Monsanto & Roundup lose cancer trial in San Francisco

Monsanto Loses Landmark Roundup Cancer Trial,
Set to Pay USD 289 Million in Damages

Aug 11 2018 by Sustainable Pulse

Monsanto has lost a landmark cancer trial in San Francisco and has been ordered by the Judge to pay over USD 289 Million in total damages to the former school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson, a California father who has non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which was caused by Monsanto’s glyphosate-based weedkiller Roundup.

Johnson, a father of three and former school groundskeeper, who doctors say may have just months to live, was the first person to take Monsanto to trial over allegations that the chemical sold under the Roundup brand causes cancer. About 4,000 other people in the U.S. claim in lawsuits they were sickened by Roundup.

Johnson’s attorneys said he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins Lymphoma after spraying the glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer for two and a half years.

Monsanto is responsible for Dewayne “Lee” Johnson’s illness, suffering and reduced life expectancy because of the cancer-causing nature of its product, glyphosate-based weedkiller Roundup, the San Francisco Superior Court jury determined on Friday. The jury deliberated for three days after a four-week trial.

The damages included $2.3 million in economic losses, $37 million for pain and emotional distress and $250 million in punitive damages. The punitive damages were based on the jury’s unanimous finding that Monsanto had “acted with malice or oppression” toward Johnson.

Johnson has undergone chemotherapy and is considering a bone-marrow transplant. One of his doctors testified that Johnson is unlikely to survive until 2020.

The verdict sends a message that Monsanto “acted with reckless disregard for human health,” said attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a member of Johnson’s trial team. “It’s a strong message to the boardroom of Bayer/Monsanto that it’s got to change.”

Continues here

As much as I dislike our government's & our food industry's dependence on subsidized monocultured crops and monsanto's poisonous contributions....

This is proof of nothing other than a judge's opinion.

It will be appealed.

The case stems not on if glyphosphate is cancerous, but rather if glyphosphate's reaction(s) to the other ingredients in roundup can be cancerous, and caused his cancer. There's next to no science or research into if this is true, even less than the studies into if glyphosphate alone is cancerous.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ChefJayTay:

...This is proof of nothing other than a judge's opinion....

---

It was the jury's decision.

Did you even read what I posted? It makes it very clear that it was a jury that decided--that is 12 people, and the judge merely affirmed their decision. Appealed it may be. There is lots of science and research, on which European countries previously decided. You seriously discredit anything you write on Wacco, given your biases. I am glad that you were not on the jury.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ChefJayTay:

...This is proof of nothing other than a judge's opinion.

It will be appealed. ..

---

Thank heaven and about time!! So many other beings have been harmed by this gruesome product.

it's High Time
they look at all of RoundUp's possibilities for causing cancer
And
other debilitating conditions
to internal organs

i have two cats
who show RoundUp in Kidney, Liver, Bladder

which can be detoxed
via a special holistic vet
which is Rare

i'm grateful to Stephanie Chalmers DVM
for detecting
and treating this

Time Magazine: Jury Awards $289 Million to Man Who Blames Monsanto's Roundup for Cancer
https://time.com/5364686/roundup-can...y-289-million/

Bayer stock is down 10% on this news. There are hundreds of cases lined up behind this one. At this point the science is not conclusive; it is disputed. And this verdict may not stand. But is has the potential to become asbestos-like. Bayer bought Monsanto a year ago, and was questioned on the move.

Bayer 83.73 EUR −9.63 (10.31%)

So, I guess what I'm saying is the company is getting punished, and it may even be smart to pull it off the market rather than fighting this in the courts for years to come.

To: [email protected]
Dear Editor:
The guilty verdict in the Monsanto case is a heads up for Sonoma County where thirty-seven tons of glyphosate were used on Sonoma County farms in 2016.*

The prosecution revealed that Monsanto’s internal company documents proved “ that Monsanto has known for decades that glyphosate and specifically Roundup could cause cancer.”

The same week, federal appeals court ordered the ban of widely used farm pesticide chlorpyrifos, citing long-standing evidence that even secondary exposure can harm children.Pesticide residues that parents unwittingly carry home on their clothes, tools, and skin can be culprits in damaging health.

Over 100 schools in Sonoma County are within 1/4 mile of a farm that uses pesticides.The majority of these farms are vineyards, which is worrisome because 98% of the vineyards in Sonoma County are treated with synthetic pesticides.

Though the Sonoma County Winegrowers Association has a goal of certifying all vineyards as “Sonoma Sustainable” by 2019, certification does not require vineyards to reduce pesticide use.

