Chemical Warfare, Patented Seeds, and the Subversion of Regulatory Oversight
Popular Information is powered by readers who believe that truth still matters. When just a few more people step up to support this work, it means more lies exposed, more corruption uncovered, and more accountability where it’s long overdue.
If you believe journalism should serve the public, not the powerful, and you’re in a position to help, becoming a PAID SUBSCRIBER truly makes a difference.
buymeacoffee.com/ggtv
In a recent commentary on the intersection of agriculture, corporate influence, and public health, Alex Clark presented a concise yet significant critique of the historical and contemporary actions of major chemical and agribusiness firms, with particular reference to Monsanto. She noted, “During the Vietnam War, the American government compelled seven chemical companies, including Monsanto, to create Agent Orange.” The implications of this legacy extend far beyond military history. The same corporate actors involved in the development of toxic herbicidal agents were later positioned to dominate the post-war agricultural economy through the commercialization of genetically modified seeds.
Clark continued, “The same people that made Agent Orange sold patented seeds to our farmers that now cover 80% of our farmland.” These genetically engineered seeds, primarily for staple crops such as corn, soybeans, alfalfa, and wheat, were specifically designed for resistance to glyphosate, a synthetic herbicide marketed under the name Roundup, which Monsanto also owned. As Clark remarked, “These seeds include corn, soybeans, alfalfa, and wheat. And these seeds were created to be resistant to a product that you and I both know called Roundup, which is shocker also owned by Monsanto.”
(Robert F Kennedy on Joe Rogan)
The active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, has been the subject of extensive scientific and regulatory controversy. While originally developed as a broad-spectrum herbicide, glyphosate has also been identified in multiple studies as a probable human carcinogen and potential neurotoxin. Despite these concerns, its use remains widespread due in part to its compatibility with genetically modified crop systems.
Clark emphasizes the structural nature of this system, pointing out that these crops are not only industrially cultivated at scale but also financially sustained by federal agricultural subsidies. “These crops are subsidized by the government and are largely used to make ultra-processed food, which cures up anywhere from 60 to 90% of the standard American diet,” he states. Such foods, characterised by high levels of refined starches, sugars, seed oils, additives, and minimal nutritional value, form the core of dietary consumption across much of the United States.
The health consequences of this system are increasingly visible. A growing body of public health literature links ultra-processed food consumption to rising rates of metabolic disease, neurological disorders, and various chronic conditions. Nonetheless, the corrupt regulatory regime continues to deem these products safe for consumption, in part because of long-standing relationships between industry, regulatory agencies, and political institutions. As Clark concludes, “This is what the majority of American families are eating because the government says it’s safe.”
The historical continuity between wartime chemical production and contemporary food systems reveals a deeper entanglement of corporate and governmental interests. The case of Monsanto and its successors reflects broader structural patterns in which public institutions not only fail to regulate harmful technologies but actively subsidize their proliferation. These developments raise urgent questions about the capacity of democratic governance to safeguard public health in the face of corporate power and scientific capture.
The history of glyphosate reveals a troubling truth about how a chemical, never intended for human exposure, came to dominate global agriculture and infiltrate the food supply. Originally patented in 1964 by the Stauffer Chemical Company, glyphosate was created not as a weed killer, but as an industrial descaling agent designed to strip mineral deposits from pipes. Its chemical function was to bind, or chelate, essential minerals such as iron, zinc, manganese, and boron, minerals that plants, animals, and humans all require to thrive. This chelating ability later became the very mechanism by which glyphosate poisons plant life: by depriving plants of the nutrients they need to grow, it shuts down their development and causes metabolic death. When introduced into agriculture in 1974 under the trade name Roundup, this same mechanism was turned against crops’ natural resilience, and with genetically modified seeds built to resist it, glyphosate became the backbone of industrial farming.
The use of glyphosate in food production means this compound, once used to clean machinery, now touches nearly every bite Americans or other populations exposed to this eat. It strips not only weeds of nutrients, but also depletes the soil in which crops are grown, thereby weakening the nutritional value of both plants and animals raised in this environment. These deficiencies then pass into the human body through food, compromising immune health, metabolism, and brain function. As independent studies have shown, glyphosate also disrupts the gut microbiome by killing off beneficial bacteria, leading to inflammation and chronic disease. While the chemical industry maintains glyphosate’s safety through regulatory lobbying and selective research, the long-term impacts on public health are increasingly difficult to ignore.
The seriousness of this situation has grown even more urgent with the passage of the FY26 Interior-Environment Appropriations Bill on July 23, 2025. Without a public vote, and buried deep in the legislation under section #453, the bill includes provisions to grant legal immunity to pesticide and herbicide manufacturers. If enacted into law, this would mean companies responsible for environmental degradation and widespread health consequences would be protected from accountability. This move further undermines public trust in both government oversight and scientific integrity, suggesting that the corporate influence behind chemical agriculture not only shaped the present but seeks to secure its future without consequence.
This systemic mineral depletion caused by glyphosate has far-reaching implications for human health. Calcium, magnesium, potassium, zinc, and selenium, each vital for the functioning of bones, muscles, immunity, and cellular repair, are no longer reliably present in the foods we consume. Even animal-sourced foods, once considered rich in bioavailable minerals, are now diminished, since the livestock are also raised on mineral-deficient feed. The result is a silent but widespread nutritional collapse, where people eat full plates of food that no longer provide the elemental building blocks of life.
The body’s dependency on these minerals is non-negotiable. Without them, enzymes cannot function, hormones become imbalanced, and the immune system falters. Chronic fatigue, hormonal disorders, and even neurodegenerative conditions are increasingly linked to long-term mineral deficiency. What began as a chemical innovation for cleaning pipes has now hollowed out the very foundation of health for generations. As the food chain breaks down from the soil up, it becomes clear that this crisis cannot be solved by institutions that helped create it.
Faced with the combined weight of industrial agriculture, weakened regulation, and declining health, individuals are increasingly forced to take matters into their own hands. Some are now reintroducing essential minerals into their diets by supplementing their water and food, attempting to restore what modern farming has taken away. While personal responsibility can bridge some of the gap, the broader truth remains: a society that outsources its food to chemical manufacturers and grants immunity to polluters cannot expect public health to be preserved. Without mineral-rich soil, nutrient-dense crops, and a truly accountable system of governance, the health of the population will continue to deteriorat, not from lack of food, but from engineered lack of nourishment.
Authored By:
Popular Information is powered by readers who believe that truth still matters. When just a few more people step up to support this work, it means more lies exposed, more corruption uncovered, and more accountability where it’s long overdue.
If you believe journalism should serve the public, not the powerful, and you’re in a position to help, becoming a PAID SUBSCRIBER truly makes a difference.
buymeacoffee.com/ggtv
Leave a comment