The problems are piling up at the company's front door.
By Reynard Loki
Monsanto has been reeling from a number of setbacks around the globe. Here's
a look at some of the main reasons that 2015 has been a giant headache for the
biotech giant. But that headache could find some reilef if the U.S. Senate hands
them a legislative victory that would keep American consumers in the dark about
what's in their food.
Roundup Probably Causes Cancer
In March, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World
Health Organization's cancer arm, said that the controversial herbicide
glyphosate — the main ingredient in Monsanto's popular weedkiller Roundup — is
"
probably
carcinogenic to humans." IARC noted, "Case-control studies of occupational
exposure in the USA, Canada, and Sweden reported increased risks for non-Hodgkin
lymphoma that persisted after adjustment for other pesticides." Used by home
gardeners, public park gardeners and farmers, and applied to more than 150 food
and non-food crops, Roundup is the Monsantot's leading product and the world's
most-produced weedkiller.
In June, France banned Roundup. French Ecology Minister Segolene Royal said,
"France
must
be on the offensive with regards to the banning of pesticides." She added,
"I have asked garden centers to stop putting Monsanto's Roundup on sale" in
self-service aisles. And earlier this month, California issued a
notice
of intent to list glyphosate as a carcinogen. “As far as I’m aware, this is
the first regulatory agency in the U.S. to determine that glyphosate is a
carcinogen,” said Dr. Nathan Donley, a scientist at the Center for Biological
Diversity. “So this is a very big deal.”
In April, U.S. citizens filed a
class
action lawsuit against Monsanto, claiming that the company is guilty of
false advertising by claiming that glyphosate targets an enzyme only found in
plants and not in humans or animals. The plaintiffs argue that the targeted
enzyme, EPSP synthase, is found in the microbiota that reside in human and
non-human animal intestines. In addition to its potential cancer-causing
properties, Roundup has been linked to a host of other
health
issues,
environmental
problems and the record
decline
of monarch butterflies.
And in September, another of the company's herbicides got slammed when a
French appeals court confirmed that Monsanto was
guilty
of chemical poisoning, upholding a 2012 ruling in favor of Paul Francois,
whose lawyers claimed the company's Lasso weedkiller gave the cereal farmer
neurological problems, including memory loss and headaches.
Tweet Backfires
Monsanto would probably love to forget one of their recent tweets that tried
to put out the glyphosate-fueled public image fire. A day before the
cancer-listing announcement by California's EPA, Monsanto posted a tweet, asking
if people has questions about glyphosate with a link to a FAQ page:
The tweet wasn't the PR success that the company had hoped for. Instead of
helping to alleviate consumer fears about the chemical, the tweet became a
target for the Monsanto-hating Twitterati:
EU Nations Ban
GMOs
In addition to the glyphosate backlash, Monsanto has had to deal with several
EU countries who have said no to the company's GM crops. A new European Union
law signed in March allows individual member countries to be excluded from any
GM cultivation approval request. European opposition to GMOs has been strong:
Unlike in the Americas and Asia, where GMO crops are widely grown, only
Monsanto's pest-resistant MON810, a GMO maize, is grown in Europe. Several
nations have taken advantage of the new exclusion law: Scotland, Germany,
Latvia, Greece, France and recently, Northern Ireland, have all invoked it.
In August, Scotland became the first EU nation to ban the growing of
genetically modified crops by requesting to be
excluded
by Monsanto's application to grow GMO crops across the EU. “Scotland is known
around the world for our beautiful natural environment — and
banning
growing genetically modified crops will protect and further enhance our
clean, green status,” said Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead.
Germany cited strong resistance from farmers and the public when it made its
opt-out request. “Germany has committed a
true
act of food democracy by listening to the majority of its citizens that
oppose GMO cultivation and support more sustainable, resilient organic food
production that doesn’t perpetuate the overuse of toxic herbicides,” said Lisa
Archer, food and technology director at environmental nonprofit Friends of the
Earth. “We are hopeful that more members of the EU will follow suit and that the
U.S. Congress will protect our basic right to know what we are feeding our
families by requiring mandatory GMO labeling.”
Soon after Germany's decision, Latvia and Greece announced that they too are
taking advantage of the EU law. France, too, is using the opt-out law to ensure
the country's GMO ban
remains
in place.
While anti-GMO activists warn of the dangers that genetically modified foods
pose to health and the environment, the Big Food industry and
many
scientists argue that GMOs are safe and can help feed a skyrocketing human
population. Monsanto told Reuters: "We regret that some countries are deviating
from a science-based approach to innovation in agriculture and have elected to
prohibit the cultivation of a successful GM product on
arbitrary
political grounds.” There is a significant political dimension as well:
Newswire reported that the GMO opt-out law "
directly
confronts U.S. free trade deal supported by EU, under which the Union should
open its doors widely for the U.S. GM industry." It remains to be seen how the
opt-out law will play out in the long run.
But for now, could the GMO resistance in Europe be working? Following the
announcements by Latvia and Greece, EurActiv, an online news service covering EU
affairs, reported that Monsanto "said it had
no
immediate plans to request approvals for any new GM seeds in Europe."
