as a marine. we don't. need to. 2 sleep. we can do better we should be. everyone is contributing a way but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever the challenges grateful to response has been so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we are in it together. so if someone wants to authorize a product in europe let's say a plan protection product dispersant be recalled this person or this company the

applicant has to provide data that allows us as the risk of says us to judge whether this product is safe or not and this information comes from the applicant and the studies that are commissioned by the applicant to allow us to assess the safety are paid by the applicant obviously so it's the intellectual property of the applicant and we can publish parts of these studies in the current legal framework but we also have to respect the business confidentiality claims of the applicants so there's a balance to be found between transparency as much as possible but also to protect the investment of companies into their product innovations. that is that companies have to submit studies to the european commission they do

the studies themselves. they have to submit it to the european commission and to f. so so the european food safety authority and they have the tenor of experts that looks at the studies and then they say ok it's safe or not. so what we have found is that within these expert panel so you have a lot of people with ties with the food industry so that means a conflict of interest. so the home system the communication urgencies and the regular to reaction seeds have the same scientists. they were in order to promote the commercialization of their products. this is why if you ask them something you have the same answer and they say it's

a consensus. exactly like in the middle ages you were asking to the priest what is the truth you know you are asked to these scientists regular to religion sees what is the truth and they act in the same manner as a magician you know because they work in secret compounds we secretly effects they say that you cannot publish that however they say they have the truth. if you spend a huge amount of money doing a study a study of something when there's a lot of confidential information in there that you don't want. another company to copy paste of course not i mean you might have spent here is all over sources so

people time a lot of time a lot of money on doing this research. what i've said does it analyzes all of that a publish the results so it will publish it will come out with a statement at the end. and it will publish the results but it won't publish all the details of what a lot of people want to see because there are a lot of people for 4 out relativize all of it because it's not actually a lot of people but some people. want to see everything that's fine i think now it's actually open published but you're talking about several thousands of pages i don't know who in his right mind would sit down and we through all of those pages i think is some parts can be blacked out but i would insist that that's to do with privacy so the relationship between our company. and research institutes and universities is quite strong as i mentioned before in many parts of the world it tends to be the public sector developing the products thanks to a relationship with the company maybe the company donated the technology the

problem in europe for example is that in f. so that you mentioned before they have scientists assessing the products and the scientists have a obligation to have no conflict of interest that means they have to have had no relationship whatsoever with industry ever so if you're a scientist in europe. having any kind of dealing with a company closes a number of avenues of work later so again we are really champions in creating difficulties for ourselves in europe but the rest of the world is. part of the problem and something else that needs to be changed is all the industry is funds many laboratories and funds studies through the universities which to a certain extent has to be done because the universities don't have enough money

but the problem then becomes that when the universe when the monsanto for example drafts a paper and they ghostwrite it and they need to slap a name onto it they'll go to the university and say you know remember that lab we bought for you or remember that study we funded through university now we need your help and that's the problem there's this circular synergistic effect between the universities needing the money and the companies being willing to provide it but it's sunday collecting. rather joins work from monsanto and with me is my partner. who's right here with. me right. the.

thank you very much for your courage to this 2nd panel which look. at the transparency and use of scientific studies and yes this month of july for seed in the united states and the hopefully will provide insight into the so-called papers thank you very much for inviting me to be here today as a journalist for some 30 years now i'm someone who has spent most of my life focusing on facts pursuing the truth i spent roughly 20 of those 30 years delving into the dealings of monsanto and i can confidently tell you that the story of the company's top selling chemical to say is not one of truth but one of deceit it's sort of a treasure trove a look inside a very big and powerful company that has been very secretive you know for decades

and a lot of the information is quite alarming when it comes to public health and safety associated with the use of their popular product life the same around it another way in which months and who has manipulated regulators and the public by establishing networks of scientists around the world to support its agenda and its message about the safety of this chemical months and no end or the months in a back like this a task force pays them they lobby regulators they author papers sensually to push this message that the chemical is safe there are many individuals and there are many types of different relationships that we've seen in these documents you can see here that professor david kirkland is one such paid expert monsanto has relied on.

