreed to settle $ 10 + Billion of US lawsuits for the product that we know as " Roundup".
 

thesilentone

Member
NFFN Member
Location
Cumbria
Two very dubious Companies.........Sitting at the top of the food chain.

Above the law, Governments, and the human species.....

Create problems, illness and disease then produce the medication to treat them.

There is no chance of the Company paying $10Bn to settle anything, ever.
 

Cowabunga

Member
Location
Ceredigion,Wales
With costs like that for spurious claims, it is a wonder why they bother with crop protection and productivity chemicals at all. Researching, developing and bringing to market genetically modified crops with massive benefits to human kind has crippled Monsanto. Such a damned shame. More so for consumers and especially consumers in less developed countries with specific environmental or human health problems and for future developments in these areas that desperately need solutions to malnutrition due to infestations, crop failures and specific nutritional deficiencies.

There is nothing at all wrong with glyphosate. It has been used by farmers and gardeners with no ill effect for decades. Now anyone with anything wrong with them will claim "I used Roundup so that must be the cause. Pay up!" and American courts are daft enough to uphold the claims and award stupidly high damages.
If I was Bayer I would withdraw completely from the crop protection and breeding market and tell the population to go forth and eat shite or starve.
 

Ivorbiggun

Member
Location
Norfolk
With costs like that for spurious claims, it is a wonder why they bother with crop protection and productivity chemicals at all. Researching, developing and bringing to market genetically modified crops with massive benefits to human kind has crippled Monsanto. Such a damned shame. More so for consumers and especially consumers in less developed countries with specific environmental or human health problems and for future developments in these areas that desperately need solutions to malnutrition due to infestations, crop failures and specific nutritional deficiencies.

There is nothing at all wrong with glyphosate. It has been used by farmers and gardeners with no ill effect for decades. Now anyone with anything wrong with them will claim "I used Roundup so that must be the cause. Pay up!" and American courts are daft enough to uphold the claims and award stupidly high damages.
If I was Bayer I would withdraw completely from the crop protection and breeding market and tell the population to go forth and eat shite or starve.
Nothing at all wrong with glyphosate. !!!!!!

Is that why it says suspected of causing cancer on the can?
 

Cowabunga

Member
Location
Ceredigion,Wales
Nothing at all wrong with glyphosate. !!!!!!

Is that why it says suspected of causing cancer on the can?
That’s a legal thing. Salt is far more toxic, yet I’ve not seen a warning on the packet. Plenty of medical warnings sporadically though. Bacon is another well known carcinogenic that some people eat quite a lot of yet no warning on the packet. Red meat, ditto. Yet there has never been scientific evidense linking glyphosate in any practical dose rate or frequency of exposure to cancer. It has been used for literally decades regularly by tens of thousands, if not millions of people with no apparent ill effect.

the scariest contrast of all is alcohol which directly kills hundreds of thousands every year and indirectly at least as many more including third parties. Demonstrably toxic yet nothing that contains it has a warning apart from 'flammable' on some products and the advice not to drive 'under the influence ' on some packages.
 
Last edited:

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
All alcohol packaging here . . .
image.jpg
 

2wheels

Member
Location
aberdeenshire
did monsanto bend over for this? it's costing them a fortune anyway . why didn't they fight it? i have only read the bare bones but on the face of it there doesn't appear to real proof of harm.
 

Farmer Roy

Member
Arable Farmer
did monsanto bend over for this? it's costing them a fortune anyway . why didn't they fight it? i have only read the bare bones but on the face of it there doesn't appear to real proof of harm.
Err, it’s Bayer actually.

its largely because of the US legal / court system apparently ( which is unique to the US ). They can’t really fight it on factual or scientific based arguments, so just a business decision to pay the money & walk away.

Just like VW did with the emissions scandal in the US but not elsewhere.

They are not admitting any fault or blame on their part.
I doubt you’ll see the same result in other countries
 

2wheels

Member
Location
aberdeenshire
Err, it’s Bayer actually.

its largely because of the US legal / court system apparently ( which is unique to the US ). They can’t really fight it on factual or scientific based arguments, so just a business decision to pay the money & walk away.

