From Rachel Carson to Monsanto: Insect Genocide, Predator Capitalism and The Silence of Spring

Apr 18, 2022 https://off-guardian.org/2022/04/18/ by Colin Todhunter shared with thanks.

Former Monsanto Chairman and CEO Hugh Grant is currently in the news. He is trying to avoid appearing in court to be questioned by lawyers on behalf of a cancer patient in the case of Allan Shelton v Monsanto.

Shelton has non-Hodgkin lymphoma and is one of the 100,000-plus people in the US claiming in lawsuits that exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup weed killer and its other brands containing the chemical glyphosate caused their cancer.

According to investigative journalist Carey Gillam, Shelton’s lawyers have argued that Grant was an active participant and decision maker in the company’s Roundup business and should be made to testify at the trial.

But Grant says in the court filings that the effort to put him on the stand in front of a jury is “wholly unnecessary and serves only to harass and burden” him.

His lawyers state that Grant does not have “any expertise in the studies and tests that have been done related to Roundup generally, including those related to Roundup safety”.

Gillam notes that the court filings state that Grant’s testimony “would be of little value” because he is not a toxicologist, an epidemiologist, or a regulatory expert and “did not work in the areas of toxicology or epidemiology while employed by Monsanto”.

Bayer acquired Monsanto in 2018 and Grant received an estimated $77 million post-sale payoff. Bloomberg reported in 2017 that Monsanto had increased Grant’s salary to $19.5 million for that fiscal year.

Even by 2009, Roundup-related products, which include genetically modified seeds developed to withstand glyphosate-based applications, represented about half of Monsanto’s gross margin. It is reasonable to say that Roundup was integral to Monsanto’s business model and Grant’s enormous income and final payoff.

But the cancer lawsuits in the US are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the damage done by glyphosate-based products and many other biocides.

Silent killer

June 2022 marks 60 years since the publication of Rachel Carson’s iconic book Silent Spring. It was published just two years before her death at age 56.

Carson documented the adverse impacts on the environment of the indiscriminate use of pesticides, which she said were ‘biocides’, killing much more than the pests that were targeted. Silent Spring also described some of the deleterious effects of these chemicals on human health.

She accused the agrochemical industry of spreading disinformation and public officials of accepting the industry’s marketing claims without question. An accusation that is still very much relevant today.

Silent Spring was a landmark book, inspiring many scientists and campaigners over the years to carry on the work of Carson, flagging up the effects of agrochemicals and the role of the industry in distorting the narrative surrounding its proprietary chemicals and its influence on policymaking.

In 2012, the American Chemical Society designated Silent Spring a National Historic Chemical Landmark because of its importance for the modern environmental movement.

For her efforts, Carson had to endure vicious, baseless smears and attacks on her personal life, integrity, scientific credentials and political affiliations. Tactics that the agrochemicals sector and its supporters have used ever since to try to shut down prominent scientists and campaigners who challenge industry claims, practices and products.

Although Carson was not calling for a ban on all pesticides, at the time Monsanto hit back by publishing 5,000 copies of ‘The Desolate Year’ which projected a world of famine and disease if pesticides were to be banned.

A message the sector continues to churn out even as evidence stacks up against the deleterious impacts of its practices and products and the increasing body of research which indicates the world could feed itself by shifting to agroecological/organic practices (see the online article Living in Epoch-Defining Times: Food, Agriculture and the New World Order, January 2022).

The title of Carson’s book was a metaphor, warning of a bleak future for the natural environment. So all these years later, what has become of humanity’s ‘silent spring’?

In 2017, research conducted in Germany showed the abundance of flying insects had plunged by three-quarters over the past 25 years. The research data was gathered in nature reserves across Germany and has implications for all landscapes dominated by agriculture as it seems likely that the widespread use of pesticides is an important factor.

Prof Dave Goulson of Sussex University in the UK was part of the team behind the study and said that vast tracts of land are becoming inhospitable to most forms of life: if we lose the insects then everything is going to collapse.

Flying insects are vital because they pollinate flowers and many, not least bees, are important for pollinating key food crops. Most fruit crops are insect-pollinated and insects also provide food for lots of animals, including birds, bats, some mammals, fish, reptiles and amphibians.

Flies, beetles and wasps are also predators and important decomposers, breaking down dead plants and animals. And insects form the base of thousands of food chains; their disappearance is a principal reason Britain’s farmland birds have more than halved in number since 1970.

Is this one aspect of the silence Carson warned of – that joyous season of renewal and awakening void of birdsong (and much else)? Truly a silent spring.

The 2016 State of Nature Report found that one in 10 UK wildlife species is threatened with extinction, with numbers of certain creatures having plummeted by two thirds since 1970. The study showed the abundance of flying insects had plunged by three-quarters over a 25-year period.

