US jury orders Monsanto to pay $290mn to cancer patient over weed killer

August 11, 2018 by Glenn Chapman
Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson reacts after hearing the verdict to his case against Monsanto in San Francisco

A California jury ordered chemical giant Monsanto to pay nearly $290 million Friday for failing to warn a dying groundskeeper that its weed killer Roundup might cause cancer.

Jurors unanimously found that Monsanto—which vowed to appeal—acted with "malice" and that its weed killers Roundup and the professional grade version RangerPro contributed "substantially" to Dewayne Johnson's terminal illness.

Following eight weeks of trial proceedings, the San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $250 million in punitive damages along with compensatory damages and other costs, bringing the total figure to nearly $290 million.

Johnson, a California groundskeeper diagnosed in 2014 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma—a cancer that affects white blood cells—says he repeatedly used a professional form of Roundup while working at a school in Benicia, California.

"I want to thank everybody on the jury from the bottom of my heart," Johnson, 46, said after the verdict.

"I am glad to be here; the cause is way bigger than me. Hopefully this thing will get the attention it needs."

Johnson, who appeared to fight back sobs while the verdict was read, wept openly, as did some jurors, when he met with the panel afterward.

The lawsuit built on 2015 findings by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the UN World Health Organization, which classified Roundup's main ingredient glyphosate as a probable carcinogen, causing the state of California to follow suit.

Monsanto vice president Scott Partridge speaks after Monsanto was ordered to pay nearly $290 million in damages for not disclosing the dangers of its popular Roundup products

Monsanto vice president Scott Partridge was unimpressed with the results. "The jury got it wrong," he told reporters outside the courthouse.

"We are sympathetic to Mr Johnson and his family," Monsanto said in a statement, but promised to appeal the ruling and "continue to vigorously defend this product, which has a 40-year history of safe use and continues to be a vital, effective and safe tool for farmers and others."

Johnson's attorney Brent Wisner said the verdict "shows the evidence is overwhelming" that the product poses danger.

"When you are right, it is really easy to win," he said.

More to come?

Wisner called the ruling the "tip of the spear" of litigation likely to come.

The lawsuit is the first to accuse the product of causing cancer, but observers say a Monsanto defeat likely opens the door to thousands of other claims against the company, which was recently acquired by Germany's Bayer.

"The jury sent a message to the Monsanto boardroom that they have to change the way they do business," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr—an environmental lawyer, son of the late US senator and a member of Johnson's legal team.

Monsanto launched Roundup in 1976 and soon thereafter began genetically modifying plants, making some resistant to Roundup

Partridge said that Monsanto had no intention of settling the slew of similar cases in the legal queue, saying if anything the company would work harder to demonstrate the weed killer is safe.

"It is the most widely used and most widely studied herbicide in the world," Partridge said.

Johnson's team expressed confidence in the verdict, saying the judge in the case kept out a mountain of more evidence backing their position.

"All the efforts by Monsanto to put their finger in the dike and hold back the science; the science is now too persuasive," Kennedy said, pointing to "cascading" scientific evidence about the health dangers of Roundup.

"You not only see many people injured, you see the corruption of public officials, the capture of agencies that are supposed to protect us from pollution and the falsification of science," Kennedy said.

'Win for all of humanity'

The judgement will stand even if Johnson succumbs to his cancer during appeals, according to his lawyers.

"We will fight this to the last minute of the last day," Wisner said. "We will do everything to make sure Mr. Johnson and his family share in that award."

Johnson hugs one of his lawyers after hearing the verdict to his case against Monsanto at the Superior Court Of California

Roundup is Monsanto's leading product.

"The Johnson vs Monsanto verdict is a win for all of humanity and all life on earth," said Zen Honeycutt, founding executive director of non-profit group Moms Across America.

"The majority of our illnesses and losses to soil quality, water, wildlife and marine life are due to toxic chemicals, particularly Monsanto's most widely used glyphosate herbicides like Roundup and Ranger Pro."

Despite its denials of any links between its products and ill health effects, Monsanto has already suffered hits to its reputation in light of the controversy.

Records unsealed earlier by a federal court lent credence to Johnson's claims—internal company emails with regulators suggested Monsanto had ghostwritten research later attributed to academics.

