it's pollution that causes cancer first of all special report is coming up next. two thousand and two the top ten drug companies in america made more profits than four hundred ninety of america's wealthiest companies combined helping raise profits are cancer drugs which in two thousand and five alone rose nearly sixteen percent compared to three percent for other prescriptions. today an average cancer drug prescription costs nearly one thousand six hundred dollars a month. the pharmaceutical industry spends about fourteen percent of their budget on research and development and about thirty one percent for marketing in a ministration. in fact there are more pharmaceutical industry lobbyists in washington d.c. than members of congress. food and drugs act in the united states and the food and drugs act in canada are not being a budget buy this is a very serious problem this is been the fight that i have fought for now for the

last twenty years in canada and together with my colleagues and my union and a lot of other people and as a result of brees three of us automatically were fired by health canada four years that took to build up this case and ultimately fired us and saying we should pass everything that america busses and we're saying we cannot we are a country we are sovereign country we have a sovereign law none of us refused to conduct our work if it's insubordination to pass drugs of questionable safety or harmful products then of course we want to be in support if that's the way it is let the commission government say then that this is what they're fighting us for the companies pressure to get is fired. this where the longer the weird the more time they get

to continue doing what they're doing they have got at least ten years it may take longer to keep selling the same stuff and damaging the health of people who make profit on the backs of people's health that was the insubordinate. sgt the same chemical companies that brought us pesticides chlorine and dioxins have known barked on

a new frontier biotechnology. this new technology has been used to transfer genes from one organism to another and has subsequently enabled companies to patent and own the organisms that they genetically modify that means that seeds plants and even trees which are modified using this technology can be privately owned by corporations for the first time in history. all right owsley there's a lot there much. i want there and it's for some c. . they said well yeah we got some but the image that expensive seat is how much all that a lot got what there was now but they was quite a bit over and. i didn't silo graeme with them they didn't ask me to sign him because somebody else had them bought a back somebody had done bottom and kill them out and bought a mat. so i'm gonna plant this and you can. classify it on

top of. this i want to end in the plant and then. with grass feet i don't i don't like colorado as most obvious. but anyway. and that was where most i like on them that homey. you know they said they got a patent on it there's no you can't have a. mother nature bottom line. so the guys at the seed. have you sign a license just said here's a new seed and the state was brought back by somebody else. somebody done signed off on he want to get rid of because he didn't want people in the mold where most not a lawyer. or do you see. as a star. that i don't never rate a bag. because i'm too busy working and stuff like it and then trying to keep it

running here is the most. that was flown. by i want to most on a represent that's not my hand right now. i say as my hand right now. in my hand right now right here. that's my hand right does that look anything it cost me five thousand dollars to prove that that was not my man right and judge ryan is simple would not allow this to be in the. our justice system legally so. it's just a corrupt company. mr alf was fined over two point nine million dollars for a patent infringement in regards to saving c. . the district judge mr else case was rodney simple a former attorney who worked at the law firm that represents monsanto and who is

listed as one of month sandoz attorneys in one thousand nine hundred ninety seven class action lawsuit. from two thousand two thousand and eight. the judge in eleven cases of which monsanto was the plaintiff or defendant eleven cases were ruled in one sentence favor. i found that the original research grants came from the new york foundation and that was the rockefeller foundation and that they had spent over one hundred million dollars of their foundation money to finance scientists around the world to do research to genetically modify some of the basic food seeds of the human food chain in the animal food chain and the more i researched into this the more i found that three maybe four companies if you include the swiss sent them to but three main companies and one among them was dominant and that's monsanto that these what

i call in the book the four horsemen of the apocalypse these private seed companies they were originally chemical companies. stude poised within five or ten years at the rate they were going to dominate the basic seeds and patent those seeds that much power concentrated into four corporate entities three of whom have decades long track record of fraud deception lying to the public about the dangers of dioxin the dangers of agent orange and the vietnam war and after and so forth. that really set off the alarm bells for me. i got involved in the jail issue because it was

a new technology bringing opportunities and still see them as alternately. i was the only the to support the that she took in four years of trawling. they were the monsanto the grave eyes and gentlemen they were all in in this grouping and agreed to to follow the trial which all told the two hundred sixty all different i mean not just cannot if they did spring and winter and i did both on the farm collector a gross spring right occasionally when i have to when i have a failure in the winter so i did both of those trials almost mom for three years did the first year as a winter protocol the over they decided to exactly how they were going to set the. eight he didn't have a loan to realize at least walls a potentially simpler way to farm therefore it was cheaper therefore we could double benefits that could be seen to be bad to be passed almost as if you use j.

