In case you didn’t hear, earlier this April Dr. Oz shocked – and enlightened – audiences worldwide by questioning the safety of controversial herbicide glyphosate on national television. Airing April 7th, the famous physician spoke with a panel of experts in opposition of the chemical and sought to understand more about why it was labeled a “possible carcinogen” by the World Health Organization, as well as the potential health effects it still likely poses being a heavily used pesticide.
But by seeking to unearth glyphosate’s ill effects (and Monsanto’s dirty dealings), the physician set himself up for an attack by agrochemical-supporting doctors in the States and the big-agriculture company itself.
As you can view above, pediatrician Dr. Alan Greene, Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), and food advocate Robyn O’Brien appeared with Dr. Oz on the episode to discuss the potential health risks of glyphosate.
Dr. Oz did state that he tries to keep an open and honest conversation at all times, but was unable to to get anyone in support of glyphosate to appear on the show.
“My goal is to always have an open and honest conversation, you all know that, but I couldn’t get anyone to appear on the show that supports glyphosate. I reached out to the Grocery Manufacturers of America, Crop Life America, and Monsanto, and they all declined to be on the show.”
During the course of the conversation, Dr. Oz and his three guests discussed the World Health Organization’s (WHO) classification of glyphosate as a “possible” carcinogen. They discouraged its use, warned viewers of its numerous health effects, and refuted Monsanto’s official point that “Glyphosate does not pose a risk to humans, wildlife, or the environment.”
Stated Dr. Green about Monsanto’s statement, “That’s just not true.” He then backed this statement with verifiable studies that directly and completely contradict Monsanto’s talking point.
It’s in light of the new WHO classification the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been forced to “reassess glyphosate.” As Natural Society shares, EWG’s vice president Scott Faber has stated: “The EPA should take another look at it (glyphosate), but let’s not forget, the EPA got this wrong. For 20 years we’ve been told that this herbicide is a better alternative… and it turns out the world’s leading experts (WHO) now have found this is “probably” a human carcinogen.”
Activist Robyn O’Brien spoke on behalf of all mothers and concerned consumers, stating: “If you step back and think about this big chemical company (Monsanto), this is one of their most profitable products, so of course they’re going to try to dismiss any concern around it and refute the science.”
But it’s openly calling out Monsanto and the more-than-likely health risks glyphosate poses that has landed the doctor in hot water.
Just a couple of weeks after this episode aired, health professionals with agrichemical industry ties attacked the doctor. Inspired to uncover the truth about the subject, many news sites have begun to objectively cover the feud.
According to MintPressNews,
“There’s been a decades-long debate over the safety of glyphosate, with the Food and Drug Administration first labelling the product carcinogenic in 1985 then changing their findings to label it safe in 1991. The newest report, released last month, is from the International Agency for Research On Cancer, or IARC, a division of the WHO that is considered a top authority on the subject.
IARC classifies every substance on a scale of 1 through 4, with 1 reflecting extremely carcinogenic substances and 4 reflecting substances which are extremely safe. Based on a review of many studies and scientific findings by over a dozen experts, the IARC determined glyphosate falls into category 2A, indicating that glyphosate “probably” causes cancer.”
Intriguingly, officials speaking for Monsanto are accusing the World Health Organization of having a hidden agenda. Have something to hide, Monsanto? Sounds like projection.
In fact, it seems Monsanto’s hidden agenda is to smear Dr. Oz’s reputation and his position on the faculty at Columbia University.
“Ten doctors co-signed a letter asking the university to terminate his position, based on what they call “an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain.
While it’s far from the first time Dr. Oz has been criticized, the timing and authorship of the letter should raise suspicions about the motive. Released about a week after Oz’s attack on Monsanto aired nationwide, the letter has been extensively quoted in the media. Several of the letter’s authors have ties to the American Council on Science and Health, which U.S. Right to Know calls “a front group for the tobacco, agrichemical, fossil fuel, pharmaceutical and other industries.”
Many of the doctors calling out Mehmet have less than stellar reputations, however. The lead author, Henry I. Miller, has been criticized by SourceWatch for supporting the tobacco industry against cancer scientists, and another ACSH-linked letter author, Dr. Gilbert Ross, was previously convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy.
The clip of the controversial episode above ends with Dr. Oz stating that “This is a big debate, everyone. Folks who make these products say ‘we need more data before you can make that statement (glyphosate is a possible carcinogen.)’ I think it’s the opposite. Not enough research doesn’t mean it’s safe, it means we actually don’t know! And it’s upon us; it’s our obligation to figure it out before we start releasing it and exposing kids and others.”
Mehmet has definitely opened a can of worms by openly attacking glyphosate, a move that might ruin his career. But hopefully his bold directive will at least help to awaken and save thousands of lives as a larger number of people begin to question the food they are eating and reject the toxic contaminants sprayed on it.
What are your thoughts? We’d love to hear. Comment below.