The world according to Monsanto : pollution, corruption, and

78 the world according to monsantoavoiding serious accidents during use. They then evaluate what is called“subchronic toxicity,” the effects of repeated absorption of the product onbodily organs, chiefly the liver and kidneys. Usually conducted over a periodof ninety days or one year (even two years if a problem appears), these testsmake it possible to establish what experts call the NOAEL (no observableadverse effect level), that is, the maximum quantity of the substance whosedaily absorption has no effects on the test animals. The NOAEL is expressedeither in milligrams of active ingredient per kilogram of body weightof the animal tested per day or in milligrams of the substance per kilogramof food (expressed in ppm) if a food ingredient is involved. Finally, tests mustverify whether the product is potentially oncogenic (causing cancer), teratogenic(causing birth defects), or mutagenic (causing permanent and inheritablechanges in the DNA of subjects exposed).Taken together, the toxicological data as a whole enable the establishmentof regulatory categories, such as the lowest acceptable daily dose (LADD),which designates the quantity of the substance that the user or consumer issupposed to be able to absorb daily over a lifetime with no health effects. Inother words, to make the absurdity of the process clear: it is known that asubstance is toxic for mammals and one calculates the dose that can be inflictedon them daily before they fall ill, or even die. Then, the data are extrapolatedto people. But how do we know that the dose calculated for a rator a rabbit will protect us effectively from being poisoned? A mystery. Andwhat of the accumulation and interaction among the various toxic substancesthat we ingest every day, because the LADD (the daily acceptabledose of poison) refers not only to many pesticides, but also to food additives,such as coloring agents and preservatives? The question is ignored. In anyevent, it is troubling to realize that the calculation of this disquieting LADDis based on tests conducted by the manufacturers, whose purpose is primarilyto sell their products.In addition to toxicity tests intended to assess the danger that a newmolecule may constitute for people, there are tests that consider its performancein the environment (including its persistence, mobility, absorptioninto the food chain, and biodegradability), as well as its ecotoxic potential(for birds, bees, fish, and aquatic plants).Finally, the toxicological file is examined by the Commission d’étude de latoxicité des produits antiparasitaires à usage agricole, which submits anopinion to the Ministry of Agriculture. This usually conforms to decisions