Mary Hobbs
DTNZ
The true light that shines on the world is from each soul who uses their voice to speak out in the midst of the deepest corruption – no matter how tempting it may be to remain quiet. For those voices will rise to a crescendo and lead towards the world of which we dream: A world without poison and one of health to all life – in mind, body and spirit. Just as Nature intended. – Mary H
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and ‘Food Safety’ has proposed to increase the allowable amount of glyphosate residue up to 100 times more than the current permitted maximum levels on wheat, barley and oats, the most common grains in our country. For dried peas it is 0.6mg per kg.
Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the weedkiller known as Roundup. The current permitted amount of glyphosate is 0.1mg per kg. Under the proposed 100 times increase of glyphosate residue, the permitted maximum amount would rise from 0.1mg per kg to 10mg per kg in staples that most New Zealanders eat every day.
Let’s take a look at this product: In a Forbes magazine article of Feb 2024, it is explained:
Roundup, the most popular and profitable weed killer ever sold, uses glyphosate as its most active ingredient. Glyphosate is toxic to most broadleaf plants and grasses. It kills most plants it comes into contact with, instead of targeting certain weeds or plants.
Monsanto, a now defunct company, developed the product. Because glyphosate kills anything it touches, Monsanto developed plant seeds that were genetically modified to resist the damage of Roundup. This is when residential Roundup sales skyrocketed.
However, as the years went on, science questioned the safety of glyphosate. Studies have shown that the chemical might cause illness to humans and cause damage to the environment. The International Agency for Research on Cancer categorizes glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans – essentially, the IARC is saying this toxin may cause cancer.
In 2018, Roundup was purchased by Bayer. By then, consumers had filed thousands of lawsuits linking Roundup to cancer. The most common cancer associated with Roundup is non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma ...
It further stated that Monsanto has settled over 100,000 Roundup lawsuits, paying out about $11 billion as of May 2022 with 30,000 lawsuits pending, although Reuters reports that 67,000 lawsuits are still pending. [Note: Reports in news sources on the total payments vary between $10b and $11b.]
The article finished with a referral to a study from the University of Washington that found exposure to glyphosate increased an individual’s risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by 41 per cent and stating, “That is significant”. It ended with the chilling advice that “If you have used Roundup even once, you could be at a higher risk of cancer. “[Bold type was not in the article].
A Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) report gives cause for further concern:
On 22 May 2025 The Lawsuit Information Centre reported: The MAHA report, released by Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, emphasizes the herbicide glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as a potential contributor to chronic illnesses in children. The report warns that the primary route of exposure to glyphosate is through food, underscoring concerns that residues from widespread agricultural use may be making their way into the American diet. It cites glyphosate as one of two herbicides (alongside atrazine) flagged for an updated federal safety assessment, which is expected to be completed in 2026. Another news release on this is found here.
When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall… think of it, always. – Mahatma Gandhi
Additional information
- In 2018, a man known as Dewayne “Lee” Johnson, who had non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, alleged that his work with the Roundup weed-killer – containing the active ingredient glyphosate – had caused his cancer. He took the manufacturer to court and won. He was initially awarded $USD289 million in damages, although this was later reduced to $39 million. A film of his story was released in 2023.
- Reuters reported on 11 October 2024 that Bayer must pay $78 million in the latest Roundup cancer trial. It further exposed that although Bayer has had wins in court, it has been hit with “several massive verdicts in the litigation, including last November for $1.56 billion, later reduced to $611 million and one in January for $2.25 billion, later reduced to $400 million”.
- On March 8 2025, Reuters stated that Bayer informed the US it could halt Roundup sales in the US, over legal risks. Disclosing glyphosate sales numbers for the first time, Bayer said the product, one of the most widely used weedkillers in US field farming, generated 2.6 billion euros ($2.8 billion) in revenue last year.
- The article revealed that Bayer is one of the world’s largest seed and pesticide/herbicide makers and is the only glyphosate producer in the United States where apparently the US farming sector “relies on modified soy and corn that are resistant to its weedkilling effect”.
Current status of lawsuits
- Pending Cases: As of early 2025, Bayer faces approximately 67,000 unresolved lawsuits in the U.S. alleging that exposure to Roundup (active ingredient glyphosate) caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
- The Lawsuit Information Centre (LIC) stated that Bayer has settled over 100,000 claims for about $11 billion. These settlements were reached through negotiated agreements, including block settlements with plaintiffs’ attorneys. Apparently Bayer has set aside $5.9 billion in legal provisions.
- Bayer is actively seeking legal protections to limit future lawsuits. The company has petitioned the US Supreme Court to review its case and is lobbying for legislative changes to shield it from liability.
- The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (part of WHO) classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A)” in 2015. It was found there was sufficient evidence of cancer in experimental animals and strong evidence for genotoxicity (the ability to damage genetic material) associated with glyphosate and glyphosate-based formulations. These findings were published in the IARC Monograph on glyphosate, which is available on the IARC website.
- As recently as 4 April 2025, a Jury in Georgia, USA, announced a $2.1B verdict over glyphosate cancer claims.
The GM-soy and corn crops don’t die when glyphosate is used, but for humans dealing with this product, and non-GMO plants, the above information appears to tell a tragically different story. Why else would a multi-billion dollar corporation like Bayer have paid out around $10b to $11 billion to settle disputed claims? Reuters reported that BlackRock is the largest shareholder of Bayer. The same players seem to keep popping up.
For additional information on the lies that appear to have been told about GM crops and their ‘increased yields and safety’ refer to my article: The Gene Tech Bill – An Act of War on New Zealanders Part 2 – specifically sections 9 to 11, inclusive. Part 1 is at this link.
The italic type below is a quoted extract from the Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network (PAN) website:
GLYPHOSATE – PROBABLE HUMAN CARCINOGEN
In 2015, the World Health Organization determined that glyphosate, the active label ingredient in Monsanto’s flagship herbicide Roundup, is a probable human carcinogen. A carcinogen is an agent that is capable of producing cancer. But upon the announcement, Monsanto immediately waged an all-out war to discredit and undermine science, researchers, and their findings.
This wasn’t a new strategy, as Monsanto has been working to control what scientists say about glyphosate for decades. They’ve promised funds to universities when their studies confirmed safety of Monsanto’s products, arranged trips and speaking tours for supportive scientists, cultivated relationships within EPA, and even attempted to convince scientists to ignore findings. Monsanto even went so far as to ghostwrite “independent” studies verifying the product’s safety.
However, all the money and influence Monsanto pushed was brought into question when the jury made a connection between the corporation and Dewayne Johnson’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. This ruling set a powerful precedent for other legal cases against Monsanto. Soon after Johnson’s case, other significant awards for damages were realized in the Hardeman and Pilliod cases.
At that time Linda Wells, formerly the Midwest organizing director for PAN, made a strong statement: “Monsanto has deliberately deceived the public about the safety of its flagship herbicide Roundup for decades. Monsanto’s business model assumes that any cancer caused by pesticides will be someone else’s problem. Changing that equation is crucial to moving toward a healthy and just food system.”
Bayer, following its 2018 acquisition of Monsanto, found itself facing nearly 100,000 individual lawsuits and the precedents set by the Johnson, Hardeman and Pilliod cases. Bayer was eventually ordered to pay up to $10.9 billion to settle lawsuits alleging that exposure to the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup caused cancer.
A STORY BIGGER THAN LEE JOHNSON
With the current government narrative pushing for a 100-fold increase of the permitted residue of glyphosate, I urge every New Zealander to watch the movie, Into the Weeds, about Mr Johnson and his mighty battle against glyphosate. Even just the two-minute trailer packs a punch that can bring one to tears. Certainly everyone dealing with this product needs to know. We all need to know.
“This is about food. This is about health. This is about the soil. This is about the environment. This is not the Lee Johnson story. This is bigger than me.” – Dewayne “Lee” Johnson
An extract about the film from the Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network (PAN) website:
Into the Weeds: Dewayne “Lee” Johnson vs. Monsanto Company is coming to movie theaters ... The ... film will be supplemented by exclusive follow-up bonus footage featuring findings and expert testimony from scientists, doctors, policy makers, farmers, environmentalists, food safety advocates and concerned public figures.
Attend a screening and journey with Bay Area groundskeeper Dewayne “Lee” Johnson as he fought for justice against Monsanto (now Bayer). Johnson’s case was the first to go to trial in a series of lawsuits claiming Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup, or its industrial counterpart Ranger Pro, contributed to their cancer. The film follows this groundbreaking trial, while also stepping back to consider the systemic effects of the world’s most widely used herbicide.
