Monsanto / Roundup found to have caused Cancer

[PortDawg]

Berlin (AFP) - Monsanto's German owners insisted Saturday that the weed killer Roundup was "safe", rejecting a California jury's decision to order the chemical giant to pay nearly $290 million for failing to warn a dying groundskeeper that the product might cause cancer.

While observers predicted thousands of potential future claims against the company in the wake of Monsanto's defeat, Bayer -- which recently acquired the US giant -- said the California ruling went against scientific evidence.

"On the basis of scientific conclusions, the views of worldwide regulatory authorities and the decades-long practical experience with glyphosate use, Bayer is convinced that glyphosate is safe and does not cause cancer," the company said in a statement.

It said other court proceedings with other juries might "arrive at different conclusions" than the jury which ruled in the California lawsuit, the first to accuse glyphosate of causing 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.

More at the link



Link

[Loco Vette]

California juries beleive everything a corporation does causes cancer.

[MrPeabody]

The weeds where I live get high off of Roundup.

[Wathen1955]

Same goes for medical products. A product works on 99.9% of the population, but it does not work on some individuals, so they sue claiming that the product is defective for
multi-millions in compensation.

[Sea Six]

This country's legal system needs an enema.

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Wathen1955

Same goes for medical products. A product works on 99.9% of the population, but it does not work on some individuals, so they sue claiming that the product is defective for
multi-millions in compensation.

Like that tummy/stomach mesh hernia crap.....Decades ago I had an accident when messing around with an old friend, got stabbed/poked in the belly button with a screwdriver.....did not bleed, but hurt for a short while....pains came/went for decades, then in early 2012 I had to start wearing a tummy brace/bandage/support, and with being Florida and all, it caused itching/rashes and so I finally gave in and had a mesh planted behind my belly button...recovery went well at home that same day, and 3-4 daze later I was fine, couple weeks later back to normal.....

that lasted maybe 3 years, then I noted some discomfort/pain in that specific area....and never made the association of other symptoms and pains with the mesh....and of course on FB, I started seeing adds from lawyers about stomach cramps/mesh symptoms.....doing a Google on it/them I found a list about 6 items long that aligned with my issues....so over the last ~2 years I have been fighting this issue, in/out of the ER a few times....and finally noted my original surgeon had left town and is living in Ca. now....gone about as far as he could....seemed off/odd.....so I made another appointment with another surgeon who denied that ANY of my symptoms are related to the mesh....

which is where it stands now, HE said it's all lawyer driven BS....that in europe/asia the rest of the world has no issues with this mesh, but only here in America......I think it's total bullshit what he was trying to convince me of....

[69camfrk]

Originally Posted by Sea Six

This country's legal system needs an enema.

That is an understatement....

[Mike Mercury]

the California ruling went against scientific evidence.

glyphosate has been studied and tested sooooo much that this latest ruling from that court really does go against scientific evidence.

In a 1993 review, the EPA, considered glyphosate to be noncarcinogenic and relatively low in dermal and oral acute toxicity. The EPA considered a "worst case" dietary risk model of an individual eating a lifetime of food derived entirely from glyphosate-sprayed fields with residues at their maximum levels. This model indicated that no adverse health effects would be expected under such conditions. In 2015, the EPA initiated a review of glyphosate's toxicity and in 2016 reported that glyphosate is likely not carcinogenic.

On March 15, 2017 the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) announced recommendations proceeding from a risk assessment of glyphosate performed by ECHA's Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC). Their recommendations maintained the current classification of glyphosate as a substance causing serious eye damage and as a substance toxic to aquatic life. However, the RAC did not find evidence implicating glyphosate to be a carcinogen, a mutagen, as toxic to reproduction, nor as toxic to specific organs

In November, 2015, the European Food Safety Authority concluded that "the substance is unlikely to be genotoxic (i.e. damaging to DNA) or to pose a carcinogenic threat to humans," later clarifying that while carcinogenic glyphosate-containing formulations may exist, studies "that look solely at the active substance glyphosate do not show this effect." The WHO and FAO Joint committee on pesticide residues issued a report in 2016 stating the use of glyphosate formulations does not necessarily constitute a health risk, and giving admissible daily maximum intake limits (one milligram/kg of body weight per day) for chronic toxicity.

Glyphosate adsorbs strongly to soil, and residues are expected to generally be immobile in soil. Ground and surface water pollution is limited. Glyphosate is readily degraded by soil microbes to aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA, which like glyphosate strongly adsorbs to soil solids and is thus unlikely to leach to groundwater). Though both glyphosate and AMPA are commonly detected in water bodies, a portion of the AMPA detected may actually be the result of degradation of detergents rather than from glyphosate

A 2000 review concluded that "under present and expected conditions of new use, there is no potential for Roundup herbicide to pose a health risk to humans". A 2002 review by the European Union reached the same conclusion.

A 2012 meta-analysis of epidemiological studies (seven cohort studies and fourteen case-control studies) of exposure to glyphosate formulations found no correlation with any kind of cancer. The 2013 systematic review by the German Institute for Risk Assessment of epidemiological studies of workers who use pesticides, exposed to glyphosate formulations found no significant risk.

Several studies have not found mutagenic effects, so glyphosate has not been listed in the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the International Agency for Research on Cancer databases.

A 2013 systematic review by the German Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) examined more than 1000 epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in vitro studies. It found that "no classification and labelling for carcinogenicity is warranted" and did not recommend a carcinogen classification of either 1A or 1B, :139, 34–37 It provided the review to EFSA in January 2014 which published it in December 2014. In November 2015, EFSA published its conclusion in the Renewal Assessment Report (RAR), stating it was "unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans".

and it goes on... and on... and on... and on...