The report mysteriously vanished from the website on the 2^nd of May, with the explanation that it had been leaked, and was not, in fact, the agency’s final word on the glyphosate issue.

And that’s where it gets really interesting, because just a few days later, Jess Rowland mysteriously retired.

Of course, the usual “nothing to see here” rhetoric came thick and fast, with condescending references to “conspiracy theories” thrown in the direction of anyone who dared to question the glaring coincidence.

The latest twist in this saga is even more disturbing: A group of cancer victims who are suing Monsanto in a California federal court, have accused Rowland of actively hiding evidence of the cancer-causing properties of glyphosate. And their accusations are obviously not far-fetched, since the judge presiding over the trial has referred to the relationship between Monsanto and Jess Rowland as “highly suspicious.”

The plaintiffs’ attorneys have introduced into evidence a letter written to Rowland in March 2013, by Senior Toxicologist Marion Copley. Copley worked in the EPA’s Health Effects Division, had been with the agency for 30 years, and was the recipient of numerous awards.

In a sad and ironic twist, Copley herself was dying of cancer at the time she wrote the letter.

Copley started the letter by referencing her decades of pathology experience and expressed the hope that her insights would be valuable to the CARC in its investigation of glyphosate.

Having noted that glyphosate was originally created as a chelating agent – chelators are chemicals or chemical compounds that react with heavy metals, altering their chemical structure and improving both their stability and their ability to bond with other metals or substances – Copley went on to list 14 different mechanisms in glyphosate that could cause cancer:

–Chelators inhibit apoptosis, the process by which our bodies kill tumor cells

-Chelators are endocrine disruptors, involved in tumorigenesis

-Glyphosate induces lymphocyte proliferation

-Glyphosate induces free radical formation

-Chelators inhibit free radical scavenging enzymes requiring Zn, Mn or Cu for activity (i.e. SODs)

-Chelators bind zinc, necessary for immune system function

-Glyphosate is genotoxic, a key cancer mechanism

-Chelators inhibit DNA repair enzymes requiring metal cofactors

-Chelators bind Ca, Zn, Mg, etc to make foods deficient for these essential nutrients

-Chelators bind calcium necessary for calcineurin-mediated immune response

-Chelators often damage the kidneys or pancreas, as glyphosate does, a mechanism to tumor formation

-Kidney/pancreas damage can lead to clinical chemistry changes to favor tumor growth

-Glyphosate kills bacteria in the gut and the gastrointestinal system is 80% of the immune system

-Chelators suppress the immune system making the body susceptible to tumors

Copley then went on to make a truly shocking statement: She noted that while any one of the above mechanisms could, in fact, cause tumors, glyphosate causes all those mechanisms simultaneously.

Her chilling conclusion? “It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer.” [Emphasis added]

Copley went on to point out that Rowland’s credentials were outdated, and that the CARC’s science was at least a decade behind where it should have been. She begged him to put personal gain aside and do what he knew he needed to do in speaking out about the dangers of glyphosate.

She ended her letter, “I have done my duty.”

Jess Rowland, on the other hand, clearly did not do his duty.

Sources:

TROFire.com

DeltaFarmPress.com

Drive.Google.com^[PDF]

NaturalNews.com^[PDF]

TheEcologist.org

Monsanto has become infamous for their genetically modified seeds, and for manufacturing one of the most widely used herbicides, Roundup. Their star weed-killer has gained notoriety of its own, thanks to its toxic active ingredient, glyphosate. While the corporate behemoth claims that the product is safe, there is much evidence to the contrary; even the World Health Organization has declared that glyphosate is a “probable carcinogen.” But like all soulless corporations, Monsanto has been using their prowess to keep the lid on glyphosate’s carcinogenic nature. But all good times must come to an end, and a revealing letter from a now-deceased EPA scientist could hopefully be the beginning of Monsanto’s end. [RELATED: Keep tabs on the EPA’ latest misadventures at EPAWatch.org.]

USRTK, a non-profit working for accountability in our nation’s food system, originally uncovered a heart-breaking letter  former EPA scientist Marion Copley, who passed away from cancer. In this letter, Copley begs fellow EPA employee Jess Rowland to protect the public from glyphosate’s toxic nature, rather than continue to cow-tow to Monsanto’s influence. “For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus,” Copley writes.

