Directed by Marie-Monique Robin
Reviewed by Jeffrey M. Smith
How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How much damage can they inflict? The breathtaking new film, The World According to Monsanto, features a company that sets the new standard. From Iowa to Paraguay, from England to India, Monsanto is uprooting our food supply and replacing it with their patented genetically engineered creations. And along the way, farmers, communities, and nature become collateral damage.
The Gazette says the movie âwill freeze the blood in your veins.â The Hour says itâs a âhorrifying enough pictureâ to warrant âfury.â But most importantly, this critical film opens our eyes just in time.
The film is the work of celebrated award-winning French filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, whose three years of work on four continents exposes why Monsanto has become the worldâs poster child for malignant corporate influence in government and technology. Combining secret documents with accounts by victims, scientists and policy makers, she guides us through a web of misleading reports, pressure tactics, collusion, and attempted corruption. And we learn how the company systematically tricked governments into allowing dangerous genetically modified (GM) foods into our dietâ"with Monsanto in charge of determining if theyâre safe.
Deception, Deception, Deception
The companyâs history with some of the most toxic chemicals ever produced, illustrates why they canât be trusted. Ask the folks of Anniston, Alabama, where Monsantoâs PCB factory secretly poisoned the neighborhood for decades. PCBs are Monsantoâs toxic oils used as coolants and lubricants for over 50 years and are now virtually omnipresent in the blood and tissues of humans and wildlife around the globe. But Anniston residents have levels hundreds or thousands of times the average. They all know their levels, which they carry as death sentences. David Baker, who lost his little brother and most of his friends to PCB-related diseases such as cancer, says Anniston kids used to run up to him, report their PCB level and ask, âHow long you think I got?â
Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group says that based on Monsanto documents made public during a trial, the company âknew the truth from the very beginning. They lied about it. They hid the truth from their neighbors.â One Monsanto memo explains their justification: âWe canât afford to lose one dollar of business.â
Monsanto also produced the infamous Agent Orange, the cancer and birth-defect causing defoliant sprayed over Vietnam. It contaminated more than 3 million civilians and servicemen. But according to William Sanjour, who led the Toxic Waste Division of the Environmental Protection Agency, âthousands of veterans were disallowed benefitsâ because âMonsanto studies showed that dioxin [the main ingredient in Agent Orange] was not a human carcinogen.â But his EPA colleague discovered that Monsanto had allegedly falsified the data in their studies. Sanjour says, âIf they were done correctly, [the studies] would have reached just the opposite result.â
Secret documents stolen from the FDA also reveal serious health effects from Monsantoâs genetically engineered bovine growth hormone, called rBGH or rBST. In particular, the amount of a powerful hormone called IGF-1 is substantially increased in milk from treated cows. Samuel Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, says that approximately 60 studies link IGF-1 to âbreast, colon, and prostate cancers.â
Cancer is also implicated in Monsantoâs showcase herbicide, Roundup. According Professor Robert Belléâs research showing disrupted cell division, âRoundup provokes the first stages that lead to cancer.â Bellé, who is with the National Center for Scientific Research and the Pierre and Marie Curie Institute in France, says, âThe tested doses were well below those which people normally use.â
Monsanto has promoted Roundup as harmless to both humans and the environment. But their advertised environmental claims, such as âbiodegradable,â âleaves the soil clean,â and ârespects the environment,â were declared false and illegal by judges in both the US and France. In fact, Monsantoâs own studies showed that 28 days after application, only 2% of the product had broken down. They were forced to remove âbiodegradableâ from the label.
Above the law
When Monsantoâs transgressions are reported to authorities, somehow the company is magically let off the hook.
When Monsanto finally did share information on PCBs with the government, for example, Ken Cook says âinstead of siding with the people who were being poisoned, [the government] sided with the company. . . . It was outrageous!â When William Sanjourâs EPA colleague, Cate Jenkins, asked the agency to review Monsantoâs flawed Agent Orange studies, Sanjour says, âthere was no investigation of Monsanto. . . . What they investigated was Cate Jenkins, the whistleblower! They made her life a hell.â
When Richard Burroughs of the FDA held up approval of rBGH by demanding more rigorous and relevant testing, he was fired. He says, âThey figured: âWell, if youâre in the way, weâll get you out of the way.â. . . One day, I was escorted to the door and told that was it; I was done.â Senior government scientists at Health Canada testified that their superiors were pressuring them to approve rBGH and that Monsanto had offered them an alleged bribe of $1-2 million. The scientists were later reprimanded, punished, and eventually âdismissed for disobedience.â rBGH was never approved in Canada, Europe, and most industrialized nations.
When Professor Bellé went to his administration âto let the public know about the dangersâ of Roundup herbicide, he was âorderedâ not to communicate his findings âdue to the GMO question lurking in the background.â That question about genetically modified organisms was in relation to Monsantoâs âRoundup Readyâ crops. Monsanto has the patent for 90% of the GMOs grown on the planet, and most of them are genetically modified specifically to tolerate applications of Roundup.