Just like VW did with the emissions scandal in the US but not elsewhere.

They are not admitting any fault or blame on their part.
I doubt you’ll see the same result in other countries
thanks, seems crazy but it is the usa.
 

Al R

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
West Wales
unfortunately this doesn’t show other actives like organophosphate’s and organochlorine’s, cypermethrin, Dieldrin,Aldrin but it’s does have DDT which is part of that group of organochlorine family.
8A4AB506-F1BB-4098-A508-AB4F0CB85EC7.png
 

ajd132

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
Suffolk
Of course thats why they have done it, nothing to do with profit at all.

Thats why many "useful" products are being withdrawn because the cost of the licence means they don't make enough margin.
Well said, to suggest they did it to ‘benefit’ human kind is an absolute joke. If they wanted to benefit human kind they would develop traits that actually help people, not that require specific inputs that they can then sell you. What an absolute con GM is. Read ‘altered genes, twisted truths’ frightening
 
Of course thats why they have done it, nothing to do with profit at all.

Thats why many "useful" products are being withdrawn because the cost of the licence means they don't make enough margin.

Is organic farming just about altruism and not profit? I was never sold of RR GM crops at all. Yanks and South Americans do love them though as it has lifted a lot of profit for them

Fwiw the issue seems mainly about labelling or lack of. With hindsight glyphosate should have been labelled "possible carcinogen" which it wasn't. Is it carcinogenic? Possibly. Is using it likely to give you cancer? Not really/ highly unlikely. Statistics and data presentation doesn't seem to indicate it.

I don't deny we will evolve from using glyphosate as a burndown product in due course but lets not pretend it kills everyone or even anyone much because the statistics are very unclear, to the extent that it is highly unlikely. Yet we still legally sell, market and promote plenty of known carcinogens....

Quite why organic farmers and organic promotion bodies care I have no idea. They don't use it!
 
Well said, to suggest they did it to ‘benefit’ human kind is an absolute joke. If they wanted to benefit human kind they would develop traits that actually help people, not that require specific inputs that they can then sell you. What an absolute con GM is. Read ‘altered genes, twisted truths’ frightening

If more people in Asia ate Brown rice not white rice they would be better nutritionally. My point is sometimes human kind making the most of what it has anyway
 

Al R

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
West Wales
IsQuite why organic farmers and organic promotion bodies care I have no idea. They don't use it!

not a clue and yet they try and use copper sulphate - I think they’ve got a problem with the license of it this year from what I saw in a Soil Association producer newsletter and they were panicking because they couldn’t get it approved this year.

A lot of these types need to concentrate less on saving their world and should concentrate more on saving their own farms first!!
 
they patented glyphosate as an anti-biotic in 2010.

Big companies with a lot of R and D will do this kind of thing routinely as a form of patent protection- to stop anyone else doing it basically. They might not have a single piece of evidence or work to suggest it works as an antibiotic but they will patent it for a range of applications anyway.

With the latest damages being awarded against Bayer etc it does make you wonder why they bother with agrochemicals at all.
 

Is Red tractor detrimental to your mental health?

  • Yes, Red tractor increase my stress and anxiety

    Votes: 298 97.7%
  • No, Red tractor gives me peace of mind that the product I produce is safe to enter the food chain

    Votes: 7 2.3%

HSENI names new farm safety champions

  • 142
  • 0
Written by William Kellett from Agriland

Farm-safety-640x360.png
The Health and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland (HSENI) alongside the Farm Safety Partnership (FSP), has named new farm safety champions and commended the outstanding work on farm safety that has been carried out in the farming community in the last 20 years.

Two of these champions are Malcom Downey, retired principal inspector for the Agri/Food team in HSENI and Harry Sinclair, current chair of the Farm Safety Partnership and former president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU).

Improving farm safety is the key aim of HSENI’s and the FSP’s work and...
Top