Is the Bayer-Monsanto Merger Bad News for mankind?

Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 1 week ago to Business
18 comments | Share | Flag

Two new studies from Europe show that the number of birds in agricultural areas of France has crashed by a third in just 15 years, with some species being almost eradicated. The collapse in the bird population mirrors the discovery last October that more than three quarters of all flying insects in Germany have vanished in just three decades. Insects are the staple food source of birds, the pollinators of fruits and the aerators of the soil.

The chief suspect in this mass extinction is the aggressive use of neonicotinoid pesticides, particularly imidacloprid and clothianidin, both made by the Germany-based chemical giant Bayer. These pesticides, along with toxic glyphosate herbicides such as Roundup, have delivered a one-two punch to monarch butterflies, honeybees and birds. But rather than banning these toxic chemicals, on March 21 the EU approved the $66 billion merger of Bayer and Monsanto, the U.S. agribusiness giant that produces Roundup and the genetically modified (GMO) seeds that have reduced seed diversity globally. The merger will make the Bayer-Monsanto conglomerate the largest seed and pesticide company in the world, giving it enormous power to control farm practices, putting private profits over the public interest.
SOURCE URL: http://www.daniellemagazine.ca/the-bayer-monsanto-merger-is-bad-news-for-the-planet/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by peterchunt 3 months, 1 week ago
    The article seems to indicate that GMO is bad. I haven't (to date) heard of anyone dying from eating food from GMO products, but have heard that the use of GMO has enhanced crops production, and saving lots of folks (in third world countries) from dying from starvation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 months, 1 week ago
      You're right, the article does not make clear the details on what the problem is with the GMO's that they are referring to specifically.
      They assume you are already aware of them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 3 months, 1 week ago
    This is babble from some wacko with an agenda. Just as one example, Monsanto and Bayer have been doing business together in a joint venture, Mobay Chemicals since back in the 60's. It is a change in corporate organization not doing anything they weren't doing anyway. I don't know much about Monarch butterflies but someone should check the WHO's statistics in the reduction of starvation of HUMAN BEINGS due to the chemical industry.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  exceller 3 months ago
    There are many more birds killed daily by the windmills in the country. Millions of songbirds and raptors including Bald Eagles are being mangled as they fly into the spinning blades. Of course the left never says a word about that. Wind energy is "good" said Obama: never mind the price paid for it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 months, 1 week ago
    I am sure that the article can provide statistics and studies proving the assertions in the article.But, if they can't, then what?.The constant struggle between truth and profit often leaves the general public in the dark.Take the average farmer who has just worked his butt off bringing in a crop. The cost of planting, growing and harvesting has depleted his funds and he's looking forward to the big payday when he sells his crops.With the aid of chemicals he has just brought in a great crop of beautiful banana peppers and it looks as if he'll pay off his debts and be able to look forward to a prosperous year. Do you think he'll be prone to destroying that because of something in the future? I don't think so, and I wouldn't blame him. As in all economic problems there are a number of viable solutions. But, do you think Mr. Farmer wants to bother? Or Mr. Manufacturer? No. It is strictly "Show me the money!" What will happen as it usually happens is that once the crisis point is reached, then and only then will humanity bend its will to correcting the situation. The eco-freaks among us will say, "What if there's no solution?" Then it may well mean the end of mankind, not through spectacular nuclear explosions but through starvation. To date, that's never been the case and there is no indication that it will ever be the case. It is not always possible to plan for the future, for the simple reason that the future is elusive and rarely works out the way it is predicted.Ask anyone living in 1950 what 2018 would look like and you wouldn't even come close.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months, 1 week ago
    It's not the chemicals per se that is the problem. Killing off many plant species that provide food for the insects (milkweed and dandelions, in the case of the Monarch butterfly) reduces their population, and that of the birds that are insect predators.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  edweaver 3 months, 1 week ago
    I suspect there is a lot of bias in this study. Chemicals are safer today than they were 50 years ago. I offer as simple proof that life expectancy is higher today than it was 59 years ago. And more people are fed at lower cost as well. The alternative is starvation. Keep in mind, the same people pushing this are the same people that believe in man made climate change.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 1 week ago
      Chemicals are not safer nor more dangerous and have not changed and will never change. They are what they are . How we handle and use them has changed. With greater experience comes knowledge for use in applying the reality of observation. Monsanto and Bayer combo creates a BEHEMOUTH in the AG industry the influence and lobbying efforts on their behalf could create havoc with the environment.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  edweaver 3 months, 1 week ago
        I agree, larger is not better and yes how we use the chemicals is better but would argue the newly developed chemicals are safer to use. I don't see how the behemouth could impact the environment. People have to abuse products for them to impact the environment.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 months, 1 week ago
          Here is how. The larger the organization and in different countries it is easier to be more opaque. This evidence recovered and archived took 40 years to come to light on a common product used for over 40 years. Ed we need innovation and need to accept the science that is independently applied. https://www.theguardian.com/environme....
          Sourcing products from monopolies is no good
          unless highly regulated and that always brings corruption with it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Abaco 3 months, 1 week ago
      Interesting. We do know that chronic disease is on the rise, with onset occurring earlier in life. I get the impression this is a pivotal time.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  edweaver 3 months, 1 week ago
        I've heard chronic disease is occurring earlier and have nothing to prove or disprove it. The only thing I can go on is life expectancy, which up until just recently has been on the rise. I think there are many factors as to why the next generation may not live as long as their parents and contribute that mostly to their sedentary lifestyles. More to it than that and of course that is simply an educated guess, very similar to the computer models that predict climate change. :)

