permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

Monsanto 'bullied scientists' and hid weedkiller cancer risk, lawyer tells
court | Business | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/09/monsanto-trial-roundup-weedkiller-cancer-dewayne-johnson
Monsanto 'bullied scientists' and hid weedkiller cancer risk, lawyer tells
court

As ill California man’s landmark case begins, attorney attacks Roundup
maker’s response to researchers’ findings

Monsanto <https://www.theguardian.com/business/monsanto> has long worked to
“bully scientists” and suppress evidence of the cancer risks of its popular
weedkiller, a lawyer argued on Monday in a landmark lawsuit against the
global chemical corporation.

“Monsanto has specifically gone out of its way to bully ... and to fight
independent researchers,” said the attorney Brent Wisner, who presented
internal Monsanto emails that he said showed how the agrochemical company
rejected critical research and expert warnings over the years while
pursuing and helping to write favorable analyses of their products. “They
fought science.”

Wisner, who spoke inside a crowded San Francisco courtroom, is representing
DeWayne Johnson, known also as Lee, a California man whose cancer has
spread through his body. The father of three and former school
groundskeeper, who doctors say may have just months to live, is the first
person to take Monsanto to trial
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/22/monsanto-trial-cancer-weedkiller-roundup-dewayne-johnson>
over allegations that the chemical sold under the Roundup brand is linked
to cancer. Thousands
<https://usrtk.org/pesticides/mdl-monsanto-glyphosate-cancer-case-key-documents-analysis/>
have made similar legal claims across the US.
Landmark lawsuit claims Monsanto hid cancer danger of weedkiller for
decades
Read more

In his opening remarks, the Monsanto lawyer George Lombardi alleged that
the body of research over the years was on the company’s side: “The
scientific evidence is overwhelming that glyphosate-based products do not
cause cancer and did not cause Mr Johnson’s cancer.”

The case is significant in part because the judge has allowed
<https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Judges-order-in-Johnson-Case-ahead-of-trial.pdf>
Johnson’s lawyers to present scientific arguments
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/22/monsanto-trial-cancer-weedkiller-roundup-dewayne-johnson>.
The suit centers on glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide,
which Monsanto began marketing as Roundup in 1974, presenting it as a
technological breakthrough that could kill almost every weed without
harming humans or the environment.

Over the years, however, studies have suggested otherwise, and in 2015, the
World Health Organization’s international agency for research on cancer
(IARC) classified
<https://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/2016/glyphosate_IARC2016.php>
glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans”.

Roundup products are registered in 130 countries and approved for use on
more than 100 crops, and glyphosate has been found in food
<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/30/fda-weedkiller-glyphosate-in-food-internal-emails>,
a variety of water sources, and the urine of agricultural workers and
others. A number of countries
<https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/where-is-glyphosate-banned/>
have policies banning or restricting the sale and use of glyphosate.

Johnson worked as a groundskeeper for a the school district in Benicia,
just north of San Francisco
<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/san-francisco>, and was responsible
for applying Roundup. Lawyers showed the jury photos of lesions and rashes
on Johnson’s skin after he was regularly exposed to the chemical and was
eventually diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in 2014, at age 42.

“The simple fact is he’s going to die. It’s just a matter of time,” Wisner
said in court, as Johnson lowered his head and his wife cried in the seat
next to him. “Between now and then, it’s just nothing but pain.”

Wisner, who said the trial would include commentary from 10 current or
former Monsanto employees, also read aloud internal corporate documents
obtained during the case. In response to one critical study about
glyphosate exposure, Donna Farmer, product protection lead, wrote
<http://baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/41-Internal-Email-from-2008-Monsanto-Executive-Long-Aware-of-Glyphosate-Link-to-non-Hodgkin-Lymphoma.pdf>
in an email: “How do we combat this?”
Sign up for Guardian Today US edition: the day's must-reads sent directly
to you
Read more

Wisner also referenced an email
<http://baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents/27-Internal-Monsanto-Email-You-Cannot-Say-That-Roundup-is-not-a-Carcinogen.pdf>
from Farmer in which she gave colleagues guidance
<https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/monsanto-secret-documents-page-six/>
on how they could publicly talk about science, writing: “You cannot say
that Roundup does not cause cancer.” The Monsanto lawyer later said this
comment had been taken out of context and presented in a misleading way.

A strategic corporate document
<https://usrtk.org/pesticides/how-monsanto-manufactured-outrage-at-iarc-over-cancer-classification/>
also revealed Monsanto’s public relations plan to “orchestrate outcry” in
advance of the IARC glyphosate classification, Wisner told the jury.

Wisner further cited Monsanto emails from decades prior, in which the
company was working with a genotoxicity expert who reviewed a series of
1990s studies. He raised concerns about Roundup impacts on humans and
suggested further areas of research. After the expert’s analyses, Monsanto
representatives began considering finding a different expert and also
started working on a press statement saying the product carried no risk,
according to Johnson’s lawyer.

Wisner also read documents that he said showed how Monsanto strategized
plans to “ghostwrite” favorable research.

Monsanto has continued to assert that its herbicide is safe
<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/05/monsanto-pesticides-roundup-court>,
a claim that Johnson’s legal team is challenging, arguing that “scientific
fraud” has contributed to Roundup marketing.

Lombardi, the Monsanto lawyer, argued that Johnson’s lawyers were
“cherrypicking” studies that did not provide a “full picture”, repeatedly
pointed to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) findings approving the use
of glyphosate, and argued that the plaintiffs were overstating the
significance of IARC’s conclusions. He also said Monsanto had been open
about its involvement in research, adding: “Testing has been done by
independent scientists, by university scientists, by government
scientists.”

Timothy Litzenburg, one of Johnson’s lawyers, called his client “incredibly
brave” in an interview with the Guardian prior to trial, adding: “Whatever
happens ... his sons will get to know that their dad was brave enough to go
up against Monsanto completely alone, and first, before he died.”

In addition to financial compensation, a verdict in Johnson’s favor “would
say that his life is worth something”, Litzenburg added.

Regardless of the outcome, the attorney said, “so much of what Monsanto has
worked to keep secret is coming out”.