Campaigner Dr Rosemary Mason has written to public officials on numerous occasions noting that agrochemicals, especially Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup, have devastated the natural environment and have also led to spiralling rates of illness and disease.

She indicates how the widespread use on agricultural crops of neonicotinoid insecticides and the herbicide glyphosate, both of which cause immune suppression, make species vulnerable to emerging infectious pathogens, driving large-scale wildlife extinctions, including essential pollinators.

Chemical Castration”: White Genocide and Male Extinction in Rhetoric of Endocrine Disruption – NiCHE

Providing evidence to show how human disease patterns correlate remarkably well with the rate of glyphosate usage on corn, soy and wheat crops, which has increased due to ‘Roundup Ready’ seeds, Mason argues that over-reliance on chemicals in agriculture is causing irreparable harm to all beings on the planet.

In 2015, writer Carol Van Strum said the US Environmental Protection Agency has been routinely lying about the safety of pesticides since it took over pesticide registrations in 1970.

She has described how faked data and fraudulent tests led to many highly toxic agrochemicals reaching the market and they still remain in use, regardless of the devastating impacts on wildlife and human health.

The research from Germany mentioned above followed a warning by a chief scientific adviser to the UK government, Prof Ian Boyd, who claimed that regulators around the world have falsely assumed that it is safe to use pesticides at industrial scales across landscapes and the “effects of dosing whole landscapes with chemicals have been largely ignored.”

Prior to that particular warning, there was a report delivered to the UN Human Rights Council saying that pesticides have catastrophic impacts on the environment, human health and society as a whole.

Authored by Hilal Elver, the then special rapporteur on the right to food, and Baskut Tuncak, who was at the time special rapporteur on toxics, the report states:

Chronic exposure to pesticides has been linked to cancer, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility.”

Elver says that the power of the corporations over governments and the scientific community is extremely important: if you want to deal with pesticides, you have to deal with the companies which deny the damage inflicted by their chemicals as they continue to aggressively market their products

While these corporations falsely claim their products are essential for feeding a burgeoning global population, they also mouth platitudes about choice and democracy, while curtailing both as they infiltrate and subvert regulatory agencies and government machinery.

Whether it is the well-documented harm to the environment or tales of illness and disease in Latin America and elsewhere, the devastating impacts of chemical-intensive agriculture which the agribusiness-agritech corporations rollout is clear to see.

Corporate criminals

Post-1945 the nutritional value of what we eat has been depleted due to reliance on a narrower range of crops, the side-lining of traditional seeds which produced nutrient-dense plants and modern ‘cost-effective’ food-processing methods that strip out vital micronutrients and insert a cocktail of chemical additives.

Fuelling these trends has been a network of interests, including the Rockefeller Foundation and its acolytes in the US government, giant agribusiness conglomerates like Cargill, the financial-industrial complex and its globalisation agenda (which effectively further undermined localised, indigenous food systems) and the giant food corporations and the influential groups they fund, such as the International Life Sciences Institute.

Included here in this network is the agrochemical-agritech sector which promotes its proprietary chemicals and (genetically-engineered) seeds through a well-developed complex of scientists, politicians, journalists, lobbyists, PR companies and front groups.

Consider what Carey Gillam says:

US Roundup litigation began in 2015 after the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Internal Monsanto documents dating back decades show that the company was aware of scientific research linking its weed killer to cancer but instead of warning consumers, the company worked to suppress the information and manipulate scientific literature.”

Over the years, Monsanto mounted a deceitful defence of its health- and environment-damaging Roundup and its genetically engineered crops and orchestrated toxic smear campaigns against anyone – scientist or campaigner – who threatened its interests.

In 2016, Rosemary Mason wrote an open letter to European Chemicals Agency Executive Director Geert Dancet: Open Letter to the ECHA about Scientific Fraud and Ecocide. More of an in-depth report than a letter, it can be accessed on the academia.edu site.

In it, she explained how current EU legislation was originally set up to protect the pesticides industry and Monsanto and other agrochemical corporations helped the EU design the regulatory systems for their own products.

The Green Economy

She also drew Dancet’s attention to the journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology and how, in 2016 Volume 46, Monsanto commissioned five reviews published in a supplement to the journal.  Monsanto also funded them. Mason argues the aim was to cast serious doubts about the adverse effects of glyphosate by using junk science. Straight out of the Big Tobacco playbook.

Mason told Dancet:

CEO Hugh Grant and the US EPA knew that glyphosate caused all of these problems. The corporation concealed the carcinogenic effects of PCBs on humans and animals for seven years. They have no plans to protect you and your families from the tsunami of sickness that is affecting us all in the UK and the US.”