She went on to state that Rowland and another EPA employee, Anna Lowit, intimidated the staff on CARC (Cancer Assessment Review Committee) and altered the MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor the industry. Lowit is still working for the EPA, and Copley’s letter warns that other scientists within the EPA may also be taking bribes.

“Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her,” Copley states.

The unsealed court documents also reveal that Monsanto has been working with scientists at the EPA to conceal the true nature of glyphosate. While the company has denied this, an email clearly shows that Monsanto’s toxicology manager William Heydens conspired to help ghostwrite the EPA’s reports on glyphosate. Specifically, Heydens suggested that Monsanto would ghostwrite the Exposure Tox and Genetox sections of the documents, supposedly to “keep the cost down.”

Rowland also reportedly set out to “kill” another agency’s investigation of glyphosate’s toxicity. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease was intending to conduct their own analysis of the chemical, but their report never did surface. A Monsanto employee relayed their conversation with Rowland via email, and quoted Rowland as saying, “If I can kill this I should get a medal.”

In her dying letter, Copley describes a number of mechanisms by which glyphosate could cause cancer. In fact, Copley states that with the evidence she describes, “It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer.” Among the things she describes, Copley notes that glyphosate is genotoxic — a quality she says is essential for cancer formation, and that it induces free radical formation and causes damage to the bacterial populations of the gut. According to Copley, because glyphosate was initially formulated as a chelating agent, it produces many similar effects which can be toxic to humans, suppress the immune system, and cause cancer.

Copley couldn’t have been the only person at the EPA to put all the pieces together and see the true toxicity glyphosate possesses — and it’s clear that Monsanto has done their best to obfuscate the facts on their cancer-causing chemical. But will they face punishment for their obvious crimes? Read more stories about glyphosate at Glyphosate.News.

Sources:

Glyphosate.news

NaturalNews.com

USRTK.org

Finance.Yahoo.com

NaturalNews.com

There are many factors in the decline of bee populations: Habitat destruction, disease, pesticides and GMO agriculture are all thought to play a role in the decimation of one of our most needed species of insects. Bees are essential to the pollination of many crops grown for food, and it is doubtful that the loss of these little critters will come without consequences.

The decimation of what was previously a widespread and common bee species shows just how damaging human impact can be. And while many pesticide and herbicide manufacturers, like Monsanto, claim that their products are “bee safe,” it is clear that simply is not the case.

Monsanto and their ilk have indeed played a substantial role in the devastating decline in bumblebees. Research has shown that glyphosate, which is the most widely used herbicide in the states, can be very harmful to bees.

How Monsanto harms bees

Past research has shown that glyphosate is capable of doing serious damage to bees, even at sub-lethal doses that are equivalent to what may typically be found in the environment. In 2014, researchers from Argentina found that Roundup can actually cause bees to starve by interfering with their senses.

In the study, the researchers used field-relevant doses of glyphosate to examine its effects, and what they found was shocking. Glyphosate exposure actually decreased the bees’ sensitivity to sucrose, which resulted in a decreased ability to find food. Exposed bees also exhibited poor memory and decreased learning capacity. The researchers noted that bees that come into contact with glyphosate were also more likely to experience Colony Collapse Disorder, most likely because the herbicide renders them unable to find their way back to the hive.

The team also found that indirect exposure to the herbicide occurred as well. After being exposed to glyphosate while gathering nectar, the bees then brought traces of the toxic chemical back to their hives, poisoning the rest of the colony as well. The researchers found that exposure to glyphosate from tainted nectar reduced the entire colony’s ability to function normally.

In the study’s abstract, the researchers wrote, “[W]e speculate that successful forager bees could become a source of constant inflow of nectar with GLY [glyphosate] traces that could then be distributed among nestmates, stored in the hive and have long-term negative consequences on colony performance.”

Given that glyphosate is one of the most widely used agrochemicals in the world, the fact that it can cause bees to lose their hives and impair their foraging abilities is quite concerning. While glyphosate is not the only chemical that is known to harm bees, it certainly may be the most common.