Founded in 1901 in St Louis, Missouri, Monsanto began producing agrochemicals in the 1940s. It was acquired by Bayer for more than $62 billion in June.

Monsanto launched Roundup in 1976 and soon thereafter began genetically modifying plants, making some resistant to Roundup.

Explore further: Dying groundskeeper to testify in Roundup cancer trial

More information: US giant Monsanto known for controversial chemicals: phys.org/news/2018-08-giant-mo … rsial-chemicals.html

Related Stories

US trial over Roundup cancer link set to open

June 28, 2018

A first of its kind trial over whether Monsanto herbicide Roundup caused a groundskeeper's lethal cancer is scheduled to begin here on July 9 with opening remarks by attorneys.

Monsanto faces first US trial over Roundup cancer link

June 21, 2018

In the first trial of its kind, a Californian dying of cancer is suing US agrochemical giant Monsanto, claiming its popular herbicide Roundup caused his disease—a case that could have sweeping ramifications.

Recommended for you

Space-inspired speed breeding for crop improvement

November 16, 2018

Technology first used by NASA to grow plants extra-terrestrially is fast tracking improvements in a range of crops. Scientists at John Innes Centre and the University of Queensland have improved the technique, known as speed ...

Cells decide when to divide based on their internal clocks

November 16, 2018

Cells replicate by dividing, but scientists still don't know exactly how they decide when to split. Deciding the right time and the right size to divide is critical for cells – if something goes wrong it can have a big ...

81 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

tjhammond1
3.5 / 5 (11) Aug 11, 2018
This appears to be a case of "stick it to the big, rich corporation" without any evidence that Roundup caused this man's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has been associated with auto-immune diseases, a plethora of viruses, radiation, Immunosuppressant drugs used to manage the aforementioned auto-immune diseases, as well as inherited disorders. There still exists little or no evidence that glycophosphate causes cancer, let alone NH lymphoma.
KBK
3.5 / 5 (16) Aug 11, 2018
This appears to be a case of 'finally sticking it to the big controlling overreaching corporation' who has bribed, stolen, threatened, sued and forced it's way into making sure that no one could stop or hinder their creation and control of a GMO market.

First the inherent toxic genetically modified crops, the toxic stew of a pesticide for those crops, then the suing of the farmers and groups forced to suffer from this scenario, then the paying off or usage of planted officials in governmental agencies that oversee the regulation of these products.

Horrifically, there is more, much more.

People could write books about monsanto's crimes against humanity. And they have.

WHO has recommended on banning roundup, entire countries ban GMO crops, specifically Monsanto products, and so on.

Monsanto has a long history of horror. Canada, for example, bans Monsanto GMO corn stock for human consumption. Monsanto sues them, of course.

Tons of evidence. Monsanto works to bury it.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (12) Aug 11, 2018
Well this is one way to kill capitalism...

Trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find ways if protecting our food supply from infection and infestation. So it's getting to the point where either we tolerate certain unpleasant side effects, or we starve.

And its only these big corporations that are equipped to protect us.
gculpex
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 11, 2018
Well this is one way to kill capitalism...

And its only these big corporations that are equipped to protect us.

Funny, It was David that took down Goliath...
And since when is capitalism more important than life? Without life, there is no capitalism.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
JRi
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 11, 2018
If smells fishy that this comes right after German BASF bought Monsanto.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 11, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (7) Aug 11, 2018
Funny, It was David that took down Goliath...
And since when is capitalism more important than life? Without life, there is no capitalism
Capitalism is competition. Evolution is competition. Competition is the best way of producing quality.

Capitalism is life.
small Panama farmers have no problem with their bananas
And their little bananas cannot feed the worlds population. Only GMO foods protected by successive gens of herbicides and pesticides, which only these big crops have the resources to develop, has any hope of sustaining the worlds pops into the future.

So we're back again to the inescapable conclusion that the world is too full of people.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (3) Aug 11, 2018
Errata
Big crops = big corps/corporations
arcmetal
5 / 5 (3) Aug 11, 2018
A chemical weapons company that produces agricultural products. Who knew there might be problems with that? :/
Thorium Boy
1 / 5 (2) Aug 12, 2018
It's not the money of the lawsuit, which is ridiculous, how much did this guy earn? It's the stupidity of naming substance carcinogenic without REAL proof. If the nutjobs who hate everything agricultural post-1880 are the leaders here, we are in big trouble.
betterexists
1 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2018
Dangerous Research is Bad !
There are ways of benefiting humans using Genetics. For example, Wood Frog of Alaska is frozen to rock-like state, stopping all of its cardiac and respiratory functions. Then, It thaws like food in the dish and starts hopping away. There are VARIETIES of Frog and Toad species. Do Gene Sequencing on all of them and introduce genes for that Great feature to others also. One day, we may be able to walk barefoot on North and South Poles, Who knows? May be a matter of decades. We do not want to be frozen into a stone-like state like Wood Frogs, though !
humy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 12, 2018
This weed killer may or may not cause cancer; I currently have no personal opinion on that either way because the scientific 'dury' is still out on that one because the current SCIENTIFIC evidence so far is SO circumstantial (and I HAVE looked at it) that we cannot even say it "probably causes cancer" or "probably doesn't cause cancer". This link helps explains this;

https://theconver...k-100875

But, since Monsanto has become the object of extreme hatred by most environmentalist extremists (and, don't get me wrong here; I am all FOR protecting people/whales etc against pollution,global-warming etc), I presume any LEGAL jury, NOT any rational SCIENTIFIC 'dury', would always give Monsanto a guilty verdict as charged. Who cares about the truth when you can f*** Monsanto?
humy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 12, 2018
the scientific 'dury' ...
NOT any rational SCIENTIFIC 'dury', ...

My Misedit; both of those "dury" should be "jury".
They really should give you more time to correct edit mistakes. Anyone agree?
TheMuffinMan
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 12, 2018
Who knew chemicals that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.
humy
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 12, 2018
Who knew chemicals that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.

Who knew insects that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed. So ladybirds kill humans!
...see the illogic of your (implied) argument now?
Just because SOME members of a set of things X cause Y doesn't mean ALL members of set X cause Y.
TheMuffinMan
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 12, 2018
Who knew chemicals that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.

Who knew insects that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.
...see the illogic of your (implied) argument now?
Just because SOME members of a set of things X cause Y doesn't mean ALL members of set X cause Y.


'implied argument', I think that's called putting words in people's mouths and strawman-ing.
humy
5 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2018
Who knew chemicals that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.

Who knew insects that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.
...see the illogic of your (implied) argument now?
Just because SOME members of a set of things X cause Y doesn't mean ALL members of set X cause Y.


'implied argument', I think that's called putting words in people's mouths and strawman-ing.

It is obvious what you implied else why did you say it?
TheMuffinMan
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 12, 2018
Who knew chemicals that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.

Who knew insects that kill plants and weeds would also kill humans. I never would've guessed.
...see the illogic of your (implied) argument now?
Just because SOME members of a set of things X cause Y doesn't mean ALL members of set X cause Y.


'implied argument', I think that's called putting words in people's mouths and strawman-ing.

It is obvious what you implied else why did you say it?


What was I implying, oh dear mind reader, please enlighten me on my own thoughts.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
humy
5 / 5 (3) Aug 12, 2018
Apparently both sides of Monsanto controversy argue with their impressions and none of them bothers to look at the documents, which Monsanto covered before years. And from these documents follows clearly, that https://www.thela...fulltext - and not just on mice but also human.
IYour link doesn't show ANY conclusive evidence that glyphosate is mutagenic for humans nor merely it probably is. It says
"Biomonitoring of genotoxic risk in agricultural workers from five Colombian regions: association to occupational exposure to glyphosate."
And, in science, an "association" is NOT a "causal link" and should never be confused with a causal link. Day is always followed by night thus is "associated" but day doesn't cause night. etc.

https://www.ncbi....5515989/

"The EU assessment did not identify a carcinogenicity hazard,"

Apparently then you don't bother to look at the documents.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
unrealone1
5 / 5 (1) Aug 12, 2018
So everyone that gets Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma will receive a $290 million payout?
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
humy
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 12, 2018
There is also another strange thing, that RoundUp (which is supposed to be just an inert solution of glyphosate according to Monsanto) https://www.ncbi....955666/, so that it apparently contains another shits, probably residui from bacterial cultures.
Whart1984