Compounds that include chlorpyrifos and glyphosate are commonly used locally. We call upon our local ag community to put our community’s health and safety over profits for true sustainability.

Reuben Weinzveg, 6024 Fredricks Rd, Sebastopol, Ca. , 707-695-6023

*(https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pur/pur16rep/16sum.htm)

How?!?!?!
Detected or detoxing? There is no process.
Did she have a wand over them and feel the Roundup in them?
Are you paying for biopsies on your pets?
Lemme guess, special feed full of charcoal or bran that costs doc nothing, but cat won't complain.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by santoshimatajaya:

...
i have two cats
who show RoundUp in Kidney, Liver, Bladder

which can be detoxed
via a special holistic vet
which is Rare...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ChefJayTay:

The case stems not on if glyphosphate is cancerous, but rather if glyphosphate's reaction(s) to the other ingredients in roundup can be cancerous, and caused his cancer. There's next to no science or research into if this is true, even less than the studies into if glyphosphate alone is cancerous.

---

it's not really a scientific question at this point. As MikeH notes, Monsanto's getting punished and I suspect they deserve it. Once you're at the stage where a jury is weighing the technical testimony, you've left the arena of evidence-driven academic debate. Juries debate the evidence too, but their ability to understand it is much more of a question. Of course, Monsanto can't be trusted to keep their fingers off the scales when the evidence is being gathered. It bothers me as much as it apparently bothers you that non-scientific ideas like holistic detox are bound up with opinions on the interaction of multiple chemicals as the causation of Johnson's health issues.

Hell if I have any idea how society could deal with these questions any more rationally, though. Sure can't trust Monsanto, and you sure have to be suspicious of any public regulators. Most of the critics have poor scientific standing, and very few are qualified to refute the research based on equivalent expertise of their own.

It is being detected in the urine of animals (farm animals, dairy cows included) and humans using mass spectroscopy. This means it is in the blood. Routes for humans are dermal absorption and inhalation for those involved in the application. For dairy cows it is from the feed they are given, and it is in the milk.

We know it damages enzymes in plants, which is how it works. Does it damage enzymes in humans and animals?

Here's one study suggesting a problem, and another saying the levels detected (in farm family children!) are low.

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-acc...25.1000210.pdf

In the present study glyphosate residues were tested in urine and different organs of dairy cows as well as in urine of hares, rabbits and humans using ELISA and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy (GC-MS). The correlation coefficients between ELISA and GC-MS were 0.96, 0.87, 0.97and 0.96 for cattle, human, and rabbit urine and organs, respectively. The recovery rate of glyphosate in spiked meat using ELISA was 91%. Glyphosate excretion in German dairy cows was significantly lower than Danish cows. Cows kept in genetically modified free area had significantly lower glyphosate concentrations in urine than conventional husbandry cows. Also glyphosate was detected in different organs of slaughtered cows as intestine, liver, muscles, spleen and kidney. Fattening rabbits showed significantly higher glyphosate residues in urine than hares. Moreover, glyphosate was significantly higher in urine of humans with conventional feeding. Furthermore, chronically ill humans showed significantly higher glyphosate residues in urine than healthy population. The presence of glyphosate residues in both humans and animals could haul the entire population towards numerous health hazards, studying the impact of glyphosate residues on health is warranted and the global regulations for the use of glyphosate may have to be re-evaluated.

https://link.springer.com/article/10...003-014-0927-3

On average, sixty percent of the farmers had detectable levels of glyphosate in their urines on the day of application with a 87 % detection rate for South Carolina farmers as compared to only 36 % for samples taken in Minnesota. A similar pattern became apparent when the magnitude of urine residues was considered. The geometric mean of the concentrations for the whole group of farmers was 3.2 µg/L on the day of application but exhibited a considerable difference between the two Federal States (1.4 µg/L in Minnesota vs. 7.9 µg/L in South Carolina). It seems that the explanation for this gap is not in the application rates but in the different use that is made of personal protective equipment. Farmers who did not wear rubber gloves had higher urinary concentrations than those found in the other men (nearly 10 µg/L as compared to 2 µg/L) and, in fact, use of rubber gloves was much more common in Minnesota.

In all participants, a decline over the next days was observed.

The maximum value, measured in a sample taken from a farmer from South Carolina, was 233 µg/L. (Based on all the available studies, this is the highest urinary concentration that was ever measured in a man so far.) On post-application day 3, the urinary concentration was still 68 µg/L. It is remarkable that the same man’s teenage son had the highest urine concentration among all children, i.e., 29 µg/L.