Glyphosate, of course, is not the only item produced by Monsanto that has had catastrophic effects on the environment. For example, the nitrogen fertilizers used for Monsanto’s GM crops have seriously depleted soil quality across the country, and has reduced the soil’s ability to soak up carbon. In essence, these fertilizers are turning farmland into veritable deserts where nothing useful can grow. GM crops are also associated with a loss of biodiversity, and the elimination of flowering weeds that many pollinators use as a source of nectar.

So in addition to their grievously harmful herbicide, Roundup, being sprayed across the US, Monsanto also contributes to bee deaths in other ways, such as reducing pollinator food sources and habitats. Being that glyphosate is the most-used herbicide in the country, it stands to reason that the harmful effects of this herbicide cause more harm, simply because it is used more often than other chemicals. But, the fact remains that many types of pesticides and agrochemicals can harm bees.

Sources:

Independent.co.uk

FWS.gov

Glyphosate.news

OrganicConsumers.org

OneGreenPlanet.org

Maryland State Agriculture statistics reveal that the state is home to some 14,000 registered colonies. As Bill Castro from Bee Friendly Apiary explains, this translates to about 7,600 colonies that need to be replaced each year. With the average cost of replacement per colony being about $150 with the starting price of $100 per package and up to $200 for nucleus colonies, it can get quite expensive. Castro writes that in total, Maryland beekeepers are forced to spend about $1.3 million each year just to replace lost colonies, and that figure doesn’t include lost revenue and labor, or losses in potential growth.

Beekeepers across the nation haven’t been faring much better: in the 2015-2016 year, the average loss of colonies for apiarists around the United States was a staggering 44 percent. In total, average losses had increased by 3.5 percent in just a single year.

The massive decline in bee populations can be attributed to many things. For example, the state of Maryland saw low rainfall last year and low amounts of “abundant natural forage,” which can lead to compromised immunity in bees. This, in turn, leaves the bees susceptible to things like mites, bacterial infections and viruses.

Outside of these more natural causes that tend to ebb and flow, however, there is a more sinister player: pesticides. (RELATED: Learn more about the harmful effects of pesticides at Pesticides.news)

Pesticides and bee deaths

Over the years, beekeepers in Maryland have reported that there has been an increase in pesticide use for things like farm and lawn spraying. With the addition of mass municipal and private broad-spectrum spraying to combat supposed threats like the Zika virus, you can see where trouble can begin to arise.

Pesticides come in many forms, but they all share a common goal: to kill pests. Being a member of the insect family, bees are often an unintended target of pesticides. Even those that are supposedly “bee safe” can often be very damaging to bee colonies. For example, glyphosate, which is an herbicide, has been found to have deleterious effects on bees.  A September 2016 study that was published in the journal Nature Scientific Reports systematically assessed the effects of multiple pesticides that accumulate within bee colonies.

The researchers found that regardless of dose, the number of different pesticides found within a colony was closely correlated with colony death. They also found that many fungicides which are often deemed “bee safe” still had a strong correlation with bee death.

Dennis vanEngelsdorp, the study’s senior author and assistant professor of entomology at the University of Maryland, stated that their findings are contradictory to one of the basic principles of toxicology and suggest that dose does not always make the poison.

“We found that the number of different compounds was highly predictive of colony death, which suggests that the addition of more compounds somehow overwhelms the bees’ ability to detoxify themselves,” vanEngelsdorp explained.

To conduct their research, vanEngelsdorp and his team followed 91 different colonies owned by three different commercial migratory beekeepers over the course of one agricultural season. They analyzed three key areas: total number of pesticides, number of pesticides that exceeded the minimum toxicity threshold, and total hazard quotient — which was defined as the hazard posed to each colony posed by the number of pesticides.

Over the season, the researchers found that 93 different types of pesticides made their way into the colonies, accumulating in their wax, the processed pollen known as “bee bread,” and even in the bodies of nurse bees. Every sample of bee bread tested had between 5 and 20 different pesticides that exceeded the toxicity threshold. They also found that every colony with high pesticide concentrations in their wax lost their queen during the beekeeping season.