for me to grow then if the price of the end product came down i could still produce it because after the end of the dow got to make a margin whatever i'm doing as it happened is because of the technology we were also finding that the g.m. crop yielded a bit more than the conventional call in the same field under otherwise similar management because i was doing little. after what now thirteen years of crops in the field the theory is that. we'll have we have a herbicide tolerant trait that will reduce the demand for herbicides in we have. a trait that will protect farmers or pretty crops from some does some pests that's the theory. even that can't be proven finally at this stage there's a still a constant battle union yang going on between researchers and the companies does to show whether or not this really does work or not. we're not seeing increased food production we're not seeing increased benefits to farmers in terms of their

production costs we're not seeing improved nutritional qualities in in our or in our on our table so there really isn't a clear benefit. everywhere

you go this is seem to be good when we see that you should just have to apply for grants. to come from the phone companies on on campuses the. students beginning. to appear and on what subject and where little they can publish those materials because they're now owned by the companies so it's wherever you go there is this kind of corruption going on this is not science. people what it is a ministry departments are not competent all these unqualified or educated insides these are accountants these are good lawyers these are m.b.a.'s is that anything but scientists this universe and since we have become part of the uk.

what do you think about genetically modified foods just in general yeah i think it's definitely safe but as long as there's regulation there's been research and everything there's. no research showing that it's not safe or that there's any difference between it and regular or not and modified food and scholarships they give us caution oh yeah there's lots yeah lots from it cardio santo. better than yeah all the different chemical companies and everything like that for sure. so yeah they're getting involved in there's definitely have. a presence on campus for sure. it is the first time in the history of mankind that we have been able to engineer the genetic inheritance of living beings and it would be wise to ask if there are side effects and to check on them when you insert artificial genes

anywhere by bombarding an organism the plants general metabolism can be affected it could be terrible but if somebody could prove that the g.m. moves are dangerous a really good good. course. would be very positive because he would have arguments that nobody else has but as soon. if nobody has the argument. it's better to go home thinking. there is no reason why did should be. monsanto made as they were a huge chemical company and they own ninety percent of the biotechnology patents so we took some of those g.m. corn i was part of the commission which was assessing this corn. and we said where are the blood tests firstly the tests on rats didn't go beyond three months

which was crazy they concealed the results not from the commission but from the public there were affects many others on the commission said no it doesn't matter we said we must at least start over but we didn't so we asked it to be made public we had to go to a court of appeal monsanto went before the court to stop the world scientists and the general public from seeing the blood tests on rats they're genetically modified corn for only three months. and you imagine that. the world's largest company which sells the most herbicide and which sells virtually the most g.m. seeds in the world goes to court to prevent disclosing blood test results of rats who ate their g.m.o. foods for only three months that's crazy. so we published the effects that we had observed there was a forty eight percent increase in fat a ten percent increase in sugar in the females an increase in liver weight an

increase in body weight it resembled a pre-diabetic symptom the rats urine samples were abnormal particularly in the male rats the rats lost wit and their livers were affected. in the past thirty years there have been no government tests. all the world's drugs are only tested by pharmaceutical companies. the same goes for pesticides. in the late one nine hundred ninety s. patrick to see that his local organic supplier. turned out to be contaminated with g.m. most so he filed a complaint to uncover where the contamination originated but in two thousand and one the case was dropped mr dick who was then contacted by a group of american farmers to join them in a class action lawsuit against monsanto dupont dow chemical astra zeneca and

novartis international accusing them of engaging in anti trust activities and failure to test for human health and environmental safety coincidentally the judge was rodney simple the same judge as in mr ralph's case the case was ruled in favor of the chemical companies. resent. the gene in my field it was a paid content monsanto gene which was sold to me in seeds by as a girl which is a monsanto subsidiary i agreed to take part in a class action lawsuit in the united states so in two thousand i went to washington d.c. to testify to answer the questions asked by monsanto's lawyers all day they asked questions such as do you know your neighbors names i much tax do you pay and where nothing to do with g.m. seeds. i tended to meetings at the