Of all children who had been enrolled in the study, 12 % (all from South Carolina) had detectable glyphosate concentrations in their urines on the day of application. All but one of these children either had helped with the application or they were at least present during herbicide mixing, loading, or spraying. Among spouses, only very few (4 %) had detectable levels in their urine on the day of application, but not later, with the maximum value being 3 µg/L.

Taking all this information together, it seems that exposure to glyphosate in this study was predominantly occupational by the dermal and inhalative routes and that dietary intake was of very minor, if any, relevance.

https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-pet-health-2573246280.html

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ChefJayTay:

How?!?!?!
Detected or detoxing? There is no process.
Did she have a wand over them and feel the Roundup in them?
Are you paying for biopsies on your pets?
Lemme guess, special feed full of charcoal or bran that costs doc nothing, but cat won't complain.

---

Glyphosate has already been classified as carcinogenic by the State of California. It is now listed under Prop 65. All Roundup products currently at the store are supposed to be labeled but this is not being enforced. There was a thorough scientific review by the state government before declaring glyphosate carcinogenic.

There are over 1,000 people lined up in hundreds of trials against Monsanto. The Dwayne Johnson trial was just the first one. If similar awards are given to everyone suing - is that enough money to bankrupt the company? I have dreamed of taking down Monsanto but taking down Bayer too is beyond my wildest dreams. I might really be dreaming now but that company is one of the most evil companies ever in history - Bayer built the concentration camps (Auschwitz etc.) before the Nazi's because they were using them for slave labor to start their pharmaceutical company. They turned them over to the Nazi's for more genocide during the holocaust.

One of the exciting things about these trials is that one of the lead attorneys is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who is a highly skilled environmental lawyer. The people really CAN win when we pull together.
Love,
Emerald
Occupy Sonoma County

Testing urine doesn't specify where in the animal they are contaminated (as previous poster stated). It doesn't even mean it's still in the body (it's in the urine, not the body).
Nor does this offer suggestions for removing it from the system (again, as previous poster claimed was possible).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-pet-health-2573246280.html

---

Yeah, urine isn't in the body, yet why do doctors insist on testing urine?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ChefJayTay:

...It doesn't even mean it's still in the body (it's in the urine, not the body). ,,,

---

This was a post from a neighbor on Nextdoor:

"Roundup has been banned in France. It’s causing bee collapse of the second generation. Not to mention human lymphoma. I refuse to use it. Frogs are disappearing there used to be lots. My dog had bad itching after walking in GohlisPark. When I went to the vet all the other dogs there were having the same problem.Next time I walked there city workers had put up signs about spraying."

Urine is made via the body

therefore
it reflects directly the state of the body

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Yeah, urine isn't in the body, yet why do doctors insist on testing urine?

---

the holistic vet i go to
muscle tests
for chemicals

as i said in an earlier post

she can tell you
what organs are being affected
by which chemicals

often the products we eat
and use on our bodies
contain these toxic chemicals

i brought in a small bottle of cedar oil

she found it contained GMO promoter

when i buy raw meat for my cat
she tests which Lot #'s are clean / have no toxins

most are not clean

even the bottled water
she says is not clean

she recommends Whole Foods Reverse Osmosis
and using glass jars

Lots for us to learn
and catch up on~

seems we need to learn how to do kinesiology / muscle testing~

urine shows one's ph level~

acid / alkaline

Reverse osmosis filters waste large amounts of water (something like 3 gallons wasted for every gallon produced) and aren't really necessary here where the water is already treated. A better bet is a good quality water filter, like Multi-Pure, that has been independently tested to remove just about all the impurities and toxins you can think of.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by santoshimatajaya:

...
even the bottled water
she says is not clean

she recommends Whole Foods Reverse Osmosis
and using glass jars...

---

https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/si...NkLJ95XOnhoBHQ

I was reading a local newspaper online, and this advertisement was imbedded in the article. It has glyphosate and imazapyr as active ingredients.

My take is that the way this is marketed is vegetation is our enemy.

RM43 is your solution for total vegetation control on bare ground or for spot control of brush, vines and over 150 weeds, including kudzu, poison ivy and poison oak. It kills existing weeds and prevents future growth on walkways, roadsides, fence lines and any place you want to keep free from invasive plants. For a full list of species controlled, see the COMPLETE LABEL.