The GMO Debate Rages
On
The debate over genetically modified foods is complex, and not without its
contradictions. While the anti-GMO movement appears to gaining steam, GMO foods
have been a big part of the U.S. food system for many years. The vast majority
of several key crops grown in the U.S. are genetically modified, including soy
(93 percent), corn (93 percent) and canola (90 percent). As Morgan Clendaniel,
editor of Co.Exist, points out, "Many crops are genetically modified so
frequently, it’s
nearly
impossible to find non-GMO versions." He adds that, althought 80 percent of
all packaged food sold in America contain GMOs, consumers are kept in the dark,
because the U.S. is "one of the few places in the developed world that doesn’t
require food producers to disclose whether or not their ingredients have any
modifications."
One scientist who has been sharply critical of GM crops is David Williams, a
cellular biologist at the University of California at Los Angeles. He says that
"inserted genes can be transformed by several different means, and it can happen
generations
later," which can result in potentially toxic plants. In addition, faulty
monitoring of GM field tests presents another danger. For example, from 2008 to
2014, only 39 of the 133 GM crop field trials in India were properly monitored,
"leaving the rest for
unknown
risks and possible health hazards."
But within the scientific community, Dr. Williams is in the minority, In
fact, as science writer David H. Freeman notes in Scientific American, "The vast
major it of the research on genetically modified crops suggests that they are
safe
to eat." David Zilberman, an agricultural and environmental economist at the
University of California at Berkeley (who Freeman describes as "one of the few
researchers considered credible by both agricultural chemical companies and
their critics") says that the use of GM crops "has increased farmer safety by
allowing them to use less pesticide. It has raised the output of corn, cotton
and soy by 20 to 30 percent, allowing some people to survive who would not have
without it. If it were more widely adopted around the world, the price [of food]
would go lower, and
fewer
people would die of hunger.”
The European Food Safety Authority said it will issue its scientific opinion
on the GM crops by the end of 2017. For now, the GMO debate — filled with a host
of
pros
and cons — rages on. But beyond the health and environmental threats that
Monsanto's products may pose, some worry that about the how control of the
global food system is increasingly concentrated in a few biotech and agriculture
megacorps like Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Pioneer and DuPont. "Beating in the
heart of every good capitalist is the heart of a monopolist," says Neil Harl, an
agricultural economist at Iowa State. "So we have to have rules, we have to have
the economic police on the beat. Or we end up with concentration and that means
higher
prices."
GMO Labeling Law: SAFE or
DARK?
While Monsanto has been taking a beating lately, the company is crossing its
fingers for a huge victory in the Congress. Any day now, the U.S. Senate could
take up H.R. 1599, the misleadingly named "Safe and Accurate Food Labeling
(SAFE) Act," which would make federal GMO labeling voluntary, while prohibiting
states from labeling GMOs — even though it goes against the vast majority of the
public wants.
According to a New York Times poll that,
93
percent of Americans want GMO foods to labeled as such, with three-quarters
of survey respondents expressing concern about GMOs in food. The industry-backed
bill, which opponents have nicknamed the "Deny Americans the Right to Know
(DARK) Act" has already passed the House of Representatives and, if passed,
could overturn democratically enacted state laws.
"The bill is a
sweeping
attack on states’ rights to self-govern on the issue of GMO labeling, and on
consumers’ right to know if their food has been genetically engineered," warn
Alexis Baden-Mayer and Ronnie Cummins of the nonprofit Organic Consumers
Association. "If the Dark Act becomes law, there will never be GMO labels,
safety testing of GMOs, protections for farmers from GMO contamination or
regulations of pesticide promoting GMO crops to protect human health, the
environment or endangered pollinators."
Going to
Market
It remains to be seen how Monsanto will be impacted by the persticide and GMO
backlash. Since the onslaught of bad news for Monsanto started in the spring,
the company's stock price has plummeted from a February high of $125.46 to
$87.61
as of September 21. This decline follows a first quarter decline of
34
percent that analysts have tied to the cut back on Monsanto's GMO corn by
South American farmers.
Still, Roundup remains one of the world's most widely used weed killers and
the most popular weedkiller in the U.S. The global market for glyphosate is
expected to reach
$8.79
billion by 2019 (up from $5.46 billion in 2012). In addition, Transparency
Market Research reported that "Monsanto Company, Dow AgroSciences and DuPont
have been shifting their focus to develop integrated weed management systems, in
order to
reduce
reliance on single dominant herbicide such as glyphosate."
"Stocks in the fertilizer space have struggled all year long," said
TheStreet's Bryan Ashenberg and Bob Lang of Trifecta Stocks, noting that
Monsanto in particular "has been hit hard" and their "performance has been
dreadful."
Perhaps a sign of that economic reality is the fact that last month Monsanto
dropped its
$46.5
billion hostile bid for rival Syngenta, the world's biggest pesticide
company. To many Monsanto-watchers, this development may have been the company's
biggest setback of the year.
However, the Ratings Team at TheStreet sees things differently and rated
Monsanto as a buy, saying "The company's
strengths
can be seen in multiple areas, such as its revenue growth, growth in earnings
per share, increase in net income, expanding profit margins and notable return
on equity."
But that review holds little value for those who value health, the
environment and the fate of world's food supply more that a "notable return on
equity."
RELATED
STORIES
How
Monsanto Could Get Even Bigger and More
Powerful
Will
Monsanto Launch Another 'Sneak Attack' in
Congress?
Low
Levels of Exposure to Monsanto's Roundup May Cause Kidney and Liver
Damage