Overall, the team found that being exposed to multiple pesticides, even in lower amounts, was extremely harmful to bee colonies. Previous research has also hinted that specific pesticides, such neonicotinoids or glyphosate, can be harmful to bees.  Neonicotinoids, in particular, have been noted as especially harmful to bees’ immune systems.

Sources:

NaturalBlaze.com

BeeInformed.org

CMNS.UMD.edu

Recently, the U.S. Right to Know website has revealed a series of bombshell court documents raising serious questions about the weed killer’s safety and the research practices of its producer. The unsealed documents exposed the friendly and “highly suspicious” relationship between Monsanto and the former Deputy Director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Jess Rowland.

The leaked documents, which bear Rowland’s signature, buried scientific evidence linking glyphosate herbicides to cancer in humans, thereby making sure toxic herbicides like Roundup remained approved by the EPA. The documents were discovered during a court filing by cancer patients who are suing Monsanto in San Francisco.

Big cover-ups in favor of the agricultural industry

Ever since the WHO declared glyphosate as a probable carcinogen, the industry has been trying to cover up the evidence of the cancer-causing properties of glyphosate through “fake science” reports. Last year, the EPA produced a report, overseen by Monsanto’s “mole” Jess Rowland, stating that glyphosate was “not likely to be carcinogenic.” A month later, after the report had been leaked to the media, it was quickly removed from the EPA’s website while Rowland quietly resigned a few days later.

At that time, Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) of the House Science Committee, raised serious questions about the removal of the report and Rowland’s abrupt resignation. The EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, however, carefully dodged all his questions, stating that the report was “a mistake that had caused all kinds of conspiracy theories to erupt.”

What’s more, Glyphosate.news also reported on a heartbreaking letter sent to Rowland in 2013 from a dying EPA toxicologist, Marion Copley, begging her colleagues to tell the truth about the dangers of glyphosate. The letter stated that based on the latest studies, glyphosate should be classified as a “probable carcinogen.” She listed more than a dozen health-damaging effects of glyphosate.

Furthermore, Copley accused Rowland of playing political games, intimidating staff members, and altering documents for the industry. Additionally, she also accused Anna B. Lowit, director of the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs, of taking bribes while engaging in science intimidation tactics to change the EPA’s conclusions about glyphosate in favor of Monsanto.

“For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus,” Copley said. “You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed HIARC and HASPOC final reports to favor industry,” she added.

In the hope of safeguarding the world from glyphosate, Marion Copley signed off her letter with: “I have cancer, and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.”

Thanks to outstanding investigative work at the U.S. Right to Know website, a backup of the original PDF of the court document, which also includes a copy of Marion Copley’s letter, can now be found at the Natural News archives.

Let us hope that these revelations come just in time to halt the European Commission’s decision to relicense the use of glyphosate for another 15 years. Last year, they agreed to temporarily extend glyphosate’s license pending further investigations.

Recently, the European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) risk assessment committee concluded that “the available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria to classify glyphosate as a carcinogen, as a mutagen, or as toxic for reproduction.”

Now, it is up to the European Commission to decide whether they will reauthorize glyphosate or finally put an end to the use of one of the world’s most toxic substances, poisoning millions of people worldwide.

Sources:

Glyphosate.news

USRTK.org

NaturalNews.com^PDF

TROFire.com

Glyphosate.news

Independent.co.uk

The scientist, Dr. Marion Copley, D.M.V., who died from cancer, worked for the EPA for three decades until her illness made it impossible for her to continue. In a letter to EPA colleague and Monsanto “mole” Jess Rowland in 2013, two years before a public debate over the carcinogenic effects of glyphosate began, Copley – a senior toxicologist at the EPA’s Health Effects Division – voiced major concerns about how Rowland and the EPA were dealing with the compound.

“Since I left the Agency with cancer, I have studied the tumor process extensively and I have some mechanism comments which may be very valuable to CARC based on my decades of pathology experience. I’ll pick one chemical to demonstrate my points,” she wrote. (RELATED: Heartbreaking letter from dying EPA scientist begs Monsanto “moles” inside the agency to stop lying about dangers of RoundUp (glyphosate.)

