Monsanto & EPA: toxic bedfellows

Source: RT
May 18, 2017

More than 700 lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto claiming that their popular weed-killer, ‘Roundup,’ is carcinogenic. The lawsuits bring attention to bogus studies and apparent collusion between Monsanto and the EPA, further damaging the credibility of the already embattled agency. RT America’s Manila Chan has the details. Then, Mike Papantonio, host of “America’s Lawyer,” joins “News with Ed” to offer his legal expertise and insights.

Advertisements

Blood-Thinning Drug Xarelto Faces 18,000 Lawsuits

FakeNews

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
April 26, 2017

The first court test of Bayer/J&J’s billion-dollar bonanza, blood-thinner, Xarelto, is coming up in New Orleans next week. The outcome will influence how the 18,000 lawsuits behind it will be handled.

The plaintiff in the first suit is Joseph Boudreaux. “While Xarelto was supposed to help cut his stroke risk, Boudreaux says it instead caused internal bleeding that required a week-long hospital stay in the intensive-care unit, several blood transfusions and multiple heart procedures. ‘I don’t want anybody else to suffer like I have from that drug,’ the part-time security guard says,” reports the Chicago Tribune.

Lawyers for Bayer and J&J will argue, in the main, that Xarelto was approved by the FDA as safe and effective.

This is the normal front-line strategy in cases where the drugmaker believes it can’t be accused of purposely concealing a medicine’s dangers from the FDA.

“Well, the government says the drug is safe and effective, so what else do you want from us? We’ve done our duty. We’re off the hook.”

It’s called shift the responsibility.

The last time I looked, the FDA doesn’t develop, manufacture, and sell drugs. Pharmaceutical companies do. If their drugs kill people and maim them, why shouldn’t they shoulder the blame, regardless of what a government agency says?

A simple change in law would remedy this situation: irrespective of what the FDA claims or doesn’t claim, ultimate accountability for a drug’s effects lies with the company that created it.

If you own a business that makes a product, and 18,000 people are lined up to sue you because they claim the product seriously harmed them, you’re the one who’s going to have to go to court and try to defend your actions.

You’re not going to be able to claim it was your second cousin’s fault or the man in the moon’s responsibility.

Even if we assume the FDA is honest and thorough and honorable (laughable, I know), they’re simply offering their assessment. It doesn’t matter that they’re the only body that can certify a drug for public use. That’s not a reason to exonerate a drug company.

Drug companies try to make hay from the fact that the FDA is certifying their medicines. “Don’t blame us. The FDA liked our drug. Blame them. And good luck with that.”

This would be like a mother saying, “Yes, I was in the park with my child, and yes, I wandered away to talk to an ice cream vendor, and I came back a half hour later to find her with a broken leg, but you see, it was my husband’s fault. He decided I would be competent to take care of our children…”

Forget all about the clinical trials of new drugs, and the published studies, and the back-and-forth between the pharmaceutical company and the FDA, and the FDA certifications.

It’s far simpler. It’s the sign in the store that says, “You break it, you pay for it.”

You break people, you pay.

The only ones who don’t understand that are criminals.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Is Monsanto Seriously Exempt from ALL Liability Lawsuits for PCB Contamination?

Chemical Safety Bill Adds Dirty Protection

toxic world spray earth planet monsantos 735-250
Source: NaturalSociety.com
Christina Sarich
March 2, 2016

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton, 1887

Monsanto says it has nothing to do with the clause that our corrupt Congress just passed in a piece of legislation exempting the St. Louis-based company from ALL financial liability involved with lawsuits and financial settlements related to PCB contamination and cleanup sites. REALLY? [1]

We’re supposed to assume that a company responsible for almost 1.25 billion pounds of carcinogenic PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, sold in the US between the 1930’s and 1970’s had absolutely nothing to do with a provision giving Monsanto a free pass for polluting the waterways, fields, and air. The EPA even admits that these chemicals are carcinogenic and harmful to reproductive health, the immune system, the endocrine system, and the nervous system?

Just because Monsanto switched its focus from polluting the world with PCBs to polluting it with Round Up and Round Up ready crops, the mega-corp is absolved from taking an ounce of responsibility?

Monsanto already agreed to pay $700 million to a city in Alabama to clean up PCB contamination, but with a host of new cities suing for the same reason – did Monsanto just turn Congress onto a new level of corruption in order to protect itself from further culpability?

The provision was slipped into another bill regarding chemical safety introduced last year by an unknown representative, and though it doesn’t name Monsanto specifically, it has the company’s name written all over it. The provision would benefit the only manufacturer in the United States of now-banned PCBs, a mainstay of Monsanto business model for decades. [1]

The House and the Senate last year both passed versions of legislation to replace the 40-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act, a law that the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged had become so unworkable that as many as 1,000 hazardous chemicals still on sale today needed to be evaluated to see if they should be banned or restricted. But instead of protecting Americans from further chemical exposure, it just renegotiated Monsanto’s past misdeeds into a disappearing pit of corporate escapism.

Continue Reading At: NaturalSociety.com