2012 months and was very worried about toxicity questions arising from a research gauge. needed someone to help counter these concerns that were persisting with bill hayden wrote in that e-mail i think. was just naive and it clearly did not lead to any policy decision we all have decades of experience in the industry and their reputations. and that means that there is no point in being responding to the influence of one stakeholder over another because those reputations would be destroyed i can say absolutely. categorically this paper was not written we all imports. sections to the paper there was no input involvement or influence of the review. thinking. well it seems apparent that monsanto actually

fears real independent authentic science said itself it feared the i.r. only billet ian epidemiology toxicology geno talks. officials even predicted that glyphosate would warrant a possible or probable rating with respect to. process is defined as a peer review and i understand that i don't have a problem with that peer review problem in this case is that. nobody went back and verified the findings studies and by failing to verify those findings it cascaded through the entire. review process such that you don't have the answer which is based on the best science i think that the important. we have doing in a proper independent assessment. according to sources that we have enough so

according to the regulation that focus on the use of the active and based on the. news regarding the independence from industry is clear in the legislation i would say these are the basic principles big comp on the market something the you must pay for the assessment so this studies are conducted by industry to go though the current process is scientifically flawed it is starting to have an independent panel of scientists to evaluate the way in which the science is reviewed there is a need for the regulatory agencies to really analyze the data and there is a need to publicly publicly release all of the analysis and data to improve the transparency of this process these are not the actions of a company that has nothing to hide this is not how you promote a product this is that's actually proven safe this is how you whitewash unfortunate and unprofitable facts. this is not by accident but by design and it serves monsanto very well but it does not seem that it serves the public interest thank

you. monsanto prepared certain documents for the registration and the etc report if you look at it has taken directly certain language from the monsanto documents and just placed it in the report so there's a lot of concern about whether f.'s i really did an independent analysis or whether they just took the position to be against iraq at monsanto request so that is not an independent assessment how can we therefore expect that on the basis of such robust science and i'm quoting industry we can make a decision politicians in the e.u. can make a decision to protect their people that if somebody. you know i said hello to the industry at some stage in his life that should not mean that that particular scientists should be banned from a panel or. research has been funded somewhere by someone and many of

the scientists that have a lot of them have now left the f c organization and their science panels because they have been accused of having worked with the industry but since when does that make a scientist dishonest why should having worked with the industry some years ago on a small project at some stage i did i'm a scientist by training and when i was in university of course i was looking for a grant to do my research because some research can cost a lot of money i was helped by industry i haven't spoken to that particular industry now for many many yes it's been a long time since i was in college. but that doesn't mean i'm dishonest as a scientist.

now you're of dense to be the region we were in france is very high and was a region look at europe. for for regulation. and that's why it's so important that europe keeps regulation which is scientific

which is databases in which as much as possible. decides. being influenced by. by i would say by noise or by just emotions and fear. when science meets values and it's becoming complicated we come with science with evidence we do and it's scientific process of risk assessment but then this evidence is given on another stage on the policy level there are believes emotions values coming and what we see is if politicians don't like the outcome of our risk assessment. they don't question their belief they question the validity of the

process so basically if succumbs with an opinion let's say only only continue its insecticides. politicians love if so. wonderful have so you're protecting the bees you're doing the right thing really good work down there so we all applaud to you and if the same process with the same people with the same scrutiny comes with a conclusion let's say. people say i'm sorry i don't like this outcome should not say that it is relatively safe so if so must be corrupt i find this very bizarre you know regulations is independent of corporate influence and. everything is test. actually test it. with a lot of money and origins are looking at it independently. i don't

know where these people have been living. even in some of the mainstream if you do find reports that clearly explain that this is not happening we are seen corporate capture not only in the sciences in sciences is this one of the fields we see corporate capture in every walk of life. i'd like to say it seems to be very highly charged not because of the safety of classes but because of g.m. because of monsanto because of international trade maybe even because of inequality with global trade you for such a smooth ride. and you say it's true muslims are called to the streets it's very

true for such reporting about president obama yeah i mean really obnoxious from the part you're from are very stiff reduced to your extreme interaction for this to get into for science for both good and. for love. but of course if the scientists works for the company that's a different story but i think we need to be a little bit more. realistic about what it is we want do we want the best scientists to assess the products the guest to make sure they're safe all do we want to make sure there's no conflict of interest what is the objective is that the safety of the product is that the conflict of interests of the of the scientists i think we need to be a bit more. honest and trustworthy without falling into the mistakes and so that's not something that we're looking for either. the experts we

