GMOs

IG FARBENSANTO’S LATEST SCAM

December 18, 2017 By Joseph P. Farrell

Just when you thought that IG Farbensanto couldn't possibly stoop any lower, a story will come along which reaffirms one's faith in the utter irredeemability of modern corporate crapitalism and the joys of GMOs and their conjugate pesticides. This story was shared by Mr. B.H., who also shared his moral assessment of the newest gimick and scam, which we'll get back to later. Here's the article that appeared on Reuters':

Monsanto offers cash to U.S. farmers who use controversial chemical

In case you missed it, here's the newest low in IG Farbensanto's bid to keep its GMO gavotte going:

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Monsanto Co will give cash back to U.S. farmers who buy a weed killer that has been linked to widespread crop damage, offering an incentive to apply its product even as regulators in several U.S. states weigh restrictions on its use.

The incentive to use XtendiMax with VaporGrip, a herbicide based on a chemical known as dicamba, could refund farmers over half the sticker price of the product in 2018 if they spray it on soybeans Monsanto engineered to resist the weed killer, according to company data.

The United States faced an agricultural crisis this year caused by new formulations of dicamba-based herbicides, which farmers and weed experts say harmed crops because they evaporated and drifted away from where they were sprayed.

Monsanto says XtendiMax is safe when properly applied. The company is banking on the chemical and soybean seeds engineered to resist it, called Xtend, to dominate soybean production in the United States, the world’s second-largest exporter.

Oh, and there's more "good news," as we're informed that IG Farbensanto is joined in marketing the new pesticide by Duponzanto and BASF( an actual component - surprise surprise - of the former IG Farben chemicals cartel):

BASF SE and DowDuPont also sell versions of dicamba-based herbicides.

Well, at least, so far as we know, those two firms are not involved in the bribery scheme rebate scheme, but one is tempted to think, "give 'em time, they'll come around".

So there you have it: when the revolving door of personnel flitting back and forth between agribusiness and the FDA doesn't work, and when "substantial equivalence" doesn't work, and when suing farmers doesn't work, or slapping lawsuits against states passing GMO labeling laws doesn't work, when the "assured science of GMO safety" doesn't work because it's challenged by genuinely independent studies, or farmers' pictures of livestock with cancers that have developed after prolonged feeding with GMOs show up, or other studies showing declining yields and profits on GMO fields challenge the whole narrative, then simply go straight to the market itself, and offer bribes ...er... "rebates."

Mr. B.H. summed it all up in his email sharing the article, and for once, I forego my own evaluations to pass along his, because his reaction to this story is "substantially equivalent" to my own: "I hate to make the obvious connection in plain English but I believe the word 'whore' would figure in it."

Yup, that about sums it up: a disease-ridden whore pedaling a disease-ridden product at a discount to drum up more business.

Breathtaking.

And shameless.

See you on the flip side...