“Glyphosate was originally designed as a chelating agent and I strongly believe that is the identical process involved in its tumor formation, which is highly supported by the literature.”

Copley goes on to note:

— Chelators prevent the process of apoptosis, which is a necessary bodily function to kill off tumor cells;

— Chelators act as endocrine disruptors, which in turn plays a role in the growth of tumors;

— Chelators serve to bind zinc, which is a necessary mineral for proper immune system function;

— Chelators also bind calcium and magnesium, as well as other minerals, thereby making foods “deficient for these essential nutrients;”

— Glyphosate has been found to be a genotoxic substance, which is key in cancer formation;

— Chelators can often cause damage to the kidneys or pancreas, which glyphosate does, serving as another cancer formation mechanism;

— Glyphosate is responsible for destroying good gut bacteria and in the gastrointestinal system at large is 80 percent of the body’s immune system;

— Chelators’ tamping down of the body’s immune system also leads to cancer formation.

She noted further that, in the past, CARC found that glyphosate was a “possible human carcinogen,” and that kidney pathology in separate studies in animals led to the formation of tumors “with other mechanisms.” She also said that “any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously.”

“Jess, you and I have argued many times on CARC. You often argued about topics outside of your knowledge, which is unethical,” she wrote. “Your trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated, thus CARC science is 10 years behind the literature in mechanisms. For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”

Copley, who passed away in January 2014, also identified another EPA colleague, Anna Lowit, accusing both of them of “intimidating staff on CARC” and changing various reports to make the industry look better.

A February filing in U.S. District Court for Northern California seeks to compel testimony from Rowland. The document says that Rowland, now a private citizen, left EPA “mysteriously” a day after an “inadvertent” leak and later retraction of a draft EPA report on the safety of glyphosate that bore Rowland’s signature. (RELATED: EPA Corruption, Monsanto And RoundUp Litigation: Full Text Of Motion To Compel Deposition Of Jess Rowland.)

“…[T]he Plaintiffs have a pressing need for Mr. Rowland’s testimony to confirm his relationship with Monsanto and EPA’s substantial role in protecting the Defendant’s business, efforts subsequently embodied in government reports consistently cited by Monsanto in this Court and elsewhere,” the court filing said. “As stated in the original Motion, the circumstances underlying the relationship between Mr. Rowland and Monsanto are highly suspicious.”

Keep up with this story as it develops at Glyphosate.news.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

Glyphosate.news

NaturalNews.com

USRTK.org

EPAWatch.org

Glyphosate.news has published the full text of the court document “Motion to Compel Deposition of Jess Rowland.”

Also published on Glyphosate.news is this heartbreaking letter from a dying EPA scientist begging her colleagues to stop lying about the dangers of glyphosate.

Continuing with the full disclosure of these court documents — originally acquired by U.S. Right to Know — Glyphosate.news has now published the full text of the “Third-Party Discovery and Pending Motions to Seal” document.

Some of the more interesting highlights from this document include these passages:

Monsanto has trumpeted reports generated by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) concluding that glyphosate is not hazardous… In this phase, which is limited to “general causation,” the Court will decide only whether there is sufficient admissible evidence that glyphosate and/or Roundup is capable of causing cancer (specifically, Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma) in humans.

Texas A&M’s motion to quash the subpoena to Dr. Ivan Rusyn is granted. [Who is Dr. Ivan Rusyn? And why doesn’t Monsanto want him subpoenaed?]

Monsanto’s request to seal the documents submitted in connection with the motion to compel Rowland’s deposition is denied, with the exception of one document. As previously mentioned, the EPA reports are important to this litigation. Therefore, to support its sealing request, Monsanto must present compelling reasons for concealing documents relating to the EPA reports from the public… Potential embarrassment to Monsanto (or to Jess Rowland) is not enough.

Finally, the parties have submitted a discovery letter regarding Monsanto’s practice of designating a high percentage of documents produced in discovery as “confidential” in accordance with the protective order. That dispute is resolved in favor of Monsanto… when the plaintiffs provisionally file documents under seal based on Monsanto’s confidentiality designation, Monsanto must undertake a good-faith review of the documents and inform the Court whether they should remain under seal. [i.e. Monsanto will inform the court of whether Monsanto thinks its own documents should remain secret from the court.]