Meanwhile, on the US Right to Know site, the article Roundup Cancer Cases – Key Documents and Analysis sets out just why more than 100,000 cancer sufferers are attempting to hold Monsanto to account in US courts.

In a just (and sane) world, CEOs would be held personally responsible for the products they peddle and earn millions from. But no doubt they would do their utmost to dodge culpability.

After all, they were ‘just doing their job’ – and they would not want to feel harassed or burdened, would they?

Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture and is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization in Montreal. You can read his “mini e-book”, Food, Dependency and Dispossession: Cultivating Resistance, here.
Follow us on Telegram for regular updates & commentary

Filed under: agriculture, environment, latest

Tagged with: agriculture, Carey Gilliam, Colin Todhunter, environment, glyphosate, Monsanto, Rachel Carson, Rosemary Mason, Round Up, Silent Spring

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

5

Article Rating

Subscribe

Connect with

Login

guest

8000

6 Comments

newest

wardropper

wardropper

Apr 18, 2022 2:44 PM

Human civilization simply lacks the backbone to name names and prosecute the half-wits who think their latest ‘good idea for company profits’ bears no obligation to protect life outside their bubble of ignorance.

Nobody dares to stop them. They are a pernicious, parasitic fashion, based on the narcissistic idea that “If I don’t live my life as if greed was a good thing, then somebody else will step into my shoes and do it for me.”

Pfizer, Monstanto, Bayer, Bill and Melinda, Schwab, Fauci, Ferguson, Johnson and the rest – these are only the scary headline names, helping us to avoid the crucial issue of “HOW DO WE STOP THIS?”

Sitting there reading those headlines is doing nothing to prevent things getting twice as bad tomorrow. Where are the people who are serious about putting an end to our serial poisoners?

A little anecdote:
In the lead-up to the 2008 banking crash in Iceland, one of the country’s top politicians was heavily implicated in having deliberately profited from inside knowledge. A TV satire programme pointed the finger directly at him, and suggested that he be physically “borne out” (of his office). It struck me then that this is exactly what ought to happen when constitutions and laws of the land are routinely trampled by those whose wealth leads them to think they have superhuman rights.

But that phrase, “to bear out” is also a play on words:
Since the fairly distant past, it has also indicated the terrible choice that faced many utterly destitute Icelanders with too many mouths to feed: In their desperation, they took their youngest child (or baby) out into the country (bore it out) and left it to what we can euphemistically call, “God’s Mercy”.

Today, nobody in Iceland is that destitute, but the old principle of ‘bearing out’ could still be transferred, as hinted at in the TV satire, from “too many mouths to feed” to “too many parasites to leave untreated”.

For the sensitive PC folk who grow pale at the thought of anything which approaches real human justice, let me emphasize that there is no need for violence.
Anthony Fauci will simply be borne, calmly, by a sizeable group of upstanding citizens, out of his office and placed equally calmly in a dock. After a trial, he will – also calmly – be placed in a prison – as a much-needed lesson to the others… It is of course a nice bonus that he is a calm person himself, quite happy to sit in front of a committee of eminent interrogators and lie his head off – with the utmost tranquillity.

Regrettably, I think that’s where we’re headed, since ‘official channels’ are clearly every bit as corrupt as the pestilence we are trying to fix.

0

0

Reply

Howard

Howard

Apr 18, 2022 2:00 PM

And then there’s the added irony that many of the “weeds” these chemicals are used to destroy are as valuable as, if not more valuable than, the foods agribusiness is attempting to grow.

Weeds grow so prolifically because they’re native to the soil, as opposed to the often imported crops agribusiness finds so profitable. Food crops that are native to the local environment generally require no added protection from the growers.

We humans do seem to have a propensity for vicious circles, don’t we?

0

0

Reply

CST

CST

Apr 18, 2022 1:06 PM

Can you please add the bit at the end of the article that you have not included?

0

0

Reply

Johnny

Johnny

Apr 18, 2022 12:59 PM

Deutsche Bank were the lucky recipients of billions in sub-prime mortgage debt after the US banks realised they were holding a time bomb, it looks like the Germans (Bayer) are the recipient of another liability time bomb courtesy of the US Corporate fascist state, this is how joined up government works.

0

0

Reply

Johnny

Johnny

Apr 18, 2022 12:53 PM

It is only since it was sold to Bayer that the real attacks in the media and massive legal victories started against Monsanto. It’s just another looting of Bayer, a European giant to be robbed by the US corporate fascist state. BP, VW, RBS……etc.

0

0

Reply

Orthus

Orthus

Apr 18, 2022 2:38 PM

Reply to  Johnny

Bayer, also known as IG Farben. Pardon me if I don’t shed too many tears.

0

0 Reply

One thought on “From Rachel Carson to Monsanto: Insect Genocide, Predator Capitalism and The Silence of Spring”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: