Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They can and will appeal as they have plenty of highly paid lawyers on staff as do the big pharma companies.
The bottom line is that all of the chemicals in these products are dangerous, it’s just a matter of the specific exposure level.
In this case the plaintive was a grounds keeper. There will always be some people that receive higher exposures than other people. Years ago I ran one delivery of a new insecticide for a large chemical company. Since the product was in trial runs; it was only the one trip. My job was to deliver five gallon containers to distribution sites in Mississippi and Louisiana. They rented a 16 foot box truck for me to use. When I opened the door to the back of the truck the fumes were strong. But the distributers, that I delivered to, took fumes to another height - many of them took your breath away just walking into their warehouses.
My thinking is that some people in transportation, warehouse workers, grounds keepers, state workers that spray guardrails, farmers, and others will be exposed or have been exposed to significant amounts of this product.
I just cannot see easy times ahead for Monsanto and Bayer.
The jury were not scientists. Monsanto will appeal, and rightly so.
of course they will and they will probably win. I must say, when I heard this, I was a bit shocked. Yes we use Round up or something similar in our yard, but we also have a weed control company spray every 3 months so the amount we use is minimal. Now I don't know if I want hubby to use it, even a little. On the other hand, aren't we hearing daily about everything causing cancer?
This short video (4:41) by Dr. Michael Greger covers the issue of Roundup's toxicity. He points out that Roundup is not the same as pure glyphosate, it's main ingredient, since it contains surfactants and other chemicals that help it to penetrate and render it to be far more toxic than glyphosate alone.
People can deny it all they want but we have always heard that these poisons probably cause cancer. I lived in an apartment complex back in the 1970s that stopped using junk like this on the lawns because the people didn't want their kids exposed to it. They said they'd rather have the dandelions.
True, it cannot be proven that this guy got cancer from Roundup. But he probably did. If nothing else, let this serve as a wake up call to people. If you want to wait until it is finally PROVEN, you may be waiting a long time. Who pays for most of the studies, after all? Monsanto is rich. You usually don't hear about the people who got cancer from their products because no one is absolutely sure that was the cause. It sure doesn't help along with everything else we're exposed to.
I'd much rather not have any of this junk on my food. I'd rather not have to walk my dog and worry about him stepping in some grass that's been poisoned. It's unbelievable how so many people want to just look the other way and laugh it off. "Everything causes cancer, hahahahah." It's best to reduce your risks.
Glyphosate isn’t used on lawns, if it were, there wouldn’t be any lawn because it would all be dead.
Personally, I worry more about chemicals like atrazine or dicamba that are used in weed and feed products. Atrazine is used heavily on golf courses and corn fields and persists for a long time.
This short video (4:41) by Dr. Michael Greger covers the issue of Roundup's toxicity. He points out that Roundup is not the same as pure glyphosate, it's main ingredient, since it contains surfactants and other chemicals that help it to penetrate and render it to be far more toxic than glyphosate alone.
I don’t know anyone that buys Roundup branded glyphosate anymore, the patent expired years ago and now there are many companies that make a generic. I’m sure they all have the same surfactants in them though else they wouldn’t work.
PBI/Gordon is a big maker of glyphosate, yet I never hear anyone going after them, only big evil Monsanto.
I don’t know anyone that buys Roundup branded glyphosate anymore, the patent expired years ago and now there are many companies that make a generic. I’m sure they all have the same surfactants in them though else they wouldn’t work.
PBI/Gordon is a big maker of glyphosate, yet I never hear anyone going after them, only big evil Monsanto.
Isn't the issue that the plaintiff in the case used the Monsanto product, and not a generic? That's what Monsanto was sued.
The jury were not scientists. Monsanto will appeal, and rightly so.
Yeah, I have to admit that was the first thought that crossed my mind. Obviously I don’t know the details of the case, the evidence presented but, in general, I feel much more comfortable leaving questions of disease causation, especially something as complicated as carcinogenesis, to the scientific community. Many lay people do not understand the subject even when careful attempts are made to explain them.
Having said all that, I’m not particularly enamored with the whole GMO thing just so tons of round up can be dumped on crops. It’s a big, messy issue. We humans seem to specialize in making a mess of things.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
