HE FDA WANTS TO "MONITOR GLYPHOSPHATE"... UH HUH...

THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: THE FDA WANTS TO “MONITOR ...

February 25, 2016 By Joseph P. Farrell

I had to blod about this one, because when one talks about "too little, too late," this fits the bill, and it's right up there with the Magic Bullet, with the nineteen Arab terrorists managed to pull of 9/11 in such a way that it was "coincidentally" during several drills mimicking aspects of the operation, and finally, right up there with "Hi, we're the government. We're here to help you."  THis was found by Mr. J.C., and since it concerns the topic of glyphosphate, the nasty ingredient in so much pesticide and in some GMOs, I had to pass it along, if for the sheer bouts of hysterical laughter that it will provoke in anyone who has been following the GMO story:

http://time.com/4227500/fda-glyphosate-testing/

One has to give credit to Time magazine for reporting on this story, since the GMO issue rarely makes any headway with the American lamestream media. Here, the two opening paragraphs say it all, and additionally, constitute a major reason why so many American's are simply fed up with their "goobernment":

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the nation’s chief food safety regulator, plans to start testing certain foods for residues of the world’s most widely used weed killer after the World Health Organization’s cancer experts last year declared the chemical a probable human carcinogen.

The FDA’s move comes amid growing public concern about the safety of the herbicide known as glyphosate, and comes after the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) rebuked the agency for failing to do such assessments and for not disclosing that short-coming to the public.

Now, besides the amusing scene of FedGov, Inc., having one department of its increasingly tyrannical sprawl rebuking another, is the idea that the FDA would be an impartial administrator in this instance anyway. We all know how the major agribusiness companies like IG. Farbensanto were able to buy influence during wht first Bush administration (geez, what is it about that hideous family?) and under the principal of "substantial equivalence" were able to get a dramatic relaxation of regulations on testing of their GMO products. After all, if it looks like corn and tastes like corn, that must mean it's "substantially equivalent" to just plain old corn, and therefore, we don't need to do all that nasty testing, and beside, we already have, and here's the results, and it's perfectly safe, see?  F. William Engdahl's Seeds of Destruction, documents the utter fiction of this idea, which, incidentally, was conveniently jettisoned when it came time to file patents for their GMO crops, and pursue unlucky farmers in a variety of draconian ways. Engdalh also copiously documented the revolving door between "agribusiness" and the FDA, to the extent that the latter was but a department of the businesses that really ran it.

Thus, having the FDA monitoring glyphosphate years after studies of its carcinogenic properties were uncovered by scientists in France and elsewhere who were, thankfully, not on IG Farbensanto's payroll, is a little like having G.W. Bush appoint commissioners to the "independent" 9/11 commission, or like inviting representatives from the CIA, big oil, banking, Wall Street, and the Mafia, investigate the assassination of President Kennedy.

Oh.... wait... they already did that!

But wait, it gets worse. According to the Time article, the GAO may have actually had to shame the FDA into doing the job it should have been doing in the late 1980s:

The GAO reported that it found multiple deficiencies in the FDA’s pesticide residue testing program, and specifically cited a failure to test for glyphosate, which the GAO called the “most used agricultural pesticide.”

“Maybe we shamed them into it,” said John Neumann, a spokesman for the GAO FDA report. Neumann said the GAO did not demand that FDA conduct such testing, but said at the very least, FDA needed to disclose the lack of testing. The GAO will be reviewing FDA’s progress on meeting all of the GAO recommendations in June, Neumann added. “There were significant limitations to the credibility of their data,” he said.

And of course, there are the usual denials from IG Farbensanto:

Monsanto brings in about $5 billion annually in revenues from glyphosate. The company and other agribusiness interests say that there is no valid evidence linking glyphosate to disease or illness and trace amounts of glyphosate residues on food are nothing to fear. They say there are numerous studies that have determined glyphosate to be safe.

So, before you think twice about trusting any findings the FDA may make, remember that all this began under King George I, and all in the name of "science" bought and paid for by the very companies that want the product on the market, and by the very agency that Mr. Engdahl so meticulously documentated was but a revolving door for people who worked for the GMO cartels.

Trust the FDA? Sure, if you trust the 9/11 commission, the Warren report, or, for that matter, blaming the sinking of the USS Maine on Spain.

See you on the flip side...