Listen to the Podcast:
Watch the Podcast:
In this episode Jeffrey appears on a Real Truth about Health conference call and is asked, "Tell us more about the research of the biotech industry. Why do you say their research is rigged?" Jeffrey tells 3 stories of different examples where Monsanto rigged their science they submitted to the EPA and also created fake science in order to convince the EPA to approve their dangerous products.
The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to protect you & the World from GMOs (and while we’re at it, Roundup®...) To find out exactly how we do this and to subscribe to our newsletter visit https://www.responsibletechnology.org/
Join us at Protect Nature Now to Safeguarding Biological Evolution from GMOs 2.0. The place to get critical up to date information, watch our short film and most importantly, learn easy ways for you to take action against this existential threat. Visit: https://protectnaturenow.com/
Sign the Petition https://protectnaturenow.com/signthepetition/
Notes for this week's Podcast
This week's Transcript
Speaker 1: (00:08)
Tell us more about the research of the biotech industry. Why do you say their research is rigged
Speaker 2: (00:16)
In the recent
Speaker 2: (00:19)
Trial, um, where people who got non Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Monsanto's Roundup, we won the plaintiffs, won all the cases so far were awarded huge sums of money by the jury later taken down by the judges. One of the reasons why the juries were so angry at Monsanto was the revelations of how they, they did all the evil things that we think they do, but it was there in black and white because so many memos came out over a million pages, millions of pages were made available and a whole team was sorting through it. And by and large, it verified what I knew and what those of us in my position know what it brought us new information that we had never seen before. So there was an example of a typical Monsanto study, typical Monsanto, but it's, it's one of my favorites, cuz it's so graphic.
Speaker 2: (01:24)
They wanted to demo. They had, they had to see the, uh, absorbability of Roundup on human skin as part of their EPA report. So they took cadaver skin, dead body skin, put Roundup on, checked it 10% absorption, oops, more than three times the allowable level. They did not tell the EPA probably illegal. Instead they took human skin and they baked it in an oven. Now think about cooking meat. Think about overcooking meat, how it becomes tough, but that some, for some reason wasn't good enough for them. They probably checked it and found it wasn't holding up. So then they took that overcooked human skin and froze it. Then they applied, the Roundup didn't get absorbed much. They reported that to the EPA without telling them that they had baked and frozen the human skin before they applied the Roundup. So they could give a real number based on a fake rigged research.
Speaker 2: (02:31)
They've uh, I mean I can give example after example on how they R their research using the wrong tools, the wrong statistics, the wrong control group. It's so blatant. I mean, what I just described is blatant. There's a long trail of blatant rigging research. They hire a scientist, Dr. Perry, the expert in determining whether it's, um, their glyphosate is going to be causing changes in the DNA, which could lead to cancer. He reviewed the research and said, it appears that it does. So they, he wrote a report. They were supposed to give that report to the EPA, buried it. Thank you, Dr. Perry, you don't have to work for us anymore. Release him from contract and decided to ghost write a review paper that came to the opposite conclusion, paid scientists. So they put their name on it, release that it became the basis of review by the EPA and other regulatory agencies determined that glyphosate didn't cost cancer.
Speaker 2: (03:35)
It was a ghost written false report. So you can see. And the last example I'll give, which is also one of my favorites is their assumptions. Their scientific assumptions are bizarre. And yet they're repeated by regulatory agencies. I've talked to people in regulatory agencies and it's so unscientific what they say. It's like, are you guys on a payroll or just not using your brain? So in Australia, New Zealand, um, Monsanto tried to get high lyce corn approved to feed to pigs. And it created a protein that was new. And they claimed that there needed to be no studies on the protein because it was already safely eaten by humans, cuz it was produced in soil and we have soil residues in our food. So obviously if we're eating food, we're being exposed to the protein. So it's safe. So Dr. Jack, Heneman a scientist from New Zealand who I know, decided to call their bluff and figured, okay, what's the average amount of corn and American male eats. And if it's Monsanto's high lycine corn, how much of that protein would be in their diet? How much of that protein is produced in soil? How much soil would they have to eat in order to have the same amount that they would get from just the corn they'd have to eat 22,000 pounds of soil per second, per second. Throughout the day. a dump truck of soil every second in order to get the equivalent amount. This is the, this is Monsanto science. This is checkbook science. This is not real science.
Speaker 2: (05:43)
Thank you for listening to live healthy. Be well. Please subscribe to the podcast. Using whatever app you're listen to podcasts with, or go to live healthy, be well.com to subscribe. This podcast will inform you about health dangers, corporate and government corruption and ways we can protect ourselves, our families and our planet. I interview scientists, experts, authors, whistle blowers, and many people who have not shared their information with the world until now, please share the podcast with your friends. It will enlighten and may even save lives, safe, eating.