No, moron, it is because it contains detergent and the toxicity of glyphosate is SO LOW that the toxicity of detergent completely dwarfs that of the glyphosate. And Monsanto don't deny that detergent is there. That detergent has NOTHING TO DO with GM so you are just talking complete ignorant CRAP.
THIS is why the detergent is deliberately put into it;

https://en.wikipe...adjuvant

-it is to help more of the glyphosate to get absorbed through the leaf. And I have a C&G in horticulture which covers pesticides so I am speaking as a qualified EXPERT on this.

humy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 12, 2018
To elaborate on what I said there in my last post
That detergent is normally called a "surfactant" when put in the pesticide (even through all that means is that its a detergents i.e. surfactant means detergent).
That detergent is added to cause the droplets of pesticide to better speed over their target as well as help with absorption of the active ingredient of the pesticide to penetrate through slightly oily barriers of the target such as the slightly oily cuticles of plants etc.
When the detergent is used exactly like this, it is technically called a "wetting agent".
humy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 12, 2018
... to better speed over ...
My misedit in my above last post; "speed over" above should be "spread over"
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
humy
4.3 / 5 (6) Aug 12, 2018
Allergies Are On the Rise, and Scientists Have a Good Idea Why I have even better one - and it also has lotta things to do with Monsanto... See also Not just a fad: the surprising, gut-wrenching truth about gluten
The rise of gluten allergy can be also attributed to ]GMO spreading like at the case of another autoimmune diseases.
Whart1984

You are just talking a load of CRAP as usual.
Your very own first link actually says "children who grow up on farms are less likely to develop allergies." which would surely be inconsistent with Monsanto having something to do with it.
And your second link is about GLUTEN causing allergies, NOT GM nor Monsanto.
In fact, neither of your links even mentions "GM" or "Monsanto" or the equivalent.
Your 'theory' makes no sense whatsoever.

humy
4.3 / 5 (6) Aug 12, 2018
Whart1984

To date, there are several competing scientific theories I know of that can explain the increase incidence of allergies including what is called the "hygiene hypothesis". See;

https://en.wikipe...pothesis

NONE of the credible and/or common ones even mention "GM" nor the equivalent.
And note there IS some real evidence to support the hygiene hypothesis although it is very far from proven but, unlike your idiotic GM theory, at least it at least based on SOMETHING;

https://gizmodo.c...25655317

Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
barakn
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 12, 2018
The rise of gluten allergy can be also attributed to ]GMO spreading like at the case of another autoimmune diseases. -Whart1984/Zephir
Actually it can be attributed to the spreading of false info between yoga-pants-clad soccer moms. Just look at what Gwyneth Paltrow decided to stuff in her vag.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
humy
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 12, 2018
Your very own first link actually says "children who grow up on farms are less likely to develop allergies." which would surely be inconsistent with Monsanto having something to do with it.
On the contrary, the farmers children eat processed food less frequently
Whart1984

1, ..AND be more likely to be frequently exposed to pesticides on the farm

2, Processed food isn't necessarily more likely to have more pesticide traces on it than unprocessed food. This is because "processed food" means food that has been processed, NOTHING MORE. Food processing typically involves things such as mincing, liquefaction, cooking, pickling, pasteurization, etc. It is just totally idiotic to imply doing any of those things would increase any pesticide traces; why would it?

3, What the hell has food processing got to do with Monsanto? Do you blame Monsanto for literally everything including volcano eruptions? Food processing has NOTHING TO DO with Monsanto.
humy
3 / 5 (4) Aug 12, 2018
Food processing has NOTHING TO DO with Monsanto.