If Monsanto continues to file unreasonable or unsubstantiated declarations, it will be sanctioned.

Read the entire decision from U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria at this link from Glyphosate.news.

Does Glyphosate / RoundUp cause Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma?

Here’s what a few authors and researchers say on the subject:

Because the shikimate pathway is only found in plants, it is assumed that glyphosate does not affect animals and therefore is safe; however, the retinoic acid signaling pathway in animals is very similar to the shikimate pathway. Research by Mesnage et al. found that Roundup from 1 ppm to 20,000 ppm causes cells of the human body to die through necrosis. At 50 ppm it delays the cellular apoptosis that is essential for the normal functioning and regeneration of cells, body tissues, and organs. GLYPHOSATE AND CANCERS: A case-controlled study published in March 1999 by Swedish scientists Lennart Hardell and Mikael Eriksson showed that non-hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) is linked to exposure to a range of pesticides and herbicides, including glyphosate. Prior to the 1940s, non-hodgkin’s lymphoma was one of the world’s rarest cancers. Now it is one of the most common. Between 1973 and 1991, the incidence of non-hodgkin’s lymphoma increased at the rate of 3.3 percent per year in the United States, making it the third fastest-growing cancer. In Sweden, the incidence of NHL has increased at the rate of 3.6 percent per year in men and 2.9 percent per year in women since 1958.
– The Myths of Safe Pesticides by Andre Leu

Roundup Ready soybeans convert much of the applied glyphosate into a metabolite called AMPA (aminomethylphosphonic acid) with unknown health properties. In one study, the beans contained 3 mg/kg of glyphosate and up to 25 mg/kg of AMPA.35 “The presence of high AMPA residues in Roundup Ready soybean was not anticipated and presents a new type of consumer exposure.” Glyphosate is toxic According to the Journal of Pesticide Reform, “Symptoms of exposure to glyphosate include eye irritation, burning eyes, blurred vision, skin rashes, burning or itchy skin, nausea, sore throat, asthma and difficulty breathing, headache, lethargy, nose bleeds, and dizziness. Glyphosate and glyphosate-containing herbicides caused genetic damage in laboratory tests with human cells, as well as in tests with laboratory animals. … Exposure is linked with increased risks of the cancer non-hodgkin’s lymphoma, miscarriages, and attention deficit disorder,” as well as Parkinson’s disease. Exposure to mouse testicular cells (Leydig cells) resulted in a 94% reduction in sex hormone production.
– Genetic Roulette – The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods by Jeffrey M. Smith

According to French and international bodies, glyphosate is considered an irritant that may produce severe eye lesions, and [is] toxic for aquatic organisms,” Marc reports. “According to the World Health Organization, the U.S. EPA, and the European Community, the use of glyphosate in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions therefore poses no human health risks. . . . However, several epidemiological studies have demonstrated a correlation between exposure to glyphosate and cancer.” Roundup Triggers the First Stage of the Development of Cancer: In fact, while regulatory agencies have continued to classify glyphosate-based herbicides as “not a human carcinogen,” a series of epidemiological studies tend to demonstrate exactly the opposite. For example, a Canadian study published in 2001 by the University of Saskatchewan showed that men exposed to glyphosate more than two days a year had twice the risk of developing non-hodgkin’s lymphoma of men never exposed.
– The World According to Monsanto by Marie-Monique Robin

The original PDF of this document is found at the USRTK website, with a backup copy archived at Natural News.

In this letter, EPA scientist Marion Copley begs Monsanto “mole” Jess Rowland to do his job and protect the public rather than protecting Monsanto’s profit interests, saying, “For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”

She also accuses Rowland and another EPA scientist Anna Lowit (still with the EPA) of engaging in science intimidation tactics to force EPA scientists and bureaucrats to change their conclusions in favor of Monsanto. “You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor industry,” says Copley. This tactic, by the way, is 100% aligned with the deeply evil corporate culture at Monsanto, which routinely engages in intimidation legal tactics, science intimidation and character assassination campaigns against anti-Monsanto activists.

