Update: Top-Secret Studies Prove Monsanto Knew Its Best-Seller Caused Cancer 40 Years Ago
- Researchers unveil Monsanto’s long-hidden studies to find unbelievable results
- As many false results as it takes — doing science the Monsanto way
- Some members of the EPA were hoodwinked by junk science into approving the health destroyer.
A while back, Living Well Daily brought you an article about how the World Health Organization (WHO) declared glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup, a probable human carcinogen.
In the same article, we reported how the EPA approved glyphosate and allowed most of our food supply to be drowned in the toxin.
Today, we have an update on the toxicity of this weed-killer and will reveal the shocking truth behind the science that deemed it safe.
And even more surprising, how some of these documents show signs of the EPA’s resistance to Roundup’s approval.
A study published in the Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry now reveals the World Health Organization (WHO) was right about glyphosate.
However, it’s not just a probable carcinogen. It’s a definite carcinogen.
The truth came out when researchers Dr. Stephanie Seneff from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Anthony Samsel of the Collaborative on Health and the Environment uncovered toxicology studies proving Monsanto is aware glyphosate causes cancer.
And here’s the kicker: Monsanto has known for almost 40 years.
We will dig into the not-so-credible experimental practices of this cancer-peddling chemical giant that led to the approval of this lethal herbicide in just a moment.
First, let’s explore how the researchers dug up this secret data and the shocking results of these buried studies.
Here’s a hint at what is going on with the numbers — two words: data manipulation.
Junk Science and Monsanto: A Match Made in Hell
Samsel obtained the documents by petitioning the EPA.
Once both researchers started sifting through the documents, it quickly became apparent something was amiss.
The Monsanto-conducted experiments to evaluate the safety of human consumption of glyphosate either clearly indicated a correlation with disease or showed altered data.
As it appears, Monsanto has a long-standing tradition of working the numbers in its favor when it comes to glyphosate.
Some of these cancer-indicative studies went as far back as 40 years ago, to the 1970s.
Often when a study has not yielded the results the chemical goliath needs to get one of its noxious creations approved for human use, Monsanto will “play” with the data.
By “play,” I mean handpick specific statistics or controls from a wide range of studies in order to alter the results, thus creating junk science.
Seneff and Samsel had this to say about Monsanto’s tamperings:
It should be noted that significant incidence of tumors was found during these investigations. However, to create doubt and obscure the statistical significance of inconvenient findings, which may have prevented product registration, Monsanto used experimental noise from three, five, seven, and even 11 unrelated study controls to effectively eliminate results, as needed.1
In fact, the researchers reported that in some instances, the experiment’s controls would show a zero occurrence rate for tumors. However, results for glyphosate-treated groups would show a significant increase for tumors.
Samsel and Seneff went on to call these findings “dishonest magic of comparing the findings to data from unrelated historical controls… and were explained away as a mystery and deemed not to be related to administration of the glyphosate.”1
Chances are had the untampered results seen the light of day, Roundup may have never reached product registration.
And what is even more shocking, the researchers found documents proving the EPA’s decision to approve glyphosate was, in fact, not unanimous.
It seems not all members of the EPA review committee for glyphosate were blinded by Monsanto’s junk science.
Members that did not approve signed “DO NOT CONCUR” on the document.
Unfortunately, there weren’t enough nays to keep glyphosate out of our food supply.
In conclusion, Samsel and Seneff said:
“We believe that the available evidence warrants a reconsideration of the risk/benefit trade-off with respect to glyphosate usage to control weeds, and we advocate much stricter regulation of glyphosate.”1
The researchers thoroughly explain how glyphosate causes cancer in the body through biological processes. If you would like to learn more, you can read the study here.
If you have anything to say about glyphosate, send me a line! Nmoore@lfb.org
Managing editor, Living Well Daily
Written By Natalie Moore
Natalie Moore is a dedicated health researcher with a passion for finding healthy, natural, and science-based solutions. After a decade of direct healthcare experience in western and natural medicine, she was involved in public health research before joining Living Well Daily.
View More Free Articles
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, Thanks to DECADES of mainstream nutritional misinformation, Americans are terrified of fat. They fear eating fat even though sugar and vegetable oils are the true villains. And I’ve yet to meet an American that doesn’t believe all body fat is bad, too. Of course, you don’t want to carryi around...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, What do you think are the top 3 things one can do to live a long life? –Mary from Milford, CT Hi Mary, Thanks for your excellent question! When you asked for the TOP three, it really stumped me at first. We can do so many things to live longer...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, A sprinkle of THIS. A dash of THAT. If you like to cook, chances are you love seasoning your dishes to bring out their best flavors. But a study published last year has a lot of folks questioning how they’re preparing their food. Because according to the researchers, no matter...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, Honestly, I thought we’d already put this issue to bed. After all, the evidence is in. We KNOW that taking a daily aspirin is a bad idea. But the headlines just keep coming anyway… “Aspirin Reduces Breast Cancer by 20 percent!” “Aspirin Cuts Heart Attack Risk!” With incredible claims like...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, I’m going to give it to you straight. Aging is tough on your whole body. Your joints… heart… and even your youthful skin all begin to show the effects of the passage of time. But aging takes the biggest toll on your brain. Because as the years go by, you...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, Every 90 seconds. That’s how often another woman in the United States has a heart attack. Because the reality is heart attacks don’t just happen to men. Nearly one out of two adults in the United States has high blood pressure. And heart disease is one of the biggest health risks...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, Mad scientists have created some pretty crazy chemicals in the laboratory. And mad businesses have taken those toxic concoctions and unleashed them into our world. You’ve probably seen a few headlines about “forever chemicals” lurking in our environment. In fact, I’ve shared warnings about them right here in Living Well...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, “What can I do about varicose veins?” — George, 75 Huntsville, AL Dear George, I have some good news and some bad news about varicose veins. Let’s get the bad news out of the way first. Once the damage is done to the veins, it’s hard to reverse. But the...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, I’ve got a little pop quiz for you today. But don’t worry, it’s only one question. Now, if you’re anything like me, you HATE to fail. The trouble is the deck is stacked against you this time. So I don’t want you to be too hard on yourself if you...
Dear Living Well Daily Reader, It’s a nearly universal experience. When you reach a certain age, you start to worry about your memory. Because when you’re a senior, a “simple” forgotten name or missed appointment is NEVER simple. Instead, it’s yet another reason to be anxious about whether it’s an early sign of Alzheimer’s disease....