Corporate Coup dâétat
Monsantoâs past manipulations were mere warm ups compared to the virtual government takeover used to approve GM foods. Author Jeremy Rifkin, President of the Foundation for Economic Trends, says, âI have never seen a situation where one company could have so much overwhelming influence at the highest levels of regulatory decision making.â
The problem Monsanto faced was that GMOs are inherently unsafe. They can create dangerous side effects. That was the overwhelming consensus by FDA scientists, according to 44,000 agency documents made public from a lawsuit. But the most important document, FDAâs official policy, claimed that GMOs were not substantially different. They were granted the status âGenerally Recognized as Safe,â even though they failed to meet the normal criteria. Thus, no safety testing is necessary. If Monsanto declares their GM products safe, the FDA has no further questions.
Former FDA biotech coordinator James Maryanski admits on camera that the GMO policy âwas a political decision,â not scientific. In fact, FDA political appointee Michael Taylor was in charge of the policy. Taylor was formerly Monsantoâs attorney and later their vice president.
Monsantoâs people regularly infiltrate upper echelons of government, and the company offers prominent positions to officials when they leave public service. This revolving door has included key people in the White House, regulatory agencies, even the Supreme Court. Monsanto also had George Bush Senior on their side, as evidenced by footage of Vice President Bush at Monsantoâs facility offering help to get their products through government bureaucracy. He says, âCall me. Weâre in the âde-regâ business. Maybe we can help.â
Monsantoâs influence continued into the Clinton administration. Dan Glickman, then Secretary of Agriculture, says, âthere was a general feeling in agro-business and inside our government in the US that if you werenât marching lock-step forward in favor of rapid approvals of biotech products, rapid approvals of GMO crops, then somehow, you were anti-science and anti-progress.â He admits, âwhen I opened my mouth in the Clinton Administration [about the lax regulations on GMOs], I got slapped around a little bit.â
Unlike Glickman, FDAâs Maryanski tries in vain to convince filmmaker Robin that GMOs are safe and that US regulation is adequate. But Robin had conducted four months of intensive internet research examining declassified documents, leaked internal files, scientific studies, trial transcripts, articles, and first hand accounts of whistleblowers. She was prepared.
In a priceless sequence, the film alternates between Maryanskiâs assurances and public interest attorney Steven Druker reading formerly secret memos by agency scientists, describing the serious health damage that GMOs may cause. When Robin repeats these same quotes to Maryanski, he resorts to uncomfortable stuttering, stammering, and backtracking. When he ultimately tries to dismiss genetic engineering as completely safe, Robin nails him. She reads to Maryanski his own words from a 1991 memo in which he acknowledged that genetic engineering of a food supplement called L-tryptophan in the 1980s may have been responsible for a deadly epidemic that killed dozens and caused thousands to fall sick or become disabled.
Suppressing evidence of harm, attacking GMO scientists
When Monsantoâs GM crops hit American farm fields in 1996, virtually no safety studies had been published. The pro-GM UK government decided to commission Dr. Arpad Pusztai, the worldâs leading scientist in his field, to design rigorous safety testing protocols that would convince a skeptical public to embrace GM foods. When Pusztai fed GM potatoes to rats, however, they developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, a damaged immune system, and inhibited growth of major organs. Moreover, Pusztaiâs work implicated the generic process of genetic engineering itself as the cause. That is, any GM food already on the market might create the same problems in humans.
When Pusztai went public with his concerns, he was praised for his âwonderful workâ by his director at the prestigious Rowett Institute. But according to a colleague, âtwo phone calls from Downing Street [the home of UK Prime Minister Tony Blair] to the directorâ resulted in Pusztaiâs sudden dismissal after 35 years. His protocols were shelved and he was the target of a relentless smear campaign, designed to destroy his reputation while promoting that of GMOs.
UC Berkeley Professor Ignacio Chapela was also targeted after he published evidence that GM corn had cross-pollinated with indigenous Mexican varieties, forever contaminating âthe worldâs genetic reservoir of corn.â Just after his research was published in Nature, Mary Murphy and Andura Smetacek began posting false accusations on a biotech forum website, recruiting scientists to inundate the publication with demands to retract the study. When anti-GMO campaigner Jonathan Matthews analyzed the technical headers on the twoâs emails, he traced Smetacek to a Monsanto computer, and Murphy to their PR firm. The two were apparently fictitious characters created to stir things up. Matthews says, âThereâs no ethics at all in whatâs going on here. It shows an organization that is determined to push its products into countries around the world and itâs determined to destroy the reputation of anybody who stands in their way.â
Monster corn and contamination by design
The film explores an ominous new development in Mexico that has yet to be reported in the scientific literature. Mutated and bizarrely shaped corn plants have been found âalong the roadside or in peopleâs yardsâ or fields. Community organizer Aldo Gonzales says, âThey are really monsters!â And whenever analyzed, the monsters turn out to be genetically engineered. Local scientists believe that when GM corn cross-pollinates with traditional varieties, some genetic effect disturbs the offspring.