Copley further warns that EPA scientists are likely being bribed by Monsanto, saying, “Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.”

Marion Copley signs off with a plea for humanity, knowing that she is nearing death but wanting to help save humanity from the toxic chemical “holocaust” being pushed by Monsanto and a criminal EPA:

I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.

Read the full letter to Jess Rowland (the “Monsanto mole” inside the EPA) from Marion Copley (now deceased, former EPA scientist) to get the full picture. Read the entire unsealed court document that includes this letter at this page on Glyphosate.news.

Letter from Marion Copley to Jess Rowland, March 4, 2013

Jess,

Since I left the Agency with cancer, I have studied the tumor process extensively and I have some mechanism comments which may be very valuable to CARC based on my decades of pathology experience. I’ll pick one chemical to demonstrate my points.

Glyphosate was originally designed as a chelating agent and 1 strongly believe that is the identical process involved in its tumor formation, which is highly supported by the literature.

-Chelators inhibit apoptosis, the process by which our bodies kill tumor cells

-Chelators are endocrine disruptors, involved in tumorigenesis

-Glyphosate induces lymphocyte proliferation

-Glyphosate induces free radical formation

-Chelators inhibit free radical scavenging enzymes requiring Zn, Mn or Cu for activity (i.e. SODs)

-Chelators bind zinc, necessary for immune system function

-Glyphosate is genotoxic, a key cancer mechanism

-Chelators inhibit DNA repair enzymes requiring metal cofactors

-Chelators bind Ca, Zn, Mg, etc to make foods deficient for these essential nutrients

-Chelators bind calcium necessary for calcineurin-mediated immune response

-Chelators often damage the kidneys or pancreas, as glyphosate does, a mechanism to tumor formation

-Kidney/pancreas damage can lead to clinical chemistry changes to favor tumor growth

-Glyphosate kills bacteria in the gut and the gastrointestinal system is 80% of the immune system

-Chelators suppress the immune system making the body susceptible to tumors

Previously, CARC concluded that glyphosate was a “possible human carcinogen”. The kidney pathology in the animal studies would lead to tumors with other mechanisms listed above. Any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously. It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer. With all of the evidence listed above, the CARC category should be changed to “probable human carcinogen”. Blood cells arc most exposed to chelators, if any study shows proliferation of lymphocytes, then that is confirmatory that glyphosate is a carcinogen.

Jess, you and I have argued many times on CARC. You often argued about topics outside of your knowledge, which is unethical. Your trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated, thus CARC science is 10 years behind the literature in mechanisms. For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus. You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor industry. Chelators clearly disrupt calcium signaling, a key signaling pathway in all cellos and mediates tumor progression. Greg Ackerman is supposed to be our expert on mechanisms, but he never mentioned any of these concepts at CARC and when I tried to discuss it with him he put me off. Is Greg playing your political games as well, incompetent or does he have some conflict of interest of some kind? Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.

I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.

Marion Copley March 4, 2013

Read the full text of the unsealed court document at this page on Glyphosate.news.

We are now translating all the documents into plain text so that journalists and activists can easily mine the documents for bombshell revelations implicating the corrupt EPA in a far-reaching campaign of environmental crimes.

There are hundreds of pages of documents in all. This is truly a Wikileaks-style document dump revealing deep collusion between the EPA and Monsanto to conceal conclusive evidence showing glyphosate to be carcinogenic.

Without question, these documents reveal a criminal racketeering operation inside the EPA in much the same way that the CDC is also running a criminal racketeering operation that colludes with vaccine manufacturers.

Here’s the URL of the first document we’ve posted, which is the “PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF JESS ROWLAND.”

http://glyphosate.news/2017-03-15-epa-corruption-monsanto-and-roundup-litigation-full-text-of-motion-to-compel-deposition-of-jess-rowland.html

Jess Rowland was a high-level EPA operative who squashed scientific evidence for Monsanto, making sure toxic herbicides like glyphosate remained approved by the EPA (which has become a total joke itself, now dubbed the “Environmental Pollution Agency”).

Hundreds more pages are currently being processed and posted to Glyphosate.news in the next 48 hours.

