Monsanto Ordered to Pay $289 Million After Jury Finds Roundup Caused Man’s Cancer… – Eco Snippets

Monsanto Ordered to Pay $289 Million After Jury Finds Roundup Caused Man’s Cancer…

Monsanto Ordered to Pay $289 Million After Jury Finds Roundup Caused Man’s Cancer...

A San Francisco Jury awarded $289 million in damages to a former school groundskeeper, Dewayne Johnson, who said Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller gave him terminal cancer. The award consists of $40 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages.

Johnson’s trial was fast-tracked due to the severe state of his non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system he says was triggered by Roundup and Ranger Pro, a similar glyphosate herbicide that he applied up to 30 times per year. His doctors didn’t think he’d live to live to see the verdict.

Johnson testified that he had been involved in two accidents during his work in which he was doused with the product, the first of which happened in 2012. Two years later, the 46-year-old father of two was diagnosed with lymphoma — which has covered as much as 80% of his body in lesions.

Monsanto says it will appeal the verdict.

“’Today’s decision does not change the fact that more than 800 scientific studies and reviews — and conclusions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. National Institutes of Health and regulatory authorities around the world — support the fact that glyphosate does not cause cancer, and did not cause Mr. Johnson’s cancer,’ Monsanto Vice President Scott Partridge said in a statement.”

Monsanto is a subsidiary of Germany’s Bayer AG, which closed on its $66 billion purchase of the agrochemical company in June.

On Tuesday, Johnson’s attorney Brent Wisner urged jurors to hold Monsanto liable and slap them with a verdict that would “actually change the world” — after arguing that Monsanto knew about glyphosate’s risks of cancer, but decided to ignore and bury the information.

“According to The Guardian, Johnson is the first person to take Monsanto to trial over allegations that the chemical sold under the Roundup brand is linked to cancer although thousands have made similar legal claims across the United States. This lawsuit focuses on the chemical glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, which Monsanto began marketing as Roundup in 1974.  The company began by presenting it as a “technological breakthrough” that could kill almost every weed without harming humans or the environment.” –SHTFplan.com

In September, 2017 the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that glyphosates were not likely carcinogenic to humans, based on a decades-long assessment. In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO)’s cancer arm issued an opposite statement — warning that glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Johnson’s case isn’t part of the consolidated proceedings in Missouri, Delaware or California state court, where some 2,000 similar cases are pending. It’s also separate from a federal multidistrict litigation waiting to be heard by US District Judge Vance Chabria of San Francisco — who allowed hundreds of Roundup lawsuits to proceed to trial after ruling that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to hear the cases despite calling a plaintiff’s expert opinions “shaky.”

Documents released in August of 2017 led to questions over Monsanto’s efforts to influence the news media and scientific research and revealed internal debate over the safety of its highest-profile product, the weed killer Roundup.

As the New York Times noted last year, new internal emails, among other things, reveal ethical objections from former employees to “ghost writing” research studies that were pawned off as ‘independent’ analyses.

“The documents underscore the lengths to which the agrochemical company goes to protect its image. Documents show that Henry I. Miller, an academic and a vocal proponent of genetically modified crops, asked Monsanto to draft an article for him that largely mirrored one that appeared under his name on Forbes’s website in 2015. Mr. Miller could not be reached for comment.

“A similar issue appeared in academic research. An academic involved in writing research funded by Monsanto, John Acquavella, a former Monsanto employee, appeared to express discomfort with the process, writing in a 2015 email to a Monsanto executive, ‘I can’t be part of deceptive authorship on a presentation or publication.’ He also said of the way the company was trying to present the authorship: ‘We call that ghost writing and it is unethical.’”

The newly disclosed emails also reveal internal discussions which cast some doubt over whether internal scientists actually believed in the company’s external messaging that Roundup was, in fact, safe.

“If somebody came to me and said they wanted to test Roundup I know how I would react — with serious concern.”

And, here’s more:

“The documents also show that a debate outside Monsanto about the relative safety of glyphosate and Roundup, which contains other chemicals, was also taking place within the company.

“In a 2002 email, a Monsanto executive said, ‘What I’ve been hearing from you is that this continues to be the case with these studies — Glyphosate is O.K. but the formulated product (and thus the surfactant) does the damage.’

“In a 2003 email, a different Monsanto executive tells others, ‘You cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen … we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement.’

Not surprisingly, Monsanto’s lawyers have argued that the comments above have simply been taken out of context…

“Monsanto said it was outraged by the documents’ release by a law firm involved in the litigation.

