Frivolous lawsuit in USA over Roundup.

in news •  9 days ago  (edited)

A jury in the United States has awarded a couple who got cancer 2 BILLION DOLLARS in a completely absurd punitive damages case in California.

The plaintiffs charged that after 30 years of being exposed to Roundup brand weed killer which is chemically known as Glyphosate, they both ended up with cancer because of it.


Now regardless of whether or not you believe that Roundup causes cancer or not, does it seem fair that someone should be awarded many times their lifetime earnings because of something that very well could be circumstantial?

I'm no fan of Bayer (the company that manufactures Roundup) because they are the main reason why DDT is almost globally banned due to some propaganda about it killing fish and bald eagles that has been disproven time and time again and the absence of this inexpensive an effective chemical has resulted in millions of malaria deaths as well as the proliferation of bedbugs around the world. I do, however, feel as though granting these massive payouts is a bad precedent to set.

There are hundreds of studies that show that Glyphosate in fact does not cause cancer. Even the studies that show that is might is very specific about the "might" aspect of it and most of these peer reviewed studies have been shown to have inconclusive results. I'm not saying it is wonderful to use Roundup, but i do know for a fact that it is extremely effective in what its intended results are.


If you spray roundup on virtually anything with chlorophyll, said thing will die and not come back. I used it regularly on my yard in various houses in Thailand and for the maintenance of the grounds at a villa operation that I managed for several years. It simply works. They have all these hippy natural remedies that combine vinegar with reiki stones or something and now your yard smells like a salad bar and the weeds thrive!

Let me give you some real word examples of how this very well could be (and likely is) circumstantial that this couple now has cancer.

  1. I come from a multi-generation family of farmers. Since the United States was colonized all of my ancestors were farmers... some of my relatives are farmers now. Since the product existed, they have all used Roundup or some variation of it.... Why? Because it friggin works! They were exposed to far larger quantities of the stuff than this couple did in their vegetable garden in their backyard in Oakland... None of them got some sort of respiratory cancer.
  2. My immediate family owned a turf-care / landscaping company for nigh on 20 years. One of the main chemicals used in turf maintenance and beautification is guess what? Vinegar and reiki stones? No, it was Roundup. I was exposed to it on a regular basis and while the concentrated mix of the stuff (a controlled substance that in many USA states you have to have a permit to purchase) smells friggin awful and will definitely poison you if you drank it or burn your skin if you poured it on you, this never happened.... why? Because we followed the instructions. Again, we were far more exposed to it than this couple was from treating their tomato plants on their half acre garden in Oakland.

Of course the SJW's are up in arms claiming this is a massive victory against chemical companies. The same people that likely enjoy having fruit and vegetables at the supermarket in a cheap and easily accessed fashion are now calling for it to be banned nationwide!


I'm not saying that Roundup can't hurt you because I am quite certain it can. I do not however buy into this narrative of the fact that Monsanto knowingly sold a product to people that causes cancer. I don't even know the details of the case and I am not going to look into it because the science there is "iffy" at best. The plaintiff's attorneys must have done a wonderful job appealing to the "feels" of the jury because there is no conclusive scientific evidence other than ones the likes of which take a sample size of 1000 people and then focus on only 9 of them.

Even if it had caused cancer and there was science to definitively prove that it did, the payout of 2 billion dollars is completely absurd.


what do you think? Do you agree with me or am I a fool with the blinders on? I welcome any discussion about this and will not think negatively of you or downvote you if you think i am wrong.... I welcome dissent.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Erin Brockovich 2.0

2 billion dollars? Holy shit. I don't even remotely understand how you get to that number for a lawsuit payout on this level. That just seems fucking bonkers, man. I could see a couple million if they had some solid proof, but my lord. Apparently I need to go with whoever they took this case to if I slip in some peepee at Walmart or some shit.


It will be appealed and drastically reduced for sure. But can I sue to get my money?

Posted using Partiko Android

I just used some good old roundup this weekend on my front yard. I would much rather do that than pull weeds. I don't use it in my back yard because I don't want my dog licking it or getting it all over her paws. I wonder what other environmental factors are going on around their house? For example, I live and grew up right down the road from Dow Corning/ Dow Chemical, so I pretty much attribute my cancer to that or just bad luck rather than one randomly specific thing.


You are probably entitled to at least half a billion... Hopefully you live in California

Posted using Partiko Android


Nope, probably too far away from the fallout way over here in Michigan! :)

I was wondering how can one prove that was using Roundup for 30 years.
Don't get me wrong, it's very sad and regrettable that they got cancer, I know how it is first hand unfortunately.
But how can they prove they were using it for 30 years? What evidence do they have?
There was a similar case with Johnson and Johnson baby talc powder.

Even I do not believe it too! For real that much amount is something not digestive.

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

until we see the evidence its hard to judge but we have to hold big pharma to account for their negligence and sometime been in a rush to push a product out, i grew up in a farm and i saw the effects of some of this chemicals that we used on plant and that is why am not a fan of big pharma.

Very good reminds me of those paid program ads that we see on television pay very interesting story as all you bring by the way I saw a movie called "alita" is cyber punk I invite you to see it ... I'll make a review later in blog.