Bayers newly acquired Monsanto has been in the courts yet again this week for yet another claim that their World famous weedkiller Roundup caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cancer in couple Alva and Alberta Pilliod.
The Courts ordered Bayer to pay out a record $2 Billion to the couple, this was the third case so far against Monsanto over claims that their Glyphosate-based products have caused Cancer in plaintiffs and there are literally hundreds of similar cases in waiting. Many believe Bayer made a terrible mistake with their recent Monsanto acquisition in regards to these recent payouts for damages, but the truth is, the entire purpose of the acquisition was to protect Monsanto’s biotechnologies for the future.
Monsanto has been in the spotlight for the potential dangers surrounding its active ingredient in their roundup products for many years, the World Health Organisation even stated back in 2015 that Glyphosate “Probably was Carcinogenic” and add to this an ever-growing list of lawsuits building against the company since as early as 2015 – do we really think these issues were an oversight on Bayers behalf?
Liquidate the Brand, Protect the Tech
The acquisition of Monsanto occurred because of the issues surrounding Glyphosate, it was a planned operation to limit the damage caused by what is beginning to happen now and what will unfold over the coming months and years. The Monsanto name has been dirtied for a long time, the brand needed to be liquidated while all its tech secured and protected.
Bayer now has the patented technology firmly in their grasp without the blood on their hands, the blood, after all, is on the hands of Monsanto. However, what Bayer can do is take the Moral high-ground and payout billions in damages for the crimes of Monsanto.
Bayer were under no illusion of what laid ahead following the acquisition, the long-term reward outweighs the next few years of damages payouts a million to one. Biotech is estimated to expand exponentially over the coming decades, with changing climate and increasing populations the industry is predicted to boom – Bayer will have everything they need to lead the way.
GMO Technology Never Went Away
While activists sit smug and content watching the lawsuits against Bayer unfold they seem to of forgotten one of the main concerns surrounding Monsanto, GMO’s.
SYHT0H2 soybean developed by Bayer Crop Science and Syngenta but now held by German Chemical company BASF. It is resistant to the herbicides glufosinate and Mesotrione, according to the biotech group ISAAA.
Bayer-owned Monsanto’s 88302 canola variety is tolerant to glyphosate during the reproductive flowering phase. It promised better control of certain tough weeds and a wider application window, according to a Bayer statement on Tuesday. It will be available this year to Canadian and U.S. farmers, and Bayer estimates 1 million planted acres in 2019.
BASF’s RF3 canola seeds are tolerant of Liberty glufosinate, a herbicide, according to the Canola Council of Canada.
That’s just some of the new GMO’s being introduced this year, there are plenty more, but the point is GMO’s are now being released into the environment with very little opposition – people got bored and moved on to the next great protest.
Which unfortunately is Climate Change.
Groups like Extinction Rebellion have been popping up all over the World, backed by the environmentalist groups who only two years ago would be protesting against GMO’s – they now, however, fight for an ideology which ultimately supports GMO crops. After all according to them, in a World of parched soils and erratic weather conditions, we will need GM crops to survive. It’s for the greater good, right?
Well no, there is no evidence to support that GM Crops actually produce better yields over longer periods of time, a few seasons maybe, but as time goes on yields dramatically drop and all gains are lost. Though of course its worth noting that for every claim that GMO’s don’t increase yields there is another Biotech backed study that claims they do – but who do you believe, companies like Monsanto who have already been caught ghostwriting scientific papers to suit their narrative or independent research?