Monsanto (now owned by German pharma giant Bayer) took a huge hit in court last week, with a jury finding that its star product, Roundup, is a carcinogen.
On Wednesday afternoon, German chemical giant Bayer sustained another costly legal defeat related to Monsanto, the US seed and pesticide giant it subsumed last year. A US District Court jury in San Francisco awarded plaintiff Edward Hardeman $80.3 million—including $75 million in damages—after ruling that Monsanto’s blockbuster glyphosate-based Roundup herbicides had caused his case of non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
[…] On Thursday, yet another glyphosate trial opened in the Superior Court of California for the County of Alameda. The plaintiffs, a married couple named Alva and Alberta Pilliod, claim long-term exposure to Roundup herbicide caused them both to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Theirs is the first of more than 250 Roundup cancer cases consolidated before Superior Court of California Judge Winifred Smith.
Roundup is highly valuable to Monsanto, not just as a remarkably effective weed-killer, but by letting it sell Roundup-resistant seed, which makes weed-free farming terrifically easy (plant your seeds, spray it all with Roundup, and just the stuff you want grows). Monsanto has earned oodles of money that way — which is why Bayer’s stock has taken such a hit.
The company’s share price has plunged nearly 25 percent since the phase-one verdict on March 18, and by more than 40 percent since mid-August 2018, when a California Superior Court jury awarded school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson $289 million in damages after ruling that Roundup exposure had caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma. (The award was later reduced to $78 million—roughly equal to the damages decided in the Hardeman case.)
As a home gardner, I love Roundup as much as anyone. But increasing evidence that its got some nasty effects led me to stop using it at home. Which doesn’t mean that the replacement weed killer I’m using won’t cause me to grow a second head, but that’s a story for another lawsuit.
Do you want to know more? The Latest $80 Million Cancer Judgment Is Just the Beginning of Roundup’s Woes – Mother Jones
They Roundup you and I use isn’t the same as the commercially available Roundup. My brother in law is a farmer and he, his family and other farmers have used it for years. However, I do believe during the original lawsuit in SF, the judge even stated that there wasn’t any scientific evidence that proves that Roundup caused the cancer. The 9th circuit, which, go figure, is the most over-ruled circuit in the country, generally goes along with the lower courts. This case will be interesting to follow.
@Michael – The distinction between agriculture-grade Roundup and pick-up-at-Home-Depot-grade Roundup is a matter of concentration, not substance. Both have as their active ingredient Glyphosate. While it is true that concentration can play a role in general toxicity, it’s not as clear that it plays a similar role in carcinogenicity.
As to the Ninth Circuit — your statistics are incorrect. https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/
Monsanto, now a subsidiary of the multinational pharmaceutical company Bayer AG, can ask Chhabria to overturn or reduce the jury verdict before appealing to higher courts. The judge, an appointee of President Barack Obama and a former deputy San Francisco city attorney, said in a pretrial ruling that the evidence linking Roundup to cancer was “shaky” but decided there was enough to bring the case to a jury.
This is from the trial. Also, the round up we use at home is not the same as the commercial. I’ve asked the experts on this. The concentrate that is available over the counter isn’t the same are commercial use. Ask any farmer or commercial landscapers that use the product. There is different rules, storage and preparation requirements.