ministry of agriculture recently during which they tried to impose on a bill for a ministerial order for coexistence determining a twenty five yard distance between two fields of corn. that means that my neighbor g.m. crops twenty five yards away from my field and yes we officially proved in two thousand and six and two thousand and seven that plant three hundred yards away was contaminated. maybe there's not much organic corn today. maybe someone with five acres of organic corn surrounded by people with by five hundred acres of g.m. . so he's not important you can just die out that's the situation if you're small you don't matter make room for those who will feed the world.

big farmers in my group managers will feed the world having poisoned it for years it's unbelievable their objective is obvious they want to sell the seeds on the side with the same company makes them both the objective is to liberate the farmer or to make a mint dependent it isn't to make a better product for the consumer. pesticides and g.m. owes. g.m. food due to our d.n.a. to ourselves and to our children. we don't know. for the past twelve years genetically modified crops have been grown on a large scale around the world they feed both us and our animals we haven't observed any problems due to g.m. consumption or direct or indirect. this french farmer is completely self-sufficient along with four hundred fifty million other farmers worldwide he

practices are again a public culture of farming compared to conventional chemical agriculture this type of farming produces soil with three times more earthworms produces eighty percent more yields in developing nations and fruits and vegetables that are up to forty percent more nutritious studies even show that this type of organic farming could feed today's population and more so why do governments still give the majority of subsidies to conventional chemical farming companies claim we need g.m. crops to feed the world. if this is the case then why in america where g.m. crops have been commercialized the longest are thirty five million americans still food insecure see only experience and few experiment with something without any follow up it's almost criminal off it pesca came in the because what we are doing isn't very serious to secure those coffee yet that's what every government has done because biotechnology is their religion they think it will

develop so that it will be good to all but that's just a belief it will be you know it's just like when we were told the earth was flat or you get rather than the reality of e.g. . someone from the european union commission explained it to my wife at the time they did there and it sure as my wife she does that carry my name is she's professor bought a daughter not professor pushed they explained it to had that. if it if they repeated the study. a fad symbolising that what we thought. would be able to hush it up again is

once it was bad enough. twice is saw most of possible what i regarded also as the most important think of studies is that that is an even response and in each case since then whatever the g.m. was they looked at the even status of the other oss they always found that it was jeopardized when we looked at the rats who had been having the g.m. then the clip was illuminated and that we wouldn't have expected if the g.m. is substantially equivalent in other words the same then the links should be the identical but they weren't so both the whole and the steinle tracked the lining was growing it was thick and so we thought this was evidence of there was a growth factor at work and if you apply that to transition lesion in the

human for example with the lower end of the year so for goes if you apply the growth factor the very then you might haste on the development of malignancy at the lower and of yourself with us and similarly in the stomach this once again transition lesions there which normally will take time to develop into council got at its immune system the god is this as for in the cheerio. it's almost like an infection it's not an infection but the immune system just sees something coming in as strange foreign and it has to be act to it i just think that. it was highly it is possible to foist on us something

that was not properly examine and we are all made to be exposed to it is highly irresponsible or infact i would say that it's probably criminal but who the hell listens to me monsanto b.s.f. bayer dupont dow chemical syngenta and astra zeneca declined to be interviewed for this film. let me. let me play a. player.

let's. get. lucky. to play a little leg. length. let. her move her. a. lower lower leg. a.

place.

please. let's just say. the show is that so much slimmer really. is china and the

world undergoes massive economic and geopolitical shifts as the world changes to china take on a greater. us . just. kalyan that it has caused the

hospital started in a bid to stem growing concern that the u.s. third largest economy could become the latest victim of the euro crisis. most of us are palestine is expected to push for a vote on its un statehood even if it loses it wants the opponents to justify their decision which it believes will be dictated by the u.s. . and western corporations to send the palm oil rich seeking to exploit the riches left following nato bombing mission. international news and comment live from moscow this is r.t. with twenty four hours a day italy has lashed its perceived bureaucracy into action as it seeks to rush it .