“’There is a standing confidentiality order that they violated,’ said Scott Partridge, vice president of global strategy for Monsanto. He said that while ‘you can’t unring a bell,’ Monsanto would seek penalties on the firm.

“’What you’re seeing are some cherry-picked things that can be made to look bad,’ Mr. Partridge said. ‘But the substance and the science are not affected by this.’”

Glyphosate, Roundup’s main ingredient, was first approved for use in weed killers in 1974, and has grown to become the world’s most popular and widely used herbicide.

By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge

New: Click Here To Learn About The Medicinal Plants That Are Hiding In Your Own Backyard Right Now...


Gardening & Self Sufficiency Lifestyle Tips!

Join over 220,000 people that get our organic gardening & self sufficiency lifestyle tips via email. Simply enter your name and best email address below and click the "Get Instant Access" Button now...

Leave a Comment:

(51) comments

This man will easy lose on appeal . People need to realise the product is glysophate not round up . How can his doctors prove it it was roundup or the other weed killer . Why one man out of millions can get cancer ?

Reply

    He can prove what he used.

    Reply

    Mark Friedlander he used round up and ranger pro .now how do you price which one caused the cancer ?

    Reply

    Cris Ward Monsanto produces both of them and contains the same shit

    Reply

    Monsanto made Agent Orange, and their new partner Bayer made Zyklon B for the Nazis.

    Reply

    Cris Ward I guess twelve of his peers decided he did.

    Reply

Let me know when the process has run it’s course. I expect a number of years will have gone by and the poor man will be gone.

Reply

Too bad the jury ignored the science which continues to show Roundup is no more of a carcinogen than coffee. (But in Cali, coffee is labeled a potential carcinogen so a great place to sue.)

Reply

There was no evidence that said Roundup caused anything. Go read the case yourself before posting this bias rubbish online !!

Reply

    Paul Humphreys it’s like saying ford caused my cancer yet every car company uses the same fuels .

    Reply

    Cris Ward I was naturally very concerned when I heard about this because our family have been using the stuff for a whole generation but after doing a lot of digging and researching online I find out its ALL just scare mongering BS and a making decisions based on emotion and not facts.
    Monsanto lost the patent to Glysophate 18 years ago so anyone can and do produce it and add “other ingredients” to the mix so point the finger at Monsanto is simply because they are worth billions and the Lawyers can smell MONEY a mile away !!

    Reply

    Paul Humphreys yes generations from every country have been using these products but seems it’s just a groundsman was the only one who got cancer ? Or as you say he had the best law firm in the world running his case .

    Reply

    ur welcome to have a glass of the shit

    Reply

    Craig Mcclure Use it every week mate, probably drunk a few glasses by now. Although I am older and wiser now and wear a mask BUT at the end of the day, we eat, drink and breath crap day in and day out….. when its your time, its your time !

    Reply

    No it is not just this groundsman who got cancer, there are 8,700 people waiting to go to trial over their cancer being caused by Roundup.

    Reply

    Paul Humphreys Explain your logic to all those crippled Vietnamese who were sprayed by Monsantos magic drink.

    Reply

    FredBarb Russ dunno mate…….. but I’m all ears if you can !!! 🙂

    Reply

    FredBarb Russ is another one of the clueless that doesn’t realize agent orange and roundup are two totally different chemicals they’re not even in the same family of organics.

    Reply

    Clare Nesdale please show the actual scientific research that shows the link between roundup and cancer. You can’t . WHO, the UN, and the EU in 2017 which Ecosnippets keeps on forgetting to put in their articles did the largest known 30 year research on roundup and found no link. These 8700 individuals could easily have gotten it from working in the sun. An actual known cause of cancer.

    Reply

    Paul Humphreys so why did they leave the US if they are not guilty as you claim

    Reply

    Craig Mcclure yes go ahead and drink it it’s good for you

    Reply

    Daniel Sudek would be because like Google and Amazon and so many other billion dollar companies….. the US tax system sux !

    Reply

    Daniel Sudek same guy that doesn’t have the brains enough to do real research. By the way Flourine in water comes from phosphorite rock a natural occurring material.

    Reply

    John Baker Why are you trolling here? You haven’t read other articles on this case or on Monsanto. Do you have no one to dominate at home so you what to dominate here? Roundup kills our beneficial gut bacteria and this in itself has been linked to chronic illness. Monsanto have done their best to suppress any research that shows that Roundup causes cancer in lab rats. Monsanto says the studies showing it causes cancer are done over to long a period and has had these studies suppressed.

    Reply

    Clare Nesdale John Baker and Paul Humphreys are two Mosanto trolls that know all, so its hard to say who is trying to dominate whom out of the two of them.