My error; I forgot Monsanto at least used to make (don't know if they still do) saccharine and vanilla with the identical chemical formula to that of vanilla from natural source (so if their vanilla causes allergies then so must natural-sourced vanilla), neither of which are blamed by science for the general increase in allergies. Big deal.
Whart1984
Aug 12, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
humy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 12, 2018
Saccharine with identical formula from natural source?
food processing got to do with Monsanto
A lot. You know - meat and proteins are expensive. But soya is cheap and it has also lotta proteins - they're mostly unpalatable without fermentation, .
Whart1984

They are extremely hard to find in the shops (no idea why) but, despite that, I HAVE actually eaten some unprocessed soya beans in stews and they seems fine to me. And why should processed soya be bad for you BECAUSE it is processed? Does, say, precooking it or mashing soya (or any other kind of food) mysteriously make it bad for you? If you say so, explain HOW so...
And haven't you heard of "processed meat"?
humy
4 / 5 (4) Aug 12, 2018
Saccharine with identical formula from natural source?
Whart1984

Straw man and obtuse; I very clearly was said VANILLA with identical formula from natural source, NOT saccharine.
a_rae
3 / 5 (2) Aug 12, 2018
Lolz, as soon as all of you start growing your own food and become self sustainable then you can complain about GMO food. Too many people living in cities who have no idea how food gets to their local market.
aksdad
3 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2018
Overlooking the fact that no study yet has found anything approaching solid evidence that glysophate causes cancer. From RealClearScience:

Last year, the United Nations International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic" based on a review of the available evidence. While that classification has been disputed by another prominent agency, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), it still isn't as disconcerting as it sounds. The "probably carcinogenic" ranking places glyphosate's cancer causing potential behind bacon, sausage, and other processed meats that many people enjoy on a regular basis.


But who needs science when you've got a California jury?
humy
4.3 / 5 (4) Aug 13, 2018
Overlooking the fact that no study yet has found anything approaching solid evidence that glysophate causes cancer. ...

Last year, the United Nations International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic" based on a review of the available evidence. While that classification has been disputed by another prominent agency, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), it still isn't as disconcerting as it sounds. The "probably carcinogenic" ranking places glyphosate's cancer causing potential behind bacon, sausage, and other processed meats that many people enjoy on a regular basis.


But who needs science when you've got a California jury?

Crazed environmental extremists haven't the slightest interest in the truth or protecting people's health.
All they want is a way to spite Monsanto which they REALLY HATE, even when and where Monsanto didn't do anything wrong.
THAT is what this is REALLY all about.
yep
1 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2018
only these big crops have the resources to develop, has any hope of sustaining the worlds pops into the future.

So this is the lie corporations sold us.
https://www.thegu...d-hunger
yep
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018
Capitalism is also some what of a lie or maybe you forgot to big to fail. Who bailed out the capitalists? We did through the government. Does that mean socialism saved the day again? The new deal by taxing the wealthy to create jobs and social security gave us decades of prosperity. Those reforms have slowly been whittled away leading to the crash and wealth disparity that we have not seen since feudal times.
yep
1 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018
Crazed environmental extremists haven't the slightest interest in the truth or protecting people's health.
All they want is a way to spite Monsanto which they REALLY HATE, even when and where Monsanto didn't do anything wrong.
THAT is what this is REALLY all about.

Drink some more cool aid! Serious do you know anything about its sordid history? Hell I remember in the nineties when the sold of the pharmacueticals division because it looked shady that they were developing medicine to help people that were developing disease from the food they produced. Capitalism at its finest make food that gets people sick then sell them the drugs to help them deal with it. Merica F*ck yeah!
https://www.globa.../5387964
arcmetal
3 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2018

But who needs science when you've got a California jury?

Crazed environmental extremists haven't the slightest interest in the truth or protecting people's health.
All they want is a way to spite Monsanto which they REALLY HATE, even when and where Monsanto didn't do anything wrong.
THAT is what this is REALLY all about.

Yeah, incredible isn't it? I don't understand it either. Why would anyone complain about a corporation that bottles death and destruction at the biological level, and then profits from it?
humy
5 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018

Yeah, incredible isn't it? I don't understand it either. Why would anyone complain about a corporation that bottles death and destruction at the biological level, and then profits from it?