        Also, the older people get the more likely health issues will crop up.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Abaco 3 months, 1 week ago
          Yes. I learned of the latest trends by my work in the financial industry. We had numbers to back up what I said and utilized that to educate investors about planning. I can see it all around me, too. But, I'm too busy to dig up those studies. The areas in health where I have actually dug up the studies?...I keep that to myself, anymore.

          To answer the original question. Yes. If there is such a merger it's bad for mankind. I won't get into why. I've spent so much time doing research, reading. The knowledge is mine. Why upset people with it? People don't want to know.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • -4
      Posted by CircuitGuy 3 months, 1 week ago
      "same people that believe in man made climate change"
      People's beliefs do not matter. The science shows human activities are causing climate change and probably in ways that will be costly. The science does not show risks to GMO and pesticides designed for use with them. In the political world, the same who accept the reality of anthropgenic global warming reject the science of GMOs. They also often accept unscientific alternative medicine. They often reject the science of how price floors/ceilings inevitably create surplus supply/demand and the problems that come with them.. People respond politically to what they want to be true. Their wishes have no effect on reality.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 3 months, 1 week ago
        The climate "science" has been unrealistically adjusted and is only "science" to those who have a financial interest in spreading the lies. The headlines are not supported by the details. The liars even changed the title of the so-called effect because the details made it impossible to sell the lie. Unethical political motivation is not science. Unfortunately, if the people consent, those in power do change reality from liberty to slavery regardless of science reality. The looters have created a matrix of lies to enslave the gullible.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Solver 3 months, 1 week ago
          It has become a political cult of climate changers all marching in step; preaching more imminent doomsday predictions; blaming the majority of the problem on human beings using the cult’s own settled science. “Deniers”, those who question or test the validity of their holy words, are attacked and silenced.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 3 months, 1 week ago
    As soon as all thistles and thorny weeds are removed from the earth, I'll keep using herbicides. And when all the beetles and other insects that eat my plants are dead, I'll stop using insecticides. Until then, it's war, baby.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 3 months, 1 week ago
    Yes...both are harmful crony corps...together...they might succeed in killing all life on this planet...

    Maybe that's the key...make them take their own medicine...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo