By Upatissa Pethiyagoda –

Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda
Virtually all governments since Independence (in 1948), upon election, have proclaimed that their actions will be based on “Science and technology”, but none have walked the talk. I will choose just three criteria as examples, but this is certainly not all.
Inclusion of Science and/or Technology in composing Cabinet rank, is either a sick joke or a cynical deception. As evidence, they (Science/Technology} have been coupled with some strange bedfellows, including Education, Culture, youth Affairs, Construction, Industries and by some other bizarre Cabinet formations that defy logic. Thus it is merely Lip service, cover-up, or ballast for the Ship of Politics.
We also have component or umbrella organizations such as NASTEC, NSF, CRI, TRI, RRI, CEA. Minor EC, etc., together numbering over thirty. The National Academy and The SLAAS are the emblematic “apex” organizations.
The last two being funded by the State. As a matter of interest, the grants are about Rs. 800.000/= each, per annum. This compares with some Rs. 7,000.000/- for a single days “sitting” of Parliament, showing what importance is attached to “Scientific Governance”. This is palpable insincerity.
In contrast, I was privileged to attend the Ceremony marking the opening of the new Headquarters of the Korean Academy of Sciences in Seoul. It is located in the busiest part of the city. There were nine Nobel Laureates among the invitees.
The building was a monstrous, six-storied building said to have cost some 25 million US Dollars, and financed totally by the Government. It covers a Floor area, about five times the immediate needs of the Academy. The balance to be rented and the earnings used to augment the finances of the Academy.
Wrong advice is costly
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, set up a group called the “Viyathmaga”, supposedly to advise him on technical matters. Together, they made a mighty mess, by banning the Import of Palm Oil, and all other agrochemicals including artificial fertilizers and the weed killer Glyphosate, all “with (a 24 hour) immediate effect,” despite dire warnings, by competent/scientists against this patent recklessness. Sadly, stubborn idiocy prevailed. Millions of Rupees were thus lost, thousands of farmers were plunged into desperation and the “Vipathmaga” (intended mis-spelling), simply disappeared.
Dangerous, catchy slogans
The current catchy buzzword is “Artificial intelligence”. Why one may ask? Is it that we lack the genuine, and seek a lower quality substitute? I am virtually, totally ignorant of what it (AI) exactly means. It (like digitization) possibly means using machines to replace human labour. Not unlike an infant who has just received a new toy. The “advanced” countries are addressing the several problems that could arise. But we boldly, are willing to leap in at the deep end. The loudest promoters are possibly know least. Happily, the present President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, has declared that he is not all-knowing and will seek the advice of knowledgeable persons, on matters of which he is ignorant, while insulating them from the stress of coping alone, to meet the required political imperatives. So far there is no reason to doubt his sincerity.
The plain truth is that we already face the twin realities of a lackadaisical public “service,” and growing numbers of unemployed youth. Do we therefore need machines to codify or even think for us? What about the need for providing leisure time recreational facilities, for those relieved of work responsibilities? “Narcotization” of our youth may well be the winner.
whywhy / February 17, 2026
Survival of the fittest and that is where Technology gets
its nutrients and not out of beggar’s bowl . Have we
benefitted enough from Industrial revolution ? If yes , why
do we still import safety pins ? Technology ? Who wants it
most ? It is expatriate nagging . Real locals not interested
and can not afford it . Too much for the bowl . Hey thumbs
down dudes , enjoy your day , what else can you do ?
/
Lester / February 17, 2026
If Glyphosate is not harmful, why did Bayer settle to the tune of over $11B?
“As of February 2026, Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) continues to face extensive litigation over Roundup weed killer, with over 100,000 claims settled or in progress regarding cancer (non-Hodgkin lymphoma) risks
. Bayer has paid over $11 billion in settlements but still fights ongoing lawsuits, with the U.S. Supreme Court reviewing a case that could significantly affect future litigation.”
Some (not all) of those “competent scientists” you mention have their own agenda. They are paid large sums of money by vested interests, like Bayer, to downplay the effect of toxic chemicals. Just like the Tamil Diaspora paid lawyers in Western countries large sums of money to tarnish the international reputation of S Lanka.
/
leelagemalli / February 17, 2026
Glyphosate, sometimes known as Round-up, is harmful only in areas where water analytics are not frequently regulated. That is exactly the case in some agricultural fields in North America, whereas European countries where farmers have relied on glyphosate for decades appear to face no severe threat.
–
Individual personal injury/cancer claims in EU courts are very limited
–
Tbc
/
leelagemalli / February 17, 2026
cont.
Unlike in the U.S., where plaintiffs have filed hundreds of thousands of personal injury and cancer claims over Roundup and glyphosate, there is no large-scale, mass litigation in EU countries equivalent to the U.S. lawsuits alleging that glyphosate-based weed killers caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma and seeking damages. The massive litigation wave seen in U.S. state courts has not been mirrored in European courts.
–
That said, there have been individual cases in Europe, for example:
–
A French court in 2025 rejected a complaint by the Grataloup family alleging that prenatal exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide caused their son’s disabilities, though the family is appealing. This was one of the more high-profile glyphosate-related legal actions in an EU country.
–
Farmers such as Paul François previously sued Monsanto in France over another herbicide (Lasso) and won a small compensation award — showing that individual claims can proceed, though not on the scale or type of the Roundup cancer litigation in the U.S.
/