The new test for "Bayer" is the knowledge that the authorization for use of pesticides in the EU is issued on the basis of studies requested by the manufacturer and not by independent experts. A people's population is convinced that their debt has got cancer, but it has not yet been confirmed. However, it is certain that Monsanto & # 39; poisoned – his new boss.
Since the company of the company last year, the amount of former viewers "Monsanto" customers and the consistent loss of trust it invests in & # 39; a German pharmacy empire "Bayer". A new "Bajer" sale could be investigated based on the opinion of a European Parliament (EP) that endorsed the use of controversial "Monsanto" in & # 39; The EU was released by the overly-studied studies commissioned by an industry on its security, not independant experts.
A group of EP deputies from various political blocks concluded that the German Federal Risk Assessment Institute (BfR) in the rough half of & # 39; The chapter, which was the basis for the licensing of glyphosphates in the EU, was largely the text student "Monsanto". Due to these declarations signed by the BfR, the EU Health Secretariat (EFSA) has recommended that glyphosaphates can be used in the territory of a Union.
Business leaders who submit the works of BfR in this case consider the German institute to carry out an independent evaluation, while in one reality only repeating what the industry wanted. Molly Scott Keith, Greens, is of the opinion that this distinguishes between BfR's decision and world-wide research that makes glyphosphate "likely to be cruel to humans".
According to EFSE, the Guardian reports that the report of the MP does not contain "new scientific information that requires the evaluation of glyphosphate and its conclusion." BfR lacks the idea that it is a "conscious disgrace" and claims its people are investigating the quotes from a Monsanto before choosing the sections of those articles to practice in their own. Is it true that, in the name of BfR, they do not understand the "ordinary procedure" in such studies, or if there are unlawful links between industry and certain supervisory authorities, it is also set in & # 39; a time when the US Environmental Protection Agency 63% estimates were used by unpublished studies by chemical manufacturers, while the International Bureau for the Study of & # 39; e World Heritage Organization only on official availability literature.
We see if these suspected votes of EP deputies cause more concrete consequences for "Monsanto", even harder than, according to Reuters, the French court in Lyon just the right to use one of glyphosate-based pesticides , to & # 39; think they are not considered Take all the health risks they carry. The French President Emanuel Macron has previously promised that glyphosate products come out of communication in his country & # 39; e will be executed in the next three years.
And without any further complications, the new boss "Monsanto" – "Bayer" goes through one of the best situations in his 155-year history for this purchase, writes "Mirror". For "Monsanto", "Bayer" paid $ 63 billion, that is the most expensive purchase in Germany's history. It returned to him by losing about half of this amount in a market value of his shares this year. Thousands of farmers, namely, due to "Monsanto" placing a punishment for "Bayer", and now investing their shares, to consider them at great risk. This could even cost the German company more than the compensation for each loss. According to the first kind of judgment, last August, Divein Li Jonson, it stated that cancer of glyphosate has cancerous pesticides, $ 289 million. Fortunately, "Bajer", the second copy condemned the $ 78 million compensation amount. This is still massive, but the real danger for Bayer is that a series of similar decisions will follow, after which investors will have to take care of themselves.