PAN also have a page illustrating the treadmill of using GM-crops with poisonous herbicides and the additional dangers of super-weeds that, according to PAN now “plague more than 60 million acres of US farmland thanks to widespread planting of Bayer’s (now merged with Monsanto) “RoundUp Ready” crops. It also describes how this cycle “wreaks havoc” on farmer livelihoods, including the cost of the patented seeds and accompanying chemicals and managing superweeds in the fields along with the risk of seed patent lawsuits.
WHY WOULD THE NZ GOVERNMENT PROPOSE SUCH A RECKLESS AND DAMAGING ACTION?
The question that must be asked is whether this appalling increase in the permitted residual amounts of glyphosate is in preparation for the Gene Tech legislation that is currently before parliament. Is this level of poison something that is required for the genetically-modified crops?
Apparently GM crops were ‘designed’ not to be able to be killed by glyphosate, although glyphosate can apparently kill most other plants. And if the GM plants cannot be killed and then spread to other farms and contaminate non-GMO crops, won’t that ruin those farms? The Gene Tech legislation doesn’t appear to make the contaminator responsible for any clean up, but instead makes it the responsibility of the owner of the farm that was contaminated.
So, again, is this part of a deal the government has made with Bayer for the gene-tech seeds or crops they intend to have grown in NZ? Bayer will probably have more glyphosate than they will know what to do with, as other countries around the world dump the product in light of the health dangers.
It has been reported that Bayer may soon withdraw this product (in the US) and declare bankruptcy through a manoeuvre known as the Texas-two-step, but are they also planning to use it on GM crops in NZ – crops that, according to many farmers in South America, are extremely bad for health, don’t increase yield and make people sick? (Don’t let the government present glufosinate-ammonium as an option either. That is apparently also used on GM crops, is extremely dangerous and has no antidote.)
Bayer would possibly find it attractive to move into a country where they could not be sued. It won’t have escaped their attention that NZ has ACC, a section of government that is there to compensate New Zealanders from illness, accident and medical misadventure – although ACC has become notorious in recent years for denying an incredible number of genuine claims by New Zealanders seriously harmed by a gene-altering injection falsely touted as safe and effective when it has been found to be the opposite. Public trust has been betrayed – multiple times. Who loses?
New Zealanders.
No farmers, no food.
The majority of farmers are against the proposed increase in glyphosate and the Gene Tech Bill. To their credit, many are employing the Precautionary Principle, among other non-harmful methods. Some are described here.
New Zealanders who found out about the proposed permitted increase in glyphosate residues, scrambled to put objections in before the unreasonably short opportunity to do so was closed. This was made more difficult when taking into consideration that those who wished to object were already heavily involved in responding to the proposed Gene Tech Bill (of over 200 pages) that was dumped on parliament on the 17 December 2024 – the last day before the summer holidays. The public could submit on the Gene Tech Bill from 18 December 2024 – virtually on the eve of their traditional treasured summer and Christmas holidays – so the majority of Kiwis missed it. The ability to make an objection closed on 17 February 2025. Just two months to respond and slap-bang in the middle of the holiday season. Usually there is a six-month period, so this inexplicably short time frame of such a damaging piece of legislation tended to suggest ill intent. In my view, it made a mockery of the process, indicating an arrogant don’t-care-what-you-think group of ministers of parliament, towards those they pretend to represent. Hot on the heels of this came the glyphosate issue, with little time to respond to it, as well as the Commission of Inquiry Phase 2, and the invitation for comments on the government proposal to throw all natural healers into the Ministry of Health, under the title of “modernising health workforce regulation”. There were others, including those related to the ever-increasing creep of Digital ID.
Here we are then, with a government pushing to increase a toxic poison that can kill by up to 100 times. What should we call that? Intentional harm? Treason? Premeditated harm? If a New Zealand businessman suggested increasing the use of a poisonous product 100 times – on grains that are used for everyday items like bread and cereal – isn’t it likely that the business would be shut down and the owner would possibly be locked up?
So what is different here? How is it that any government considers it has the right to cause such harm to our country, nature and us, when the proof of harm seems apparent when viewing the amounts paid out to compensate victims, and the number of lawsuits? A multi-billion dollar corporation like Bayer surely doesn’t fork out such enormous amounts to settle lawsuits if there is no substance to the claims does it?
How do we best describe a government that seems to be intentionally sabotaging the quality of our food and water to the point where it is harmful to eat or drink – in a country that is perfectly placed to be the organic food basket of the world?