Guess what? I don't see Monsanto as angels (I bet they have done at least one bad thing in the past) and I think it was quite right to ban DDT etc. That doesn't mean it would be right to ban roundup; that should depend on the FACTS.
And I think we should do something about man made global warming and stop mass deforestation etc.
I AM FOR environmentalism!
What I AM against are the usual hateful lies from a crazed minority that call them selves "environmentalists", typically being anti-science anti-GM anti-nuclear (even anti-fusion power) and anti-industry and sometimes even seem to want us to go back to the stone age, and who give environmentalism a extremely bad reputation it ill deserves.

kl31415
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018

Guess what? I don't see Monsanto as angels (I bet they have done at least one bad thing in the past) and I think it was quite right to ban DDT etc. That doesn't mean it would be right to ban roundup; that should depend on the FACTS.
And I think we should do something about man made global warming and stop mass deforestation etc.
I AM FOR environmentalism!
What I AM against are the usual hateful lies from a crazed minority that call them selves "environmentalists", typically being anti-science anti-GM anti-nuclear (even anti-fusion power) and anti-industry and sometimes even seem to want us to go back to the stone age, and who give environmentalism a extremely bad reputation it ill deserves.



But is is so easy for these people to make conclusions without even any basic understanding of science behind it...
Whart1984
Aug 13, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
barakn
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018
small Panama farmers have no problem with their bananas
And their little bananas cannot feed the worlds population. Only GMO foods protected by successive gens of herbicides and pesticides, which only these big crops have the resources to develop, has any hope of sustaining the worlds pops into the future. -TGOO1923

The Cavendish banana is king in the exported banana market, but will soon be wiped out by a new strain of Panama disease. The banana that will fill the void will almost certainly come from one of the "little bananas" that you have so haughtily dismissed. The lure of "big crops" is also their downfall - lack of genetic diversity. How do you not see the danger of large populations becoming dependent on monocultures that could be wiped out in an instant?
Whart1984
Aug 13, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 13, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Anonym216579
not rated yet Aug 13, 2018
Over a quarter of a billion dollars because this dumb a$s hat got cancer from a product any moron knows is toxic? 10 Million tops, but almost 300 mil, seriously? What a douche. Ill gladly take cancer for a quarter of a billion dollars if thats the new thing.
IwinUlose
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 13, 2018
Whart1984
.. it (Roundup) apparently contains another shits..

humy
...it contains detergent and the toxicity of glyphosate is SO LOW that the toxicity of detergent completely dwarfs that of the glyphosate..
..That detergent is normally called a "surfactant" when put in the pesticide..

First we need clarify: Herbicides come in concentrates and pre-mixes. The caretaker in this case was using concentrates. This would also be the case for ag/industrial workers.
I have used both (as concentrate), and I read the labels and instructions. Both generic glyphysate products and Roundup concentrates suggest using a surfactant, so I don't think it's included; although both products do have inert ingredients for the active chemicals to bind to (usually a clay or salt).
IwinUlose
5 / 5 (1) Aug 13, 2018
I stopped purchasing Roundup (concentrate) because 1) its more $$ and 2) along with glyphosate it does have a 'proprietary blend' which is not disclosed, 3) it only works faster than generic forms of glyphosate with 41% active ingredient: Glyphosate( with no other actives) not better. Keep in mind, the Roundup concentrate still recommends a surfactant, so I do not believe it's contained in the propietary blend. It also does not smell like 2,4D so.. it seems plausible it has some other rapid delivery mechanism or it's substrate is what is actually toxic.
IwinUlose
5 / 5 (1) Aug 13, 2018
Lastly, it's been stated in other articles regarding this case that the plaintiff was completely soaked in the product multiple times in his career. This is the most believable part of the case IMO and in my experience. All pesticides/herbicides dedicate pages to PPE and procedure. The equipment available to administer said products though seems to have virtually no bottom end for standards. I don't understand why the producers of the chem tanks he was using are not on the line here as well?
humy
5 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2018

..That detergent is normally called a "surfactant" when put in the pesticide..

First we need clarify: ...
I have used both (as concentrate), and I read the labels and instructions. Both generic glyphysate products and Roundup concentrates suggest using a surfactant, so I don't think it's included; .
IwinUlose

Then you are wrong;
https://www.round...efficacy

"...Roundup agricultural herbicides have surfactant already included in the formulation..."

So everything I said was correct (which is unsurprisingly given I an EXPERT on the subject) and there was no need for you to "clarify" what I just said, thanks.

humy
5 / 5 (2) Aug 13, 2018

... given I an EXPERT on the subject...