One Mexican farmer realized the implications. âIf we donât manage to stop their spread in our fields, soon weâll be forced to buy our corn seed because our own wonât work anymore?â Gonzales wonders if the contamination was intentional. He says, âContamination only benefits multinationals like Monsanto.â
Intentional contamination of another sort appears to have happened in Paraguay, as illegal Roundup Ready seeds were smuggled in before GMOs were approved. Roberto Franco, Paraguayâs Deputy Agriculture Ministry, tactfully admits, âIt is possible that [Monsanto], letâs say, promoted its varieties and its seedsâ before they were approved. âWe had to authorize GMO seeds because they had already entered our country in an, letâs say, unorthodox way.â
Once approved, large agribusinesses bought huge tracts and cut down the rainforest to plant vast Roundup Ready soybean fields. The GMOs allow them to spray by plane or mechanical spreader; to farm without farmers. Peasants who had worked the land for generations are forced outâ"100,000 each year leave rural areas to live in the shanty towns of the cities. In one small farm community that is holding out next to a soy field, sprayed Roundup kills their livestock and crops, and sickens their children.
Destroying farmers
US family farmers also feel the heat. Troy Roush is one of hundreds accused by Monsanto of illegally saving their seeds. The company requires farmers to sign a contract that they will not save and replant GM seeds from their harvest. That way Monsanto can sell its seedsâ"at a premiumâ"each season.
Although Roush maintains his innocence, he was forced to settle with Monsanto after two and a half years of court battles. He says his âfamily was just destroyed [from] the stress involved.â Many farmers are afraid, according to Roush, because Monsanto has âcreated a little industry that serves no other purpose than to wreck farmersâ lives.â
Massive farmer suicides
In many countries where Monsanto monopolizes the seeds of certain crops, they eliminate non-GMO choices to force farmers to buy GM varieties. In India, for example, where Monsanto pushes their pesticide-producing Bt cotton, âthere was no non-BT hybrid seed available in the market,â says agronomist Kiran Sakhari.
Farmers had to borrow heavily to pay four times the price for the GM varieties, along with the chemicals needed to grow them. In spite of glowing promises of higher yields by Monsantoâs ads, Bt cotton often performs poorly. Tragically, tens of thousands of indebted desperate farmers have resorted to suicide, often drinking unused pesticides. In one region, more than three Bt cotton farmers take their own lives each day.
Replacing Nature: âNothing Shall Be Eaten That We Donât Ownâ
Monsanto is the worldâs largest seed company and many are concerned. Troy Roush says, âThey are in the process of owning food, all food.â Paraguayan farmer Jorge Galeano says, âIts objective is to control all of the worldâs food production.â Renowned Indian physicist and community organizer Vandana Shiva says, âIf they control seed, they control food; they know it, itâs strategic. Itâs more powerful than bombs; itâs more powerful than guns. This is the best way to control the populations of the world.â
The World According to Monsanto is aptly named. It is about Monsanto seeking to recreate the world in its own image, for its own benefit. They intend to replace (and patent) the entire food supply. And since their genetic pollution self-propagates in the environment, it will outlast the effects of global warming and nuclear waste.
Such widespread permanent influence may not be safe with any individual or company. With Monsantoâs record, the results can only be catastrophic.
This powerful documentary might just inspire a global rejection of Monsantoâs plans for our world. If so, it will be the most important film in history.
___________________
Jeffrey M. Smith is the international bestselling author of Seeds of Deception and Genetic Roulette, the executive director of the Institute for Responsible Technology, and director of The Campaign for Healthier Eating in America.
The World According to Monsanto is co-produced by the National Film Board of Canada, ARTE France, Image & Compagnie, WDR, and Les Productions Thalie.
___________________
© copyright Institute For Responsible Technology 2008
Jeffrey M. Smith is the author of publication Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, which presents 65 risks in easy-to-read two-page spreads. His first book, Seeds of Deception, is the top rated and #1 selling book on GM foods in the world. He is the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology. www.responsibletechnology.org, which is spearheading the Campaign for Healthier Eating in America. Go to www.seedsofdeception.com to learn more about how to avoid GM foods.
"The greatest threat of childhood diseases lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunization.....There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease."--Dr Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.
__._,_.___
Replying to this email will send an e-mail to 6000+ members of J-Forum.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
About Jharkhand Forum @ http://www.jharkhand.org.in/about-jharkhand-forum
Jharkhand Forum's Posting Norms http://jharkhand.org.in/posting_norms.htm
Add your Name in Members directory - http://directory.jharkhand.org.in
Be an Internet Volunteer, find more @ http://volunteer.jharkhand.org.in
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Post your Petition Online @ http://petition-online.blogspot.com/
MAKE FUNDING APPEAL HERE @ HTTP://FUNDING-APPEAL.BLOGSPOT.COM
Check out Free Gifts for NGOs at http://gift.jharkhand.org.in
__,_._,___