A small taste of what you’ll find in this “motion to compel deposition” document includes the following:

Marion Copley, D.V.M., a 30-year career EPA scientist and recipient of numerous awards, wrote a letter to Mr. Rowland in March 2013, two years before the public debate about the carcinogenicity of glyphosate began in earnest. Dr. Copley was a senior toxicologist in the EPA’s Health Effects Division, and she worked closely with Mr. Rowland. Diagnosed with terminal cancer, she had to retire for health reasons and passed away in January 2014. Before her death, she voiced her serious concerns to Mr. Rowland about his and EPA’s handling of glyphosate.

Dr. Copley’s dying declaration begins by naming no fewer than fourteen effects of glyphosate known to EPA, all of which are plausible mechanisms of action explaining the increase in lymphoma risk.

Dr. Copley’s letter points at corruption within EPA; she asks that Mr. Rowland consider her scientific assertions rather that “play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants [pesticide manufacturers].” Dr. Copley confronts Mr. Rowland with allegations that he and Anna Lowit, who still works at EPA, “intimidated staff on CARC and changed HIARC and HASPOC final reports to favor industry.” Dr. Copley’s letter closes with an additional accusation toward Ms. Lowit: “If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.” She requests that Mr. Rowland “for once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”

Read the full document now at this link at the Glyphosate News website.

In an eye-opening new documentary, Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, is bravely blowing the lid off what he calls the greatest environmental crime you’ve never known: biosludge. If that word doesn’t ring a bell for you, you are not alone. In fact, the government has gone out of its way to ensure that the concept is not familiar to most people.

When people flush their toilets, raw sewage goes to wastewater treatment plants, where it is treated to decrease the levels of pathogens it contains and reduce its bad smell. The resulting product, biosolids or biosludge, is then sold to local municipalities, who use it as fertilizer in parks and even on local farms. In fact, the EPA says that every state in the nation uses this material as fertilizer. Cities are permitted to sell it to farmers to spread on their fields, and it is also being spread across school playgrounds.

If the human feces is treated with chemicals, it must be safe, right? Not according to EPA whistleblower, Dr. David Lewis, who says that these biosolids contain a host of heavy metals and toxins. When he started to ask questions about this deeply disturbing practice, he was terminated from his position as a senior level microbiologist for the agency. Prior to his termination, he managed to publish two articles about the shortcomings of the EPA’s Part 503 sludge rule in the journal Nature.

This rule monitors only a handful of the 27 metals that are found in biosludge, and completely ignores other concerning contaminants, including endocrine-disrupting chemicals, pesticides, antibiotics and birth control pills – just the type of thing you want to be exposed to if you are hoping to come down with Alzheimer’s, autism or Parkinson’s disease.

Massive cover-up

How exactly are they getting away with this? The EPA published an agreement with wastewater trade association Water Environment Federation to fund a public acceptance campaign for biosolids. Dr. Lewis says that scientists who drew attention to the connection between biosolids and negative health effects were blacklisted or even accused of misconduct.

Adams’ film, Biosludged, explores how the EPA silenced all of the environmental scientists who tried to tell the truth about the situation and the fake science used to support the practice.

In an interview with Mother Earth News, Dr. Lewis pointed to a study funded by the EPA from the University of Georgia that concluded the deaths of cattle on two dairy farms using biosludge from the city of Augusta, Georgia, were not related to the biosolids. However, it was later discovered that the City of Augusta fabricated the environmental monitoring data used in that study.

It is clear that there is a lot about this situation that the EPA does not want the public to know. In his book, Science for Sale: How the US Government Uses Powerful Corporations and Leading Universities to Support Government Policies, Silence Top Scientists, Jeopardize Our Health, and Protect Corporate Profits, Dr. Lewis exposes the dangers of this sewage sludge, and Adams’ film presents a compelling case for why everyone should be outraged by this.

Thanks to the efforts of people like Dr. Lewis and Mike Adams, people are starting to find out just how widespread this dangerous practice is, and hopefully something will be done to put an end to it. In the meantime, those of us who would rather not eat anything that has been fertilized with our neighbors’ feces have little choice but to grow our own food.

Sources include:

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

NaturalNews.com

MotherEarthNews.com