Misedit; that should be "...given I am an EXPERT on the subject.."
TheGhostofOtto1923
not rated yet Aug 13, 2018
The lure of "big crops" is also their downfall - lack of genetic diversity. How do you not see the danger of large populations becoming dependent on monocultures that could be wiped out in an instant?
I didnt say that. What makes you think thats what I said?
The Heretical
not rated yet Aug 14, 2018
Bob Dylan, from Infidels Album "Sundown on the Union":
"I can see the day coming when even your home garden is gonna be against the law!"

Big Agri has destroyed countless farmers and screwed up the gene pool. And they constantly say only they can save us. They just want to make a buck. As long as all corporations care about first and foremost are profits the truth and the best solutions will take a back seat. It's human nature.
leetennant
5 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2018
I admit I was waiting to be directed to the proof that Roundup causes cancer at all, let alone this cancer. Could someone direct me?
humy
5 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2018
I admit I was waiting to be directed to the proof that Roundup causes cancer at all, let alone this cancer. Could someone direct me?

There is (currently) no such real proof of any kind (and here I am talking as a qualified expert in the field).
It may or may not cause cancer; time will tell. It is currently too early to tell.
But it seems the way the jury works is very different from the way science works; they gave a guilt verdict BEFORE the proof.
humy
5 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2018
---I should also add, if roundup does increase the risk of cancer, it must be only by a very tiny amount (else there would be evidence by now of a FAR stronger link) and about the same amount as adding mustard sauce oil to your dinner (and, yes, science DOES tell us there is such a risk. Its due to the mustard oil in it) and yet nobody is proposing banning mustard sauce because of this!

And yet I would continue to put mustard sauce oil on my dinner and use roundup in my garden even if and when there is absolute proof of both causing cancer. Why? because the risk is so minute its not worth worrying about. I am MUCH more likely to get run over by a car.

FACT; Several people die from falling out of beds each year. So why shouldn't we ban beds?
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Aug 14, 2018
@humy
and about the same amount as adding mustard sauce oil to your dinner (and, yes, science DOES tell us there is such a risk. Its due to the mustard oil in it) and yet nobody is proposing banning mustard sauce because of this!
had mustard last night
fell out of bed this morning
it's probably a tumour from mustard

that's it, I'm going to sue French's!
LMFAO

IwinUlose
not rated yet Aug 14, 2018

..That detergent is normally called a "surfactant" when put in the pesticide..

First we need clarify: ...
I have used both (as concentrate), and I read the labels and instructions. Both generic glyphysate products and Roundup concentrates suggest using a surfactant, so I don't think it's included; .
IwinUlose

Then you are wrong;
https://www.round...efficacy

"...Roundup agricultural herbicides have surfactant already included in the formulation..."

So everything I said was correct (which is unsurprisingly given I an EXPERT on the subject) and there was no need for you to "clarify" what I just said, thanks.


Could you become an expert in reading what I wrote to clarify, and what I wrote as a supposition, instead of an expert at cutting them together like that? Thanks for the link.
I an EXPERT on the subject

OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE..yada yada
IwinUlose
not rated yet Aug 14, 2018
I'm sorry; that last part was really mean.
humy
5 / 5 (1) Aug 14, 2018
had mustard last night
fell out of bed this morning
it's probably a tumour from mustard
LOL
barakn
1 / 5 (1) Aug 14, 2018
The lure of "big crops" is also their downfall - lack of genetic diversity. How do you not see the danger of large populations becoming dependent on monocultures that could be wiped out in an instant?
I didnt say that. What makes you think thats what I said?
Apparently you wrote a typo intending to write "big corps" and failed to issue a correction notice later. But if you think that the big corps have any intention of selling diversity instead of monoculture, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
not rated yet Aug 14, 2018
think that the big corps have any intention of selling diversity instead of monoculture
What makes you think diversity is any different in pre-GMO crops vs GMO crops?

"Over the past 50 years, there has been a major decline in two components of crop diversity; genetic diversity within each crop and the number of species commonly grown."

-And what makes you think this has anything to do with your 'big corps'?
Whart1984
Aug 18, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 18, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.