    Reply

And the shit’s still on the shelf.

Reply

    Mark Heismann McDonald still sells coffee.

    Reply

Paul Humphreys agree 100% Ecosnippets has the worst journalists around. The couldn’t find a fact if it bit them in the butt.

Reply

Independent research since 1985 has found that Roundup, glyphosate causes cancer in rats. Monsanto suppressed this research. The research that says it does not cause cancer was paid for by Monsanto and they restricted the period of the research so the tumours in lab rats didn’t have time to develop. Since 2015 the WHO said that glyphosate is a probable carcinogenic. There has been no long term research on the exposure of glyphosate on humans. “There is consensus, among non-industry scientists, that there is no safe level of exposure to glyphosate. That is, no level established that comes with no possible harm,” said Paul Mills, a public health professor at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) who has studied the prevalence of glyphosate exposure in humans.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2015 that glyphosate was a probable cause of cancer in humans.

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has concluded it’s known to cause cancer.” https://www.healthline.com/health-news/can-weed-killer-give-you-cancer#2

Reply

    What a crock of shit…….Smoking causes cancer, burning plastic causes cancer, taking a dump at ground zero causes cancer……. what I am getting at is there is thousands of things that can give us cancer and YET it is still goes on around us every day. Its not about WHAT the product can cause but about the safety precautions recommended when handling the product.

    Reply

    Paul Humphreys please go back under your bridge ? the problem with Monsanto, they said safe for humans on the container, they should have had a warning on the container – there was no warning. The groundsman who sued wrote to Monsanto after he was diagnosed with cancer and asked if it was alright for him to keep using Roundup, they didn’t write back. They gave him no reply so he kept using it. In Europe after some of the research saying it wasn’t safe, when countries decided the label on Roundup should not say it is safe for humans, Monsanto fought them tooth and nail and didn’t want to change the label.

    Reply

    Roundup was never safe for humans. It kills our beneficial gut bacteria for starters and our beneficial gut bacteria is important to our health and well being.

    Reply

    Paul Humphreys I propose to you to use Roundup on a large quantity for a year in a field or something without protection. Will be a nice experience from you to demonstrate personnaly that it does not harm people.

    Reply

Since the verdict of this trial 8,700 other cases are now waiting to go to trial. “Bayer AG isn’t counting on another trial over its Roundup herbicide until February, but an elderly couple who say exposure to the weed killer gave them cancer has other ideas.

Among some 8,700 people who blame their cancer on Bayer’s recently acquired Monsanto unit, the couple is asking to go to the front of the line to present their case to a jury in December “before they die.” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-14/bayer-may-face-next-roundup-cancer-trial-sooner-than-planned

Reply

    they can all smell money !! and like most of these, they will be dismissed on appeal !

    Reply

    Paul, do you have shares in Bayer? They fell about 10% after the court case https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45167906

    Reply

    Clare Nesdale just because a jury says so doesn’t mean its fact. Americans are so emotional and antiscience. There are over 50 researches that have been done last one in 2017 by the WHO, UN, and EU that prove there is no link.

    Reply

    Facts are facts just look are how ignorant you are. LOL

    Reply

    John Baker John, you are a real piece of work. Did you have a hard childhood?

    Reply

California to list glyphosate as cancer-causing

Reply

    Russell Kehoe a rogue judge same one said coffee causes cancer.

    Reply

    John Baker How long have you been working for Monsanto?

    Reply

5,000 similar lawsuits across the United States

Reply

    Russell Kehoe ambulance chasers.

    Reply

World Health Organization’s cancer arm in 2015 classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Reply

    Russell Kehoe in 2017 after their last research program with the UN and EU proved no link at all. Time to get up to speed.

    Reply

    In 2015 the sun was classified as a known carcinogen better hide in a hole somewhere.

    Reply

Scientists have increasingly been able to link lawn chemicals, particularly 2,4-D, to canine cancer. … Even at low concentrations, Roundup and glyphosate are linked to myriad health problems, including everything from kidney disease to birth defects to cancer.May 29, 2018

Reply

Russell Kehoe: Go back to college and learn the difference between in vivo ( whole organism) experiments and the conclusions you may draw and the in vitro (petri dish) experiments and the restricted conclusions permitted by science. Civil courts allow unreliable testimony from fake scientists and the petri dish data and make conclusions which cannot be supported by real science. $289M does not sanctify the allegation , it only lines pockets of lawyers. You cannot assign culpability for cancer to any one chemical the unfortunate patient may have been exposed to in a long life.

Reply
Add Your Reply

Leave a Comment: