train value of example and the understanding of my fellow countrymen and let no one doubt that as long as i live i will be ready with my food in the stirrup to defend the home like a revolution and socialist it may well be right but what do you really get her in here every day her cuban revolution will continue to be. cast try saying it's impossible to know what exactly by. the by the ministry is going to do he promised during the election campaign he was going to restore normal relations with cuba. yes and that the is going to fail as already said several times and we've given the governor said several times that one normally lives within one's ability level. has really going to be very low but at. the moment he doesn't seem to be the case where there is not an intensification of the aggression on the part of the ears of situation against cuba the united states is important to

cuba own economy because no one until the newspapers are really saying. is going to be a world power and the nation and bags. draw and why should they change anything they respect the united states to change hopefully they will. many thanks for joining us here on r.t. international this morning we'll be back in fact minutes with the very latest. so if someone wants to authorize a product in europe let's say your plan protection product this person because this person or this company the applicant has to provide data that allows us as the risk a says 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 properly parts of the studies in the current legal framework but we also have to respect the pieces 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. there. the stem the communication engine seas and the regular to reaction cease have the same scientists and 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 in the whole you ask to these scientists regular to religion sees what is

the truth and they act in the same manner as 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 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 or 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 it for 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. 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 companies 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 a 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 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 need and the money and the companies being willing to provide it but it's sunday collecting. joey it's worth for monsanto and with me it's my partner after. who's right who's here worth. next to me why i know. the. thank you very much for your courage to this 2nd panel which look. at transparency and use of scientific studies and yes this month of life proceed 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 like the same around it another way in which months and who has manipulated regulators in 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 are their 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. david kirkland is one such paid expert who has relied on. 2012 months and was very worried about toxicity questions arising from research gauge her needed someone to help counter these concerns that were persisting with bill hayden wrote in that email i think i was just naive

and it clearly did not lead to any policy decision we all have decades of experience in the industry. and that means that there is no point in. 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 import involvement or influence of the review. thinking. it seems apparent that monsanto actually fears real independent authentic science. itself it feared the i.r. preview when it found on a 2014 this is before down before the classification monsanto says it fears this it

says internally that it knew it had vulnerability in epidemiology toxicology geno talks. officials even predicted the glyphosate would warrant a possible or probable rating with respect to. the process is defined as a peer review and i understand that. and that's i don't have a problem with that peer review problem in this case is that's not was done nobody went back and verified the findings on the original 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 a proper independent assessment. according to sources that we have enough so according to the regulations that focus on the use of the active and based on.

regarding the independence from industry is clear in the legislation i would say these are the basic principles big companies are the ones to market something the you must pay for the assessment so this studies have conducted by industry there is no doubt 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 analyses 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 at 70 point if you look at it has taken directly certain language from the monsanto documents and just placed it in the us the report said 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. monsanto's 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 could 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.

the world is driven by dreamers shaped by one person or those with. dares thinks. we dare to ask.

it's been decades since the fall of spain's fascist regime but old wounds still haven't healed and you're going to see him go i look into some of them thought i was pretty honest. because for me from a gold. medal feeder market economy suppose so go to me on the bus at the system you know what i notice that they seem caught in which we know. of newborn babies were torn from their mothers and given away and forced adoption i don't know a lot about i was the other feaster but in my own role as a fellow mentor to this day mothers still search for grown children while adults look in hold for their birth parents. no you're of dense to be in a region where influence is very high and all the regions look at europe for for

regulation. and that's why it's so important that europe keeps a regulation which is scientific which is the other bays in which as much as possible. besides. being influenced by. i would say by noise or by just emotions and fear. when science meets values and it's becoming complicate. we come with science with evidence we do scientific process of risk assessment but then decide given on another stage on the policy level where our beliefs emotions values come in

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 peace you're doing the right thing really good work than i have 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 and. 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 a 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 split right. yes it's true muslims are called statistics it's very true for starts reporting about that in the world for. other markets from product or from our very stiff to your extreme interactions with mr van impe you 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 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 scientist 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. 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 i'll stop you. yes i thought leads to fog.

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 one last 101 telephone anything honest i thought of and even less left on my mission is what i am plump and think is that i 100 buying from here in the last are going to be like that i live in nothingness when enough luck and the other bashfulness going to hop over from plymouth to sell us but if we like a machine open it but i'm into opium in a country. like and he got a pass from the can of a hunk in the face of his that i list but if we. do know that that of the mother. 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. there is a risk in the. new presses and. this is a risk. this is a 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 corner 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 in the house no one had no air by going on the way b.s. and and yet z. a car maker was not a murderer. the car was like this. it was a very safe car for the time and i'm not saying that she says of 950. you know

where fantasy but buys in there were a very good night and then we discover that there are some side effects and then the regulation evolves in regulation becomes more demanding and especially sides and or always 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 chemicals or something of asian. innovation is that we now have in addition to round up ready and round resistant plants we have to cumber resistant plants and to for the resistant plants so we're

getting an even more cocked toxic cocktail that's innovation. has to get it's just has to get the. 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 crowfoot 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 marvelously shoes social issues they're collateral they're all

part of the of this whole thing that is connected and the connect the connecting center piece is food. and how you produce it. because we see. the world as it is. we are in fact and the border edge of or evolution. because the human kind is able to do it but 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 like that. for the yeah you want to our own 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 is not just about g.m.o. there are lots of other technologies coming up and the companies are committed to invest in europe as well despite it being so. uncomfortable is a euphemism to work here. a.

a. a an ale. the end.

of a i. want to. see. and it's. just so. is you'll be a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. tyson nation full community. are you going the right way or are you being

lead so. please direct. 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 shallowness of. the world is driven by shaped by one person. who dares thinks. we do.