RM43 is a combination of two herbicides and surfactant. It is rainfast in two hours and there are no entry restrictions to sprayed areas for pets or people after the spray has dried. The time is now to keep your property free from unwanted growth. Apply RM43 today and get the protection you desire for up to a year.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

...RM43 is your solution for total vegetation control on bare ground or for spot control of brush, vines and over 150 weeds, including kudzu, poison ivy and poison oak.

---

I don't care much about kudzu, but hell yes the others are my enemy

It Kills
at Great Cost
to all Life Forms

which is not worth allowing on the market
from my point of view

Too Destructive

Best Way to get rid of unwanted growth
is to dig it out~
plow it out~

which is what was done before poisons were ignorantly engineered
and thought that they would only hurt the vegetation targeted

well
they missed registering that fumes dissipate from liquid form
and become airborn
and are very potent
in continuing to damage and destroy Life

which includes humans, animals, other plants

being invisible
we don't know
that we are suffering from their effects

so
problematic
multiplies
and
becomes hard to solve

all unnecessary

let's not buy into the use of poisons,
simply ban them
as hazardous to Life in general

risks we cannot afford
for the sake of killing weeds
and doing yard maintenance, crop maintenance

crops are here to keep us alive and thriving

what's the point of using poisons on the living planet Earth?

:waccosun::heart:

And yet, another angle of the debate? on Glyphosate:

A $289M Hit Job On Science In Jackpot Verdict On Monsanto's Glyphosate

I'd take ACSH's offerings with a grain of salt, Shandi. They're pretty much a shill for corporations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...nce_and_Health

https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-...ce-and-health/

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

And yet, another angle of the debate? on Glyphosate.
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/08/16/289m-hit-job-science-jackpot-verdict-monsantos-glyphosate-13320

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:

I'd take ACSH's offerings with a grain of salt, Shandi. They're pretty much a shill for corporations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...nce_and_Health

https://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/why-...ce-and-health/

---

sure looks to be. Although I'm agnostic in this debate, and not very worried about Roundup in particular, I have zero faith in Monsanto. And zero faith in anyone who writes like this (from the link above):

Quote:

---

First, as stated above, glyphosate does not cause cancer because it does not harm humans. It is an herbicide, so it is only toxic to plants. There is no known biological mechanism by which glyphosate could cause cancer, therefore its carcinogenicity is not even theoretically possible. That is why there isn’t a single reputable public health agency that believes glyphosate causes cancer. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the World Health Organization, and the European Food Safety Authority all reject claims of any link.

---

huh? those are words in the form of an argument, but they have no logical structure at all. "it's an herbicide so it's only toxic to plants"??? sure, go ahead - eat/drink all you want of any herbicide, since you're not a plant! And if "there is no known.. mechanism" then, since clearly we know everything, harm can't be possible. And I'm too lazy to look it up, but IIRC those agencies are unconvinced of the link but do not outright reject the possibility.

Any site that uses such sloppy arguments is pretty worthless.

(Funny, their credentials actually look reasonable, too. They should be ashamed of themselves for that article)

Pure propaganda and lies. I watched the lawyers discuss what occurred with tons of documentation.
Monsanto lied over and over and the jury agreed.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

And yet, another angle of the debate? on Glyphosate:
A $289M Hit Job On Science In Jackpot Verdict On Monsanto's Glyphosate

---

Excerpt from the Bolen Report today

The best news I got last week was that the $289 million dollar verdict against Monsanto for their use of the herbicide Round-Up, led by Robert F. Kennedy. Jr. and his brave band of “Untouchables” caused an $11 BILLION DOLLAR drop in the price of its parent company, Bayer.

An article in Bloomberg News put it in perspective:

“The reliance of the U.S. company, and now, its German acquirer, on Round-Up extends far beyond just selling it as a weed-killer. Monsanto genetically engineered the DNA of corn, soybeans and other crops to make them resistant to Round-Up; it now makes more revenue from seeds and traits than it does from herbicide.”

The market value of the entire Monsanto company is only $66 billion dollars. A few more weeks like that and we’ve made some serious progress in destroying one of the most evil companies on the planet.
I mean, really, we can strike a blow against PESTICIDES AND GMOs at the same time?

These are good days to be alive.

I'd like to add to the Bolen report, this article and video of Johnson's attorneys, Brent Wisner and co-counsel Robert F Kennedy Jr. on Del Bigtree's show, High Wire, in what came down in court.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by intheflow88:

Excerpt from the Bolen Report today...

---