use are as independent as possible but i think also here it's not black or white it's not c. or one that's not the binary approach we have to find the right balance between the best expertise which means people that have done research that people that are with both their feet in the scientific endeavor and on the other hand to make sure that no conflict of interest and if i may say also but i think europe needs to make a decision whether we know i think or stop you. yes i thought leads to follow. but i think this time nothing on this from which the mice when they don't suffer the impulse to cut off he got there then that's fine last 101 telephone anything

honest i don't often even list left on my mission is what i am plump and think is that i 100 buy in from here and last are going to be like that i live in nothingness when enough like on t.v. i better not going to hump or to implement to sell us but if we like a machine up in it but i'm into opium in a country. like and he got the best from the can of a hunt in the home here is that i list but if we. do not come to that that of the other. so yes precautionary principle is and by scientific n.e.t.'s i think. a big issue for european economy in general because it reduces. the willingness of.

there is a risk in the. new presses and. this is a risk. benefit i'm i willing to take this risk yes or no and the regulation today . gives us an answer. if you look at the core of today it is much safer than the car yesterday you know the 1st car that i drove in when i was a boy and my father was riding no safety belt and i was no i had no air by i did not know a.b.s. and and yet the a car maker was not murder. the car was like this. it was a very safe car for the time and i'm not saying that because he says of 950. you know where fantasy but buys in there were very good night and then we discover that there are some side effects and then the regulation evolves in regulation becomes more demanding and those sides bond or i was drawn from the company and that's

normal that's normal. of any industry the power of innovation doesn't come from the big companies the big companies are too big to be innovative anymore they just want to preserve their privileges but they're not innovating anymore look at look at the g.m. and the pesticides we're dealing with g.m. plants that were developed 30 years ago nothing has changed it's another side resistance since the beginning it's all chemical testing of asian. innovation is that we now have in addition to round up ready and round resistant plants we have become resistant plants and 2 for de resistance plants so we're getting an even more cocked toxic cocktail that's innovation. it has to get it's just has to get. benefits versus risk right what

is a risk you're willing to accept on the environment even if it's very small in order to have a safe and affordable food supply. to me the defining battle in the future will also be around our akron food system if we manage to get our in my view dysfunctional agra food system. on a sound environmental economic social and economic basis. then we solve everything else will come from. even climate change and these things health issues and marginally shoes social issues they're collateral they're all part of the of the whole thing that is connected and the connect the connecting the centerpiece is this food. and how you produce it.

because we see. the world as it is. we are in fact and the border edge of the river lucian. because humankind is able to do that but home much time that will take how much. misery. that will create i don't know but that's i'm only you know there is a french writer called peer hobby he said this is a colibri affair so i'm just a little bird in the system doing my job as much as i can.

for the yeah you want to watch on thing we need to as. she goes well i can certainly add that we're hopeful i mean i'm happy to say you know in europe we're not going to give up when are going to there are lots of other technologies it's not just about g.m.o. there are lots of other technologies coming out and the companies are committed to invest in europe as well despite it being so. uncomfortable is a euphemism to work here. this is a. leg

. to. leg .

plus new to national the star you know when you've been able to molest that solicit it to prevent. her from the regular morgue you're more your partner going to provide. water source i.q. all those lucifer mistletoe is just that i'm like i don't i'm just nobody it is not my achievement mr davies are 5 you have plans for conceit. and carried out by the people themselves if how they would produce or even floor it with the idea of making a film like this they probably be branded as crazy. how was the sentiment during the war the soviets were brave heroes resisting the nazis that's going to change of

course after the war but once the cold war begins. little people think that hollywood is a free plates holywood is strictly defined by one side of the business and the other side is ideology. how would i define hollywood is they call it the dream manufacture which i think's true but i think equally it's a problem and the fact. is you'll media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. tyson nation community. are you going the right way or are you being

let go. well. what is true what is faith. in the world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the depths. or a maybe in the shallows. it's been decades since the fall of spain's fascist regime but old wounds still haven't healed. me from you know you are. on the bus at us as mean older than us and the same question which we know sells ins of newborn babies were torn from their mothers and given away and forced adoption i don't know. to this day mothers still search for grown children while adults look in hope for their birth

parents. in. russia expels 20 czech diplomats in europe tell a tree move thoughts after pride to accuse moscow of being behind a huge explosion of a devil 7 years ago through a russian. meanwhile in a week of strained international diplomacy moscow slaps the us with sanctions in retaliation for washington imposing risk.