SUMMARY
While glyphosate is now banned or restricted in 21 countries and the Health Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr, and the MAHA movement in the US calls out glyphosate as one of the toxic chemicals being investigated, the NZ government wants to increase the permitted residual amounts of glyphosate by up to 100 times on crops that provide food eaten every day by New Zealanders. Based on the history of this product it will damage the health of our people and poison our food and our soil.
The promoted 100-fold allowable increase of glyphosate residues, combined with the proposed Gene Tech legislation, puts NZ completely out of step with the rest of the world that is reducing or banning glyphosate, and seeking reliable GM-free food and organic produce. It is also likely to seriously damage our export markets, particularly the USA which, as of March 2024, is now the second largest export market of New Zealand. It destroys our internationally stellar reputation of high quality food and produce, and our clean, green image.
Quite frankly, it beggars belief that the New Zealand ‘government’ is stupid enough to make a deal with corporations that are known for such damage that they have had to pay out billions for the adverse effects of this product. This should surely give them pause for thought.
Unless of course their goal is to destroy our good food sources and our health? That question tends to dovetail with their actions which – combined with the Gene Tech Bill – can only be described as an all-out attack on our people and our country. Intended harm. Treason.
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. – Plato
As mentioned, on many occasions, Dr David Martin has said, “We are done being polite. We are way past being polite.” He stated this in relation to the so-called ‘Covid vaccine’ and said we have to call a falsely labelled gene-based therapy injection a bio-weapon if it is one. He says it is. In my view his description is far more accurate than the lies we have been told. And if the actions of a government are treasonous, that has to be called out for what it is, too. The Gene Tech legislation – combined with the proposed increase in glyphosate levels – seems to be just another type of bio-weapon targeting our food, our health and our exports. The Gene Tech Bill absolves all involved from any liability, too – an echo of a tactic referred to above, by Linda Wells, formerly of PAN.
Some in government may not have known the above information. They may be required just to stamp and approve such things and move these approvals through the channels at the behest of members of parliament. Well, it will affect their families too. And if they are reading this opinion piece with its references, they now know. As do the bureaucrats. It is incumbent upon each one of them to speak out and stand for the people, not a group of cravenly corrupt, unelected cabals offshore such as the WEF, WHO and UN. There are good reasons why RFK Junior, the Secretary of Health for the US, has called for other countries to join the USA in leaving the WHO.
It is time for all of us to stand up and say no and call out the corruption.
The government must NOT allow the administration of this hideous product to be increased, for if they do, in addition to the catastrophic sabotage to our country, it is a terribly heavy burden to carry on their shoulders until the end of their days when, on their death-beds, they will eventually come face-to-face with the appalling destruction they had an active part in causing to our people and our country.
‘The power of the people is much stronger than the people in power – providing
they stand up and speak out.’
Now is the time that is crucial for them (and us) to peacefully stand for what is right and do all possible to ensure that our people and our country are protected from such a damaging attack on our crops and such decimating, irreversible harm the Gene Tech Bill – combined with the increase in glyphosate will wreak – if it is passed. If members of parliament and the bureaucrats don’t say no to such madness, then they need to immediately stand down, for they no longer serve the people. Worse, they are guilty of treason to those they pretend to represent.
Contact your MP, let them know, feel free to send them this article. Send New Zealand First this article. They have the power to swing the votes and there are only eight of them. The other MPs (all parties) look too far gone – if not on this issue, on others such as taxing Kiwis on already taxed income of their homes and also taxing farmers to oblivion – and seem to do little more than vote how their parties order them to, not how the people tell them. We must ALL stand up and say NO. Thousands have.
We cannot allow our Earth, Living Nature, or our bodies, minds and souls, to be further polluted.
All of us have a duty to protect our beloved farmland, our nature, our flora and fauna and ourselves. NOW. BEFORE WE SINK IN THE LIES AND CORRUPTION. STAND UP, SPEAK OUT, AND SAY NO. Join the thousands who have done so. Share articles that speak out and dare to tell the truth. If you don’t know what to do to help, contact GE-Free New Zealand, NZDSOS (New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science) , or VFF (Voices For Freedom), RCR, and The Daily Telegraph. There are many more incredibly courageous Kiwis out there battling for our freedoms, too. New Zealand First have yet to vote NO to the Gene Tech Bill, so there is serious concern as to whether or not they will front up and walk the talk. Report what you see to honest groups that appeal to you and care with passion. Or fund them.
The future of our people, and our country, hangs in the balance.
It is from the numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance. – Robert Kennedy
All photos are copyright © Mary Hobbs.
This article was originally published by the Daily Telegraph New Zealand.
